by Ron Davis
Is it correct to assert that the United States is no longer a Christian nation? If we’re judging based on census answers, then no, the majority of the U.S. still claims Christianity. The answer is yes, however, if we are concerned with what occupies the center of the nation’s cultural thought and life. A type of postmodern thinking, which holds that individuals are the arbiters of truth for themselves (in particular times and circumstances), dominates the center of American thought. James Emery White calls this functional atheism: ignoring the concept of God as a part of a normal cultural experience.[1]
This phenomenon is the result of a shift away from an “image of God” concept of man (created by and for God) to a “blank slate” concept of man (product of natural causes). Owen Strachan argues that this new theology of man has produced a crisis of anthropology. In other words, secular visions of man are quickly replacing the biblical concepts of man.[2] Thus American society is in a “secular age,” i.e., a cultural mode of thought driven by the idea that belief in God is only an option among beliefs.[3]
This point brings us to a stark reality: American culture has adopted the secular ethos (including a way of life according to “me”) as the new normal, i.e., the cultural pressure to conform is absent (or mostly absent) of a true God concept (the Christian ethos). David Kinnaman describes contemporary American society as being “especially and insidiously faith repellent.”[4] His point is not that the United States does not have a strong church element but that that element is no longer central to cultural norms (pressures within society to conform to a standard).[5]
We are truly “in the world”—a place Jesus prayed for His disciples to remain in and to overcome (Jn. 17:15–21, ESV). Our Savior’s prayer extends directly to us (17:20) for the express purpose of gospel intentionality and effectiveness (17:21). The American church finds herself in a similar position to the early church (and most churches throughout history): on the fringe of cultural norms.
Negative Responses to Living on the Fringe
Cultural isolation refers to the belief that culture is evil and that Christians must avoid it for the sake of pure Christian thought and life. This produces a sub-culture where Christians interpret the command to “be holy” and “not be conformed to the world” as complete separation from the “evil world.” To be sure, separation from the evil aspects of culture, and even other Christians who do not separate, is imperative. However, cultural isolation destroys the balance required to “eat with sinners” without the fear of being tainted.
Cultural isolation is also a threat to the gospel because it produces a legalistic, performance-based Christianity. It can give the false idea that being “saved by faith” means we have somehow earned God’s favor because of what we do (or don’t do). Those who embrace cultural isolation will typically produce the following:
- a judgmental, hyper-critical environment that stifles growing in grace;
- an unbiblical separation from the world;
- a lack of understanding of cultural thought/expression;
- divisions within the church body (both local and universal); and
- a replacement of biblical parameters with preferential standards of Christian living.
Cultural affirmation, on the other hand, is refusing to set parameters of cultural engagement while neglecting the uniqueness and significance of Christian thought and life. “Be holy” is a descriptive phrase and not an instructive one. Separation from the world is an internal construct and not an external reality. Reinhold Niebuhr warns that this kind of response eliminates the church’s ability to convict the world of sin.[6]
Cultural affirmationis also a threat to the gospel because it takes the life-changing gospel message and assimilates it into a message of “Christian morality.” It can convey that God loves and accepts all people “just as they are” (no need to submit to Christ in salvation). It offers little concept of what it truly means to be “saved by grace through faith” as the masterpiece of God to “walk in good works” (Eph. 2:8–10). Those who embrace cultural affirmation typically produce the following:
- an “anything goes” mentality that prevents growing in grace;
- an unbiblical adaptation of the world’s mindset;
- a conformity to the world that mirrors its cultural expressions;
- unhealthy unions with almost any doctrinal position; and
- a neglect of biblical parameters for Christian living.
The problem with both cultural isolation and cultural affirmation is the same: They are both extreme reactions to the evil elements of the world, as expressed in the cultural parameters of any time and place in human existence.Tim Keller labels these two threats as legalism (isolation)and antinomianism (affirmation).He states, “These two errors constantly seek to corrupt the message and steal away from us the power of the gospel.”[7] If there is a pure gospel that changes the lives of people, Satan will certainly try to pervert this message—even if it means using those who have decided to follow Christ (or make this claim). To this point, we should ever be aware of these two prevailing threats and marginalize them.
The Proper Response to Living on the Fringe: Cultural Engagement
Cultural engagement is the flexibility of expression within culture(s) while embracing the uniqueness and significance of Christian thought and life. This includes the pursuit of relevance with the clear understanding that the Christian message will always be in opposition to fallen culture. Our response should be both timeless and relevant. C. S. Lewis defined this balance as a focus on unchanging truth and the language of “our age.” He states, “[Your] teaching must be timeless at its heart and wear a modern dress.”[8]
The value of cultural engagement is the subtraction of the determinate elements of both cultural isolation and cultural affirmation.It allows us to wear “a modern dress” without compromising the uniqueness and significance of the gospel. It gives the follower of Christ the ability to contextualize Christian thought and life properly. We do not fear culture but show a healthy respect for it. We do not blindly accept culture but give healthy evaluation to it. Cultural engagement allows the believer to be defined by the gospel, centered in Christ and His teachings, and encounter the culture without fear or compromise.
