Deconstruction and How to Talk with Progressive Friends

What you'll learn

Define deconstruction, explain why people deconstruct, and distinguish honest doubt from settled unbelief
Describe how a shaken faith can be rebuilt on the risen Christ and the authority of Scripture, using real testimonies
Practise a gentle, question-driven way of talking with deconstructing and progressive friends, shaped by Jude 22-23 and 2 Timothy 2:24-26

What deconstruction is

Deconstruction is the word many people now use for re-examining, and often rejecting, the faith they grew up with. Alisa Childers defines it as "the process of systematically dissecting and often rejecting the beliefs you grew up with." The term borrows loosely from the French philosopher Jacques Derrida, but in church life it simply means pulling one's beliefs apart to see what, if anything, survives. Around 2016 the label exvangelical (ex-evangelical) also spread online.

Some well-known Christians have described this journey publicly. In July 2019 Joshua Harris, author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye, said he had "undergone a massive shift in regard to my faith in Jesus" and, in the same post, that by all his own measurements he was not a Christian. In August 2019 Hillsong songwriter Marty Sampson posted about losing his faith, and in 2020 the YouTubers Rhett McLaughlin and Link Neal released podcast episodes about their deconstruction.

Deconstruction can end in different places. Researchers describe two broad outcomes: some people reconstruct a faith (sometimes a historic faith, sometimes a progressive one), while others leave religion altogether. Matt Chandler has noted that deconstruction is not the same thing as ordinary doubt, theological wrestling or struggling through church hurt. That distinction will matter for how you respond.

What is deconstruction, and why does Matt Chandler's distinction matter for how you respond?Show answer

Deconstruction is re-examining, and often rejecting, the faith you grew up with; Alisa Childers calls it 'the process of systematically dissecting and often rejecting the beliefs you grew up with'. It can end with people reconstructing a faith, historic or progressive, or leaving religion altogether. Chandler notes it is not the same as ordinary doubt, theological wrestling or struggling through church hurt, so you need to find out which you are actually dealing with before you respond.

dissecting inherited beliefs
reconstruct or leave
not the same as ordinary doubt
identify what you face

Why people deconstruct

If you want to help someone, first understand what started the process. The reasons are usually a mix of these:

Church hurt. Abuse scandals, hypocrisy in leaders, harsh legalism, manipulation, or being shamed for asking questions. For many, the wound comes before the argument.
Hard questions never answered. Hell, violence in the Old Testament, suffering, science, the reliability of the Bible, sexuality. Many were told 'just believe' instead of being shown that Christianity has thoughtful answers.
A thin faith. Faith reduced to rules, culture or politics, without a deep grasp of the gospel of grace. When the cultural wrapping is torn off, there seems to be nothing underneath.
Cultural pressure. Friends, university, online communities and a culture that treats the inner self as the final authority. Hashtags and influencers make leaving feel brave and staying feel naive.
Moral desire. Sometimes a person wants to live in a way Scripture forbids, and the questions follow the desire. Never assume this, but do not rule it out either (John 3:19-20).

Why does the lesson say you need to understand what started someone's deconstruction? Give at least three possible reasons.Show answer

If you want to help someone, you first need to understand what started the process, because different causes need different responses. Common reasons include church hurt, where the wound often comes before the argument; hard questions that were never answered; a thin faith reduced to rules, culture or politics; and cultural pressure. Sometimes moral desire drives the questions (John 3:19-20); never assume that, but do not rule it out either.

understand before helping
church hurt; unanswered questions
thin faith; cultural pressure
moral desire: don't assume or rule out

Doubt is not the same as unbelief

A deconstructing friend may assume that any doubt means faith is finished. The Bible is kinder and wiser than that. Os Guinness, in In Two Minds (1976, later published as God in the Dark), describes doubt as being in two minds, suspended between faith and unbelief, rather than as unbelief itself. Doubt is a state of a believer under strain; unbelief is a settled refusal to trust God, an "evil, unbelieving heart" that turns away from him (Heb 3:12).

Scripture is full of doubting believers. Asaph nearly slipped when he saw the wicked prosper, until he "went into the sanctuary of God" (Ps 73). John the Baptist, in prison, sent to ask Jesus, "Are you the one who is to come?" and Jesus answered with evidence, not rebuke (Matt 11:2-6). Thomas demanded to see the wounds, and Jesus showed them (John 20:24-29). A father cried, "I believe; help my unbelief!" (Mark 9:24). And Jude tells us to "have mercy on those who doubt" (Jude 22).

