Philosophical Theology

R.E.M. released their hit single Losing My Religion in 1991. Although a great song in its own right, we probably don’t want to base too much theology on the provocative, even sometimes debated, lyric:

“That’s me in the corner
That’s me in the spotlight, losing my religion”

But putting 90’s alternative rock aside, how many times have we heard that a child left the Christian faith when he or she went off to college? Maybe we’ve even said it ourselves!

Rather than a covenant child’s “deconstruction” of his religious beliefs leading to a positive reconstruction that bears the fruit of a robust Christian world and life view, instead, the re-examination of true religion in college too often ends in an overt rejection of Christ and the gospel. 

As common as the “he left the faith” sentiment is, what truly is meant by it? 

What theological fence posts are in place to help us to interpret what actually transpires when a young adult rejects his parents’ faith while away at school? Secondly, what is our part in helping to prevent such a tragic outcome?

Part 1, apostasy:

The sentiments surrounding apostasy seem at best murky when the chief lament is that the person did not remain in their faith and the church. It’s as though the student, had he not encountered false worldviews that are hostile to biblical Christianity, would have remained safely in the Christian faith and heaven bound had he just not succumbed to the ideologies of his peers and secular professors. Accordingly, I sometimes find parental discourse about apostasy a bit confused, at least in informal discourse. In other words, it seems increasingly rare for the idea of apostasy to be accompanied by clear articulation and a theological commitment to the idea that the child’s former unbelief finally became outwardly manifested while away at school. Stated negatively, I find that apostasy is too often not accompanied by the conviction that the person went out from us because he was never truly of us. (1John 2:-19)

Perhaps Federal Vision is partly to blame for the confusion. And perhaps a precursor to Federal Vision was the preexisting conflation of soteriology and ecclesiology in response to evangelicalism. In any case, what needs to become clearer in our minds is that in such cases, to remain where one once was would be to continue in the same unbelief as before. The unvarnished truth is that a person who truly rejects God in college was all the time rejecting God in family devotions, youth group, worship services, at the Lord’s Supper and in Sunday school. Sadly, there never was a time when the now young adult was not at enmity with God and outside of union with Christ.

Sound theology teaches us that one’s spiritual condition does not change when a covenant child stops pretending to be a believer. Of course, this does not mean that once the Christian veneer is stripped away, the hypocrisy is decidedly over and the covenant child unshackles* himself from a faith he never savingly embraced, he is not any worse off than before. Indeed he is! For to remove oneself from the means of grace is a step toward further spiritual darkness, if not also darker and more destructive sins of the flesh. Apostates can incur greater judgment! Consequently, we must commit to the theological conviction that those who were never truly of us need not return to Christ for a second time but, rather, come to Christ in order to be saved!** That is to say, the implications of the perseverance of the saints informs us that sanctification is not what is needed to deliver our fallen young adults from such moral degradation but instead, true conversion. 

Part 2, the hope of grace:

Our confidence is that the subduing of the hearts of our covenant offspring will occur along the way, in the context of an intentional full orbed gospel that envelops creation, fall, redemption and consummation (both personal and cosmic). Accordingly, we hold out to our children along life’s way, according to their dynamic (not static) cognitive abilities, a gospel-centric worldview that is consistent, coherent and explanatory. Indeed, by grace alone we disciple our children in order that the early stages of biblical understanding might give way to a robust systematic theology, even culminating in a philosophical worldview that cannot be shaken. (Romans 12:1-2; 1 Corinthians 15:58) (An analogy of sorts would be the Trivian, an education model in which the grammar stage of learning gives way to dialectic and rhetoric.)

Final food for thought:

Below are some broad goals to strive for in the training up of covenant children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. The accent, however, is on spiritual transformation and the renewing of one’s mind through mature understanding. Surely, these objectives are by no means exhaustive nor fully attainable, though they took a prominent place in Lisa’s and my parenting, though certainly imperfectly. (The last three being more philosophically oriented.)

+ May parents purposefully lead their covenant children to improve upon their baptism, even to close with Christ once and for all.

+ May parents by grace avail themselves and their families to all the means of grace and hallow the Christian sabbath.

+ May parents teach their covenant children in a manner whereby they internalize the Christian faith to such a degree that they know without question that Christ is not just the way back to the Father but the only way back to understanding the Father’s world.

+ May parents assist their children to grasp that to reject Christ is to forgo the deposit of all wisdom and the foundation for the justification of knowledge.***

+ May our covenant children be completely walled in by a Spirit wrought faith, which knows by the principles set forth in Scripture, that all of life resonates only with the Christian worldview. In other words, may our children see for themselves in their formative years that nothing makes sense outside of Christ.****

In short, when confronted with falling away, may our covenant children justifiably confess with Simon Peter in full assurance of faith, “Lord to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.” (John 6:68)

——-

* The “shackles” of true religion are merely perceived by unbelievers, but not actual for true believers when by grace they walk by faith and not by sight. (2 Corinthians 5:7) Indeed, Psalm 119:45 and John 10:9 speak of the sheer delights of freedom that are ours in Christ! Christ’s yoke is easy and his burden is light for those who’ve surrendered to Christ. (Matthew 11:30)

** Of course, 1 Peter 2:25 speaks of a returning to the Shepherd and Overseer of our souls. However, the text is not speaking of a returning to salvation for a second time. At the very least, Hebrews 6:6 makes it clear such cannot occur. 

*** Unbelievers know things. They just cannot justify how knowledge comports with their unbelief. Their epistemology, metaphysic, and ethic reduces to arbitrariness and inconsistency, or knowledge falsely called. (1 Timothy 6:20)

**** To know this biblical truth, that to depart from Christ would come with the high cost of embracing an utterly foolish life, can provide sanctifying and persevering grace for the believer. It, also, can give the unbeliever occasion to pause and count the cost of rejecting Christ. Related to this are the warning passages, that require special care in order not to undermine Reformed theology.