Progressing Toward Destruction

By: T. J. Gentry, PhD, DMin | October 11, 2021

Introduction: This is Progress?

“Pastor, does this church care about social issues, or is the focus primarily on having a personal relationship with Jesus?” This was the question I recently faced in a meeting with a thirty-something white woman who was in an interracial relationship. The context of the question was the seemingly unstoppable barrage of news stories the woman was ingesting via her many social media feeds, usually fraught with cries for social justice, wokeness, and the need for Christians to stop politicizing their faith in an exclusively conservative manner. The binary nature of the woman’s question notwithstanding—as if it were necessary for Christians to have either social concern or a personal relationship with Jesus—what was looming in the background of the question was a deeper, more sinister agenda. While it is unknown whether the woman was, at the time, cognizant of her flirtation with dangerous ideologies, it has since become most clear to me that what was being asked in that moment was a tactic of so-called Progressive Christians.[1] It was a tactic intending to invite dialogue with the purpose of raising doubts about evangelicalism’s propriety amid the current cultural moment, and a tactic used to segue to the possibility that there may be another “way” available, the way of Progressive Christianity.

Since receiving the question, I have given considerable time and energy to learning what, exactly, Progressive Christianity is and why it matters, as well as if it is even Christian, after all. Thus, with a sense of the immediate import of the topic the woman’s question raised that day, my purpose in this article is to better understand and carefully consider the beliefs and practices of Progressive Christianity. Doing so begins with an overview of the contours of an evangelical theological method, followed by a summary of the essential tenets of Progressive Christianity, and then a consideration of reasons for confronting Progressive Christianity based on apologetic, evangelistic, pastoral, and theological reasons. In this article I intend to demonstrate the stark contrast and irreconcilable presuppositions of a genuine evangelical theological method and the progressive approach to Christianity, concluding that Progressive Christianity is neither progressive nor Christian.

GOSPL: Foundations of an Evangelical Theological Method

To better understand the error of Progressive Christianity, it will help to start with an overview of the that which it stands in opposition to it, namely the theological method most identifiable with evangelical faith and practice. In aid of this overview an acrostic is offered based on the word GOSPL. Given that one of the critiques made by proponents of Progressive Christianity of historic evangelicals is that the faith of evangelicalism is more cerebral than practical,[2] after each of the points of the acrostic are explained they will be considered in light of their significance to practical orthodoxy. Here, then is the GOSPL method of evangelical theology along with its practical implications.

G: Gospel Hermeneutic

The starting point for an authentic evangelical theological method is the gospel, the good news of the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.[3] This message, what Paul describes as “the power of God unto salvation” (Rom 1:16),[4] provides the hermeneutic—the interpretive approach—to all theological considerations. In the same way the lenses in a pair of glasses affect everything seen through the glasses, so the gospel provides the framework to approach and engage theological matters. For the evangelical Christian, to “do” theology is to begin and end with the gospel, and to find the gospel in the middle, as well. Far from eisegesis where the gospel is forced on the text, the evangelical method understands that, as a fundamental presupposition drawn from the shape of the biblical narrative’s movement from creation to fall to redemption to restoration, it is the gospel that the Scriptures reveal and the Scriptures that the gospel reveals.[5] The gospel hermeneutic, then, provides the controlling narrative for all biblical interpretation and theological formulation, serving as a source and summit for the theological enterprise. Theology flows from the gospel and directs the theologian toward it, so that there is a constant reciprocity between starting from and concluding with the good news.

The practical implications of this gospel hermeneutic in theological method is that beginning and ending with the gospel is a key to keeping the focus of theology of God’s ultimate purpose, which is redemption and restoration for humanity and the entire creation, rather than some ethereal obtuse consideration beyond the realm of the practical. What could be more practical and socially conscious than redemption and restoration for humanity? Nothing, as there is not a single concern in the fallen world not traceable to the need for redemption and restoration. Beginning and ending with the gospel is imminently practical.

