English
Português
Español
Français
Response
“Deconstruction” is the term recently used to describe the process of questioning, doubting, and ultimately rejecting certain aspects of Christian faith. This practice is based on deconstructionism, an approach that aims to dismantle beliefs or ideas while acknowledging that their meanings are inherently subjective. Both the phenomenon and its label represent a reaction against the tendency in some religious circles to minimize profound inquiries and dismiss those who raise them. Exploring the intricacies of faith openly, even if it leads to a change in one’s convictions, is a concept found in the Bible. However, in reality, “deconstruction” often serves as a polite facade for “destruction.” In contemporary times, “deconstruction” typically involves replacing challenging principles with ideas that are popular either culturally or personally.
A core tenet of biblical Christianity is the recognition of humanity’s limited understanding in comparison to God’s boundless wisdom. The Scriptures frequently highlight this distinction explicitly (Isaiah 55:8-9;Job 38:1-4;John 6:45-46). Additionally, the Bible indirectly conveys this truth by acknowledging that sincere Christians may arrive at different conclusions (Romans 14:1-5;1 Corinthians 10:28-32). It warns that individuals can be obstinate and misinterpret God’s intentions (John 5:39-40). However, this does not imply that everything is a matter of personal opinion (1 Corinthians 3:10-14;15:3-8); rather, it emphasizes the importance of approaching everything with genuine inquiries (Matthew 7:7-8). Although deconstruction claims to address such matters, its underlying motive is often not truly about exploring.
To understand, but not to undermine.
Scripture commands each person to scrutinize their faith. This involves fact-checking «These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. », (Acts 17:11), thoughtful preparation «but sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: », (1 Peter 3:15), reasonable skepticism «Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. », (1 John 4:1), cooperation with others «Iron sharpeneth iron; So a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. », (Proverbs 27:17), multiple perspectives «Without counsel purposes are disappointed: But in the multitude of counsellors they are established. », (Proverbs 15:22), and an appreciation for all God has shown in His creation (Romans 1:18-20;Psalm 19:1). Scripture often depicts people crying out with doubtful complaints and frustrations (Psalm 73:2-3;Habakkuk 1:2-4). Those who examine what they believe and why they believe it, assessing those views for truth, are following a biblical mandate «Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves. »
, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except you are reprobates? », (2 Corinthians 13:5). Yet this is not the approach of the modern deconstruction movement.
Too often, churches and church members function as social clubs, neglecting to engage with challenging questions about faith. Believing that we have definitively answered every question reflects a natural desire for control. This inclination is not aligned with biblical principles. In reality, it is the same mindset that led groups like the Pharisees to dictate specific rules about observing the Sabbath, down to regulating the number of steps a person could take. Refusing to embrace a level of trust in the midst of uncertainty is not just a form of legalism (Mark 7:8-9); it contradicts the essence of faith (Mark 9:24;Hebrews 12:1).
Instead of allowing space for genuine doubt and inquiries, some Christian communities dismiss anything beyond surface-level curiosity. This can lead to unfairly labeling individuals with doubts as nonbelievers or troublemakers. Such actions bolster the argument of those who falsely assert that authentic answers can only be found outside the church. Faith communities might overly focus on teachings that are secondary or superficial. They may solidify cultural and political preferences into their interpretation of Christianity. These mistakes contribute to the misguided narrative fueling a significant portion of the modern deconstruction movement.
Some individuals deconstruct as a response to profound personal pain. Those who have experienced neglect, rejection, or even abuse within a church setting struggle to differentiate between unscriptural traumas and legitimate biblical teachings. Disappointments and betrayals from Christian leaders result in heartache and shame. The suffering of our loved ones becomes our own burden. Some individuals react to these challenges by discarding doctrines or beliefs; this is partly an effort to create distance.
Themselves from the stigma of another person’s actions.
