What dilemma does an asperger christian face when wanting to abide by Christ-likeness but yet also wants to be an advocate for asperger’s syndrome? It’s understandable how easy it is for pro-diversity and intolerance to get confused and mislabeled.
Too many people wrongly think that a Christian pro-aspie who stands strongly behind his convictions of faith and convictions of intolerance towards those who are intolerant of neurodiversity must be a hypocrite. This belief is a mistake. My guess as to why this conclusion gets jumped to so often is because the people who do that might not have ever gotten to know what is truly Christ-like behavior.
Society is becoming accustomed to seeing a type of Christianity that isn’t representative of what pleases God. I recently warned an aspie friend (or acquaintance?—I’m not sure where that boundary exists) to not judge Christianity by paying attention to ‘Christians’. If someone wants to judge what Christianity is, they must go to the source→ Christ, as portrayed in His Father’s word (the Bible).
There are two excellent articles published by Rick Miesel called “Christian” Activism? and Is Controversy Christian? that I’ve recently re-read and I am thankful for being reminded of those words of wisdom. I highly recommend these articles to both Christians and non-Christians. Non-Christians might be surprised to find that these are articles they may actually enjoy, especially since this would equip them to spot unChrist-like behavior. The only reason I could think why non-Christians would avoid reading them would be because they really want to hang onto their excuses while they are attacking Christianity.
The main point behind the first article mentioned is→ ”Christian activism” is wrong and it’s NOT the same thing as a Christian living out his personal life in obedience to God. Even though a believer should NOT be trying to “change the world for Christ” but rather should be “converting individuals” (yes, there is a difference and admittedly it isn’t easy to discern),¹ it is good for anyone—regardless of where they place their faith—to try to change things in this world that are harmful to the well-being of all humans. There are examples detailing these distinctions in the article, so I won’t bring them up here.
The main point behind the second article is→ Tolerance and compromise are NOT the same thing. Tolerance is to grant to another the same rights which I claim for myself. Compromise is to sacrifice heart-felt conviction in order that someone else may be pleased or in order to avoid a breach of peace. Many earnest Christians are opposed to religious controversy, so they tend to avoid which would bring into focus matters likely to cause controversy. This is NOT what is meant by a spirit of tolerance.
¹Converting individuals by preaching the Gospel is NOT activism, because it is not directed to society as a whole but rather toward individuals who desire to hear more about what the Gospel message is (by the way, there exists a false Gospel that is predominantly preached today). Readers who might think that my blog is being directed to society as a whole might be wise to ask themselves if they alone comprise society. If they mistakenly think so, then the only reason that can be is because of pride. Personally, I am aware of being a mere individual whenever I’m reading someone else’s blog.
