How did this journey get started? Part I

A natural question to ask is, "How did she ever end up on this ecclesial journey?" It took off in earnest in 2005, but of course I was being conditioned for asking the relevant questions over the prior 10 years.

To provide some context, let's look back at my upbringing. I was raised in a Southern Baptist home in Texas, with wonderful parents who were/are very faithful, sincere Christians, who brought us kids up with a solid Biblical foundation. I am extremely blessed and grateful for my upbringing, for the teaching I received, and the exposure to a life lived out by my parents that was consistent with what they were teaching--their actions and words matched up and provided a strong model for being a disciple of Christ.

In high school, I was considered a leader in the youth group at church, was president of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes at the high school, led Bible studies at the public school, etc. I went to Christian summer camps and was trained in evangelism--I memorized vast amounts of Scripture and responses against a variety of arguments against the Christian faith. I was bold about my faith and was equipped to reason with non-believers and persuade them of the validity of the Gospel at an early age (1 Peter 3:15 was often told to me, to always be prepared with a reason for the hope that I have).  My focus, from the time I was about 15, was on evangelism--"bringing Christ to the lost."

In the midst of this formative time, I became aware of my family's tendency to move churches...always for a good reason, feeling "called" to do so. There was an understanding that the choice of affiliation is not set in stone, and every so often, one needs to evaluate the available churches and decide which one best fits the family's needs at that time. This made sense, since church leadership in each church changed every so often, which naturally caused changes in the culture, style, teaching, etc. of that local congregation.  Aside from changing leadership, there might also be teachings, approaches, strategies, activities, policies that were decided upon at some point by the leadership that we did not agree with, a pastor whose preaching was sub-par, a music minister with a style we didn't like, a youth group that was not vibrant, or the distance was too great, etc. So from birth to about 5 years, we were in a southern Baptist church, then
moved to a Charismatic church (where I accepted Christ as my personal savior and was baptized at age 6), then to an inter-denominational church when I was about 8, then back to a Baptist church when I was about 10. Then a group from that church did a church plant in another area around the time I was 13, and it was a seeker-sensitive church with Baptist roots, then to another church plant with deeper Baptist roots when I was about 16. Then when I was about 17, I choose to drive myself across town to the inter-denominational church we had been members of years ago, as I was drawn to the worship and teaching from the pulpit (I never got involved in anything outside of Sunday morning services).  Each of these moves was for a different reason, and the decisions to move were not taken lightly at all, but were made with much prayer, study, counsel, etc.

In college, I attended a Southern Baptist university in Alabama. However, I ended up attending a Presbyterian (PCA) church primarily. I never joined, as that would have required me to comprehend and embrace Reformed theology (and infant baptism), which I could not fully do enough to take the step to join. While in college, I was a part of several highly intellectual Bible studies, book studies, philosophical groups, and classes that considered and debated the role of Christianity in various scientific and social issues. My mind was open wide to ideas and perspectives--from mature Christians--that I had never been exposed to or considered.  I immediately began trying to understand why I was associating with the various tenets of Christianity, and in particular Baptist theology.  It was not from a perspective of doubting Christianity, but of wanting to know "why," so that my affiliation would be a conscious and deliberate decision that I could intelligently defend, not just a default because that's what I was taught and all I knew.  I remember coming home from college for a weekend and asking my parents why we believe in the Trinity, as that word is never mentioned in the Bible, there are various verses that seem to contradict the notion that God is three in one persons, and it's a highly complex notion that somehow we just accept because we're told that's the truth and central to Christianity. I also asked my parents why we believe baptism is important but not necessary. If it's so important, why isn't it necessary? If it's not that important, then why divide churches based on minor differences in it?  Why is baptism for adults, why it is by immersion? What does it really do? I also spent a significant amount of time studying Calvinism versus Armenianism--not merely the notorious predestination versus free will issue, but also the security of the believer ("once saved always saved," preservation of the saints versus perseverance of the saints), and the notion of total depravity, the effects of the atonement, and the idea of grace/justification.  I knew that Presbyterians ascribe to Reformed theology (i.e., Calvinism), but wondered what Baptists believe...my research resulted in the conclusion that it depends on the particular congregation--Baptists don't have an authoritative stance on that, but some churches tend to lean one way or the other, depending on the senior pastor's position.

