It is not uncommon to hear a call from some American Christians asking that the church embrace greater theological diversity.
Tim Keller’s sermon “The Gospel to the African” when he cited Lamin Sanneh’s work got me thinking about this promotion of theological diversity. Here are a few observations.
1. The Christian church has always had enormous theological diversity.
You read about it in the letters in the New Testament. Paul, Peter and John all trying to get churches to believe some things and not others. Alister McGrath’s book “Heresy” tracks plenty of strains of theological diversity. The diversity of views, movements, streams and sects possibly makes Christianity the most theologically diverse religion in the world!
2. Christianity is the most culturally and ethnically diverse world religion.
This was a point made by Tim Keller from Lamin Sanneh and after pondering it I believe they are right. Unlike the other major world religions (Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Secularists/Nones/Agnostic, Chinese traditional religions) Christianity long since broke free from it’s center and finds itself far more diverse, far more widespread, far less segregated than any of the others.
3. A Secularist Call to Theological Diversity is Hypocritical
When I hear secularists admonishing Christians towards theological diversity I am puzzled. Secularists are sometimes highly intolerant to views central to their religious core. Religions are a conceptual framework through which the world is viewed. A secularist might advocate that religious perspectives on “spiritual” issues be tolerated, as long as they are private, but they commonly resist applying these views in the public sphere. One of the easiest places to see that is of course on the matter of equality of women. This is a dogmatic non-starter for some secularists, even if in practice the group struggles with it.
I also find it ironic when some in the emergent wing of the church advocate for theological diversity but are intolerant of complementarians. The egalitarian, complementarian split is an example of theological diversity. I’m all in favor of a vigorous debate on the matter. I’ve got my own position I like to defend, but it still is theological diversity.
4. We Naturally and Rightly Pursue Theological Uniformity
If we are serious about our faith and our theology at some point we hope we will achieve increasing uniformity both on what is important and that which is important. We seek scientific uniformity. If theology seeks to explore spiritual truth, then we hope there is such a thing as spiritual truth. Will we get there before the age to come? Certainly not. Will we get there after the new age begins? I don’t know. The pursuit of it may be some of our joyful work in the coming age. In any case I don’t think we need to be embarrassed about seeking it.
5. Loving People is the Priority
You can’t read the Christian gospels and not see the theological priority of loving people. The conversation on the value of theological diversity should be located as a sub-conversation within Christianity of loving people. If the Sabbath was made for people, and not people for the Sabbath, then the same is certainly true of theology. We love God with our minds and seek the truth in service of the welfare of others.
The priority of loving people is one of the highest values in Christian theology and therefore must compell us to do theology well and it must govern how we do theology.
Leadingchurch.com 
Thanks Paul for your article on theological diversity in the Christian religion. This whole thing on diversity in the Christian faith has been very perplexing to me. I suppose that theological exploration leading to different views keeps some Christians from becoming stagnant in their faith. It also seems to leave some room for our personality differences. Some are more comfortable worshiping in a charismatic Pentecostal setting and others in a orthodox Reformed setting. I had a black Pentecostal tell me that we didn’t have any fun in our Reformed worship. He confessed he could never fit in a Christian Reformed Church. Of course, now CRC’s are becoming more and more diverse in their worship. And so is its theology, even though the CRC is a confessional church. There’s differences on the creation account of Genesis and the historicity of Adam and Eve, differences as to marriage and divorce, women in office, the gifts and work of the Holy Spirit, homosexuality, baptism, discipline in the church. That’s just the beginning of the differences and the changes that have taken place over time in the CRC. Take the differences beyond the CRC and the theological differences become astounding. As you said in your article, Christianity may be the most theologically diverse religion in the world. I’m beginning to think that getting a doctoral degree in theology qualifies a person to be a spin doctor, capable now to put his/her own spin on Christian theology. In fact that almost seems to be the point of getting such a doctorate.
