Ep 79: Who is a True Christian w/ David Congdon

00:00Can you talk about what actually makes a true Christian versus a fake Christian like me?

00:08I think it had, I mean, political power is part of it, but I would specify it specifically

00:12in terms of money.

00:14I think it's about money.

00:16Hey, everybody, I'm Dan McClellan and I'm Dan Beecher and you are listening to the

00:24Data Over Dogma podcast where we increase public access to the academic study of the

00:28Bible and religion and combat, combat, combat, the spread of misinformation about the same

00:36as long as our location is where it needs to be, which today it obviously is not.

00:42How are things, Dan?

00:43Man, we're off to a good start, off to a strong, solid start to our show, which is good.

00:49Competent podcasters would just start over, but fun podcasters will just leave it in and

00:56keep rolling.

01:00We have a really interesting discussion today.

01:03We're going to finally, finally getting to the answer to the question, who is a real Christian?

01:12And now I can't talk, so we're all in the same boat.

01:15Why don't you introduce our guest before we just like run ourselves into a ditch?

01:21Please help us, David.

01:22Today, we're going to be talking with my friend David Congdon, who is the author of a new

01:27book, Who is a True Christian?

01:29Good grief, contesting religious identity in American culture.

01:33Good grief is not a part of the subtitle here.

01:36And David is the senior editor at the University Press of Kansas and also adjunct set McCormick

01:43Theological Seminary and Dubuque Theological Seminary.

01:46David, welcome to the show.

01:47Thank you so much for joining us.

01:49Thank you for having me.

01:50Yeah, if we can actually get any words out, this is going to be a fun conversation, David.

01:57The book, Who is a True Christian, it feels, it feels like now's the time for this book.

02:02I'm really glad that it's that it's come out because I think that especially here in the

02:08United States, this is this is what's being screamed on every, you know, if you look at

02:15any Dan McClellan comment section or whatever, you're going to find people safeguarding with

02:24all their might, mind and strength their idea of who counts in Christianity and who doesn't

02:32count in Christianity.

02:35But I think that you will say that this is not a new phenomenon.

02:40I mean, the timing is really, you know, helpful for me.

02:45I think as Dan will, well, the other Dan will attest books take a long time to gestate and

02:52deform.

02:53You don't really have much control over when a book comes out.

02:57And so I, you know, I began this book several years ago, thought it would have been out

03:01a couple years earlier than this year, but rather happy that it happened to come out

03:06in an election year, did not anticipate having a mainline Lutheran as a VP candidate who

03:14aroused a lot of true Christian claims, you know, these things are all entirely out of

03:19my control.

03:20But it's the time it has been quite, quite helpful.

03:23Yeah.

03:24And I really, I like the quote you start off with.

03:27You're talking about Trump and the election from 2020 begin with Pastor John MacArthur

03:33statement to Donald Trump, any real true believer is going to be on your side in this election.

03:38So we're, we're not dancing around the issue at all, but, but Amy directly at the fact that

03:45who is and isn't a real Christian is not just kind of an academic exercise or something

03:51for apologists to bicker about on social media.

03:55This is something that is influencing the election of the most powerful figure in geopolitics

04:02today.

04:03So this is a question that has come to the forefront of public discourse.

04:08And it was kind of, I think a lot of it is operating under the, under the surface in

04:13between the lines, but I think this book is helpfully bringing it to the surface so we

04:18can actually talk about it openly, which again, folks in my comments section are, are you

04:25usually not, not, they don't want to see this talked about openly, at least in a way that

04:30they are not in complete and total control of.

04:33Right.

04:34But as, as Dan mentioned, this is not the first time, or this is not the only time this has

04:38been an issue.

04:39And I think your book in interestingly enough starts off by pointing out that this is the,

04:45the origins of this discussion have a particular historical and social kind of contingency.

04:52And can you talk a little bit about where this question comes from and why it's important

04:56to the, the way the question is being discussed today?

04:59Yeah.

05:00I mean, that's right.

05:01I certainly, when I began this book, I, you know, I was focused on situations happening

05:08in 2016 when I first started to kind of think about this project.

05:12And as I dug into it deeper, I began to have to push it further and further back in order

05:18to make sense of how we got here.

05:22The way that my book structures it, I frame it in terms of modernity, you know, the modern

05:28period, so to speak.

05:29And I do think that, you know, modernity, uh, can you just define the modern period?

05:35It's just, just, just because that might be, that's one of the podcasts that you're talking

05:41about, you know, from the 20 teens on or whatever, but I think we need to, who is the true modern,

05:47I guess, it's really, really tackled that one, um, I, I'm going to roughly use the reformation

05:53or, you know, 1492 as a broad kind of marker point, but I, you know, I think that what

05:59we see in modernity is our, is a challenge to two main authority structures.

06:04You have institutional authority and you have like ideological authority.

06:09So, you know, by institutional authority, I'm referring to the fact that say the pope

06:14and the emperor are, you know, presupposed to be authoritative, um, that those institutions

06:20are assumed to be, uh, to have control over society.

06:26Um, but then on the ideological side, you have ideas about doctrine, about creeds, about

06:32beliefs being normative and challenges to those norms arising.

06:38And you know, one of the things I had to wrestle with is, you know, I encounter people who

06:43are, you know, progressive or left, uh, Christians who would reject the institutional authority,

06:50but strongly affirm the ideological authority of traditional doctrines and beliefs.

06:55And so you have this kind of two pronged crisis of identity in Christianity and modernity,

07:02and they're not always in sync.

07:03Oftentimes they are, but they can be separate.

07:07Those two categories, uh, interestingly throughout your book, they keep coming up and they, they

07:12have different names you've called, you call them sort of religion versus theology or rules

07:18versus beliefs or authoritarianism versus orthodoxy that like they keep, but those ideas are like

07:26sort of the thread throughout your book and throughout, uh, the sort of, as you say, the

07:32history of this question.

07:35So it's not so, so like talk a little bit about, about, uh, each of those categories, each

07:41of those ideas as, as how they, how they affect or, or, and who's using those ideas differently,

07:49uh, when asking the question of, of, of what is true Christianity or who is a real Christian?