I also wrestled for a solid semester with various positions on evolution, based on a science and religion class I took while studying abroad in London. I also wondered about prayer--why is it necessary to pray if God already knows what we're going to say, can we pray for things in the past, etc. The list goes on and on. My point in putting all this in this blog entry, as that I began to intellectually question the various aspects of my church's theology back in 1997-2001. I say intellectually question because it wasn't based on some emotional experience that I couldn't reconcile, such as a death of a loved one and wondering why God allows suffering, or on any escapist reaction to something. It was simply based on observations and conversations, and reasoning about the issues raised therein.  I was never questioning my faith as a Christian, but just wanting to understand which group within Christianity I could really belong to and defend. I wanted to know all the arguments to convince anyone of whatever position I was associating myself with. Meanwhile, I was also attending a Eucharistic service on Fridays at an Episcopal church downtown with a few people from my college--this was an experience I had absolutely no exposure to, it was a totally foreign experience to kneel, say prayers from a book, recite responses, go forward for communion...that contained real alcohol!  Then, when I studied in London, I attended Anglican churches and was fascinated by the fact that they had "high church" (traditional liturgy) and "low church" (contemporary)--the denomination had truly separated its theology from its form of expression in worship. At college, I was also on the (competitive) Student Ministries Counsel, as the Coordinator of Evangelism, and was in charge of providing the campus with opportunities for training in evangelism, practice in evangelism (e.g., going into the streets of Birmingham), and putting on the annual week-long revival. I say all this to show that I was all over the place in terms of theological exploration, all the while being very focused on evangelism and sharing the reason for the faith that I have with others (1 Peter 3:15).

Then I went to graduate school at the University of Texas in Austin. The liberal haven of Texas. I joined a Baptist church and I took a class studying the book of Revelation--my first time to study that book. I learned for the first time that there are different positions among Christians about the Rapture and End Times, and there are the preMillennialists, postMillennialists, Amillennialists.  Hmm. How does one know what to believe?  Ah well, not an important issue, will live as a disciple of Christ regardless. After 3 years, I got involved in a local non-denominational church, where I remained for a couple years (until I moved to the Anglican church, which will be discussed in another blog post). During this time, I noticed that there was no opportunity to officially join the church--there was no members card or any sort of registry at all to record members. Everyone was simply there.  Also, nowhere was there a list of what the church believes.  This was strange to me and seemed to be related to the fact that there were no members--for there was no notion of joining in agreement with some statement of mission or belief.  Eventually, I attended a class for newcomers, which was focused on all the ways one could be involved in the various ministries at the church, and I asked where could I find a statement or document of what was believed and being taught at that church. The response from the leadership was that they have intentionally avoided such declarations, as they find it divisive and inhibiting for newcomers to remain. What?? I found this exceedingly disturbing. My response to them was that perhaps as adults we can accept that, saying that we are accountable for what we hear and discern and choose to accept from the pulpit, etc., but that for children in the church programs, parents really need to know what their child is going to be taught when the parents aren't around to filter it. This didn't garner much response from the elder leading the class.  Hmm...this lack of statement of faith was very unsettling to me, it seemed like an open door for false teaching to enter, there was little external accountability for the various aspects of the church leadership, teaching and administration of the church, and it was counter to the notion that there is an objective Truth to Christianity that the church, the body of Christ, was going to stand behind and stand up for, in the face of the shifting sands of the culture in which we find ourselves.

Meanwhile, at work/school at UT, I was on the leadership council for Grad Resources, a Christian ministry for graduate students that was not affiliated with any denomination.  The founder of the national organization immediately saw in me a heart for evangelism and sought to foster and spread that inclination among the group. We read books training us how to evangelize to the academic, deep thinker, skeptic, post-modern culture, etc. I again memorized so many passages of Scripture and logical arguments in response to the various positions non-believers might bring up.  A key focus was to combat a culture that is all about relativism--that there is no absolute truth, it is simply what one thinks is best for oneself and appropriate (for oneself) given the context of that particular culture, time and situation. (Even the notion of mathematical truth was questioned--is 2+2 really equal to 4 as an existential fact of reality, or is it a symbolic construct that we have declared to be true for our ease and convenience?) I was trained to defend the notion of one objective truth against this relativism and individualism so rampant in our culture. As Christians, we believe there is in fact Truth, that of Christ. And that Christ is revealed to us in the Bible, which is the inspired, inerrant, authoritative word of God.  Those two facts were indisputable to me, and an anchor in the midst of all kinds of teaching and beliefs promulgated at liberal universities and surrounding me in Austin.

