#1:
-How much theology you know (content)
-How much Christian-ese you know (form/language)
=Trouble: The form/content split: You can say things without knowing the consequence/significance. If there is content behind the Christianese, that’s better. But it still doesn’t solve the outside-perspective problem in #5.

#2:
-How much you love people?
-How much you love knowledge?
=Trouble: The world can do these things too. True, there is debate on the depth of “what does the world know” & “how good can the world be”.. see #4)

#3:
-How social you are (not necessarily how much you love them)
-How elitist (my ppl/snobs) you are.
=Trouble: Christians are our own ppl/community (but it’s not just an insider thing)

#4:
-How sinful this world/ppl/a person/thing is.
-How wonderfully God-made this world/ppl/person/my wife is(are).
=Trouble: Both are true. Can’t be a romantic without being a skeptic.

Conclusions:

Too much rationality (note: this is different than ‘thinking’ or ‘logical’, nevermind the context) is as much a problem as too much romanticism.
This, I think is lately a HUGE problem. Within American, Big-Money (‘protected’) Christianity, there is no ‘bad’. There is no falling out. There is no pain to be had or seen. That which is “horrible” is hardly so.

Too much ‘ethics’ leads to elitism.
Explanation: Too much ‘ethics’ can lead to a redefining of what is actual “sin”. Is sin a simple statement of “that which the world does, but not what Christians do”, or is sin “that which any of the world does, and if Christians do it, they sin.” or shall we exit that short-term debate & claim that all men are sinners & sin everyday of their lives. Is the issue even “acts of sin” at all?