But does this help the evangelical mission of the Christian church? I doubt it. Nor does this diversity give credibility to Christianity. When Christians can’t agree on the fallen nature of humankind, baptism, the nature of the Trinity (it took nearly five hundred years to reach some kind of consensus on that one. If you include Mormons as Christians, then there still isn’t a consensus.) There’s little agreement on the nature of God’s electing purposes, baptism, end times, evolution and creation, miracles in the Bible, and the list is endless. On almost all theological points in a standard systematic theology book there’ll be a noteworthy Christian who will disagree and give their own spin to what is written in that book. And how many denominations are there that have split from other denominations over differences in theology. All this diversity almost makes a mockery of Christianity. How any thinking person would convert to the Christian religion makes little sense to those on the outside looking in.
Of course, outside the realm of Christianity there are a multitude of religions, from Muslim, Hindu, Judaism, Mormonism, Buddhism, and on and on. They all claim to be inspired by God and have divinely inspired Scriptures just like Christianity. All claim, like Christianity, to be the one true way to know God and have acceptance with him. But for a person searching for God, its probably Christianity that is most confused about its own religion. So maybe some Christians think theological diversity is good and others don’t. But for an outsider, Christianity is just another religion that is trying to explain the God that seems obvious in the natural order. And Christianity along with all other religions claim to have the one true answer. But it seems that even Christians have a difficult time agreeing on what the answer might be.
Thanks for your comment. I guess it prompts a couple of responses in me.
Points 1, and 4 have to be taken together. Christian theological diversity is simply a fact, that’s what point 1 says. Point 4 says that it isn’t a goal.
Does Christian theological diversity hamper Christian mission? Certainly. It tends to invite belief in cosmopolitan relativism. The Christian canon helps mitigate cosmopolitan relativism, but doesn’t eliminate it.
There are also ways in which theological diversity helps the parallel reality of Christian cultural diversity. I think we can safely assume (given my belief in total depravity) that all of our existing theological systems have error within them. None of us gets everything all right. Some may get things more right that others. I of course believe that I am as right as I can be, until I change my mind and consider that I was wrong yesterday but am more right today. 🙂
The looseness of the system allows cultures to continue continue to develop their systems and overall I think think this is a win for the catholic church project of theological development. Hopefully as history continues to go we continue to develop, correct and perfect theology. Given that we are within history we are often in a poor position to judge it, and given the fact that we are people our judgments are always biased and corrupt to one degree or another, yet engage and enjoy the project we must and should do. These comments are also, of course, theologically biased and conditioned by my culture and place in the story.
So yes, theological diversity is lamentable, but like Sarah’s evil demand the Ishmael be put out of the family after Isaac’s birth our Lord seems to allow the imperfect and sometimes wrong to endure in the future service of his perfecting mission.
My point (and when I need to remake a point in the comments it reveals the poverty of my writing. 🙂 ) is that if you take the 5 points together, we may take away something helpful.
Point 3 makes the point that everyone chafes at theological diversity, even the voices today who wish to promote it. Theological diversity itself would assert against itself because an embrace of theological diversity must tolerate those who wish it away.
I’m not sure the diversity makes a mockery of Christianity as much as it acknowledges human nature. This is simply what people do. My dog licks his butt. I’m not sure it makes a mockery of my dog, but neither am I going to follow his lead.
Christianity is a thing and therefore even if everyone has a different take on that thing the thing still exists. If you want to know a thing managing the myriad of takes on that thing is part of the process.
I don’t think Christianity is finally a way to God. I think it is the revelation of God making his way to us because we were so lost we can’t and couldn’t find him on our own. If this is the case then theological diversity, although problematic, is not ultimately defeating because our rescue by God isn’t dependent upon our theology, but rather on our God’s capacity to rescue us. I think that is what stands at the heart of the Reformed faith and why I find comfort and pleasure in it.
Thanks again for your comment. pvk