O: Objective Truth

The next commitment of evangelical theological method is its recognition of objective truth as fundamental to—what Norman Geisler calls a precondition of—all theological considerations.[6] Objective truth is, essentially, the recognition that what is true is that which corresponds to reality—regardless of the perceiver’s interpretation or evaluation. There are, as it were, facts about the material universe, the human condition, even the Bible and its claims about God that are true in a manner that is independent of any person’s perception of them. Likewise, there are moral facts that are knowable and, even if they are not accepted or desired, they still exist in a mind-independent manner.[7] In the physical world it is objectively true that jumping from the top of a building under normal gravitational circumstances will lead the jumper to come plummeting to the earth below, regardless of whether he or she feels or thinks differently about the situation. What is true is true, and the theological method of evangelicalism depends upon such objectivity of truth as the tracks upon which the train of discerning word meanings, evaluating natural phenomenon, and even assessing the witness to the life and work of Jesus Christ runs. Yet, without objective truth the theological enterprise becomes a train wreck.

Practically speaking this entails that when coming to the Bible to learn theology, there is a confidence that what is stated there can be evaluated—even tested—based on whether what is claimed comports with reality. Did Jesus’s followers find an empty tomb as the text of the gospel narratives claims (cf. John 20:1-2)? The evidence, which is based on the knowability of objective truth, supports the claim. Likewise, the biblical witness speaks of God’s self-revelation in nature (cf. Ps 19:1), and the evidence is there to support such a claim if the objectivity of truth is maintained. It is never “true for him but not for her” that there is a moral compass in each person’s conscience and judicial sentiment that points beyond itself to a source of morality.[8] It is true for all, and objectively so.

S: Special Revelation

As “given by inspiration of God, and…profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim 3:16), Scripture provides evangelical theology with the repository of God’s special revelation. Evangelicals have a distinctively gospel centered theology because they have a Bible, and the Bible informs the evangelical theological method. In this sense Scripture provides a presupposition from which to approach assessing and understanding anything of God and his works, which in turn reveal the need for Scripture as the clearest statement of God and his works.[9] To wit, Scripture contains the narrative of the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus—the gospel—and it is the gospel hermeneutic that shapes how an evangelical approaches Scripture and understands objective truth. Scripture corroborates the experience of truth as correspondence to reality in nature and humanity, testifying to the knowability of God’s world and God’s nature through his world, while testifying to the reliability of God’s word as an essential aspect of all understanding for the Christian. Jesus makes the link between truth and Scripture when he beseeches God concerning the disciples, “sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth” (John 17:17); to have one is to have the other.

The practical benefit of this special revelation in Scripture is what Paul goes on to state concerning the outcome of the theological and ethical teaching of the Bible. It is so “that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:17). What God would have his people believe and practice is made known in his special revelation. Without such revelation, would Christians know what to think about God, let alone do in his name? Not with the clarity or confidence the Scripture affords when its teachings are learned and put into practice, which means that the practicality of the special revelation of God is a central part of evangelical theological method.

P: Personal Transformation

Another distinctive of an evangelical theological method touches on the nature of the orthopraxical dimension—the transformative life change as matters of faith intermingle into and transform matters of practical living. The goal of the evangelical theological method is, among other pursuits, the ongoing sanctification of the individual so that all their life is lived as “a new creation in Christ” (2 Cor 5:17). The psalmist declares to God, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Ps 119:105), and the Paul tells the Romans to “be transformed by the renewing of your mind,” (Rom 12:2), a contextual reference to the renewal that comes from believing and yielding one’s life unto the gospel message.[10] In both instances the emphasis on personal transformation comes to the fore as part of the intention of knowing God through Scripture as theological reflection is met with faith and yields individual transformation.

The outcome of evangelical theological method—especially when it is framed by the lens of the gospel hermeneutic, objective truth, and special revelation—is increasingly becoming like Jesus so that, “the one who says he remains in him should walk as Jesus walked” (1 John 2:6). Rather than being a disconnected-from-real-life or merely internal, esoteric experience, the goal of evangelical theology is the total transformation of the person, what Paul describes as “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col 1:27). What could be more practical? More earthy in the best, most redeemed sense of that term? Because of evangelical theology’s overt commitment to personal transformation, what might be described as “gospel change” occurs within individuals, families, and even cultures. Why else would Jesus commission believer to take the gospel message into the world and “make disciples of all the nations…teaching them to observe all that I have commanded” (Matt 28:19-20) if practical, individual, holistic transformation were not expected as an outcome of theology based on the good news of the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus? In the final analysis, evangelical theological method is necessarily personal and transformative.