Such failures of the modern church can and should be corrected. However, what is now called “deconstruction” reflects long-established and innate principles. There will always be those whose connection to faith is superficial « Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. », (Matthew 7:21). Others have understanding fragile enough to fail under strain «Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. », (Hebrews 3:12). Jesus’ parable of the sower includes two groups who demonstrate a response to truth, only to be overcome by worldly pressure or persecution (Matthew 13:20-22). Paul knew people often succumb to attractive lies (2 Timothy 4:3-4). Paul witnessed close friends yielding to popular trends «for Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia. », (2 Timothy 4:10). Even Christ saw people walk away because they did not want to accept His message (John 6:65-66).
To say, “Deconstruction means choosing easier beliefs” is an oversimplification. And yet deconstruction almost always means adopting views palatable to the unbelieving world. All too conveniently, it means moving away from positions on sexuality, gender, salvation, sin, hell, and other issues not embraced by popular culture. The vast majority
Those who claim to be deconstructing move with the flow of their surrounding culture, not against it. This movement requires a “safe space” to ask challenging questions. However, modern deconstruction often settles for simple, comfortable answers or selectively retains aspects of faith based on personal preference.
While deconstruction suggests openness in theory, it often serves as an “escape clause” when justifying new or “progressive” views. Ironically, individuals who criticize Christian culture for avoiding questions can themselves be evasive when challenged to do the same. Asking difficult questions is easy; answering them requires time and effort. Merely pointing out complications or nitpicking is not equivalent to genuinely evaluating ideas. Identifying as “in deconstruction” can easily become an excuse for avoiding commitment and simply rejecting what one dislikes.
There is a natural inclination to feel “smart” or superior when highlighting flaws in others’ views. Forgetting that questioning should be a two-way process can lead to feeling attacked. When deconstructors are prompted to explain their views, they may protest about not having a “safe space” to ask questions. While there are instances where Christian communities unreasonably shut out doubters, being asked “Why do you believe that?” or “What makes that a better choice?” is a fundamental aspect of sincere inquiry.
Three examples offer guidance on how Christians can address tough questions or doubts about faith: Nicodemus, Thomas, and the early church. Nicodemus approached Jesus to discuss faith (John 3:1-2), and Jesus provided honest answers, even if they were not entirely what Nicodemus may have hoped to hear (John 3:3-15). They were certainly not the answers Nicodemus’ culture would have preferred. Jesus’ responses often challenged the assumptions of those who sought Him out (John 4:22-24;Luke 18:22-23).
When Thomas doubted Jesus’ resurrection, Jesus took the gracious step of providing more attention, time, and evidence than anyone reasonably needed (John 20:24-28). Believers should sympathize with those struggling under doubts and be ready to go that extra mile when they can (Matthew 5:41-42). Jesus didn’t merely applaud Thomas for being skeptical; He graciously dealt with the skepticism.
While being respectful of doubters, the church needs to hold its ground on principles that are truly clear or fundamental to faith. That means insisting on truths even if they are controversial to the world at large. The book of Acts records the early church making reasonable concessions to Jewish believers. The church did not compromise cornerstone teachings in the face of intense pressure to do just that (Acts 15). While accepting the need to consider culture when communicating (1 Corinthians 9:20-23), those early believers also refused to accept false teaching for the sake of popularity «Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. », (Acts 5:29).
Christians need to lovingly engage questions from seekers and doubters. That might mean simply admitting “I don’t know” and offering to look for an answer together. Not all challenges to faith come from a point of antagonism. Some come in the form of curiosity.
Some come in the form of skepticism. Some come with intense personal pain and complicated histories. For those reasons, believers should provide a “safe space” for others to express concerns and doubts (Romans 12:18; Romans 14:13). Those who “fall away,” even when lovingly treated, don’t reflect a weakness in the truth of Christianity: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” (1 John 2:19). No one should replace sincere seeking with the attitudes connected to the modern deconstruction movement.