The Westminster Confession says true believers may have their assurance "shaken, diminished, and intermitted" yet are never utterly without the seed of God (WCF 18.4). Reformed theology therefore treats doubt pastorally: the Holy Spirit keeps his people, and he uses ordinary means (the word, prayer, the sacraments, the church) to restore them.

Here progressive writers often offer a different map. Brian McLaren's Faith After Doubt (2021) describes faith moving through stages (Simplicity, Complexity, Perplexity, Harmony), with doubt as the doorway to a more mature, less certain faith. Peter Enns' The Sin of Certainty (2016) argues that God desires our trust more than our "correct" beliefs. There is something true here: faith is trust in a person, not just ticking doctrinal boxes. But it is a false choice. Trust always rests on what we believe is true about the one we trust. Luke wrote so that Theophilus might "have certainty concerning the things you have been taught" (Luke 1:4). Christian confidence is not arrogance; it is confidence in a God who has spoken and acted.

What is the difference between doubt and unbelief, and which biblical examples show doubting believers?Show answer

Following Os Guinness, doubt is being in two minds, a believer under strain between faith and unbelief, whereas unbelief is a settled refusal to trust God, an 'evil, unbelieving heart' (Heb 3:12). Scripture is full of doubting believers: Asaph in Psalm 73, John the Baptist asking 'Are you the one?' (Matt 11:2-6), Thomas, and the father who cried 'I believe; help my unbelief!' (Mark 9:24). Jude tells us to have mercy on those who doubt (Jude 22).

doubt: in two minds
unbelief: settled refusal
Asaph, John, Thomas
mercy on doubters (Jude 22)

How would you answer someone who says God wants our trust, not our 'correct' beliefs?Show answer

There is something true here: faith is trust in a person, not just ticking doctrinal boxes. But it is a false choice, because trust always rests on what we believe is true about the one we trust. Luke wrote so that Theophilus might 'have certainty' (Luke 1:4), and Christian confidence is not arrogance but confidence in a God who has spoken and acted.

faith is trust in a person
a false choice
trust rests on truth claims
certainty (Luke 1:4)

Reconstruction on Christ and Scripture

Not everything a deconstructing person questions deserves to stand. Political tribalism, legalistic rules, man-made traditions, shallow answers and leaders who abused power should be examined and, where wrong, rejected. Scripture itself commands us to "test everything; hold fast what is good" (1 Thess 5:21), and the Bereans checked even Paul against the Scriptures (Acts 17:11). Help your friend separate the gospel from the baggage.

But reconstruction needs a foundation. Jesus said the wise man builds his house on the rock by hearing and doing his words (Matt 7:24-27). Progressive reconstruction often rebuilds on personal experience, intuition or a selective "Jesus-shaped" reading of the Bible. Historic Christianity rebuilds on Christ himself: on the fact of his resurrection (1 Cor 15:3-8, 14-17), and on his own view of Scripture as unbreakable (John 10:35; see lesson m14l2). Start with the question, "Did Jesus rise from the dead?" If he did, he is Lord, and his words about God, sin, Scripture and judgement are trustworthy.

Real people have walked this road back. Alisa Childers, formerly a singer with the Christian group ZOEgirl, describes in Another Gospel? (2020) how the teaching of a self-described agnostic pastor at her church unsettled the core of her faith, and how, by working through the evidence and the historic teaching of the church, she came back to orthodox faith. With Tim Barnett she later wrote The Deconstruction of Christianity (2023).

C. S. Lewis abandoned his childhood faith as a schoolboy and became a confirmed atheist. Through reading, argument and friendship he came to believe in God around 1930, and after a long night conversation with J. R. R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson on Addison's Walk in Oxford (September 1931) he soon came to faith in Christ. And remember Peter, who denied Jesus three times and was restored three times by the risen Lord (John 21:15-19). No one is too far gone for the Shepherd who seeks the lost.

