The first post on this topic was quite controversial, but now there's more polling evidence that suggests that modern Christians -- particularly teens -- don't really know what they claim to believe.
It turns out that, while they may profess the faith and indeed love Jesus, the vast majority of Christian teenagers in this country actually hold beliefs fundamentally antithetical to the creed. The forces of moral relativism and "tolerance" have gotten to them in a big way. In fact, some leaders believe that mushy doctrine among the younger generation ranks as the No. 1 crisis facing American Christendom today.About one-third of American teenagers claim they're "born again" believers, according to data gathered over the past few years by Barna Research Group, the gold standard in data about the U.S. Protestant church, and 88% of teens say they are Christians. About 60% believe that "the Bible is totally accurate in all of its teachings." And 56% feel that their religious faith is very important in their life.
Yet, Barna says, slightly more than half of all U.S. teens also believe that Jesus committed sins while he was on earth. About 60% agree that enough good works will earn them a place in heaven, in part reflecting a Catholic view, but also flouting Protestantism's central theme of salvation only by grace. About two-thirds say that Satan is just a symbol of evil, not really a living being. Only 6% of all teens believe that there are moral absolutes--and, most troubling to evangelical leaders, only 9% of self-described born-again teens believe that moral truth is absolute.
"When you ask even Christian kids, 'How can you say A is true as well as B, which is the antithesis of A?,' their typical response is, 'I'm not sure how it works, but it works for me,'" says George Barna, president of the Ventura, Calif.-based research company. "It's personal, pragmatic and fairly superficial."
Although the survey was of teenagers, I doubt the numbers would be much different among the older generations. I'm not really sure if these numbers are something to be concerned about, or if they're just hot air. Not that I question the poll itself, but in my experience the vast majority of everybody -- from all religious/philisophical systems -- has very little real understanding of what they purportedly believe.
There's a term for this: rational ignorance. It means that people make decisions without undergirding every position with a strong foundation. Why? Because it's impossible to know everything and we have to cut some corners. For instance, we trust building inspectors to make sure our buildings are safe; we don't each individually inspect every building we enter. We decide to be rationally ignorant. We know that building inspectors exist, but we don't take the time to learn every detail about how they do their job, and we don't take the time to check out many buildings for ourselves. If we did, we'd never have time for anything else.
Similarly, even though religious questions are potentially very important -- eternity itself hangs in the balance -- many people just aren't interested enough to worry about the details. They hear something that makes sense, they decide to believe it, and then they go on with their lives. From a Christian perspective, this attitude is short-sighted because it will cause us to miss out on many of God's greatest blessings which can only be obtained by serving him vigorously. However, the Bible teaches that very little is required of us to actually ensure our salvation.
First, we must confess our evil actions. "Confess" simply means to agree with God that the things we do are wrong, and that we break his laws (abridged) on a regular basis.
Second, we must realize that the punishment we earn for our evil is eternal separation from God and that our only hope for salvation is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
That's it. That's all God requires of us; but lest you think it sounds too easy, remember that Jesus did the real work. There are no additional facts to be learned, no political positions to affirm, and no theological truths to comprehend. Is it highly advantageous to seek wisdom beyond these mere basics? Of course. But such understanding is not required for salvation.
As Dale Buss notes, he teaches truth to the youth under his care, and I do the same for mine. However, many Christian leaders probably don't have very firm convictions, so it's no surprise than many of their students don't, either.
This is kinda scary. As a mom of a two year old boy, I worry about many things, the most important of which is his salvation. I was raised in a Christian home and am doing my best to make sure that my son will be too. I take him to church almost every Sunday and we say prayers before meals and before bedtime, but I still worry about whether or not I'm doing my best and if I'm doing enough. What is your advice to parents seeking to make sure their children know of Jesus' sacrifice and God's love for them? Should I keep doing what I'm doing, as well as continuing to pray for guidance and direction, or can you think of other things that I might be doing? I know he's young, but I don't think you can start too young when it comes to teaching children about God.
D: There are no guarantees, but consider the instructions Moses gave to the Israelites in Deuteronomy 6:5-8.
