Ever hear of the Blue Dog Democrats? They are a group of democrats who believe that, since Americans seem to be shifting toward more conservative views, Democrats ought to follow suit. They are opposed to the radical liberal agenda of much of the Democratic party. They are, in essence, Democrats in name only.
The Republicans have a similar problem. While the group is not official, Republicans have "RINOs", Republicans In Name Only. They classify themselves as Republican but embrace the liberal agenda of the Democrats. They are the "moderates". They might call themselves "centrists", the "bigger tent" folk. They ask Republicans to set aside their conservative and move toward a more liberal outlook. They reject Republican values and become Republicans in name only.
One you've never heard of, most likely, is the CINO. These are the "Christians In Name Only". You've never heard the term, I would think, but the idea isn't unusual. Surveys in the past decade have reported that something like 60-70% of Americans identify themselves as "Christian". This would include Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses as well as Catholics, Protestants, and anything else remotely related including self-identified "non-denominational" types. If that was an accurate number, I think we'd be in the midst of the biggest revival of all time and the president would have been incorrect when he told the world that we are not a Christian nation.
I think, however, that he was accurate and that "self-identified Christian" does not necessarily classify one as actually Christian. Consider the following facts. According to a 2009 Barna survey of "self-described Christians", 22% believe things contradictory to Christianity about God, such as "everyone is god, god refers to the realization of human potential," and so on. Did you read that? These are people who call themselves "Christian". And it doesn't get better when you ask more questions. Some 59% don't believe that Satan is real. Nor do 58% believe the Holy Spirit is real. They do believe that evil spirits and supernatural forces exist, just not that Satan or the Holy Spirit are actual beings. When asked about Jesus (remember, "Christian" means "follower of Christ"), 39% believe that Jesus sinned in His lifetime. If this were true, Christianity would be nullified because Jesus would neither have been God Incarnate nor would He have been able to pay for sins. It is no wonder, then, that 38% believe that their beliefs have not transformed their lives much. Oddly, while denying so much essential to Christianity, 89% hold that their main goal in life is to "love God with all their heart, mind, strength and soul." It begs the question, doesn't it? "What God?"
The Bible itself is problematic to Christians. In this survey, a majority (63%) believe the Bible is accurate in what it teaches, but 39% think the Koran and the Book of Mormon are just as accurate, that they teach the same principles as the Bible. In another study, there is a sharp decline in how reliable they think the Bible is. Only 30% of 18-to-25-year-olds think the Bible is accurate contrasted with 58% of the 64-plus group. The fear of the Barna group is that "the Bible will continue to lose hold on the next generation."
I hear a lot of people commenting on what Christians believe and what Christians are like. It makes me wonder to whom they are referring. When people self-identify as "Christian" while openly denying Christianity, is it reasonable to point to them as examples of what a Christian is like or what Christians believe? That makes no sense. So here we stand, Christians believing orthodox Christianity, trying to defend against ... Christians. These things ought not be.
4 comments:
Stan,
I'm just curious if you've heard of the Manhattan Declaration, if you've read it and your thoughts. It seems to me to be a move toward at least getting past some of the blatantly non-Christians ideas that some self-professed Christians hold. Or, put another way, come up with a list of things where "'Christians' may be more than this, but are at least this."
As you have presented, using the Barna survey is a bit misleading because it includes basically anyone who believes in any kind of god. It is at least interesting to consider some of the results, so long as you keep the makeup of the pool of participants in mind.
exactly
But what should we expect if the Bible is not trustworthy.
Yes, Jeremy, I signed it myself and then asked to have my name withdrawn when I realized some of its serious shortcomings. The most serious is that it failed to identify the singularly most important issue in Christianity -- the Gospel as the only means to salvation.
What was most disappointing to me about the Barna survey stuff was that it wasn't just those who believe in any kind of God. It was those who identified themselves as Christians. The problem, then, is that so many people who think they know what Christianity is about haven't got a clue. Now, if I ask someone "Are you a Christian?" and they tell me, "Yes", do I share with them the Gospel or do I assume they're "one of us"? If the latter and they fall among the apparently large numbers who actually are not (who are CINO), then they will not get the Gospel. If the former, then I'm insulting them. "I told you I am a Christian. Why are you giving me that stuff?"
Dan,
Yikes!
Post a Comment