What parts of a deconstructing person's questioning may be healthy, and what foundation does true reconstruction need?Show answer

Political tribalism, legalistic rules, man-made traditions, shallow answers and abusive leaders should be examined and, where wrong, rejected, since Scripture says 'test everything; hold fast what is good' (1 Thess 5:21). But reconstruction needs a foundation: the rock of hearing and doing Christ's words (Matt 7:24-27), not personal experience or a selective reading. Start with 'Did Jesus rise from the dead?', because if he did, he is Lord and his words about God, sin, Scripture and judgement are trustworthy.

separate gospel from baggage
test everything (1 Thess 5:21)
build on Christ, not experience
start with the resurrection

Which stories in this section give hope that people can come back to faith?Show answer

Alisa Childers had her faith unsettled by the teaching of a self-described agnostic pastor, but by working through the evidence and the church's historic teaching she returned to orthodox faith. C. S. Lewis moved from atheism to belief in God around 1930 and, after a night conversation with Tolkien and Dyson in 1931, came to faith in Christ. And Peter, who denied Jesus three times, was restored three times by the risen Lord (John 21:15-19).

Alisa Childers' return
C. S. Lewis from atheism
Peter restored (John 21)
no one too far gone

Practical guidance for conversations

Greg Koukl's Tactics approach works well here: ask more than you tell. "Be quick to hear, slow to speak" (Jas 1:19). Some questions to ask:

"What happened?" Let them tell their story. Is this mainly hurt, questions, or both?
"What exactly have you stopped believing?" Often they have rejected a version of church, not Jesus himself. Find out which.
"What do you believe now, and what is your authority for it?" Gently surface the new foundation: experience, a favourite author, culture?
"What do you make of Jesus? Did he rise from the dead?" Keep bringing the conversation back to Christ.
"Would you be willing to read a Gospel with me?" Let Jesus speak for himself.

Example: Coffee with a deconstructing friend

Friend: I'm deconstructing. Honestly, I'm not sure I believe any of it any more.

You: Thanks for trusting me with that. What happened?

Friend: When I asked about hell at youth group, I was told to stop being rebellious. Then I found Peter Enns' podcast. He says the Bible is just people's journey with God.

You: I'm sorry you were shut down. Your questions deserved real answers. Can I ask what you've stopped believing: Jesus himself, or the church you grew up in?

Friend: Mostly the church. I still think Jesus was amazing.

You: So do I. Here's the question I keep coming back to: did he rise from the dead?

Friend: I don't know. Does it matter?

You: Paul thought so. He said that if Christ isn't raised, our faith is futile (1 Corinthians 15:17). But if he did rise, he's Lord, and the way he trusted Scripture, as something that 'cannot be broken' (John 10:35), shows us how to read it.

Friend: I've never thought about it that way.

You: No pressure. Would you read Luke's Gospel with me? Luke wrote so that people could have certainty (Luke 1:4). We can take your hard questions one at a time, hell included.

Why does the lesson recommend asking questions rather than giving speeches, and which questions keep bringing the conversation back to Christ?Show answer

Following Koukl's Tactics and James 1:19, asking more than telling helps you learn whether the issue is hurt, questions or both, and whether the person has rejected a version of church rather than Jesus himself. Asking 'What do you believe now, and what is your authority for it?' gently surfaces the new foundation. 'What do you make of Jesus? Did he rise from the dead?' and an invitation to read a Gospel together let Jesus speak for himself.

quick to hear (Jas 1:19)
hurt, questions or both?
what is your authority now?
read a Gospel together

In the worked example, which questions does the believer ask, and how does he move the conversation toward Christ?Show answer

He asks 'What happened?' and whether his friend has stopped believing in Jesus or in the church she grew up in, after apologising for how her questions were handled. He then asks whether Jesus rose from the dead, explaining that if Christ is raised he is Lord and his view of Scripture as unbreakable (John 10:35) shows us how to read it. He ends without pressure, inviting her to read Luke's Gospel together (Luke 1:4).

listens: 'What happened?'
Jesus or the church?
resurrection as the key question
invitation to read Luke together

What to avoid, and the apologist's posture

Avoid these common mistakes: labelling someone an apostate in your first conversation; mocking progressive authors; answering questions they did not ask; defending every past failure of evangelical churches; assuming every doubt hides secret sin; and treating the person as a project rather than a friend. Admit your own struggles. Say sorry for real wrongs. Read the book they are reading so you can discuss it fairly. Keep the friendship over months and years, and pray.

