Christian Life: Overcoming False Dichotomies

Note: From Christian Life (Zondervan, 2026). Reprinted by permission of the publisher. Citations have been omitted.

One reason I have become convinced that we need a theology of Christian life in our day is that too often we are offered forms of spirituality that assert false dichotomies. That is, they take one principle or insight and oppose it against others that are just as true but seem to compete with the chosen one. It isn’t a matter of opposing truth to falsehood so much as an inability to see how two true ideas relate. We should hold together what God does not want separated. Here as we begin, we can examine a few of them, preparing us to recognize and avoid them as we construct a theology of Christian life. The trick is to ask where we can legitimately choose and rather than or when discussing these ideas:

objective and subjective
catholic and particular
transcendence and immanence
Trinitarian and Christ-centered
representation and imitation

Each of these could fill a chapter, but a brief look at them can help us to avoid rejecting one where we should be affirming both. After this, we will be ready to jump into the love of God, the grace of Christ, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, followed by the second half of the book, where we speak of human response to God. As we proceed throughout the whole book, we will address the biggest tension we face in unpacking a theology of Christian life, which is navigating questions related to agency (divine and human). The entire book will be unpacking this relationship while trying to avoid a false dichotomy that would make us pick between them or to pit them against each other in an inappropriate manner. But for now, we start with these five potential false dichotomies, which, if not recognized, could take us in problematic directions.

Objective and Subjective

Part of the challenge of living a Christian life is developing a healthy appreciation for its objective and subjective aspects. For our purposes, objective refers to realities outside of us that are true regardless of what we think or feel, whereas subjective refers to our internal world, the experience of our emotions, mind and will. The first focuses on an external inventory – what is true “out there.” This includes not simply what is happening that we see with our eyes but also what is true about God, about his presence and character – all of that is objective and not subjective. The second focuses on an internal inventory – what is true “inside” me that notices and processes perceptions, find words, uses logic to solve a problem (sometimes we call that “reasoning”), applies subconscious intuitions to evaluate circumstances (sometimes we call that “feelings”), and so on. Those internal processes respond to worship, determining whether it is merely empty ritual and detached cognitive affirmations or something deeper that penetrates the heart, mind and soul.

Like other conscious experiences, corporate worship involves subjective responses to objective factors. On the one hand, sometimes we’re most aware of what’s going on around us: greeting our friends, finding the children, following the music and words of a new hymn, contemplating the content of a sermon, deciding whether to put cash or a check in the collection plate, and so forth. Beyond these easily observable external factors, however, is God’s own presence, his promises, his glory. The power, knowledge and love of the I Am are not dependent upon our subjective feelings or awareness – they are always just true of him. On the other hand, sometimes we are also aware of our internal responses to the service: noticing how glad we are to see our friends, resolving to be less irritated when our children are inconveniently energetic, trying to hold in tears when deeply stirred by a song, giving a little more because we’re moved by gratitude for God’s gifts. Sometimes our emotions kick in, sometimes the theology of the service energizes our minds, sometimes both, sometimes neither. How important are our internal responses? Not just in terms of corporate worship (which is central) but to our daily lives?

The answer to the last two questions probably depends on your ecclesial tradition and personality. Some people will answer, “Jesus calls us to respond to him from the heart. If I’m not hearing him and following him, then something is wrong.” Others will answer, “Jesus is no less true and faithful and present if the music was sloppy, no one spoke to me, and the sermon was as engaging as reading the Paris phone book.” One perspective might resonate with you more than the other, but in that case the other might need more attention than it currently receives. Either way, we are often very nervous about the “other side,” whatever that is for us. Here, as in many other situations, we need to affirm both dimensions of worship, although some seasons and situations call us to emphasize one aspect more because it has been lost or compromised in our community or personal experience. For example, a faith that advocates “heart religion” but ignores systematic injustice in its midst fails at loving our neighbor, just as an activist version of the faith that ignores personal repentance fails at loving God. We need both, so we need to contemplate the function of both the objective and subjective in theology and practice.

Kelly Kapic, professor of theological studies, Calvin College