Some feel that something has changed in their understanding of their faith and set out for new horizons. In a picture comparison: lizards shed their skin, and these people discover that a new skin has formed under the old one. They strip off the old skin so they can live on. The time of change is inevitable, necessary and part of life.

Others go to church and realize that something is no longer right for them there. It’s like when your shoes are stuck and it hurts to walk, to go to church. You take time out, reflect on what’s happening and decide to buy bigger shoes.

Variations of the change

In earlier times, one might have simply changed churches or denominations. One does not feel completely comfortable in “this” church, and now goes to the neighboring village, because one fits in better “there”. This is still happening today. There are many evangelicals in the national churches who could no longer live in the evangelical environment. They switched to the national church. Conversely, there are also people in the free churches who may still belong to a national church on paper, but are attracted by the liveliness of free church worship. These people have exchanged one form of church for another.

Then there are people who turn their backs on institutional churches (here I include national churches and free churches) because the culture no longer fits. One finds them too “dead”, too “narrow”, too “alienated from life”, too “detached”. Some find that they are atrophying spiritually because there is no more sharing about the Bible, or have not “progressed in the faith” for years. Wouldn’t churches be there to promote faith? Why is this not happening much more?

I have also met people who have leading functions in churches who have no idea what to do with this growth, because the church is above all one thing: fixed tradition. It’s beautiful the way it is, and it should always stay that way. The change that some ardently desire is vehemently opposed by others. For some, there is a living faith connection and a “mystery of faith” that continues to develop, while others can do little with it.

There are other options. For example, those who find free churches too superficial and the usual national churches too unconcerned with life may be enthusiastic about Orthodox churches. There they find, quite similarly and yet quite differently, a richness in tradition that had been lost to them in other forms of church they had experienced. Orthodox churches often maintain a vibrant faith and have hundreds of years, if not soon 2000 years, of experience with Christian fellowship.

Of course, there are many differences between denominations. I’m not sweeping them under the rug here. I only want to point out that there are different biotopes of Christian art of living. Some move to a different biotope. They adapt there, settle in, and probably adopt many assumptions because they discover a richness for themselves in them. Is that better? Or maybe I should just apply my criteria to myself?

The seriousness with which people believe wants to be considered once without doctrines. Enough with the condemnations. Jesus did not call us to judge or exclude others. I have great respect for people who dare to make a real change in thinking. Rethinking (Gr. metanoia) is a biblical principle. They have recognized in themselves what is necessary for themselves. They are rethinking. These people don’t complain, they make a difference. This is positive. They don’t stop, but ask themselves “What now?”. They set out for a better future without knowing what exactly it will look like. That is the art of living.

Deconstruction

For some years now, there has been much talk about “deconstruction” and “reconstruction” of faith. What is deconstruction?

People who feel a change in their understanding of faith often do so because the previous environment no longer seems viable. This may concern doctrine or the lived Christian subculture. One realizes that something is wrong with the doctrine, or one has had enough of the black and white thinking of one’s own community.

If one comes to the conclusion that something is not right, is not healthy, does not continue, one can leave this environment. Deconstruction has already begun. The self-evident nature of many assumptions is questioned, new values are formulated. Perhaps one has dealt with issues (“hell”) and seen that the Bible says otherwise. Or people have compared concepts such as “God is love” and “If you do not love back, I will torment you forever” and concluded that there are concrete contradictions here.

In a deconstruction, one takes apart the previous assumptions. One deconstructs the previous belief construct because it is no longer sustainable. One says to oneself “I don’t want to believe like this any longer” and makes oneself a traveler and explorer in matters of faith.

One says to oneself “I don’t want to believe like this any longer” and makes oneself a traveler and explorer in matters of faith.

Where one ends up is often unknown. Deconstruction is only the first step. You say “no” to something, free yourself from an old way of thinking. This takes time and energy. Those who are in this process don’t know where it will lead, but you can’t help but set out.

This development is healthy. Growth is part of the human being. We have never been as old as we are today. We have no experience with which to classify today and everything that happens in it. You try to do that with previous experience, but it’s not always enough. You have to dare the adventure, here and now. We do this many times in our lives and we cope well with it: the first day of school, a choice of partner, marriage and also divorce, new beginnings, the first child, the first, second, third job, a drastic illness or the first day of a world trip and once also dying.