Jude gives the posture. The same letter that urges us to "contend for the faith" against false teachers (Jude 3-4) also says: "have mercy on those who doubt; save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh" (Jude 22-23). Distinguish the wounded sheep from the wolves: the struggling friend needs mercy, while those who teach error need to be firmly answered.

Paul adds: "the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim 2:24-25). That last sentence is a great comfort for a Reformed believer. You do not have to manipulate or win every exchange, because repentance is God's gift. Your job is to be faithful, clear and kind; the Spirit's job is to open hearts. So speak the truth, keep the door open, and trust the God who brings prodigals home (Luke 15:20).

Name three mistakes to avoid when talking with a deconstructing friend, and three things to do instead.Show answer

Avoid labelling someone an apostate in the first conversation, mocking progressive authors, answering questions they did not ask, defending every past failure of evangelical churches, assuming every doubt hides secret sin, or treating the person as a project. Instead, admit your own struggles, say sorry for real wrongs, read the book they are reading so you can discuss it fairly, and keep the friendship over months and years with prayer.

don't label or mock
don't treat them as a project
admit struggles, apologise for wrongs
read their book, stay friends, pray

How does Jude 22-23 shape the apologist's posture, and why is 2 Timothy 2:25 a comfort to a Reformed believer?Show answer

Jude, who urges us to contend for the faith, also says to have mercy on those who doubt, so we distinguish wounded sheep, who need mercy, from wolves who teach error and need firm answers. Paul says the Lord's servant must be kind and correct opponents with gentleness, since 'God may perhaps grant them repentance' (2 Tim 2:24-25). That is a comfort because repentance is God's gift: we do not have to manipulate or win every exchange, only be faithful, clear and kind.

mercy on doubters (Jude 22)
sheep vs wolves
kind, gentle correction
repentance is God's gift

In their own words

“I have undergone a massive shift in regard to my faith in Jesus.” (Joshua Harris, Instagram announcement (July 2019); in the same post he said that by all his own measurements he was not a Christian)

“Doubt is not the enemy of faith but the doorway to a deeper one: faith grows through Simplicity, Complexity, Perplexity and into Harmony, a faith centred on love rather than certainty. (Paraphrase)” (Brian D. McLaren, Faith After Doubt: Why Your Beliefs Stopped Working and What to Do About It (2021))

“God desires our trust more than our 'correct' beliefs; preoccupation with certainty is itself the problem. (Paraphrase of book's thesis and subtitle)” (Peter Enns, The Sin of Certainty: Why God Desires Our Trust More Than Our 'Correct' Beliefs (2016))

“The first half of life builds the container of rules and identity; the second half lets go of it for a broader, non-dual spirituality. Falling apart is how we fall upward. (Paraphrase)” (Richard Rohr, Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life (2011))

Key texts

Jude 22-23: Mercy for doubters, urgency for those near the fire, and moral clarity. The posture for every deconstruction conversation.
2 Timothy 2:24-26: Kind, patient, gentle correction, trusting that God grants repentance. Frees you from the need to win every argument.
Mark 9:24: 'I believe; help my unbelief!' Shows a friend that doubt and faith can exist together and that Jesus receives honest struggle.
Matthew 11:2-6: Jesus answers John the Baptist's doubt with evidence, not rebuke: a model for meeting questions with reasons.
1 Corinthians 15:3-8, 14-17: The resurrection is the foundation for reconstruction: if Christ is raised, he is Lord; if not, faith is futile.
1 Thessalonians 5:21: 'Test everything; hold fast what is good.' Affirms healthy examination while insisting that some things are worth holding.
Hebrews 3:12: Distinguishes a settled 'unbelieving heart' that falls away from the living God from the honest doubt Jude tells us to meet with mercy.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“Deconstruction is just healthy questioning. You're only against it because you're afraid of hard questions.”Show a response

I'm not against questions; Scripture tells us to 'test everything' (1 Thess 5:21), and the Bereans checked Paul against the Scriptures. Christianity has welcomed scrutiny from the start: Luke investigated so Theophilus could have certainty (Luke 1:1-4). So let's ask the questions properly. But testing needs a standard. If I tear down every belief using only my feelings or my culture as the measure, I haven't escaped authority; I've just made myself the authority. The real question is not whether to question, but what we build on afterwards. I'd love to look together at the hardest question of all: did Jesus rise from the dead? Everything else follows from that.