L: Livable Message

Geisler explains that an essential test of evangelical theological method is its practicableness, which is to say that if it is true evangelical theology then it works in real life.[11] While there may be theological discussion of the sort that only theory attains and there is not transferability into a workable real world outcome, such as the Muslim theological reflection on God solitary unity as a metaphysical monad that has no capacity or need for interpersonal engagement and, therefore, is incapable of love, this can never be the outcome of bona fide evangelical theology.[12] Rather, what evangelical theological method produces, and largely because of its gospel hermeneutic and emphasis on personal transformation, is a theology that is most agreeable to human existence. Not in the sense that there are not challenges to living out one’s faith in a fallen world awaiting final redemption, but in the sense that there is no part of life that evangelical theology does not directly or indirectly touch—nay, claim—as the domain of Jesus. As Paul declared, Christians are to be about the constant process of “bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor 10:5).

Is there a theoretical, more heavily cerebral component within evangelical theology? Of course, but nothing in evangelical theology is reducible in the final analysis to only the theoretical or cerebral. Rather, all theology is practicable when rightly nuanced and carefully applied. One need only consider the deeply theological and inescapably practicable counsel of Augustine of Hippo to “love and do what thou wilt…let the root of love be within, of this root can nothing spring but what is good.”[13] In this powerful turn of phrase, Augustine highlights the practicability of true evangelical theology—of a theology deeply rooted in the gospel of God’s love—it becomes the font from which all life’s actions flow.

Before moving to the consideration of the message of Progressive Christianity, it bears to quickly review. Evangelical theological method is fundamentally a message with a gospel hermeneutic (G); cognizant of objective truth as flowing from and revealing God (O); based on the special revelation of God in Scripture (S); committed to personal transformation that works itself into every level of faith and practice (P); and it is an imminently livable message marked by practicability that reveals the theoretical in the practical and the practical in the theoretical (L). Now, to a discussion of an instance of the opposite of evangelical theological method, that of Progressive Christianity which, it will be seen, contradicts each point of the GOSPL acrostic.

DEATH: Progressive Christianity’s Pernicious Message

Turning to a discussion of Progressive Christianity’s fundamental commitments, the acrostic DEATH is introduced as a guide. Additionally, and in keeping with the approach followed in discussion the GOSPL acrostic for evangelical theological method, the discussion of Progressive Christianity’s commitments includes their significance for Christian practice. As will be demonstrated, rather than a practical and beneficial significance, what Progressive Christianity brings forth is ultimately divisive, anti-gospel, and conducive to destruction rather than flourishing.

D: Deficient Gospel

Rather than framing their theological commitments with the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and the implications of the gospel message for redemption and restoration on the personal and cosmic level, Progression Christianity proclaims a different, deficient gospel. It is deficient in two ways. First, its approach to Jesus is that he is to be emulated as a social revolutionary concerned with the ills of injustice primarily.[14] The Jesus of the Progressive Christian gospel is not a divine savior worthy of worship who comes to put the world to right through a righteous judgment based on absolute exclusive claims. Rather, Jesus is an example of finding the good in others and seeking to right societal ills in the here and now without any real focus on life beyond this world. Second, the Progressive Christian gospel is deficient in its understanding of the human problem. Rather than affirming that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23), and that “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23), Progressive Christianity proclaims a gospel of liberation from personal limitations where the only sinners are those in power and the only saints are those who are oppressed—really or figuratively.[15]

What does this deficient gospel lead to? A very human-only, myopic Jesus who is more about social action than saving sinners; and a very divided humanity where the have-nots are the righteous and the haves are the wicked. Poverty and oppression become signs of true blessing and favor, and the idea that God would ever bring a sinner to account in a manner involving eternal separation based on cosmic rebellion is wholly anathema. What, then, is evangelism in this Progressive Christian system? It is not inviting sinners to repentance and faith. It is working for societal change and the rights of the disenfranchised and oppressed—regardless of their theological or ideological motivations. Doctrine is reduced to a matter of personal preference, and “the personal search is more important than group uniformity” in all matters theological.[16] One with even a modicum of evangelical theological integrity will immediately wonder how such a gospel is a gospel at all? Where is the good news?

