The need for a fuller portrayal of Christianity

(2 of 2)

Previous

To the Editor: I was pleased to see the recent article about Campus Crusade for Christ ( CCC promotes gospel and stirs controversy, 1/16/98, YH), although I feel compelled to correct some impressions created by the reporter. For one thing, the article implied that CCC uses manipulation to attract people to our events, or to conversations about our faith, citing the complaint of one student that an invitation to go "out for coffee" was a veiled effort to proselytize the unsuspecting individual. I don't know the details of this occasion, but I find it hard to believe that anyone would attend an event (in this case, one of our coffee houses) that is sponsored by such an obviously Christian organization and not believe they would hear that perspective discussed. In fact, what CCC students are told in advance about any of our public offerings is to be explicit on that point, so as to avoid creating any feeling that people are victims of a "bait and switch" strategy.

In addition, the article indicated that our main message is that people are condemned to hell if they don't believe what we believe. We unapologetically aver that rejection of Christ (and not our version of His claims) has dire consequences, and that this is a tenet of the Christian faith. But it is not the invention of some narrow-minded "fundies" in this century who prefer to generate an "us and them" scenario because of a regressive insecurity. One's argument with this belief begins with the Founder of our faith.

Moreover, in my 10 and a half years as a campus minister with this ministry, we have never made hell a central emphasis of our witness in any of our public events. Perhaps we should speak about it more. After all, a claim that one needs a savior implies that one needs saving from something. But the fact is, the One who spoke as much of judgment as He did of salvation made it clear that He "did not come to condemn, but to save," and such is, and has been, the emphasis of our testimony at Yale. I'm sure Joshua Marks, JE '00, the reporter felt excited to spice up his article with evocations of Bible-thumping, hell-fire spouters, but ours is primarily, as the Apostle Paul put it, a "ministry of reconciliation."

Lastly, nowhere in this article do we find any reference to the manner of our witness as it is displayed in the events we sponsor on campus. For example, in the last nine months, we have sponsored lectures by two world-class philosophers. Last March, we brought Dr. Stephen Evans, GRD '71, a renowned Kierkegaard scholar, to address issues related to the current debate over the historicity of Jesus as we find him presented in the Gospels. And on Thurs., Dec. 2, we sponsored a public lecture by Dr. Alvin Plantinga, one of the foremost figures in metaphysics and religious epistemology in the world. Not only was his material "An Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism" presented in that public forum, but an expanded version of it was hosted by Yale's own Philosophy Department on the following day.

Two points need to be stressed. First, our witness to Christ is manifestly one of intellectual engagement as well as devotional testimony. Second, we recognize, and respect, the disagreement of others in matters of faith, as well as the process by which an individual considers their religious commitments. The simple fact is, no one can be forced to believe anything. As I have often told non-Christian friends of mine, I would persuade anyone to embrace Jesus Christ; but in the end, their conversation is with Him and not with me.

We in CCC are trying to offer others the opportunity to explore what faith in Him means, as we understand it, in as engaging and faithful a manner as we can achieve. To those who express an interest in such discussions, and who aren't impressed by an overly selective alarmist rhetoric, I say without embarrassment or any hidden agenda, "Let's have coffee."

--David C. Mahan, Director of Ministries,
Campus Crusade for Christ at Yale

Back to Opinion...