Also, search into the wisdom of the book of Proverbs, which was largely written by a father to his son.If I actually believed that nonsense about a just and loving God condemning his own creation to eternal hell for such high crimes and misdemeanors as being born and failing to guess his identity correctly, I wouldn't have children. Why take a chance like that, especially after being warned in advance that the odds are better that any given person will end up in hell rather than heaven?
X: But then why take any risks at all? That's silly.
Silly is putting things lightly. It's one thing to take a calculated risk where the expected payout is good. It's quite another to take a huge risk (someone else burns in hell forever) in exchange for a relatively small benefit (I get the pleasure of having a son or daughter around for a few decades of my earthly existence). I'd rather do without the pleasure of having children than run an above 50-50 chance of seeing my own flesh and blood spend a week in Purgatory, let alone an eternity in hell.
The fact that most fundamentalist Christians do in fact choose to have children leaves me little choice but to conclude one of three things:
1. Christians are the most arrogant people on the planet, as they casually assume God will spare their children the wrath he'd so eagerly visit on everyone else's.
2. Christians are the most callous individuals on the planet, as they'll knowingly assume a very high risk of sending their own children to hell rather than do without the earthly pleasures of child rearing for the remainder of their brief, fleeting stint on earth.
3. Though they'll never admit it out loud, deep down inside, Christians know that all that fire and brimstone is really just a bunch of crap.
X: Maybe there's another explanation that also explains why God created humanity with free will, even though he knew some people would abuse it and do evil things. Some will do evil, but perhaps it's better to have some that do good than none at all.
If you define "evil" to include everyone who doesn't drink the fundy Kool-Aid, then "some" is a bit of an understatement. If I thought the odds were worse than 50-50 that my kid would turn out evil, the responsible thing to do would be not to have kids.
X: My husband and I weren't planning on conceiving a child, but it happened. Being the Christians that we are, we couldn't abort. Since we didn't choose to conceive but did choose to have our son, what does that make us "arrogant," "callous" or full "of crap?" Or do you have another category for u?
X: Correction, the last word in my last sentence is supposed to be "us."
Michael: Thanks for your comments. I will continue to do what I am doing and keep the scriptures close to my heart. God bless you!!
Danielle: By "choose to have children" I refer to those who choose to conceive, not to those who conceive inadvertently and choose not to abort. Although, when you think about it, that too would seem like the most Christian thing to do. Surely God wouldn't condemn an aborted fetus to hell? Why not kill him early, while his place in heaven is pretty much guaranteed? He'll thank you in the afterlife.
X: That is, of course, one of the best arguments against so-called "age of accountability" beliefs that say that babies who die get to automatically go to heaven. I'm not saying I have a strong position either way, I'm just agreeing that such a reality would set up a twisted incentive structure.
My (parochial) high school had mandatory religion classes for all four years. The first two years were about scripture and history of our religion and everything came premade out of textbooks and we had worksheets and tests, but I can say with confidence that hardly any of it strengthened any of the girls' faith. The last two years were classes like social justice and world religions, which evoked slightly more interest. We also began most classes with compulsory prayer.
Little of it helped us to have a better understanding our religion. For me, it was only when I had a real conversation about my faith with someone more knowledgeable than I, like one of the religion teachers, and my physics teacher, that I felt that I was learning anything.
The religion that many people consider themselves a part of is more a habit or tradition than a real faith. Tradition is huge, it's what ties a family together, and people consider it important and will keep it and pass it on to their kids, but people rarely question a tradition.
m: There's nothing wrong with tradition, but it has to be founded on actual truth. I teach kids at church, and I try really hard to engage them in conversations rather than just listing off a bunch of facts. It's like the difference between learning the state capitals and learning the history of the states.
What if the "actual truth" is only perceived as truth because of a long tradition of one generation passing it down to the next, expecting them to accept it without question as fact? Given the dearth of outside, corroborating evidence, I think the line between "truth" and tradition is a fine one indeed.
These people are not the slightest bit religious, I have been approached by them with their insane views
I consider them nothing but a cult, making up things to their own advantage.
I know of one who thinks that the 10 Commandments is a work of fiction