07:56You know, it's, they're not always like consciously or consistently using this, this terminology.

08:03So in some ways, I'm trying to impose a framework to make sense of this morass of, of norm claiming,

08:10right, or authority claiming, it's, it's messy, right, to say the least.

08:15Um, I, I do think that, uh, you know, I use a quote in the book from Peter Harris in the

08:21historian who doesn't have a nice statement about how the shift in modernity is a shift

08:25from, you know, salvation is from the, is, is belongs to the true church to salvation is

08:31from true belief, you know, the right belief.

08:34And that shift, you know, so you do see a shift from more institutional claims to more ideological

08:40claims happening in the modern period, uh, as, as authority structures are less tangible,

08:47less, uh, salient to most people's lives, um, but, uh, but I would say, you know, language

08:54of rule and canon and, and, and those kinds of languages are certainly more on the institutional

09:01side.

09:02They tend to fall on structures, uh, in institutions that are setting out those rules and norms.

09:09Um, things like orthodoxy, there are much more, uh, there, there are little flimsier in terms

09:15of like being able to identify exactly what orthodoxy means for each particular person.

09:21Um, you know, this project, I didn't begin to set out as a critique of orthodoxy.

09:26Um, I did eventually arrived there by the time I finished this book, you know, I have a whole

09:30chapter kind of critiquing the concept of orthodoxy is, is kind of like the climax of

09:35my study, but, um, and when we say orthodoxy, sorry, just to, just to clarify, we're talking

09:41about sort of a, a, a set of, of, of theological mandates or, or beliefs that, that are, that

09:50are required is it would, would that be a fair way?

09:53Yeah.

09:54And I think nowadays that's sort of what orthodoxy means for most people is just simply a set

09:58of beliefs or doctrines that is accepted as true, but, but specifically as normative

10:05for a community of, of faith.

10:08Okay.

10:09Sorry to interrupt.

10:11So go on with what you were saying.

10:13Well, I mean, it's, um, I think you have to sort of parse out in different, different

10:20situations what people won't mean by these terms, you know, so it, it, there's a certain

10:24flexibility and fuzziness around this, these language of norms and rules and doctrines.

10:31I think that fuzziness is, is, uh, for some people very intentional, um, because it allows

10:37them to maneuver authority structures to meet the needs of their particular moment and

10:43their community.

10:44Um, I find orthodoxy, I think is a, is a very, it's a classic example of this.

10:50What orthodoxy means is, uh, is always in flux.

10:55You know, we're always constructing orthodoxy constantly, right?

10:58Um, but, but the, the value or the authority of orthodoxy rests on this assumption that

11:04it's static, right, that it's, it's permanent, it's eternal, it's always been there, right?

11:11Which of course is not the case and never has been the case, but, but that, that association

11:16of orthodoxy with permanence with continuity, uh, lends it a certain gravitas and significance

11:23and authority for people's lives that you can use for purposes of structuring power and,

11:28and negotiating, uh, people's lives and how communities are going to operate.

11:33Uh, I, I think that's such a, such a kind of universal fiction that's that an awful lot

11:40of Christians use in that structuring of power and values and boundaries.

11:44There's so many things that are eternal and immutable and unchanging that are once you

11:50actually look at them with a critical eye are never the same.

11:54They're always different and, and just the idea that orthodoxy is what determines the

11:58essence.

11:59And you talk for quite a bit about the essence of Christianity, uh, that's something that

12:03has only existed for the recent, you know, the last quarter of the period of Christianity's

12:10existence.

12:11For the first 75% of Christianity's existence, there was an authority structure that spoke

12:16with ultimate authority and that was, that was the, that was it.

12:21And then come the reformation and, and everything changes and, and a big part of that was actually

12:25deconstructing that authority and democratizing it to some degree, which removed that, uh,

12:33that essence that got to make the decisions.

12:35And now we're, everybody's on a search to, uh, try to, I don't know if they're trying

12:39to achieve that authority without the, the actual, uh, structure, uh, because, and particularly

12:47with a within evangelicalism, which is the loudest voice and, and at least in America

12:51in this discourse, you know, it's, it's, uh, it's quite spread out and it's quite decentralized.

12:57And I think they value that, but at the same time they, they still want to try to be in

13:02charge of, uh, what Christianity is allowed to be.

13:07I mean, I think that's partly what's interesting about the new kind of surge in interest in

13:11Christian nationalism and integralism and those authoritarianism structures is you see these

13:16Protestants and especially evangelicals, sort of pining for an institutional authority

13:21that hasn't existed for hundreds of years.

13:23They got rid of it.

13:24Yeah.

13:25They got rid of it precisely and, and it will never come back.

13:28There's no way to recover that, you know, and, and yet they are actively, you know, forming

13:35coalitions to attempt, or at least to claim to achieve that, that, that you think, you

13:41think Trump is the messiah of this authoritarianism.

13:45Is this a way for them to achieve a degree of authority that is otherwise beyond the grasp

13:51of evangelical Christianity in America?

13:54I think in some, in many ways that he is, I think that's partly because Trump is such

13:59a raw lust for power that, um, he is, he is infinitely moldable to the ideological needs

14:10of whoever is willing to give him a power, right?

14:14And that's really attractive for a community that, um, that wants to gain power and legitimacy

14:21in society, uh, to gain more control.

14:24They just need somebody who's going to bulldoze their way into positions of power and doesn't

14:30really care about institutional norms or any of those other moral issues, uh, is willing

14:38to give them the power if, if they, if I'll put them in charge.

14:41Yeah.

14:42Even if it means totally obliterating all of the, their standards and their, their more

14:46race, they have always asserted our, uh, of prime importance, um, kitten and, you know,

14:54once you get to, uh, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the enlightenment you have, uh,

15:00and, and you start to try to, uh, a big project within European imperialism was, was categorizing

15:07everything, categorizing the whole world and all the people within it and heart, higher

15:10archiving the world and everybody within it as well. And, uh, Aristotle, um, the ghost

15:16of Aristotle haunts an awful lot of what's going on here, but, um, I want to get back

15:21to the idea of the essence of Christianity, this essentialism, this notion that we can

15:26reduce things to necessary and sufficient features that allow us to, uh, to define and

15:31encapsulate and control things.