Adaptation to the here and now

If you deconstruct, you don’t want to get stuck in an unhealthy situation. Perhaps one has experienced a value system, a subculture, characterized by narrowness and problematic views. You want to leave these behind. The same thing happens when one’s life situation is met not with grace but with condemnation.

Reactions to people who do not fit the “Bible-based” pattern:

• • You can divorce at the registry office, but before God you remain married (yikes!).
  • You may continue to come to church as a divorced person, but you may no longer stand on the platform (yikes!)
  • Divorced people are not allowed to take on representative functions in the community (yikes!)
  • Divorced? Your life is over. God wants you to stay single now (really?)
  • Now that you are married again, I have to end my friendship with the (why?)
  • Are you single and applying for a pastor position? “We don’t even have to answer that.” That’s the last I heard when I called. “We don’t want a divorcee and we are looking for a family with children”. (A single like the apostle Paul would not have had a chance at the job).
  • You are not allowed to participate in our marriage course because you are single right now (really?)
  • Those who live together in a binding manner but are not officially married cannot become members of the congregation (what?)

If you do not conform to the ideal pattern, you are demoted to a second-rate Christian. I have seen this in many ways and experienced it in myself. You are allowed to come to church and donate, but “spiritual work” is denied you.

Those who deconstruct also want to leave such ideas behind. You want to resynchronize your life and what you believe. The reality of life should return. One wants to be able to live and think in the here and now, perhaps also to believe. What does it need? In many a subculture, you are not allowed to ask these questions. That is why there is often no alternative for courageous decisions: Get out of previous structures and constructs to create a better future. One may let go of the previous thoughts to replace them with better ones.

How someone realigns his or her life is not said by this. It is first a process that you allow. Some say goodbye to everything that has to do with faith. They are disillusioned, traumatized, and see no alternative. Others, however, do not want to throw away the child with the bath water. They try to make a reconstruction after the deconstruction.

Reconstruction

Those who go through deconstruction should give it due space and time. After that we continue. Some then try to “reconstruct” a new view. You took everything apart, like you can take an engine apart, and then see yourself pushed to build a new engine from those parts – maybe with new parts, too.

However, one thing will not happen: You will not screw the old engine back together. The old, after all, is over with deconstruction. Those who, like the people of Israel, set out from Egypt for the Promised Land, experiencing the hardships of the desert, may long for the “fleshpots of Egypt” again (Ex 16:3). However, this is no longer possible. This is the past in which one was enslaved.

It only goes forward. It must go through the desert. Behind it, however, was the Promised Land. This was an outlook based on a promise. These were not booked vacations. The promise was the only assurance. It took trust to get going. None of the Israelites had ever been there. It was new territory. This story can be read in the book of Exodus.

Reconstruction would be something like entering the Promised Land, but without any claim to flawlessness or absolute truth. There may be a promise. You have to take the first step with confidence, then the second – and so on. You have to approach carefully, explore the land, take possession of it, cultivate the fields, learn to appreciate the fruit of the land. Those who change countries have many challenges to overcome. Those who seek and find a new horizon in faith must then still settle in there. Nothing is self-evident.

Reconstruction is new construction. You put ideas, experiences, insights together in a new way. This does not restore the old. The past has been left behind. Once you are 20 years old, you can’t be 10 years old anymore. Growth cannot be reversed. However, something new will emerge.

Reconstruction is new construction. You put ideas, experiences, insights together in a new way. This does not restore the old.

Leaving behind certain doctrines or a certain understanding of faith does not make one an unbeliever. Whoever discovers, for example, in the Bible that hell is a false doctrine and cannot be found back in the Bible, is not thereby less of a Christian. The way of being a Christian can change. And some are saying goodbye to any kind of Christianity. These are then personal decisions.