E: Experiential Relativism

Flowing from its deficient gospel, and in direct contradiction to the commitment of evangelical theology to objective truth, Progressive Christianity embraces a robust cherished pluralism that gives primacy to experiential relativism in all matters epistemic, ethical, and metaphysical.[17] How one thinks and comes to believe, what one considers right and wrong, and how one views God are ultimately matters reducible to personal experience and one’s own journey. The only absolute in the Progressive Christian message is that there is no place for historical evangelical theological commitments that demand an exclusivist approach to salvation as only in Jesus as one’s personal savior, and that would insist on ethical implications that flow from a relationship with Jesus. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the arena of sexual ethics and race relations. In the former, human sexuality is not defined by the biblical mandates concerning men and women in monogamous marital relationships. Rather, so long as the claim of genuine love is made, forms of sexual expression are secondary and even irrelevant.[18] In terms of race relations, one’s skin color and gender—not one’s character—is determinative of whether right and wrong in cultural matters may be addressed or not. For example, if one is white and male, then the assumption is that he is misogynistic and racist, and he may not speak to matters of sexuality or race. He is to listen to those who are not white and male, since they possess by virtue of their race and gender, a superior perspective and—regardless of the content of their character or the nature of their actions—are fundamentally in a better place to make moral judgments. Progressive Christianity is committed to its experiential relativism and buttressed by its deficient gospel, and it is anything but truly pluralistic. Rather, it cherishes its own view only.

A: Allegorizing Scripture

It is no wonder, given the deficient gospel and experiential relativism of Progressive Christianity, that it has a pick-and-choose, allegorizing approach to Scripture. Rather than seeing the Bible as the evangelical theological method does—the special revelation of God received by divine inspiration and the ultimate standard in all matters of faith and practice—Progressive Christianity embraces what constitutes a low view of Scripture.[19] The following questions and answers from the Progressive Christian view illustrate this problem.[20]

• Was there a literal Adam and Eve? No, of course not.
• Is evolution true? Yes, of course. Science has proven it. Where the Bible disagrees with science (apparent or real), the Bible is wrong.
• Is the God of the Old Testament a moral embarrassment? Yes, but he is quite different than Jesus. The God of the Old Testament was anti-woman, pro-slavery, and had a blood lust.
• Did Jesus really rise from the dead? Maybe, but it is not essential as long as you believe something good happened.
• Does the Bible forbid same sex relationships? Yes, but it was culturally conditioned to do so, and Paul was in error when he wrote about it. Jesus, though, never spoke of it, but what he wants is love above all else.
• Are there contradictions in the Bible? Yes, but it does not matter because it is not a book of facts but a book of wisdom.
• Why does the Bible matter? It only matters as an example of spiritual writing that offers nuggets of truth. Christianity is beyond the Bible; it is more than what the text says, and the text should not hinder belief.

The result of this low view of Scripture is that Progressive Christianity is decidedly not a Bible-based approach to faith—it is anti-biblical. The Bible is only used when it serves the agenda of progressing beyond whatever is deemed historically oppressive and contemporarily important. Thus, devotees of Progressive Christianity are as interested in the latest social trend or psychological theory as they are what the Bible might have to say to society or the human soul; and, where the Bible differs in any way that undermines the basic ideology of oppressed and oppressor, it is relegated to a secondary, non-authoritative status.[21]