15:33Can you talk about what you found fascinating about this search for the essence of Christianity?

15:38Yeah, the essence is a term that, of course, it's sort of fallen out of favor for obvious

15:43reasons for a lot of people today, but, you know, it was the banner under which is quote

15:48unquote liberal Christianity, uh, emerged in that kind of post enlightenment period.

15:53Um, and, you know, the term itself is interesting, says it actually has roots in pre enlightenment,

15:59uh, writers, the people who are more, uh, actually trying to defend Christianity against

16:04liberalism, people are Richard Hooker and, and folks like that. Um, but it quickly becomes

16:09this, uh, kind of, you know, rally point for liberals and, and others who are wanting

16:18to challenge, you know, traditions and orthodoxies and institutions. And the thing that's attractive

16:25about it is it'll, it provides a way to bypass doctrine, bypass the tradition and find something

16:33pure, right? That's the, that's the attractiveness of it for a lot of those, those folks. And,

16:39um, many of those early liberals were very mystical in their orientation. They wanted

16:44to attain some, some divine essence, some divine purity that, that was beyond the violence

16:52and, and degradation of history. And so there's that quest for purity, that quest for, for

17:00eternity, that it's in some, in many ways, the liberals were the ones who really launched

17:06it. But then of course the conservatives took it over in their own way. Yeah, that was

17:09an interesting one of, one of your chapters, I believe, uh, started with a quote that said

17:15that evangelicals are the new liberals. Right. Uh, and you know, obviously they ain't,

17:21uh, in a lot of ways, but in this way, they, like in this sort of search for an essential

17:29quality, uh, a sort of boiling down of, or, or, or maybe just a, a boundary, a boundary

17:37for who gets to call themselves Christianity. They sort of, they kind of took over that,

17:43that, uh, quest. Well, that's what's really been fascinating for me for the last 50 years

17:49or so. You see this odd, rural reversal within American Christianity in particular where,

17:55um, I see a lot of mainline Protestants, traditional liberal Protestants, uh, rediscover

18:01of strong interest in tradition in doctrine in orthodoxy. On the flip side, you have the

18:09quote, unquote conservative evangelical wing of American Protestantism, American Christianity.

18:15Um, while they also are sort of on this quest for historic Christianity and all that, uh,

18:19they are, uh, quite willing to rethink and redefine Christianity in rather radical ways

18:27to, to kind of fit their political agenda. Right. And so, um, they're proposing all kinds

18:34of new statements, you know, Nashville statement and whatever might be to, uh, you know, provide

18:40a new creed for Christianity today. It's, it's, it's, it's an interesting phenomenon,

18:45I think. Yeah. And a lot of it, which gives us folks like Joel Webin is trying to overturn

18:53everything that, uh, that makes this world worth living in.

19:04So one of the things that I found interesting about your book, when you were discussing sort

19:07of the history of this, of this quest and you, you call this, I think at one point, you said

19:13that all of Christianity since the Reformation has been questing has been this sort of quest

19:19to figure out what the heck Christianity actually is. Um, but you, you, you've sort of pointed

19:27to a few moments in, in history that we're like, uh, sort of pivotal moments just in world

19:36history. So you, at one point, you pinpointed World War two and you talked about C S Lewis

19:42and, uh, and, and contrasted his quest for an essence of Christianity with, uh, with a

19:49German whose name I've forgotten now. I heard off bolt one. Well, okay. Uh, so talk a little

19:55bit about the, the, their, uh, quests. Well, the World War two is interesting for a number

20:01of reasons, but I think in general kind of global critical moments where, uh, you know,

20:08broad, broad challenges to the status quo challenges to institutions, right? I mean, in

20:14many ways, the first World War was that for Europe, right? That was a, uh, you know, crumbling

20:20of institutions. So we see like, you know, Weimar Republic and eventually not to Germany

20:24arise out of the ashes of that war, right? And so, um, but I think for, for North America

20:29in particular, the second World War is a, a special pivotal moment. You see a lot of institutions

20:35form in the wake of that, the post-war period. Um, so, but in terms of C S Lewis and Rudolph

20:43Boltmann, I like that, that kind of contrast because they're both writing at the exact

20:47same time. They're writing in the context of a war in the early 40s in which, uh, both

20:53of them are attempting to articulate what Christianity is today. Um, Boltmann, who I

21:01did a lot of work on earlier in my career is very famous for his, what's called demethologizing

21:06of Christianity. Uh, he got put up to heresy trials as a result of that. Um, and, you know,

21:13when he went on a tour in the U S in the 50s, you know, he was, when he was introduced at

21:16places like Princeton Seminary, he was introduced as this great heretic. So, you know, you know,

21:23the president of Princeton Seminary said, you know, we still have things to learn from

21:26heretics, you know, and, and so it's, uh, rather humorous image, but, uh, but so he

21:33had Boltmann, who is this perceived heretic perceived a blasphemer of, of Christian doctrine.

21:38Uh, but any of C S Lewis, who of course is beloved now for bio-angelicals for, uh, you

21:44know, being an apologist for Christianity. Um, but his mere Christianity is, is itself

21:50an, uh, an attempt to provide a, an account of the essence of the Christian essence, which

21:56is language he does use at times. Um, and it's a, you know, if you read it from that

22:01lens, it's rather interesting to think about it as, as a contribution to what is really

22:06a liberal Protestant, uh, trajectory in terms of trying to formulate a relevant and convincing

22:14account of Christianity for the modern period. Do you think you could come up with a, this

22:20may be unfair of me to ask, but a sort of a some, a brief summation of C S Lewis's ideas

22:27versus Boltmann's ideas? Just, yeah. Sure. I mean, so I, you know, Lewis, so I categorize

22:34in my book three different types of the Christian essence or Christian rule. You have a doctrinal

22:39type, um, and you have a kind of a cultural or, uh, you know, experiential type, and then

22:45you have a kind of a practical or political type. Um, and I sort of trace the history

22:49in those terms. Lewis is a classic doctrinal type of Christian. He, he thinks Christianity

22:56simply is a set of doctrines, which includes a, you know, uh, Trinity, uh, incarnation

23:03and atonement. And then up, and then also a little bit on, you know, moral beliefs, you

23:09know, practical living. Right. Um, that's, that's his essence. It's just a set of doctrines

23:14and he talks repeatedly in his book about how, you know, he's not trying to make this up.