This is where things got messy. I became friends with several dear people from Turkey, who were Muslim. A significant stumbling block for them regarding Christianity was how there are so many denominations and strong differences between them, often times the churches not getting along or working together for the greater Christian cause, etc. On any given street corner downtown, one can often see multiple churches from different denominations, all within a few blocks. Why? And why are there more than twenty Baptist churches--all of different ilks, often not working together (so it's not like they are all sister churches just reaching different parts of the city)? What is the truth of Christianity? How can a Muslim know what Christianity really teaches? If the Bible is inspired and protected from error in transmission, then what does it say and why isn't there agreement? (Muslims acknowledge the Bible as a holy book, but they believe it has been altered over time.) Sure, there might be a handful of different interpretations (as within Islam), but thousands (some studies say there are tens of thousands of denominations)? It seems comical to claim that Christianity is the Truth, when even Christians can't agree on what that truth is.  How in the world can Christian evangelism work, when there are so many different (and opposing) versions of Christianity being taught? And we're not talking style here, of hymns versus choruses, but of issues substantial enough to cause church splits and competition within the body of Christ, in direct conflict with Christ's prayer in John 17 for unity, and that the world will know His disciples by their love for one another and unity of purpose.  For churches to go to such length to divide and separate and draft their own constitutions and such, the issues had to be substantial enough. So where does this leave a Muslim trying to discern truth about the One True God and considering a radical leap away from Islam to...what, which branch of Christianity? They would need to defend their conversion, so they need to understand every aspect of their decision. But they can't even wrap their heads around the conflicting claims of Christianity.

There is no authoritative teaching. Some would claim the Apostle's or Nicene Creed (established in the 4th century by councils seeking to state the essentials that distinguish Christians from heretics) is the authoritative consensus of the essentials. But a large number of Christians have never even heard of these, much less know what they say. Some denominations have stated disdain for and/or rejection of creeds.  Others pick and choose which parts to believe of these ancient creeds of the early Christians. What is the agreed upon essential tenets of Christianity? Where can we find it? Is the mark of a Christian that they believe Jesus Christ died on the cross for their sins and rose again, and that's enough? Or do they need to believe in the miracles the Bible says Christ performed? Do they need to believe Christ was born of a virgin? In my science & religion class in London, one author's thesis was that in order for Christianity to endure the test of time, Christians are going to need to let go of all the scientifically questionable teachings, such as the miracles in the Bible, and only cling to the cross. I personally disagreed with that. But on what basis can one argue, if there is no authoritative consensus? One could add on to the cross, that one must believe that what the Bible teaches is true, and the Bible is the authority. But which interpretation of the Bible? And the Bible wasn't established as a canonical set of books and declared holy and inspired and such until the 4th century, so where does that leave the early Christians prior to having all these writings? What is the standard for them?  And even when the books of the Bible were assembled, there was no printing press or way of making it accessible to the people, so what was the average person supposed to do? Believe what they were taught in the assemblies ("ecclesia")? But how can they measure that against Scripture? What if they were being taught (God forbid) Catholic doctrines?  I'm not going to answer all these questions in this post, nor continuing listing the many more questions that naturally follow from this line of reasoning. The point is, there are many open or difficult questions that were suddenly raised, and I needed to do something about finding the answers...for the sake of effective evangelism, bringing others to a relationship with Christ!

At the same time, a similar line of reasoning/issues arose with my atheist colleagues at UT--how can I claim to them that there is One Truth, namely the teachings of Christianity, when Christians can't agree on what that is? And how could they ever know? Is there any authoritative interpretation of the Bible? How can people stake their lives on this and claim with such determination that others (non-Christians or even other denominations than ones own) are wrong? And potentially going to Hell? Isn't it contradictory to claim that relativism outside Christianity is a flawed position, but within the realms of some core Christian tenets, then it's okay?  If there's Truth, wouldn't it be Truth regardless of whether you're in or outside the boundaries of Christianity discussing it?

These issues and questions I've described above were cultivating the soil for further collisions of circumstances, conversations, experiences and ideas that catapulted me into a deeper ecclesial examination in 2005. To be continued in Part II.