“Faith is about trust, not certainty. Your need for correct doctrine is exactly the problem.”Show a response

I agree that faith is trust in a person, not just agreeing with a list. But trust always depends on beliefs about the one you trust. You trust a surgeon because you believe certain things about her training. Christian trust rests on what God has said and done: 'Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures... he was raised' (1 Cor 15:3-4). If those claims are false, trust in Jesus is misplaced (1 Cor 15:17). The New Testament itself was written so that people might have certainty (Luke 1:4) and know they have eternal life (1 John 5:13). Confidence is not arrogance when it rests on God's word, not on ourselves.

“The church hurt me deeply. Why should I trust the Bible that those people used against me?”Show a response

I'm truly sorry. If leaders abused you or used Scripture as a weapon, that was sin, and God's word condemns it too. Jesus reserved his sharpest words for religious leaders who loaded burdens on people and did not lift a finger to help (Matt 23:4), and he warned shepherds who harm the flock. So the people who hurt you were not following the Bible; they were disobeying it. I'd gently ask you to separate the Jesus of the Gospels from the people who misrepresented him. Would you be willing to read one of the Gospels with me, slowly, and see what Jesus himself is like? I think you'll find he's on the side of the wounded.

“I haven't left Christianity. I've reconstructed: I follow Jesus, I just don't believe in inerrancy, penal substitution or hell any more.”Show a response

I'm glad you still want to follow Jesus, and I'd love to talk about him. Can I ask how you decide which parts of the Bible to keep? Jesus himself treated Scripture as unbreakable (John 10:35), spoke of judgement more than anyone else in the Bible (Matt 25:46), and said he came 'to give his life as a ransom for many' (Mark 10:45). If we keep Jesus but set aside what he taught, we risk following a Jesus of our own design. That's a danger for me too: I could reshape him to fit my preferences. So let's let him define himself. Which of his words do you find hardest? Let's start there.

“Even Joshua Harris and a Hillsong songwriter walked away from the faith. If leaders like that couldn't hold on, why should I?”Show a response

It's unsettling when well-known Christians publicly walk away, and I don't want to judge their hearts, which only God knows. But notice what their stories do and don't show. They show that being prominent, gifted or even a Christian author is no substitute for a living faith built on Christ himself. They don't show that Christianity is false; that question turns on whether Jesus rose from the dead (1 Cor 15:14-17), not on who stays or leaves. And for every public exit there are quieter stories of return. Alisa Childers had her faith shaken and came back to orthodox belief by working through the evidence. C. S. Lewis went from atheism to faith in Christ. Peter denied Jesus three times and was restored by the risen Lord (John 21:15-19). The real question isn't who left, but who Jesus is.

“I can tell you just want to win me back. I'm your project, not your friend.”Show a response

That's a fair thing to say, and if I've made you feel like a project, I'm sorry. I don't want to treat you that way, and you're right to be wary of people who do. I'll be honest: I do hope you'll trust Jesus, because I believe he is real and good, and pretending otherwise wouldn't be honest. But my friendship isn't conditional on where you land. I'd rather hear your story, read what you're reading and keep talking for as long as it takes. And here's something that takes the pressure off both of us: I can't argue anyone into faith. Scripture says repentance is God's gift (2 Tim 2:25). My job is simply to be faithful, clear and kind, and to keep the door open. You don't have to perform for me, and I don't have to win.

Written task

Your friend from youth group messages you: 'I've been deconstructing for a year. After what happened at church and reading Brian McLaren and Peter Enns, I don't think certainty is possible. I still like Jesus, but I don't know what I believe.' Write a 300-400 word reply (a message or the start of a conversation) that listens before it argues, asks at least three good questions, distinguishes doubt from unbelief with Scripture, gently answers the 'trust not certainty' claim, and points toward Christ and his resurrection as the foundation for rebuilding. Show the posture of Jude 22-23 and 2 Timothy 2:24-26.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

Opens with empathy and acknowledges church hurt sincerely without becoming defensive
Asks at least three open, non-manipulative questions that uncover the person's story and current authority
Uses Scripture accurately to distinguish doubt from unbelief (e.g. Mark 9:24, Jude 22, Heb 3:12)
Fairly represents McLaren or Enns and answers the trust/certainty dichotomy clearly
Points to Christ and the resurrection as the foundation and invites a concrete next step (e.g. reading a Gospel together)