23:19This is just the way it is. This is just what Christianity has always been. It's been,

23:23it's been these four things or whatever, you know, and if you don't like it, that's fine.

23:28You know, you're your own thing, but this is what Christianity is. And he uses the analogy

23:34of, uh, dictionary words, which I know, uh, Dan, you, you are a big fan of dictionary

23:39definitions. Don't want to talk about it. Uh, but, um, but he uses that, and that analogy

23:45where words have a definition. This is what a word means. And he says Christianity is the

23:52same way Christianity simply means this, the set of doctrines. Um, it's funny because

23:58you know, having been on a show with Dan for a, for a little over a year now and so I am

24:04not only suspicious of dictionary definitions now, but very suspicious when someone tells

24:09me they know exactly what Christianity might be. So, absolutely immediately, Lewis, you

24:15are, you're, you're on thin ice, buddy. So, so, so, so what is, where is bullmong coming

24:22from? So that's Lewis. I mean, bullmong is on the very far opposite end of this in terms

24:27of for him, he is, I would place him broadly in this kind of mystical liberal tradition.

24:33And for him, uh, the essence or what he calls the cringma, which is this Greek term, you

24:39know, uh, for proclamation. And he uses the word cringma in a really creative, unique

24:45way. It does represent what liberals previously had called the essence. And it is pre linguistic.

24:53It's pre rational. It's not something that can ever be put into definitive linguistic

24:59form. It doesn't have a definition at all. It cannot have one. Um, and right. That's

25:06helpful. Thanks. So, you know, he has this letter that bullmong wrote this letter to

25:10Heidegger actually in the 20s or, I mean, oh no, maybe later than that. I forget it now,

25:16but he wrote a letter to Heidegger where he said, the, the purpose of, of all of this

25:20is to be on this ongoing pursuit of trying to, to identify what the cringma is, but you

25:26will never arrive. You, you will never get there. Um, and so he holds it out as like this

25:32carrot that we can all, we're striving to reach the cringma. Um, but it's like, it's

25:37this transcendent, you know, eschatological reality that lies beyond our historical finite

25:45grasp. Christianity as a stationary bike. In some ways, right. I think that is probably

25:54one of the more kind of honest approaches to what Christianity is because it is whatever

25:59people say it is. And so recognizing that this is not something that we can actually

26:03nail down gets closer than the folks who suggest that, oh, we can nail it down because their

26:10nails and their, and whatever they're nailing down are always just socially and historically

26:15contingent, uh, just ideologies. And this is something that I think is, um, uh, I think

26:22is fascinating about this, this, uh, search for an essence is it's always an attempt to

26:30shed whatever cultural trappings you don't like to say, ah, here's the essence. And here

26:37are all my cultural trappings that I do like that are validated by this essence. And, and

26:43like even CS Lewis, I saw something on Twitter the other day where somebody pointed out that

26:48in, uh, in a volume that CS Lewis wrote on, um, some, uh, something on the Psalms, I forget

26:53exactly what it, uh, what the title was. But CS Lewis in 1958 was like, yeah, there's

26:59contradiction. There's wickedness. There's evil going on. There are things in the solves

27:04that are, that are bad. Um, and the person pointed out in erancy was not the battleground

27:11would, it was not part of the essence of Christianity at in 1958. So Lewis could get away with that

27:17and nobody cared. Now, however, in erancy is, is at the heart of a lot of what's going

27:23on there. And even as people, um, not just, uh, you know, fundamentalist and evangelicals,

27:29but, but folks like Jordan Peterson and, uh, and others who want to latch onto Lewis as,

27:35as some kind of validator of, of Christianity as, as the great hope for humanity appeal

27:41to Lewis and are just like, Hey, we don't care about that. We don't, we're gonna ignore

27:46that part. Lewis is, I mean, part of a British tradition, of course, it never had an interest

27:51in there and seeing still doesn't, you know, British evangelicals, uh, always like to

27:54complain about the American evangelicals for this very reason. What was, um, yeah, James

27:59Barr wrote a book on fundamentalism where he distinguished, uh, British and American

28:03evangelicalism. And it's a, it's an appointment with those idiots. I mean, the thing about

28:10scripture is fascinating too. Cause I do think the inerrancy debates are, I mean, while they

28:14still happen, it is largely a thing of the past, in my opinion. Um, I mean, we do, I

28:21mean, the inerrancy wars were big in the 70s, 80s, and then especially into, you know, 90s,

28:25but, um, one thing that I've noticed, I do think this is increasing the case since 2000

28:31or early 2000s is that a lot of the evangelicals, you know, they'll, they'll still of course

28:36appeal to the inerrancy, appeal to the bible, of course. Um, but there isn't the same sense

28:42that inerrancy or, or scripture is going to be the answer that will address the problems.

28:48I think there was a sort of naive assumption that if we just get people on board with Christianity,

28:53we do enough evangelistic, you know, crusades and all the rest, we get people converted,

28:58then they'll just follow our social and moral political beliefs because the bible is just

29:04so obvious, right? Once you accept the bible's authority, the rest will follow. I happen to

29:10know of a podcast that might confuse that. That might be tricky. It might make that a tricky

29:15complaint. It might. Yes. Right. And I think that became increasingly apparent to them that

29:20that was just never going to be the case, that that wasn't going to happen. Um, and I do think

29:25there's been a rhetorical shift away from inerrancy and the bible is being the focal point to

29:34other, you know, lart, other, other areas. You know, I think that's partly why we see this

29:40interest in Christian nationalism is because they, it's, it's not going to be the bible that's

29:44going to be the answer. You got to, you got to, you got to force the institutions, the political

29:48institutional power, right, to force that way of life on the people because they're not going to

29:54adhere to it just by simply being Christian. So that the one authority failed. So we're

29:59they're like, all right, we're going to try another authority structure. Right. Yeah. Right. And

30:03this, you know, this, this sort of ties into one of the things that that happens a lot in your book,

