Joshua Harris and Marty Sampson: When Christian Celebrities Question the Faith

In the past few weeks we've seen two significant Evangelical voices either turn from or seriously question the Christian Faith: Joshua Harris of "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" fame, and Marty Sampson of Hillsong fame.

Harris' book was just before my time; my teen years were largely in the 2000's. However, I do recall my older sister reading the book in the 90's. Curious, I would read passages in it whenever I found the book in the living room or wherever else she placed it. My ten year old mind didn't remember much about it other than this: apparently, if you wait to have sex until marriage you'll have this amazing wife, an amazing sex life, and wonderful children. That thought remained in the back of my mind when I finally started noticing, um, girls in my teens. I'd have probably never consciously articulated such a mindset, but looking back I know that the only reasons I remained a virgin were fear of STDs/teen-pregnancy and this desire to have a really great sex-life/marriage/kids. 

I hope I don't have to tell you that that is a lie on par with The Prosperity (False) Gospel; in fact, all it is is a sex-centric version of that heresy. That has already been said by more than a few people, so if you're interested in understanding more about that I recommend these links: an article by Katelyn Beaty in Religion News Service, and another one by Emily Hall in Christianity.com. The point is that Harris, who was only 21 at the time he wrote that book, was shot to stardom in Evangelical circles while preaching a gospel of sexual prosperity summed up in this way: follow these rules on sex and God will give you your sexual dream. 

Turn now to Marty Sampson of Hillsong. I don't know much about Mr. Sampson, and the little more I know about Hillsong I greatly dislike. A casual glance at the search engine results of his name shows that he's written also for Delirious? and other contemporary worship-style bands. 

Sampson posted on Instagram that he was turning away from the Faith, though he has since clarified that he hasn't left it entirely yet (the Instagram post has since been deleted; above is a screenshot of it). I had mentioned that I greatly dislike Hillsong; to me it represents pretty much everything that is awful about contemporary Christian music, both musically and lyrically. What frustrates me about Sampson leaning towards leaving the Faith is not so much the fact that he is (although that is always sad), but the *reasons* he gave for it. Let's look at his words in the initial post:

"how many preachers fall? Many. No one talks about it. How many miracles happen. Not many. No one talks about it. Why is the Bible full of contradictions? No one talks about it. How can God be love yet send four billion people to a place, all coz they don’t believe? No one talks about it. Christians can be the most judgmental people on the planet - they can also be some of the most beautiful and loving people...but it’s not for me.”

There is no shame in asking these questions, no matter what age you are

The problem with this IG post is, bluntly put, how absolutely ignorant it is. Not in the questions at all--one of the best ways to learn is by asking questions--but in the claim that "no one" is talking about these things. Allowing for hyperbole, (almost) no one is talking about falling preachers, the theology of miracles, alleged and apparent contradictions in Scripture, theodicy, etc.? Forget reading books, has he ever even done an online search with those questions and read or watched any pro-Christian results? The question-asking, again, is not the problem: the apparent lack of desire to find answers is what is so frustrating. 

Has Sampson ever heard of Christian Apologetics? Has he ever read a single book on Systematic Theology, or even a single book by a Christian Theologian? Not Bill Johnson or Brian Houston, but actually academic Christian Theologians? I don't ask these questions with a desire to belittle; I genuinely am curious. Sampson has recently posted about realizing that he doesn't have to take the Genesis 1 and 2 accounts of Creation as scientifically literal, and how that apparently seemed liberating to him. Again, he is only now discovering this?

***Edit: I realized, shortly after posting this, that some people reading this article might not be aware of resources that can help with these questions. Here is a list of great books, websites, and podcasts on a number of hard issues to answer within Christianity:

Books:
Mere Christianity, by C.S. Lewis
On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision, by William Lane Craig
Tactics: a Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions, by Greg Koukl
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, by Frank Turek and Norm Geisler
Inference to the One True God: Why I Believe in Jesus Instead of Other Gods, by Evan Minton

Websites:
Reasonable Faith
Cross Examined
Paul Copan's Website

Podcasts:
Unbelievable?
Religious Nut and Hellbound Sinner (my former podcast)
Cerebral Faith

This is just a small list of resources; websites like Reasonable Faith have podcast and YouTube channels as well.***

It's not simply that he's struggling with these questions as a forty year old; plenty of people that age and older have finally started to deal with tough questions in the Christian Faith. I want to make this understood, which is why I'm repeating it: there is no shame in asking these questions, no matter what age you are. The problem is that he's literally been a Christian leader to many for decades. He's been writing professionally for Evangelical worship since the 90's. 

Which brings me to the other problem that this IG post represents: the fact that it's not only very ignorant, but very true. "No one" (hyperbole, again, recognized) is caring about these questions...in the megachurch "relationship not religion" pop-concert-followed-by-a-TED-Talk Sunday gathering that calls itself Evangelical Christianity today. In much of this group of Christianity, which is quickly growing by the way (and that's not a good thing), doctrine doesn't matter. It's all about the entertainment. The pastor comes in with the flip-flops and Hawaiian tee, gives a moralizing speech with emotionally-driven music--made specifically to be entertaining and with almost no theological depth to it--on either side of his (or her) half-hour talk, and the people call it a day and live the entire week exactly the same way they did previously. 

That is what passes for popular Christianity today in the West: don't worry about doctrine, because it divides. Instead, teach about being good people, and that God loves everyone. This has been termed Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. We've known about this development within Christendom in the West for about fifteen years, specifically amongst teens in the early 2000's; in other words, today's young leaders. It hasn't been ignored; worse, it's been embraced. Moralistic Therapeutic Deism is identified as having five tenets of faith:

1. A God exists who created and ordered the world and who watches over human life on earth.
2. God wants people to be good, nice, and fair to each other, as taught in the Bible and by most religions. 
3. The central goal of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself. 
4. God does not need to be particularly involved in one's life except when God is needed to resolve a problem. 
5. Good people go to heaven when they die. 

This isn't even a bare-bones understanding of Christianity. This is not Christianity at all; this is straight up pluralism. Attaching the word "Jesus" to this does nothing but add food color to a watered-down spirituality. It is like adding dye to a glass of water and declaring you've turned water into wine. 

Conclusion

This is why we need to care about preaching the Gospel, teaching people, and discipling them in the Church. It is not enough to give a free concert and a motivational speech once a week, wipe the dust off our hands, then call it a day. A faith that does not have reasons for its moral positions, or a source, is an unrooted faith. When the source of our faith is "the god within" we end up making ourselves our own god, chasing our own tails for every wind of doctrine and piety we sniff. 

We only encourage such action when our religion (and yes, "spiritual but not religious" is a religion; make no doubt about that) primarily teaches us by coddling to our entertainment needs. Whether those needs are in a sexual pleasure ("Be celibate until marriage and you'll have freakin' awesome sex!") or other social pleasures ("Don't think about the hard questions! Just enjoy this pop music that has no spiritual depth and listen to these practical life lessons that don't challenge you to grow in the Faith, while you sit in a comfortable seat with your casual clothes and Christian coffee latte, posting a selfie n the midst of service."), our churches have been training us to be catechized, or taught, by self-indulgence. By doing so we make ourselves the center of the universe, the Canon of our faith. And we do so blasphemously when we rename our personal desires "The Holy Spirit".