Effective Communication: Breaking down barriers

In order to engage our culture in religious dialogue we have to first understand the way in which society views religion. If we talk about the grace of God with someone who has altogether different presuppositions than our own, the conversation carries no relevance to either us. We should not expect a sin-bound individual to take the initiative to understand our position, but rather as Christians we are called to take the initiative ourselves in spreading the gospel and meeting people where they are. This barrier demands that we be aware of the principles and beliefs of the people with whom we are speaking, at least to the extent that we are able to effectively communicate the gospel.

As disciples of Christ it is necessary that we share him with those around us. This is not an option. But in order to do so successfully we must understand the role that assumptions and presuppositions play in our conversations. The most powerful tool that academia claims to have is objectivity. The purported ignorance of the masses is written off as biased and subjective while the intelligence of the scholarly is deemed objective and thus inherently more accurate. Religion is the “opiate of the masses” as Marx put it, a comfort for the weak and an explanation for the ignorant. Religion is both crux and blinder in the eyes of academia, and to be an “academic” requires unbiased and independent analysis. This view is true with atheists and agnostics everywhere, and let me be clear that, though this issue dominates the university setting, it is relevant to every single one of us.

But this “fact” that is alleged by society is little more than a rhetorical power struggle amidst a fallen people. The idea that someone can present an issue objectively and without biases is an absurd delusion, and yet it fills Christians everywhere with fear. Being told that we are ignorant, that science is the only thing objective, and that God is irrational, has pushed Christians into a frightened retreat with a stifled sense of evangelism. Afraid that we will look stupid, afraid that we won’t have answers that are based on facts, and afraid that we really are too ignorant to engage such people, is central to why Christians do not share their faith. We must understand that everyone has presuppositions, no one is objective, and to point these things out in a conversation can be extremely advantageous. Not only can we have better conversations with non-believers, but we can have more confidence in understanding the rhetoric of our society.

As a part of the religion department at Wake Forest, this is an issue that I face every day of my life, but there was a specific example that I was involved with today that made me feel like I should write about it.

David Bromley, a very respected and leading expert on cults (or New Religious Movements as our objective academic friends choose to call them) from Virginia Commonwealth spoke at Wake today. The most objective among the objective came to give a lecture about the development of cults and how if we can only understand them without biases we can explain them away as sociological defense mechanisms. Early on in his lecture he made the following statement:

The study of religion begins with the understanding that God doesn’t create man, but it is man who creates God.

Not a very objective statement to say the least. This is his assumption. All of the data, all of the research and books, and all of his theories, are viewed through this lens. Were this assumption to be called into question his entire life and academic career could crumble.

How do we discuss issues of God with an “expert” in his field who doesn’t even believe that God exists? The same way we do anyone who we talk to about these issues – address the assumptions.

Bromley argues that humans create religion. I agree. There is more than one religion in the world and they are not all from God. Man has created his own gods since the fall. But we ask why. Bromley says that humans do this in order to give meaning to their circumstances. I agree. There is an innate desire that humans have to make sense of the world around them. We want to have meaning in what we do, and humans often create and manipulate religion in a way that serves this purpose.

But this is where his argument stops, and it can leave Christians in an anxious situation where they feel like they just don’t have the answers. What should we do? Keep tackling the presuppositions, keep asking why. Eventually you will get to the core of the issue and that is where true conversations can take place. In this situation there is only one more question which needs to be asked because that is where the paths will diverge. Why do humans feel it necessary to give meaning to their life? No other animals on the planet do this, it has nothing to do with survival, and no evolutionary benefit. Why would humans have such a desire? From the Darwinian perspective we are mere animals, but animals don’t do this. This is more than just the how things happen, this is the why. The how is necessary for survival and easily explained in the evolutionary process, the why is not. Your dog knows how he gets food, he knows you give it to him, but he does not care why. There is something different about humans that make them ask this question, and by asking one more why we have gotten to the core of the issue. There is no response by an evolutionist that holds ground as to why humans have a special need for meaning in life, but God tells us exactly why – we were created for him. We are spiritual beings created for a much higher purpose. Humans know this because it’s in them and everywhere around them.

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1: 19-21)

In order to effectively communicate with non-believers, we must break down their false assumptions and presuppositions. We must get to the core of the issue. Let me be clear though that this in no way negates the action of the Holy Spirit. When we share the gospel the Spirit is at work and he must do the changing in the lives of non-believers. But at the same time, this does not excuse us from our responsibilities as Christ followers. We must understand that we all have presuppositions and learn how to identity them. Effective communication is something the church is failing at, but not because we are ignorant, we have only fallen captive to the rhetoric of our day. We need to ask more questions. Ask why. Ask how. Get to the core of the issue, to the point of dispute, because that is where you apply the gospel, that’s where the healing happens.