OP-ED: No One Ever Deconstructs into a More Faithful Christian
Name a single person who ever deconstructed and came out more biblically faithful, more conservative, and more of a fundamentalist in their word and deed.
They don’t exist, because deconstruction=death.
You ever hear someone say “I deconstructed and now I hate sin even more?”
You ever hear someone say “I deconstructed and now I’m even more against same-sex marriage and unbiblical sexual activity”?
You ever hear someone say “I deconstructed and now I have an even more particular and emphatic view of what the gospel is and what one must do to be saved”?
You ever hear someone say “I deconstructed and now I’m even a more ferocious defender of the exclusivity of Christ”?
You ever hear someone say “I deconstructed and now I’m more pro-life and even more of an abortion abolitionist”?
You ever hear someone say “I deconstructed and now I have an ever higher view of the scriptures and a greater intolerance for bible twisting and exegesis?”
No. You don’t.
All you hear is “I deconstructed and now I don’t go to church and am more open to other truths and also love is love and maybe it’s ok to curb stomp a fetus.”
Deconstruction is spiritual strychnine, and those looking to indulge in it never come out the other side whole or healthy, but rather passers-on of the very theological poison they claimed to reject.
Adapted from our Twitter feed @protestia
About Author
Dear Staff Writer (whoever you may be),
Maybe you should ask why it is that the Christian faith cannot stand up to deconstruction if not a single person has deconstructed their faith and come out a more faithful Christian. If Christianity is historically and reality based, then shouldn’t everyone who deconstructs their faith come out stronger?
Is it your position that Christianity is unable to stand under scrutiny?
Because this modern “deconstruction” movement is of Satan and is deceiving people just as the Bible said it would in the last days. I encourage you to seek out the answers in the Bible versus posting here just to be antagonistic.
Susan,
If you would like to discuss being antagonistic, let’s discuss using such language as, “…maybe it’s ok to curb stomp a fetus” when describing those whom the author is attempting to caricature and stereotype.
My point is simply that the logical conclusion of the op-ed as it is written is that the writer does not believe Christianity can stand up under scrutiny. I was asking for clarification of their position.
What I believe and where I am looking for answers is irrelevant to my asking for the author to clarify what I understand them to be saying.
Thank you for your kind, logical, thought out, and non-antagonistic response.
Josh, The article is lacking. “Deconstruction” of a person’s Christian beliefs is almost exclusively used by those who reassess whatever Christian knowledge they believe they have attained and then compare with the philosophies of the world that have become popularized in recent years. This is a philosophical assessment that comes by choosing a philosophical worldview to live one’s life by. This has nothing to do with God changing a sinner’s heart, having been given the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit, and then living out that new life and knowledge of Christ in one’s own life.
If goats choose to no longer play the game of pretending they are sheep, that is very typical of what is described throughout the Bible including the new testament. Jesus himself had thousands believe at individual events, but it wasn’t a saving faith because they no longer walked with him after he said something they didn’t like. Only the actual sheep that were truly saved continued with him. The same is true today.
True Christian reconstruction would be similar to the time of the Reformation when printed copies of the Bible became widespread and available in a person’s own language, and the reconstruction was figuring out what things were false traditions that did not align with Scripture and then adjusting one’s faith to the truth of Scripture. That is not what is happening in these publicized “reconstruction” of those who claim to be Christians in recent years. For actual Christians, the more we study and reconsider biblical teaching, the more obvious the truth of all of Scripture becomes apparent to us, and the more we realize that the errant traditions that have crept in are the sources of the confusion and problems.
As I said, the article is poorly written and the premise is very flawed.
Paul,
Thank you for a well thought out and presented response that was significantly more cogent and enjoyable than the original op-ed.
LOL. You’re welcome.
I think it would have helped if the article explained what “deconstruction” is. It just starts out like it’s the middle of an article and has no logical flow. I’m not arguing against the content of the article just its structure.
Honestly, if people don’t believe the Bible at this point, it’s on them. There are plenty of resources–books, videos, etc.–out there that decisively prove that Christianity is true. The fact that we even exist proves that there is a creator. If people choose not to believe that’s on them. They’re never going to believe unless the Holy Spirit is given to them. So, we should just continue to pray for them that God will open their eyes and grant them the gift of repentance.
It is simple. People that profess to be Christian are either a real saved Christian or they are not. There is no middle road. A real Christian may very well have sins and troublesome areas in their life but they will not leave the Scriptural fundamentals of Jesus Christ, i.e., they will not “deconstruct.” The ones that do “deconstruct” were not saved in the first place.
Nice discussion. What the article did achieve, though it was not as thorough and specific as you may like, was a somewhat fleshing out of the article’s topic. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
What about people like Alisa Childers? Or people coming out of NAR who deconstruct that nonsense and reconstruct into real Christianity?