An Interesting Theory

I ran across an interesting blog article the other day. It was written by a guy from Texas named Richard Beck. He refers to himself as a professor and experimental psychologist. You can read the entire article Here

The article uses a bunch of big words like thanatocentric and ante-mortum salvific self-verification (I think words like this are lovingly referred to as psycho-babble) But once you get past the big words, his theory is really rather interesting. I usually don't pay much attention to this type of stuff. Mostly because I have such trouble understanding it. (it makes my poor little head hurt) But this one caught my attention because it addressed a question that has really been on my mind lately: Why do some good Christian people become so unreasonable, defensive, harsh and down right un-Christ like anytime their particular religious views or practices are questioned or challenged? Why do reasonable people become so unreasonable when religion is involved?

Richard says that this behavior is a defense mechanism. It stems from having a thanatocentric (death centered) faith.

"If my faith is thanatocentric then faith becomes fundamentally about where I stand at the moment of death. Am I with the saved or with the lost? How can I tell? Well, you can tell by drawing ecclesial lines in the sand and then check--self-verify--where you stand. And you keep checking, almost daily, because death can come at any moment. Faith becomes a kind of obsessive-compulsive salvation check: Am I in? Yes, I'm in. Am I in? Yes, I'm in. Am I in? Yes, I'm in. Doctrine becomes about existential self-soothing.

In my tradition, being saved was defined by being a member of the Churches of Christ. And one of the defining features of that church was non-instrumental music. For better or worse, that issue became a means of ante-mortum salvific self-verification. But what happens, as is currently being done in progressive Churches of Christ, if that line in the sand starts getting rubbed out? Blurred? Well, you start robbing people of a mechanism for existential self-soothing. You've taken away an existential security blanket. If you start rubbing out all those lines of demarcation how can you tell who is or who is not going to hell? More vitally, how can I tell if I'm going to hell? That's the real issue. Where do I currently stand? Saved or Lost?

Death is a terrifying prospect. This is exacerbated if one also believes there is a hell of never-ending torment. Thus, faith, belief and doctrine begin to cluster around defining the Saved versus the Lost. If the church is our lifeboat then we become very invested in making a clear demarcation between church and non-church. I need very clear lines in the sand so that I can self-verify, over and over, that I'm on the right "side."

So, according to Richard, this harsh unreasonable behavior does not stem from malice, hatred, anger, or feelings of superiority. These behaviors simply come from fear - terrifying self limiting fear.

If Richards assumptions are correct, and in at least some cases I suspect that they are, then how should I respond to someone who has just chewed me a new back side for dissagreeing with their particular religious views?
If I truly believe that my faith is "Grace Centered" (I don't know a fancy psycho word for that) and not thanatocentric or "Death Centered" then how should I respond?

Eph. 4:2
With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph. 4:32
And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

This of course is much easier said than done.