30:08which is when when we're discussing the modern question of, of who is a true Christian,

30:14it does tend to centralize on certain political questions. It centralizes on the questions of a

30:24abortion or the questions of, you know, other other question, other sort of societal questions

30:31rather than theological questions, or, or, or, or it centralizes those societal questions around

30:39theological questions, which is sort of part like, you know, the evangelical, the rise of the power

30:48of the evangelical movement, the political power of the evangelical movement, which started sort of in

30:52the 70s, 80s with especially centering around this question of abortion. I don't, I thought I had a

31:02question. There was a question sort of formulating. I'm sure that, but like, talk a bit about,

31:08about how this is structuring itself and about how it like, what the landscape looks like now,

31:17beyond, well, maybe not beyond the Dan's comment sections, because that, what a, what an interesting

31:24little slice of our, of, of this conversation. It is to read the comment sections in any of Dan's

31:31videos. It becomes very clear how these people are drawing their lines. It's where I go first. I

31:38just, yeah. Well, and I think there's an interesting point to make here that one of the reasons that

31:44prior to like Falwell and Wyrick and, and these others, Christianity, there were an awful lot of

31:50Christians who were like political power bad. Right. The scriptures say we should not be searching

31:56for this. That is not Christianity. That is opposed to Christianity. And then we had these

32:01campaigns to galvanize a religious right that fundamentally had to do with, with the ability to

32:07keep black folks out of evangelical universities and folks and things like that. But now when,

32:13on the other side of this, we're, it seems to me, we're kind of getting the, the outcome of all of

32:19this where we're now having people saying it doesn't matter if Donald Trump is a rapist or an

32:25adulterer or any of these things because he's going to give us the power and that's what's important.

32:31That's quite a significant shift. So yeah, could you, could you talk a little bit about how things

32:36have changed since, since the 70s? Yeah. Well, I mean, to go back to the point about the doctrine

32:44issue, because you think what's interesting about this shift is, I mean, doctrine is just no longer

32:48important to most people. It's not relevant for most people's lives. And, and I think everyone

32:53recognizes that. There's a general sense of, of acknowledgement that the doctrine exists.

32:59It's there, but it's largely faded from view. I think there's a lot of, there's some historical

33:05reasons for that. I think people will be surprised to hear that. You say everybody recognizes this.

33:11I don't think a lot of people do. I think, I think it's true in people's lives, but they,

33:16but if you asked them if the doctrine was important, I think many, most people would say it is, but

33:22it's true. I think you're right that it's well, I think doctrine is a proxy now, right? The doctrine

33:28is a proxy for other things that is to say, you know, it's not the doctrine itself, so to speak,

33:36that is what is so crucially important. It's that it's a stand-in for a larger set of cultural,

33:44political, social values and norms. You know, so, you know, when, so even some, some of the folks,

33:53you know, who are on the left, we'll talk about the importance of the Trinity, for example, right?

33:58And certainly, I do, I do believe that there's sincere that the structure of the Trinity is

34:03crucial to them. That's fine. But it's more than that. The Trinity is a stand-in for a church and a

34:10set of a liturgy, right? A liturgical community that is shaping our culture, shaping their culture,

34:19shaping their values, that whether you belong to that church or not is kind of reflected in

34:25how strongly you adhere to this doctrine, right? And so the doctrine becomes a portal to a larger

34:31set of institutional social values. Well, it becomes an identity marker, but I think it's

34:37use as an identity marker usually takes over from its doctrinal significance. And because of the

34:45constant negotiation between our sacred past and our present and our future, those identity markers

34:52still have value even if the content is no longer there. And now it just functions as a

34:58credibility enhancing display or something like that or a means to the next end, which is now

35:04not doctrine but power. Yeah. I mean, the religions make believe book, which you had an

35:10episode about, which I love, you know, it's a really important and helpful book. It's all about

35:15that, right? It's a group identity marker precisely for that reason. Yes. And I think on the flip side,

35:21you know, for in terms of the story about evangelicals, I mean, evangelicals are really

35:27interesting case because there you see the atrophy of doctrine really profoundly in many ways. I mean,

35:33you look at the contemporary non-denominational evangelical church today, doctrine is not on their

35:39radar. I mean, it's there maybe on the website, but that's not what they're preaching or promoting,

35:45you know, and or to put another way, a traditional set of doctrines associated with creeds and

35:52councils and all the rest is not the focal point. What's now is a new set of doctrines that has

35:57arisen that are being constructed in real time. You know, we're seeing effectively a new creed

36:03being written right now, you know, by parachurch networks and activist organizations, you know,

36:11so you look at something like the national statement. I mean, I do think that you can say that the

36:15average American evangelical, their creed is has to do with marriage, it has to do with abortion,

36:22it has to do with, you know, patriarchy, all these other social structures. That's their creed.

36:31You know, it's almost irrelevant what you believe about the incarnation, you know,

36:35what you believe about some of those traditional views about the Holy Spirit or whatever. That's

36:41not the that's not the concern. Well, one of the things that has happened sort of, and especially

36:46in the American evangelical landscape, is that the creed has become almost atomized to each

36:55individual church, each individual pastor, his flock has it has its own creed or her flock has

37:02their own creed. And it's it and, you know, every now and then you'll see them get together for,

37:08you know, for whatever group. And the inviting begins because they can't even decide amongst

37:13themselves what's about what's what's correct and what isn't. Yes, I mean, I would say, you know,

37:20some of the people who are really strongly, you know, adhering to ancient creeds, they'll say

37:26we don't have creeds today, they have confessions or statements of faith, right? They'll try to make

37:30that distinction, right? A proper creed requires an ecumenical council. You know, that's the

37:35the really hardcore traditionalist will strongly emphasize that. But yes, I think you're exactly

37:41right. We have a plethora of statements of faith that we all are, you know, just assuming that

37:47that's what our guided principles are. So as as Christianity becomes defined more by

37:57pluriformity than by consistency, what is driving the boundaries that are reified?

