S4: E1: Gen Z in a Post-Everything World
S4: Gen Z in a Post-Everything World
E1: Communicating in Jerusalem or Babylon?
What is so special about Gen Z?[1] Well, nothing at all, and yet everything.
On one hand, there is nothing new about Gen Z, in the same way there is nothing new about my own three children (two of them Gen Z). Also, there is nothing new about them in terms of a special church dispensation. For instance, about 3035 years ago a man called Asaph wrote about the responsibility of communicating to every successive generation about the saving acts of God, “so the next generation would know them, even the children yet to be born, and they in turn would tell their children” (Psalm 78:6). So, absolutely nothing new there, even in the context of Christianity.
On the other hand, Gen Z represent something very new, at least in the West. They are the largest American generation yet – about 70 million of them. Consequently, the “Z” generation has become the most studied of all groups with answers to better and more precise questions that fall into the social science category. These questions explore the relationship of Gen Z with technology and its value in communication and connection, their complex worldview, personal and collective identity, their parents and family, the idea of security, and diversity.[2]
Answering these specific questions reveals new dimensions about Gen Z that look very different to previous generations, especially in the context of Christianity. According to David Kinnerman, the Israelite exiles in Babylon are a good example of what these new generational dimensions look like.[3]
Simply put, when Israel became exiled in Babylon a generation emerged that had no connection to where they came from – Jerusalem. They had no experience of what Jerusalem stood for, or the practices of Judaism that surrounded the temple. So, if we compare the worldview of people in Jerusalem before exile, and the worldview of exiled Israelites in Babylon, this is what it would look like:
Jerusalem Babylon
Faith at the center Faith at the fringe
One God Many gods
Reasonably paced life Accelerated pace life
Sameness Diversity
Central source for information Multiple sources for information
While exiled in Babylon, an entirely new Israelite generation became disconnected from their Judaist roots. So, prophets like Daniel and Ezekiel helped the exiled generation to reimagine what it meant to be Jewish practicing Judaism in Jerusalem. In the same way, imaginative prophetic voices are needed to help Gen Z reimagine what it is like to be in a relationship with God. I am not suggesting that we drag Gen Z back to the past, but I am acknowledging their worldview is post-Christian.
The Christian faith began in a Greco-Roman culture. It struggled under persecution until 313AD when emperor Constantine sanctioned Christianity as an official religion. In many ways, the Early Church Fathers helped establish the Christian faith in a pre-Christian world until the canon of the Bible was finished about 367AD. In very general terms, it could be said that Christianity firmly established itself from this point throughout the world.
If the Early Church Fathers represent a pre-Christian time, we are now living in a post-Christian time, at least with Gen Z.
The Daniel’s and Ezekiel’s of today are needed to re-establish the Christian faith in this post-Christian world. What this means is that communicating biblical truth must be in the context that Gen Z understand – Babylon. For them, it is a pluralistic, accelerated, diverse, world of competing and opposing voices. Approaching Gen Z in this way means we cannot take for granted they understand how to have a relationship with God, how God made that possible through Christ, and the basic practices of prayer, worship, fellowship, baptism, communion, devotion, and so on.
The immense amount of research about Gen Z clearly requires us to re-evaluate how to communicate biblical truth, as Asaph directed over three millennia ago, “so the next generation would know them, even the children yet to be born, and they in turn would tell their children” (Psalm 78:6).
So, in this new season of blogs, I want to explore how we can best communicate biblical truth to Gen Z considering their worldview is post-Christian, or much like the exiles in Babylon. To become effective, a communicator must be aware of the cultural dimensions of the world according to Gen Z – whether he/she agrees with it or not. You will find a more detailed account in my book “Experiencing the Body and Blood of Christ: Communicating Biblical Truth to Late Millennials and Gen Z”
Let’s look at one of those dimensions: the safe space.
The Immunity of a Safe Space
As a professor, I like to appropriately provoke thought, so the idea of a safe space tends to demonize my approach to thinking. Safe spaces are typically preempted with written trigger warnings posted on the classroom door, in the classroom, on certain book pages (or online pages) where the material or discussion could offend.
The idea is to warn the student ahead of time to prevent negative emotions. So, a safe space would not contain any material (of any kind) that could offend. I understand this in terms of content that could be psychologically harmful to victims of trauma, a variety of disorders, or students who suffer with mental illness. Therefore, the motive of a safe space is actually inspired by compassion and empathy. This is a healthy advancement in education.
However, when a safe space is overly used, or has an overreach within the boundaries of its original intention, it can create trauma and even foster it. What happens to opposing opinions? Do they become taboo? More so, what happens to a conversation about religion, politics, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, authority, power, race and so on? Are these subjects only heard by promoting the virtues of diversity and tolerance? If so, everyone is correct, and nothing is challenged much like an award in first grade for simply showing up.
Do the proponents of an overly used safe space not know the world is highly competitive? Is there a blind eye turned towards the competitive marketplace? What happens if a student wants to change his/her mind on a topic within a religious, political, sexual, gendering, ethnic, or racial subject? Surely, an overused safe space prevents any of this from taking place. And, what about dating? Since human beings began to write, poets have consistently told us that falling in love is delightfully dangerous but necessary.
