Chapter 15: Load-Bearing Assumptions (2 of 2)

The person who tests assumptions rather than accepting them becomes much harder to deceive. Not because they have access to secret information. Because they refuse to build their worldview on untested foundations.

Applied to the Theology Lie

Chapter 6 makes the case that "Correct Theology Will Protect You" is a lie—that the Adversary wants believers to substitute information about God for relational encounter with God.

The load-bearing assumption is this: Information about God produces spiritual security.

Test it. The person with the most precise theology in the room—are they the most at peace, or the most anxious about having it right? The person who has studied the frameworks most thoroughly—are they the most spiritually secure, or the most concerned about doctrinal error?

The assumption fails when tested. And when it fails, the entire narrative of "study more to be safe" collapses. What remains is the question that actually matters: Are you abiding? That question has nothing to do with theological precision and everything to do with relational presence with God.

Diagnostic Questions

When you encounter a narrative, ask yourself:

What would have to be true for this narrative to work? Not what facts does it present, but what foundational beliefs would have to be accurate? Write these down. Be explicit. If you cannot name them, the narrative is hiding its assumptions from you.

Is this a load-bearing assumption or a supplementary one? If this assumption is wrong, does the entire interpretation shift? Or is it just one detail among many? If it is foundational, mark it as load-bearing.

What evidence would prove this assumption wrong? Be specific. What would have to happen for you to conclude the assumption was false? If you cannot name specific evidence that would falsify the assumption, you are working on faith, not evidence.

What evidence would prove this assumption right? What would have to be true to validate it? If the evidence for and against are equally clear, the assumption is legitimate. If the evidence against is stronger, the assumption fails.

Can I name a person or situation where the opposite is true? For every assumption, ask: Do I know someone where this assumption failed? Do I have a concrete example of the opposite being true? If you can easily name examples, the assumption is questionable.

Practical Application

Start keeping an assumptions register. When you encounter a major narrative, write down the 2-3 load-bearing assumptions you can identify. For each, write the evidence you would expect to see if the assumption is true, and the evidence you would expect to see if it is false.

Then look for that evidence in your actual experience and in the world around you. Over weeks and months, track whether the assumptions are holding up or failing.

Most people will not do this. It requires more intellectual discipline than absorbing narratives and moving forward. But the person who does it will develop a finely-tuned BS detector. You will recognize assumptions the moment they appear. You will know which ones are load-bearing. And you will know which ones are failing before anyone else recognizes the failure.

Do this for three major narratives over the next month. Pick the ones that activate your strongest tribal response. The assumptions are usually deepest where the emotion is strongest. Test them systematically. Watch what happens to your confidence in the narrative as you test the foundational assumptions.

Spiritual Application

Here is what the Load-Bearing Assumptions discipline actually does at a spiritual level.

The Adversary builds his deceptions on carefully hidden assumptions. He does not ask you to believe a lie. He asks you to accept an assumption about how the world works, how God works, what produces security, what produces certainty, what produces spiritual protection. Once you accept the assumption, the lie that follows seems inevitable.

The assumption operates as the load-bearing structure. Everything else hangs from it. But because it is unstated, unexamined, hidden beneath the narrative, you never test it. You never ask: Is this actually true?

When you practice Load-Bearing Assumptions, you interrupt this operation. You become someone who surfaces the hidden assumptions. You become someone who tests them rather than accepting them. And the moment you test them against reality, they often fail.

This is why the Adversary prefers that you never ask the question. Because the assumptions are weaker than the narratives that rest on them. The narratives are seductive. The assumptions are fragile.

A believer who accepts the assumption "information produces security" will spend their time gathering more information, trying to feel safer. A believer who tests that assumption will realize: information produces anxiety. The security I am looking for comes from relational presence with God, not from accumulated knowledge.

A believer who accepts the assumption "political power determines kingdom outcomes" will spend their time in political battle, trying to win culturally. A believer who tests that assumption will realize: the kingdom comes through the Spirit, not through political victory. My work is witness and presence, not political strategy.

A believer who accepts the assumption "certainty comes from study" will spend their time analyzing, trying to feel more confident. A believer who tests that assumption will realize: certainty comes from relational knowing, not from comprehensive information. My confidence is in the person I know, not in the theology I have mastered.

The Load-Bearing Assumptions discipline trains you to be this kind of believer. The kind who tests rather than assumes. The kind who surfaces what is hidden. The kind who recognizes the fragility of assumptions and the strength of reality.

And from that discernment, you are free to abide. Not because you have solved all the theological problems. Because you have stopped letting hidden assumptions pull you away from relational presence with God.

That is the spiritual fruit of this discipline. Not greater information. Greater freedom. The freedom to recognize assumptions when they are operating. The freedom to test them rather than accept them. The freedom to remain in the vine while the apparatus builds its narratives on fragile, untested foundations.