38:06What is driving? What is acceptable variation within Christianity versus what puts one outside

38:14of Christianity? It sounds like political power is is the target for for most of the reduction

38:24of Christianity to necessary and sufficient features. So is it just whatever threatens

38:29political power? Is it more complex than that? Is it social? Is it it doesn't sound like it's very

38:36doctrinal? Can you can you talk about what actually makes a true Christian versus a fake Christian,

38:43like me? I think I mean, political power is part of it, but I would specify it specifically in terms

38:49of money. I think it's about I think it's about money. Okay. And I use the example in the book about

38:55colleges, I use Wheaton College as an example, but you could use almost any Christian college or any

38:59Christian institution these days. You look at what threatens the organization, right? It's threatening

39:06donors, it's threatening, you know, enrollment, it's threatening, you know, participation in their

39:12activities, their organization subscriptions. You know, that's so it's a it's about money,

39:18right? And I do think that is the the structuring principle, the criterion for defining the boundaries.

39:26Orthodoxy is a flexible category that by and large for most Christian organizations

39:33doesn't get used until somebody threatens a money base, you know, until somebody threatens

39:39that source. I want I want to share a brief story just to punctuate this. So I worked for just over

39:46a decade as a scripture translation supervisor for the LDS church. And I would go occasionally to

39:51a conference that was called BT Bible translation that usually took place just outside of Dallas.

39:58And it was overwhelmingly evangelical groups, a lot of them doing a lot of really good work

40:02around the world. And I was always trying to collaborate with folks, sometimes because

40:10I thought I could contribute sometimes because I wanted something, for instance, there's a Bible

40:15translation machine called paratext. I was like, we could really do a lot with this machine,

40:21we could learn a lot from it. This could be helpful for us. And I would and I had friends who were

40:27parts of organizations that were using it and and even that were parts of the paratext organization

40:32itself. And it always came that we never were able to get any approval for this. And it always

40:39was the same reason. If our donors find out that a Mormon is doing this, they will we will lose

40:46donors. And so I have seen that in in real life in in living color. So that that makes an awful

40:55lot of sense. And it also kind of cheapens, kind of cheapens the Christianity, but those institutional

41:02concerns, I think it's fascinating that the institution ultimately is what is driving things,

41:08even as the Reformation and the it was all about deconstructing the institution.

41:14You're right. I mean, what we have now are a plurality of institutions all vying for

41:21this marketplace, right, this, this free marketplace, so to speak, not really. But anyway,

41:28that's the idea is that they're all trying to, they're trying to buy for for donors for funding,

41:32for support. And I think one of the things about the kind of the American experiment

41:39politically with the wall separation between church and state is that it has forced churches to be

41:45marketing machines in a way that an established church system, the church can rely on taxes,

41:51coming to them to support their institution. So the institution is just it's in place,

41:56it's stabilized by public funding. When you don't have public funding for the churches or for

42:03anything or anything, you know, this includes higher education, this includes whatever, right?

42:07We don't have public funding to support it. You have to market yourself, you have to be this PR

42:13machine going out there hustling for those funds. And that means that everything is subordinate

42:19to that mission. Your, your statement of faith means nothing if it doesn't get you that funding,

42:26if it doesn't keep you, keep the lights on and keep going. So the kind of the capitalist neoliberal

42:32landscape of America today means that every church ultimately is subservient to the dictates of the

42:39market. That's reality. And this is why evangelical universities have to have statements of faith

42:45and why there are folks like Pete ends and like others who get they are shed from this because

42:52they know that that threatens the interests of donors, even though the donors may be operating

42:58on a more doctrinal level. Yes. Fundamentally, what is driving that engagement and that interaction

43:05is the institutional concerns for for the money. Do you think this is why fundamentalist Christianity

43:11evangelical Christianity stands so opposed to socialist approaches? Absolutely. Absolutely.

43:18Interesting. Oh, for sure. 100%. No, I mean, it's, it's, I mean, it's, it's, it's all baked in there,

43:24right? It is, it does come down to that issue. I mean, and we all know this, we don't know these

43:29organizations that if their funding base changed its beliefs and their values, they would change

43:35in a heartbeat, right? You know, tomorrow they would change. We saw this with a whole world vision,

43:41vision scandal, you know, with them trying to change their policy on employees,

43:45full or seminary is going through it right now. I mean, full or seminary is currently in the process

43:50of possibly changing their position on marriage. Exactly. Right. Yeah. And for those of you listening,

43:57I held up a copy of the book, The Widening of God's Mercy Sexuality Within the Biblical

44:01Story by Chris Hayes and his dad, Richard Hayes, which basically has this very influential evangelical

44:07scholar, Richard Hayes, changing his mind about LGBTQIA inclusion within evangelical Christianity

44:15and making a biblical case for it. And I think Chris is at Fuller. Yeah. He's a professor at Fuller.

44:22I mean, Richard Hayes's change of mind is, is of course notable in itself, but Christopher Hayes's

44:28employment at Fuller is the bigger story, in my opinion. Yeah. Because that's an institution that has

44:33fired faculty in the past for having this very position. And then as you do

44:40inclusive, is that what we're saying? Yes. And Chris talks about the, the lay of the land at Fuller

44:47in the beginning of the book. Yeah, it does seem like that like a lot of these as as society

44:55liberalizes, or rather as society changes its, its position on questions like abortion on questions

45:03like LGBTQ inclusion. So one of the one, and you can tell me if I'm wrong, wrong or right about this,

45:12but it feels like what one of the things that happens is all of these institutions that had been

45:19traditionally non inclusive and that that non inclusivity, that then becomes part of their sort of,

45:26again, identity markers and stuff. And they, and you know, they dig in their heels. They,

45:32they sort of solidify and calcite, you know, recalcitrate into these things until they can't

45:38take it anymore. And it feels like we might be reaching an inflection point or we might be heading

45:45toward an inflection point where society will no longer, you know, society at large, the, the,

45:53the view will will overpower these, these institutions. Do you think, do you think that's something

46:01that's going to happen? For some of them, yes. I think the problem, the challenge that we're facing

46:08though is that institutional Christianity is just simply dying across the board. And that's, that's,

46:15that just means that the writing is on the wall for most of these institutions that they're not

46:24going to recover something like it was, right? They're bleeding members. So the, it's, it's not

46:35currently in their best interest for most of them to change to a more affirming or, or progressive

46:41or more liberal position on some, a lot of these matters because there's, there's not a base of

46:47people clamoring to come back. Clamoring. That's a good point. I mean, a lot of people

46:52because of their, you know, their affirmation of LGBTQ people for just as an example,

46:58they left the church because the church, the church wouldn't go with them in, into that realm.