Again, do the proponents of an overreaching safe space not know that the liberties and freedoms in the Constitution of the United States of America can only be tested when they challenged, or intersect with new and opposing ideas? Congress itself is not meant to be a safe space!
What this means is that Gen Z students will deeply struggle to make a declarative statement about anything in case they offend someone. In my view, this is one of the main root causes for anxiety. At some point the world will ask Gen Z for an answer, a decision, and a measure of decisive action. For example, in a job interview a candidate may be asked, “Can you collaborate, and problem solve, if so, give me two examples where you have succeeded and two where you failed? In all probability, Gen Z may respond, “I don’t understand the question.”
Putting employment and the marketplace aside, let’s go back to the subject of dating.
Can you imagine the outcome of a girl asking her boyfriend the searching question, “Do you love me?” She wants a decisive answer, not, “I don’t know what you mean when you say ‘love’” An overly used safe space will never allow a heart to be broken – or negative emotions. But, if you ask the poets throughout history they would say in chorus, “Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.”[4]
In many ways, an overreaching safe space creates in Gen Z the characteristics of the people in Nineveh, “And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?” (Jonah 4:11).
If the overuse of a safe space makes Gen Z immune, is there an alternative for communicating biblical truth – which undoubtedly offends on some level?
The Punitive Unsafe Space
I did not know I needed Christ until the horror of sin became real to me. I did not realize that I was “without hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:12). In order to realize this horror God had to reveal it to me through someone preaching and/or teaching from the Bible. In short, even though the preacher/teacher was obviously moved with compassion in their own heart as they explained this horror, it offended me.
But in the same breath I am told, “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). In the moment of my offense I realized that Christ “was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:3). The punitive action against me because of sin was placed on God’s own Son. This is why St. Paul talks about “the offense of the cross” (Gal. 5:11).
The message of the cross confronted me. Realizing how utterly lost I was in this life, it required me to make a decision. The message of Christ and the cross unapologetically invited me to act decisively. Can you see the dichotomy between the immunity that an overly used safe space creates and the punitive consequence of sin? It means that the teachings of Christ, Buddha, Mohammed, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, and Hare Krishna are all correct, nothing is challenged, so everyone gets an ecumenical award for being religious.
A significant enabler of an overreaching safe space can be the preacher/teacher.
I think you may agree (I know Gen Z would) that an angry, mean-spirited, pompous, and authoritarian preacher/teacher is the most diabolical and counter-productive of all communicators. However, an equally counter-productive approach to communicating biblical truth to Gen Z is the preacher/teacher whose substance is much like a motivational speaker, a life coach, a therapist, or even a late-night talk-show host.
Was Christ the Son of God? Did he really die to bring us back to God? Was there something uniquely special about his body and blood? Was Christ really buried as a dead man? Did resurrection really take place? Did Christ really show himself as the resurrection and life? Did he promise to return?
You see, the message of Christ is not like the philosophies of Plato, Socrates, or Aristotle. It is not like the theories of Charles Darwin, Friedrich Nietzsche, Sigmund Freud, or Steven Hawking. The message of Christ is true because he is the Son of God, he was crucified that we might be reconciled to God, his body and blood matter, he was buried as a dead man, and he did change everything through his resurrection.
This is not motivational, coaching, therapizing, entertaining, or tips and techniques for doing life. It is radically transforming. Therefore, the preacher/teacher must be moved by the very message of Christ they preach/teach. In doing so, the boundaries and limitations of a safe space tend to become unhinged. It is where the immunity of a safe space and the punitive unsafe space merge together captured in an offensive and redeeming message.
Immunity and Punitive in the Same Space
It is a difficult thing to handle the unique message of Christ and be moved by it as it is communicated. It is far easier to communicate like a motivational speaker, life coach, therapist, or with satire like a late-night talk-show host. The former conveys biblical truth whereas the latter tends to promote the communicator.
St. Paul said, “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” (Rom. 10:14). The message of Christ is needed by this extraordinary group called Gen Z. The research shows us they are physically safer, and yet, mental illness and suicide is rapidly increasing.[5]
In many ways, the New York Times Columnist Julian Barnes captures the essence of what Gen Z may be saying in Babylon, “I don’t believe in God, but I miss him.” Gen Z need more than theatrical entertainment or the fickle shallowness of “God bless you” and “I’m praying for you”. They need prophetic voices who speak from the unsafe place that will help them reimagine what life can be like in a relationship with God.
Tell me what you think by posting your thoughts in the response below.
[1] Born between 1999 and 2015.
[2] Gen Z: The Culture, Beliefs and Motivations Shaping the Next Generation (Barna Group and Impact 360), 2018.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Alfred Lord Tennyson (1850).
[5] Andy Kiersz and Allana Akhtar. 2019. “Suicide is Gen Z's second-leading cause of death, and it's a worse epidemic than anything millennials faced at that age” Business Insider.