T: Therapeutic Ethics

Lacking any biblical anchor and infused with experiential relativism, the deficient gospel of Progressive Christianity majors in therapeutic ethics.[22] The nature of such an ethical approach is to cultivate a therapeutic, i.e., a rejuvenation-centered modality for identifying and addressing ethical consideration. Whereas personal transformation accomplished by a synergistic response to the grace of God in Christ is the ethical goal of evangelical theology, the Progressive Christian is not concerned that he or she is truly sinful or unrighteous. Rather, the problem is one of brokenness in the wake of much injustice and struggle, and the goal of ethical intervention is to help one find what they already know, that they are really okay, and everything will be okay in their life if they will just be gracious with themselves and others. Rather than taking pains to “beware…lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief” (Heb 3:12) or to “flee youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness faith, love, peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart” (2 Tim 2:22), therapeutic ethics consider God as more of a doting grandfatherly force for good that is most concerned to help his children attain some measure of self-realization.[23]

What is the ultimate outcome of this approach to ethical concerns? First, ethics becomes inherently less about doing right based on an objective standard derived from Scripture and more about doing what seems right to a person in a given situation—therapeutic ethics is the inevitable result of experiential relativism. Second, ethical transformation is more a matter of participating in the broader attempts to right perceived social wrongs, and the ends are quickly allowed to justify the means so that, as long as the oppressed are given voice and the oppressors are called into question it does not matter if one stages a peaceful march or defaces public property. Chaos, not transformation, is the outcome of therapeutic ethics ensconced in Progressive Christianity.

H: Hollow Practicality

The final area of consideration for Progressive Christianity is its hollow practicality, which is to say that is does not, in the final analysis, offer any real solutions to real world problems. Whereas evangelical theological method entails a livable message that is practicable on individual, familial, and cultural levels, Progressive Christianity does not. One need only consider the outcome of Progressive Christianity in what Voddie Bauchman calls “evangelicalism’s looming catastrophe” precipitated by the social justice movement.[24] Rather than offering what the evangelical gospel offers with its biblical commitment to faith and practice reflective of the person and work of the same Jesus whose followers “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17:6), Progressive Christianity divides the churches it touches, hollows the souls of its adherents, and leads to a fundamentally truncated gospel devoid of saving power because of its lack of theological gravitas and epistemic truth.

Anecdotally, consider the recent increase in suicides by ministers defecting from the evangelical gospel toward a more Progressive Christian, as well as the very public apostatizing by the likes of Joshua Harris and Ray Boltz, and it becomes clear that what Progressive Christianity offers is not working in real life. Geisler’s insistence that what is theologically true is practicable[25] is undeniable in the face of the hollow practicality of Progressive Christianity, which is all the more reason for the evangelical theological method to be held in highest regard and taught, practiced, and protected.

Before considering a concluding plea to resist Progressive Christianity, it will help to summarize the DEATH acrostic. Progressive Christianity purveys a deficient gospel (D), traffics in experiential relativism (E), eviscerates the substance of God’s special revelation by allegorizing Scripture (A), practices therapeutic ethics (T), and ends up with a hollow practicality when the test of practicability is applied, and one realizes that the Progressive Christian approach to theology does not work in real life (H). For these reasons, it is hopefully clear that what must be rejected is Progressive Christianity, which, in the final analysis, bears no real resemblance to historic Christian truth.

Conclusion: Four Reasons Why Progressive Christianity Must Be Rejected

To conclude this discussion, consider four reasons why Progressive Christianity must be rejected. First, apologetics demands rejecting Progressive Christianity, as it is a biblical mandate to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Pet 3:15). Such a hope is not borne of the deficient gospel of Progressive Christianity, but it does flow from the gospel hermeneutic attending to an evangelical theological method, and those who would do apologetics well must engage that hope both positively and negatively.[26] Positively, state the gospel and offer its rationale. Negatively, defend the gospel and critique its contenders, especially Progressive Christianity.

Second, evangelism demands the rejection of Progressive Christianity, which reduces conversion to a social warrior mindset and detracts from the reality of sin and the desperate need of a personal savior. If Progressive Christianity is true, whence the good news? There is none, as good news is only found in the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus and the hope that message brings to all who come in repentance and faith. The Progressive Christian evangelist is not a herald of life, but of eventual death. Only the evangelical gospel offers hope that lasts.

