NOTE: I am returning to my previous work on The State of the Churches, previously initiated in the two posts on Crying in the Wilderness. I will post this material under the category "The Churches" of Blog posts.
At the outset it is important to establish what is, and what is not in view in this writing. In a sense, church life in all of its forms, will come into view here. But my arguments will not take certain forms that I feel I need to identify first.
For example, I have no intention of dealing with pseudo-Christian cults, such as Mormonism, Seventh-Day Adventism, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, among many others.[1] It is not the purpose of this writing to deal with the impact of these cults on the contemporary or future scenarios in church history. Others have handled this important matter well already.
Nor is this writing going to devolve into a critique of Denominationalism in all of its forms, comparing and contrasting Lutheranism with Presbyterianism, or the arguments between Calvinism and Arminianism, or contrasting Dispensationalism with Covenant Theology. Again, others have handled these areas of theological differentiation quite well. This is not going to be about issues.
Although I am quite Baptistic in my interpretation of certain aspects of Scripture, I have no intention of arguing the “Baptist Distinctives” as over against any other pattern of biblical interpretation. I am not arguing here for a strictly Baptist view of church life. I have no desire to staunchly defend Baptistic theology or ecclesiology. There are far greater things at stake than that.
Nevertheless, certain aspects of church life in twenty-first century American churches will come under closer scrutiny than others in the following pages.
This entire endeavor has arisen in my thinking over many years as I have given serious consideration to what lies ahead for the churches, first in America, then exported from America to the mission fields of the world. I have been thinking about what Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 11, where he was discussing the things that wore upon him. At the end of verse 28 he speaks of “the care of all the churches.”
For many years now I have been entering into this same burden, or something quite close to it. I am quite aware that when Paul spoke of all the churches, he had been instrumental in the inception of many of them, either personally or through his writings. My burden has not arisen then from the exact same mix of contributing factors as it was for him. But the burden is no less real or troubling. In some ways, it is even more of a weight.
Today, nearly two thousand years after Paul wrote of his burden for the churches, church life has deteriorated in America to a degree that it is clear that Paul would not recognize all that goes by the label “church” as genuine.
The early churches withstood terrible persecution from the beginning and for several hundred years. It purified them. But that didn't last very long in the overall scheme of things. After Constantine, the Roman Emperor, “legitimized” Christianity as the “official” religion of the Roman Empire early in the fourth century, the persecution ceased, but a far more insidious form of corruption began. Now everyone was a “Christian.” Life-changing faith had nothing to do with it. Being a Roman citizen meant being a “Christian.” Since then, for about seventeen hundred years, being a Christian has been redefined in so many different ways that it seems that no one knows what the real thing actually is.
One underlying reason for this confusion lies in the nearly complete ignorance among God's people of the history of Christianity. Sadly, the vast majority of Christians in churches all across America today have received very little, if any, instruction in the history of Christianity. This is merely one symptom of a troubling underlying reality in American churches today.
Another symptom is that very few leaders in American churches approach their work among God's people with anything like a full-orbed historical context. It is basically as though the only thing that matters is what is happening in "our church" today. This out-of-historical-context approach to church life has resulted in essentially no one entering into the burden Paul had for the churches. All that matters is whether or not “we are content” with life in our own church.
Much of what I am going to be talking about is borne of a deep concern for what lies ahead in American Christianity. The entire purpose for the churches [or any individual church] is that God may be known and glorified for Who He is among men. Few biblically instructed Christians have any illusions about what lies ahead for America's Christians. Trials will turn into outright persecution. And persecution will turn into deadly persecution. There will still be churches, at least in name. As we shall see, this is really one of the greatest burdens of all.
Frankly, it saddens me to realize that the vast majority of church members today will give little or no thought at all to the things that trouble the Lord greatly about the churches. But the reasons folks do not give these things much thought are embedded in the paradigm of 'church life' that has become the prevailing norm, as we have been suggesting. In other words, folks have become programmed to NOT think, almost at all, and instead to simply align with whatever their leaders tell them.
All who read what I write here are going to bring their embedded system of interpretation, the one they have been taught is THE truth, and anywhere what I say does not align with that system, I must then be wrong. Frankly, that is fine. I mean, I actually do not have any desire to get anyone to believe 'what I believe.' I can only write what I understand Scripture to be really saying, regardless of how well it fits, or does not fit, into any system readers may bring with them to the reading. But sadly, many are so deeply embroiled in the system of interpretation they have had catechized so emphatically into their thinking that any other possible way of hearing what God is saying in His Word is literally anathema to them. It is far too dangerous to consider that what they have been taught may be errant. This is a very real hindrance, and one that I recognize, both historically and in personal experience.
So then, there will certainly be these obstacles. There always have been. The religious leaders among the Jews during the days of Christ's personal earthly ministry constantly warned their followers not to listen to Him, but to heed only what they [the leaders] taught them to believe. "Does he know more than we do?" was a constant refrain from their own mouths. They were able to even look into the very eyes of the God-man Himself and accuse Him of working with the Devil. They had their centuries-old, and carefully-crafted, religious system to protect, and how dare anyone, even God Himself, challenge their interpretations.
It seems to me that much of the resistance men have today to others seeing Scripture differently than they do is a result of a deeply embedded religious consciousness among the churches, that their view must be adhered to, pretty much the same as the religious leaders who rejected Christ. The entire book of Hebrews was written to counter this resistance to more fully-developed revelation among Hebrew converts to Christianity. They were literally forced to look at truth they had been taught all their lives, but interpret it through a very different lens. This needs to happen in the churches today as well.
The Judaistic interpretations of Scripture encountered by Christ had to be set aside if the people of God were to receive the New Testament revelation of truth couched in terms of the churches. The Judaistic interpretations simply could not contain the fully developed revelation of truth now coming to light through the New Testament writings.[2]
Today, these multitudinous systems of interpretation [only hinted at above] cannot adequately contain, nor interpret all of Scripture. We have grown so accustomed to being force-fed these interpretations that we rarely, if ever, give serious consideration to any other way of seeing things. In fact, pastors all across the country literally warn their church members to stay away from the writings of well-established and well-accepted writers whose writings suggest a different perspective than the leaders themselves hold. To open oneself to these writings is a betrayal of the current and present leadership. Those who do so are anathematized.
We are, in fact, the exact opposite of "free," as Jesus Himself said we would be when He said, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."[3] Instead, we have been force-fed interpretations of Scripture that we are then expected to accept and never challenge. And, any time any of us steps out of lockstep with the demanded paradigms, we are set aside and considered dangerous. We do well to remember that Jesus and all His disciples were treated in exactly this same manner.
Once again, I hold no illusions that what I have to say will bring about much of anything concrete in the way of global change. When Jesus came unto His own, His own received Him not, even calling Him a co-worker with the Devil. They demanded allegiance to their entrenched religiousness, never mind that it was lifeless and stultifying. If they would not listen to Him, instead killing Him, there is little likelihood any heed will be given to His voice through a backwater voice like mine. But He is worthy to call His churches to account, even if He must use an ass to speak, as in the days of Balaam.
[1] I refer the reader to the excellent book by Walter R. Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, published first in 1965. [ISBN # 978-0764228216] [2] This certainly calls to mind the Lord's own clear teaching about trying to put new wine into old vessels. [Matthew 9:17, etc.] [3] John 8:32
コメント