Practical Suggestions for Cultural Engagement
1. Let your life be defined by fasting and prayer. God is at work in the world. We need to do what is necessary to get in on this work. Living in a culture that no longer has a religious center requires a clear submission to and dependence upon the power of God. Agreeing with Andy Crouch, we must place solitude, fasting, and prayer at the core of this endeavor.[9]
2. Develop and maintain a robust biblical engagement method. This suggestion will look different for everyone, but also it will look the same. It is making a choice to embrace the Scriptures and the goal of conformity to the image of Christ. After all, the Holy Spirit of God, through the Word of God, does the work of God. Biblical literacy is essential to strong cultural engagement.
3. Develop a strong understanding of the culture you are in today. This proposal requires a robust analysis of culture that allows its values to be delineated and its practices to be evaluated. Cultural literacy gives us the ability to understand what is happening around us and properly respond with gospel efficacy and the love of Christ (1 Cor. 9:22–23).
4. Love God with all of your mind. This suggestion most certainly involves the previous two disciplines, but also it involves what J. P. Moreland calls “the soulful development of the Christian mind.”[10] After all, Jesus commanded us to do this (Mt. 22:37). We must develop a Christlike mind, which requires a conscious effort to develop the intellectual structure of the mind inside of the concepts of Christian thought and life.
5. Love our neighbor as ourselves. This practice can be difficult for the believer today. We live in a culture that rejects concepts of absolute truth and embraces moral pluralism. Neighbor-love requires cultural literacy and gospel fervency. Grace and kindness should define us as we engage the culture, but our neighbors will label us as troublesome. Still, loving our neighbors as ourselves helps us to realize that the enemy is not flesh and blood but principalities and powers—and we can have victory in Christ.
Our fallen world, especially modern American culture, opposes the Christian faith. We won’t be effective for the gospel in such a culture without knowing God, knowing culture, and knowing the love of Christ for the world. Our culture is experiencing the greatest explosion of information in the history of mankind. This explosion forces us to take a hard look at who we are in Christ and what we must be in our culture. The quickly changing view toward Christian faith requires an immediate response—a response that is significant and gospel-centered.
Agreeing with Kinnaman, we need a response that helps Christians to be “better prepared to serve Christ in a shifting cultural landscape.”[11] God has called us into this time and place to share the love of Christ with people who desperately need the gospel to change them. This hope requires a plan—a course of action—and we should not take it lightly. May we become all things to all people, standing firm on what is true through the power of the Holy Spirit. After all, it is He who brings lasting change into the lives of people for whom Christ died. With His help, maybe our cultural engagement will lead to cultural change.
About the Author: Ron Davis is the executive pastor at Cramerton FWB Church and the founder of CORE Apologetics. He has been married to Kristi for nearly twenty-nine years and has two daughters, Emilee (21) and Alyssa (19). Ron enjoys college football (huge Alabama fan—dad played there), religious doubt counseling, apologetics, and theology. He is currently enrolled in a PhD program at Liberty University (ABD).
[1]James Emery White, Meet Generation Z: Understanding and Reaching the New Post-Christian World (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2017), 19.
[2]Owen Strachan, Reenchanting Humanity: A Theology of Mankind (Great Britain: Christian Focus, 2019), 1–4.
[3]Charles Taylor, A Secular Age (London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007), 2–5.
[4]David Kinnaman and Mark Matlock, Faith for Exiles: 5 Ways for a New Generation to Follow Jesus in Digital Babylon (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2019), 15.
[5]For more information, see the following: Pew Research Center; Barna Group; Gallup; Landon Schnabel and Sean Bock, “The Persistent and Exceptional Intensity of American Religion: A Response to Recent Research,” Sociological Science, vol. 4 (Nov. 2017, 686–700); and David Zahl, Seculosity: How Career, Parenting, Technology, Food, Politics, and Romance Become Our New Religion and What to Do About It (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2019).
[6]Reinhold Niebuhr, Does Civilization Need Religion? A Study in the Social Resources and Limitations of Religion in Modern Life (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010), 166.
[7]Timothy Keller, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-centered Ministry in Your Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), Kindle Ed., location 727.
[8]C. S. Lewis, “Christian Apologetics,” in God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics, ed. Walter Hooper, EPub Edition (New York: HaperCollins, 2014), 113–15.
[9]Andy Crouch, Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009), 256.
[10]J. P. Moreland, Loving God With All Your Mind: The Role of Reason in the Life of the Soul (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2012), 15.
[11]David Kinnaman, You Lost Me: Why Young Christians Are Leaving the Church . . . And Rethinking Faith (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011), 6.
Recent Comments