Third, shepherding demands rejecting Progressive Christianity, which offers no hope of genuine moral transformation or interpersonal reconciliation given its compromised truth standards and low views of Scripture. Only the gospel at the heart of the historic evangelical theological method offers hope of transformation for those who come to Christ. A shepherd needs a rod and staff that actually work in caring for the sheep, but Progressive Christianity has neither rod nor staff and their sheep are being led astray.

Fourth, theology demands rejecting Progressive Christianity. As Jude 3 emphatically declares, Christians are to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered.” That faith has a definite theological content worth fighting for, and that is exactly what evangelical theological method offers—a robust, defensible faith that will stand against the wiles of a false gospel coming in the guise of death dealing Progressive Christianity.

About the Author

Dr. Thomas J. Gentry (aka., TJ Gentry) serves as the pastor of First Christian Church of West Frankfort, Illinois, the Executive Editor of MoralApologetics.com, and Executive VP of Bellator Christi Ministries. Dr. Gentry is a world-class scholar holding 5 doctorate degrees and 6 masters degrees. Additionally, he is a prolific writer as he has published 7 books including Pulpit Apologist, Absent from the Body, Present with the Lord, and You Shall Be My Witnesses: Reflections on Sharing the Gospel. Be on the lookout for two additional books that he will soon publish. In addition to his impressive resume, Dr. Gentry proudly served his country as an officer in the United States Army and serves as a martial arts instructor.

https://www.amazon.com/Pulpit-Apologist-between-Preaching-Apologetics/dp/1532695047/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=pulpit+apologist&qid=1632093760&sr=8-3

Bibliography

Augustine., “Seventh Homily on 1 John 4:4-12.” https://benrcrenshaw.com/st-augustine-love-god/.

Bauchman, Voddie. Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe. Washington: Salem, 2021.

Carson, D. A., ed. Telling the Truth: Evangelizing Postmoderns. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

Carson, D. A. The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011.

Childers, Alisa. Another Gospel: A Lifelong Christian Seeks Truth in Response to Progressive Christianity. Carol Stream: Tyndale, 2020.

Dorman, Ted M. A Faith for All Seasons: Historical Christian Faith in its Classical Expression. 2nd Ed. Nashville: B&H, 2001.

Dreher, Rod. Live Not by Lies: A Manual for Christian Dissidents. New York: Sentinel, 2020.

Erickson, Millard J. Truth or Consequences: The Promise & Perils of Postmodernism. Downers Grove: IVP, 2001.

Geisler, Norman L. Systematic Theology. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2011.

Graves-Fitzsimmons, Guthrie. Just Faith: Reclaiming Progressive Christianity. Minneapolis: Broadleaf Books, 2020.

Gulley, Phillip. If the Church Were Christian: Rediscovering the Values of Jesus. San Francisco: HarperOne, 2010.

______. The Evolution of Faith: How God Is Creating a Better Christianity. New York: HarperOne, 2011.

Gushee, David P. Still Christian: Following Jesus Out of American Evangelicalism. 2nd ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2017.

Habermas, Gary R. Philosophy of History, Miracles, and the Resurrection of Jesus. 3rd ed. Sagamore Beach: Academx, 2012.

Henry, Carl F. H. God, Revelation and Authority: Volume I: God Who Speaks and Shows. Wheaton: Crossway, 1999.

Kimball, Dan. They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007.

Kruger, Michael J. The Ten Commandments of Progressive Christianity. Minneapolis: Cruciform Press, 2019.

Meyers, Robin R. Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus. New York: HarperOne, 2009.

Sudduth, Michael. “Reformed Epistemology and Christian Apologetics.” Religious Studies 39 (2003): 299-321.

Young, David. A Grand Illusion: How Progressive Christianity Undermines Biblical Faith. 2nd ed. Nashville: Renew, 2019.

Notes

[1] Robin R. Meyers, Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus (New York: HarperOne, 2009), 4-6. Meyers explains in his testimony of moving toward Progressive Christianity how he began to think in such terms and divisions and uses them now to challenge others.

[2] David P. Gushee, Still Christian: Following Jesus Out of American Evangelicalism, 2nd ed. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2017), 49-60.