If I let go of certain things or say goodbye to a subculture, it does not automatically mean that I no longer believe. I may not believe the way I used to. There may be significant differences from previous findings. But those who deconstruct and perhaps reconstruct again answer deeply human questions. I would even argue here that someone who deconstructs and reconstructs is living out his humanity all the more. Isn’t that the greatest honor you can give to your Creator? Therefore, this statement is also true for believers. Of course, it applies all the more to unbelievers who no longer believe in a Creator. You are on the road only with yourself. However, I do not want to stop there. This paper is about the evolution in believers who deconstruct.

Deconstruction is important to get out of unhealthy structures. Those who think that our faith is more important than ourselves, that our relationship with God is higher than anything else, fail to realize that God had to create Adam before He could address him in the Garden of Eden. I learn from this story: Only as human beings can we believe or respond to God’s call. Faith is part of our humanity. Therefore, being human and being Christian are not contradictions. It is only a contradiction if we create a gap between the two. This “superfrom” attitude has no future. Deconstruction is a step in the right direction there. One becomes human again and bridges the artificially created gap. You leave the “superfrom” behind to pick yourself up in this life and in the here and now.

Only as human beings can we believe.
Therefore, being human and being Christian are not contradictions.

Reconstruction does not lead back to the old. Reconstruction can be many things. It can mean turning to the Bible again, but from a different expectation. One can ask oneself what a church 2.0 looks like when one has left behind the previous church forms as version 1.0.

What comes after deconstruction?

Deconstruction will take place throughout life. It’s not a one-time act. We deconstruct and reconstruct again and again. In the Bible, this is described as growth. It is not growth toward an evangelical understanding of the faith. It is growth in faith, just as our bodies go through different stages of growth.

Deconstruction will therefore always take place. Also, we will always reconstruct. This should not surprise us. What is mostly understood today as deconstruction and reconstruction is only one section of this path. Today, it is primarily a matter of questioning a certain culture of faith (with doctrinal exponents) and putting it to rest. Of course, it doesn’t stop there.

Those who were once “evangelical” may thus have become “post-evangelical.” The next step is “post-Christian.” Even this third step does not mean that there is “unbelief” (whatever that may be). Post-Christian is not by definition the same as post-Christ. The “Christian” in “post-Christian” defines general concepts of “Christianity” which one leaves behind. This can happen if you think ahead.

Here, too, it is a matter of deconstruction, and likewise of reconstruction. You think you can get through to better questions that you would like to answer. Is this how you craft your own faith? Not necessarily, because one of the statements of post-Christian thinking is the criticism that previous ideas of God are mere projections and thus idols. Why does it really work now? What is described in the Bible? What is passed down through the centuries as the core of the faith?

Questions about God, about Christ, about the Bible and many other questions, are looking for answers. We are and remain on this exciting path, wherein we may (!) learn to rethink Paul’s remarkable words:

“That they might seek God, whether they would grope after Him, and find Him, though indeed He be not far from every one of us; for in Him we live, and move, and are, as some also of your poets have said…”
Acts 17:27-28

The whole process of deconstruction and reconstruction can also be seen from the perspective of human development. It is our argument that no one can make in our place. Many who deconstruct no longer want to make projections. One has the desire to again authentically assume one’s own responsibility in one’s own life. This was lost in many situations. One says goodbye to unhealthy constructs of faith. They were harmful. False assumptions do not help.

What should better assumptions look like? It is important that we stay in conversation with ourselves and with others. This is not just about the mind, not just about the heart. It is also about community and meeting and supporting each other in our journeys of life and faith – even if the insights are not the same.

Deconstruction and reconstruction

There is a video on this topic:

Deepening

• Martin Buber writes: “All real life is encounter”. Can you agree with this? Why?
• Martin Buber writes: “The extended lines of relationships intersect in the eternal you.” According to this statement, how can we value every kind of human encounter?

Quotations from: Martin Buber, “I and Thou.

• How wobbly is the chair of faith you are sitting on?
• Can there be doubt in your understanding of faith? Why?
• Faith and trust are identical (the same word) in the basic languages of the Bible. Describe in one sentence using the word “faith” what the essence of faith is for you. After that, replace the word “faith” with “trust”. Does that make the statement different?
• How do you deal with times of change? What does that trigger in you?