47:04And so, and so yes, then when you say, oh, no, wait, look, here's church that's following you

47:10where you're going. They're like, no, I've already, I've already left that institution. I don't need

47:15that anymore. Yeah, I think, you know, I'm, I'm, you know, I'm one of them, you know, that's, that's

47:21been my own trajectory. And I, that's fine with that. You know, I think there, I think a lot of

47:28churches, a lot of Christian institutions, probably if they aren't already have to come to grips with

47:35the fact that they had a time in a place to serve their constituents and their, their audience,

47:42and that time is quickly coming to an end. Wow. And that's, and so I do think, you know,

47:47when I talked to a lot of mainline church leaders and people in that, in denominations,

47:51I've been involved with the PCUSA for a while. I'm not PC, PCUSA, but I teach a lot of their

47:55ministers. And they are very open about this. They recognize that they are here for a time to help

48:03these churches die well. Wow. That is, that's, that's, that's, that's bleak. It's bleak. But,

48:11but they, but they are being trained to have their eyes open about this because that's just,

48:15that's the state of things. And so a lot of them go into these churches, these small churches that

48:20have maybe 20 members left, and they know that they're on a, they're on a hospice care for that

48:27church. You know, it'd be three to five, 10 years, maybe, and then they're going to shudder those

48:32doors. And that's their call. That's, that's what their ministry is. Yeah, I do feel like a lot of

48:38the, a lot of what we see, especially in the loudest of the, of the big evangelicals is

48:47a desperation. Like, you know, when we, when we see these as, you know, these, these pastors and these,

48:54large figures screaming about Christian nationalism, it feels like they're, it feels like they're

49:05fighting for their lives. They are. Yeah. I mean, and I think, I'm sorry, go ahead. I interrupted you.

49:12No, no, go ahead. Well, I was just going to say it, it seems like there are folks who are digging

49:17in their heels. They see the writing on the wall, but, and rather than try to chart a new way forward,

49:23they're just going to dig in their heels and double down on things, which is what gives us the Joe

49:28weapons and the Mark Driscoll's and the folks who are just going to commit fully to a more radical

49:35identity marker so that they can try to reap, you know, just the fringes of society so that they

49:44have some kind of membership, some kind of income, and they don't care if it means they're people

49:51wearing swastikas in, in their services. It seems like they're, but that would be like, if they're,

49:59if they're trying to reach the most radical and the most extreme just for the sake of, of the tithe,

50:07it sounds like that's the, that's the last heartbeat of, of institutional Christianity. And that's,

50:14and that's beating true. It's exactly what it has been the entire time about trying to structure

50:21power and values and boundaries in a way that serves their moneyed interests. And there's a lot

50:26of money tied up in this kind of stuff. And there, and so it sounds like they're just trying to find

50:31out how to appeal to the most checkbooks right now. Absolutely. I mean, that is exactly what's going

50:38on. And I think we're also seeing what Christianity means for that group changing to basically it's

50:45indistinguishable from a political party. It's indistinguishable from a political organization.

50:50And, and those words might very well, very near, in the very near future be synonymous that when

50:55you say Christianity in the, in the, in the US context, it just means Republican Party far right,

51:01you know, that's, that's probably inevitably where things are headed. And I think, you know,

51:07partly that's what I was doing in the politics chapter was kind of tracing how that's happening,

51:10why that's happening. But because doctrine is not no longer really the issue anymore,

51:15because it's a set of cultural values and norms and political, political policies.

51:21That line of distinction is being erased. And, and because politics is going to be with us forever,

51:28we're always going to have the political, that's the source of growth for these pastors to become

51:37effectively local party leaders. Yeah, which strikes me as part of kind of a much more,

51:44much larger scale macro trajectory, because you start with the Reformation, the Renaissance,

51:50the Reformation and the Enlightenment is what kind of created the dichotomy of the secular

51:56and the sacred of the political and the religious. And people get upset about the intersection of

52:01the two. And it's like, their distinction is artificial to begin with. And we've been trying to,

52:08to keep them apart. But this is, to me, it seems like a pretty natural re-convergence. Now,

52:15because we've reified the distinction, and we have created two separate categories,

52:20it's more of a marriage now, rather than a kind of Borgian becoming part of the same thing.

52:28Yeah, rather than an assimilation, now it's just a marriage, a union of two distinct things. But,

52:35but it seems almost like, you know, the gravitational pull brought them right back together again.

52:43And it's almost like the, yeah, the moon crashing back into the earth after having been

52:48created by some other impact from it. I mean, it's, yeah, the history of that

52:53secular, sacred secular distinction is, is interested in itself. I mean, I would, I might

52:59actually rephrase it a little bit differently in the sense that there's, you know, the church,

53:02the medieval church erected that distinction on within its own terms, right, as a different.

53:09Yeah, like these are, these are the, this is the, the police department of the church,

53:13and this is the other part of the church. Yeah. And so like when the institution

53:16falls down, right, or gets, gets deconstructed, or, you know, you, you have to change how those

53:22terms function. It's no longer a different set of offices in society. You know, now it becomes

53:27this more, you know, these, this different set of values or different set of norms that are

53:33operated. But they've always been in this very odd dialectical tangle where

53:39how you draw that distinction is reflective of the agenda you have in that moment.

53:46We talked in a previous show about the development of the concept of religion and how

53:51in the medieval, early medieval period, a, you had religious and secular monastic orders.