[3] Cf. 1 Cor. 15:3-4. See also Gary R. Habermas, Philosophy of History, Miracles, and the Resurrection of Jesus, 3rd ed. (Sagamore Beach: Academx, 2012).

[4] Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible: New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982).

[5] Ted M. Dorman, A Faith for All Seasons: Historical Christian Faith in its Classical Expression, 2nd ed. (Nashville: B&H, 2001), 169-170.

[6] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, 2nd ed. (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2011), 60-71.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Dorman, A Faith, 3-8.

[9] “The medium by which man knows God, and hence divine revelation, is the Word.” Carl F. H. Henry, God, Revelation and Authority: Volume I: God Who Speaks and Shows (Wheaton: Crossway, 1999), 368.

[10] Cf. Rom 11:33-36.

[11] Geisler, Systematic, 95-100.

[12] The impracticability of such a view is apparent with one recognizes that such a monadic approach to the nature of God leads to a world in which all that may be said of God concerning his followers is that submission is demanded. No relationship. No love. No mercy, as far as it is a derivative of love, and definitely no paternal care. Only submission by a God incapable, by theological definition, of love. This type of theology does not work in the real world, a world of people who have relational needs and where, without either a real or surrogated paternal love will be broken, stunted, incomplete individuals. In short, Muslim theology does not work in real life.

[13] Augustine, “Seventh Homily on 1 John 4:4-12,” https://benrcrenshaw.com/st-augustine-love-god/.

[14] Michael J. Kruger, The Ten Commandments of Progressive Christianity (Minneapolis: Cruciform Press, 2019), 3-8.

[15] Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons, Just Faith: Reclaiming Progressive Christianity (Minneapolis: Broadleaf Books, 2020), 2-3.

[16] Kruger, The Ten, 1.

[17] D. A. Carson, The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 9-16. Cf. Millard J. Erickson, Truth or Consequences: The Promise and Perils of Postmodernism (Downers Grove: IVP, 2001), 13-31.

[18] Phillip Gulley, If the Church Were Christian: Rediscovering the Values of Jesus (San Francisco: HarperOne, 2010), 157-172.

[19] Alisa Childers, Another Gospel: A Lifelong Christian Seeks Truth in Response to Progressive Christianity (Carol Stream: Tyndale, 2020), 77-82. Cf. Dan Kimball, They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007).

[20] Based on this author’s interview with a Progressive Christian. These answers also reflect the consensus of the numerous Progressive Christian authors quoted throughout this essay.

[21] Voddie Bauchman, Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe (Washington: Salem, 2021), 1-8. Cf. David Young, A Grand Illusion: How Progressive Christianity Undermines Biblical Faith, 2nd ed. (Nashville: Renew, 2019), and Rod Dreher, Live Not by Lies: A Manual for Christian Dissidents (New York: Sentinel, 2020).

[22] Gulley, If the Church, 29-66. Cf. Gulley, The Evolution of Faith: How God Is Creating a Better Christianity (New York: HarperOne, 2011), 131-150.

[23] Kruger, The Ten, 7-10. Cf. D. A. Carson, ed., Telling the Truth: Evangelizing Postmoderns (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 138-152.

[24] Bauchman, Fault Lines, 1-8.

[25] Geisler, Systematic, 95-100.

[26] Michael Sudduth, “Reformed Epistemology and Christian Apologetics,” Religious Studies 39 (2003): 299-321.

Diving Deeper

(Podcast) Brian Chilton, “Does the Bible Condone Rape?,” BellatorChristi.com (5/31/2019), https://bellatorchristi.com/2019/05/31/podcast-5-31-19-does-the-bible-condone-rape/

(Article) Brian Chilton, “7 Questions the Bible Answers about Miracles,” BellatorChristi.com (9/7/2016), https://bellatorchristi.com/2016/05/09/7-questions-the-bible-answers-about-miracles/

(Article) Brian Chilton, “Does the Bible Support the Notion of the Trinity or Was It an Invention of Constantine?,” BellatorChristi.com (2/2/2015), https://bellatorchristi.com/2015/02/02/does-the-bible-support-the-notion-of-the-trinity-or-was-it-an-invention-of-constantine/