53:59And so that was kind of the original distinction of, of the two that then becomes what is fought

54:06against in the Reformation. And, and so it's, when, when you pull back and take a look at the whole

54:12macro history, it's fascinating to see how again, we're always in negotiation with what has come

54:19before, and we can't really escape. It would be nice if we could just take a, you know,

54:25we had the sacred timeline and we could just kind of cut it off and start a new one and not

54:30have to deal with what came before, but that's not how the world works. And so what, what do you see

54:35beyond? Do you have you looked beyond what happens when, when pastors just become party bosses,

54:45which, which is something that, you know, we have here in, in Utah, I mean, we've got most of

54:51our legislators are inset theocracy. Yeah. So, have you, have you considered what, what happens after

55:00that? Well, I mean, I, I've thought about it, but you know, it's, it, I don't know, I could be

55:08Nostradamus here to anticipate the future, but I, you know, it's hard to say. I mean, there's always

55:17going to be this quest for something spiritual, something meaningful, something beyond ourselves.

55:23What that looks like is, is, is in flux. And I, I, hard to say. Yeah. I, I do think that

55:30I think we're, you know, there's a sense in which I, I think churches and religions more broadly,

55:37perhaps are going to be, have to, have to reconsider their distinctions from each other. I think the,

55:46in the near term future, I do think that denominations will need to align and can join together and,

55:51and kind of coalesce. That's going to be a survival strategy for a while. But I think that that

55:59possibly might lead to maybe breaking down the walls regarding what makes one religion distinct

56:09from another religion. And perhaps finding commonality in solidarity, beyond, beyond doctrine and

56:19beyond liturgy as you know, shared human concerns, you know, that might be a source of future potential.

56:28Well, that's part of what your book concludes with is this idea of, you know, you, you do take a stab

56:36at a, at a, a, a prescriptivist approach to what should probably happen in the question of what is

56:46a true Christian. And, and you bring up the word, a polydoxy, as opposed to an orthodoxy. Talk just

56:53a little bit about what that looks like. Yeah, polydoxy is a term that I came across originally

57:00in some theological writings from people like Catherine Keller and others, but they're using it

57:04in a different way than I use it. I, I get the term from this Reformed Jewish philosopher,

57:10Alvin Rhines, who wrote this really obscure book called Polydoxy back in the 80s. And when I read

57:18it, it really blew my mind because what he's doing is he's not, he's not giving an alternative

57:25theology. This is what people ought to believe. What he's doing rather is setting up the conditions,

57:31the institutional conditions for, for a, a community for society that can embrace diversity and

57:42difference, that can have a plurality of beliefs and practices in which we can both embrace and

57:51respect that, that diversity. So, Polydoxy comes down to, for him at least, this idea of religious

58:00self-determination. That is that we have, we should have this shared value that each person has the

58:07ability to determine for themselves what religious values and, and beliefs they adhere to, based on

58:16their conscience, based on their, you know, their own commitments. And that there should be an

58:22institutional structure that supports and respects that. Right. That's, so that's the challenge here.

58:29So, Orthodoxy, as he understands it, and I think he's largely right here, that Orthodoxy

58:33comes down to this notion that ultimately, there's an authority figure, this magisterial authority,

58:39who gets to say arbitrarily, this is what you all need to believe. This is what you all got to do.

58:45If you're going to be part of this community, you got, you, you have to subscribe to these

58:50tenants, or else you're out. And that authority figure can determine what that is at any given

58:56point in time, effectively. Polydoxy says, no, we're not going to have that kind of hierarchical

59:04structure in which some patriarchal authority gets to determine what we all have to believe and do.

59:10We're going to create a system in which we respect each person's ability to determine for themselves

59:16what they believe. And then the challenge is figuring out what that looks like,

59:20figuring out what a community needs to be in order to make that possible.

59:23I think one of the things that that removes, which is, I think, one of the most salient features of

59:30the authority is, is the ability to police boundaries. What do boundaries look like and that people can

59:36come and go at will, and you don't really have a quick and easy way to determine who's in and

59:41who's out, apart from their own word, which removes an awful lot of power from the group,

59:47which is why most people today see that kind of thing as a threat.

59:51Very much so. Yeah. It removes the boundaries that policing entirely. It's really a community

59:59of consent, right? That's what it's about. And I think if we learn anything about evangelicals

60:04and today, it doesn't believe in consent. On so many different levels.

60:09Yes. Yeah. Back to the book of Acts and the folks who had no poor among them.

60:17But make sure you do what we say, or else God might kill you, is how that story ends.

60:24And that didn't last for very long. So that that need to police those boundaries is

60:33there, even in what many people consider to be the purest manifestation of having no poor among us.

60:40Ah, that's troubling to think about. It is troubling. I mean, it's there. It's in some

60:48ways baked into the human condition to want to police those boundaries, to want to say

60:52somebody's in, somebody's out. And I get it. I mean, that is a human tendency that we all have.

61:00Well, from the cognitive perspective of the cognitive science of religion, that is

61:04fundamentally what makes us human. That is why we exist as a species is pro-social

61:10markers and cues and things like that. So, yeah, that does undercut that. But at the same time,

61:18those pro-social tendencies are what also contribute to some of our greatest social ills

61:28and our geopolitical instability and stuff like that. So, you know what, maybe it's time we move

61:33beyond human evolution. Right. Well, you know what, that is going to be an interesting discussion,

61:39and I am going to make us have that discussion, or at least part of our discussion. You always do

61:43this, Dan. We're going to do that for our patrons. So, for now, David, we're going to thank you so

61:53much for joining us on the show. The book is Who is a True Christian? It is out now, yes?

62:00It's available? Yeah, it's been out for that. Yeah. Good. And so, you know, people can go and

62:06check that out. Is there anything else that you want to plug or anywhere that people can find you

62:13if they want more of you? You can still find me on the site formerly known as Twitter. I'm at

62:19D. W. Kongdon there, and I have a website, D. W. Kongdon.com. But otherwise,

62:24yeah, I have more books to come. Excellent. Awesome. Thanks so much for joining us. If you

62:31want to hear the rest of our conversation with David, please feel free to become a patron over

62:38at patreon.com/dataoverdogma, where at the $10 a month level, you can join in on the afterparty,

62:48and here. Even more interesting stuff. Other than that, thank you so much for joining us.

62:54If you want to contact us, you can reach us at contact@dataoverdogmapod.com.

62:59And we'll talk to you again next week. Bye, everybody.

63:03Data Over Dogma is a member of the AirWave Media Podcast Network. It is a production of Data Over Dogma

63:13media LLC, copyright 2024, all rights reserved.