|
Winds of Doctrine
by the
-- Elder Body of the Apostolic Christian Church of America --
PREFACE
"Finally, my
brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole
armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil" (Ephesians
6:10, 11). The Word of God provides ample warning that Satan presents himself as
an "angel of light" (2
Corinthians 11:14).
The Word of God is changeless and eternal. It lives and
abides forever (1
Peter 1:23). Yet, the enemy of our soul seeks to undermine the Holy
Scriptures. One of his most effective methods is to deceive by introducing
seemingly new and enticing forms of spiritual enlightenment. The Word also
directs God's servants, who are entrusted to feed the flock, to be vigilant and
to give much attention and effort to preserving and promoting sound doctrine (1
Timothy 4:16,
1 Peter 5:2,
1 Peter 5:8). It is needful for the church to be alerted and cautioned
concerning deceptive influences which are so forceful that they could undermine
the unity and love which currently prevail.
As a consequence of the powerful and pervasive religious
forces that have swept across America during the past few decades, it is
essential that a specific message be given to the Apostolic Christian community
regarding certain spiritual dangers which could lure unsuspecting souls into the
web of deception.
The concern at hand is the New Evangelical Movement. This
movement originated in the late 1940's with the express purpose of broadening
Christianity to make it more appealing to modern society. Nearly forty years
later it has reached full bloom and has influenced millions of people. Some of
the teachings of such modernized forms of Christianity and the consequences of
their application pose as an undermining and potentially deceptive influence to
Apostolic Christians.
The purpose of this writing is to provide the Apostolic
Christian community with background concerning the New Evangelical Movement, its
history and nature, as well as its impact on Christianity in general. A thorough
study has been conducted to research both the origin and doctrine of this
movement. Significant differences with Apostolic Christian beliefs have been
found to exist in several central areas of doctrine. The primary objectives are
to describe the differences in interpretation and application of the Holy
Scriptures and to call attention to the subtle but potentially powerful means by
which this movement may undermine the doctrinal unity, intimate fellowship, and
godly love which currently flourish in the Apostolic Christian Church. The
confusing and divisive "winds of doctrine" which swirl around the believer today
necessitate concerted effort on the part of each individual to become mature and
well grounded in the sacred truths of the Word in order to accurately "discern
the spirits" and avoid deception (1
Corinthians 12:10;
Ephesians 4:14).
It is necessary for believers to be reminded of the
importance of their place as branches in the vine (Christ), and as members one
of another in the body of Christ, the holy church (John
15:5;
Ephesians 4:25). While a soul has a personal (vertical) relationship with
God through, Christ, he also has a horizontal relationship with God's children
as a result of being a part of Christ's body, the church. Christ (the Head) and
His body (the church) are inseparable. This biblical concept of brotherhood
clearly indicates that a proper relationship with God goes deeper than only a
vertical and personal one, but incorporates the horizontal aspect as well.
This writing does not presume to make judgments or cast
aspersions on the sincerity or eternal destiny of any individuals or groups who
seek to serve the Lord. Respect for the sincere efforts of others to further
God's work is essential (Mark
9:38-40). However, this respect should not lead to a form of spiritual
paralysis which makes it impossible to declare a particular belief as false
simply because it is embraced by well-intentioned individuals. Doctrines and
practices which are in conflict with the Word of God must be identified as
false.
The quotations in this writing of various authors and
references are to provide documentation from knowledgeable sources of the
nature, activities, and impact of the New Evangelical Movement. A greater
understanding of this general movement and its enormous impact on nearly all
aspects of Christianity in America is vital in order to maintain a firm
spiritual footing and to avoid confusion in these perilous times.
Part I: THE NEW EVANGELICAL
MOVEMENT
History and Development of the
New Evangelical Movement
Many of the early settlers in
America came in search of
religious freedom. Colonial history reveals that a degree of religious freedom
was established initially, but in many instances this was a narrow freedom which
permitted the practice of only certain accepted forms of Christianity. Our
nation's Bill of Rights established a broader freedom of religion which required
that there be no involvement of the government in either the establishment of a
particular religion or interference with the free exercise thereof. This policy
has enabled the development of innumerable varieties of religious beliefs and
practices, which is known as religious pluralism. For a number of years,
Christianity in America was strongly biblical. Adherence to basic spiritual
values had a widespread and beneficial effect on society.
In the early 19th century, however, influences from Europe
which affected doctrinal attitudes began to be felt in America. Humanism and
rationalism began to grow in emphasis, and a misdirected philosophical movement
known as The Enlightenment led to questioning of the authority and inerrancy
(absolute truth) of the Scriptures. Reason, logic, and intellect became the
standards by which truth was determined, rather than by a simple and humble
faith in the Bible as the Word of God. A method for studying the Bible known as
"higher criticism" had a devastating effect on the doctrinal basis of many
churches. This method attempts to determine by human reasoning what the authors
of Scripture intended to convey by their words, as compared to a literal
acceptance of the scriptural writings as truth. This opened the door to
widespread differences and errors in the interpretation of the Scriptures.
Johann Eichhorn (1752-1827), a German Bible scholar, was a pioneer of this
method1. Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), a German professor who began
to cast doubts on the inspiration of Scriptures, also was a proponent of the
higher criticism method of Bible interpretation2. His influence
in theological circles was comparable to that of Darwin in biology. By the late
19th century, this attack on sound Bible-based Christianity was in full swing
and was being strongly felt in America.
In response to this attack, and in defense of basic Christian
doctrines, a countermovement arose in America, the proponents of which became
known as "fundamentalists." This endeavor resulted in reaffirmation of
fundamental doctrines such as the inerrancy of Scriptures, the deity and virgin
birth of Christ, His substitutionary atonement and physical resurrection, as
well as His bodily return to earth to reign. These precepts and many others are
contained in a 12-volume set of books entitled The Fundamentals which was
published in 1909. The books were widely circulated in an effort to slow the
tide of liberal thinking which had infiltrated many of the seminaries and
ultimately the churches3.
The controversy over the authority of the Bible and its
interpretation resulted in what became known as the "modernist versus
fundamentalist" conflict. Many of the long-established and so-called mainline
denominations became modernist in their theology as a result of yielding to the
higher criticism method of Bible interpretation. Coming out of these modernist
churches, fundamentalists formed new churches, new mission boards, new
seminaries, and new religious groupings. In order to shield themselves from
humanist/ modernist beliefs, many of these groups maintained separation from
both the prevailing trends of modernistic Christianity and the growing evils of
society.
While fundamentalists were correct in opposing modernism, it
is important to note that some fundamentalist beliefs differ sharply from those
of Apostolic Christians, especially regarding (1) the conversion experience, (2)
eternal security, and (3) the spiritual authority of the church versus an
individual-centered authority.
The Apostolic Christian Church was far removed from the
dynamic forces of the Christian controversy and change which raged during the
late 19th and early 20th centuries. The modernist/fundamentalist debates and
resultant re-alignment of Christian circles had little, if any, effect on
Apostolic Christian doctrine and practices. Protection from these profound
influences occurred primarily because of firmly established patterns of
spiritual separation from other religious groups as well as strong adherence to
uniformity of doctrinal convictions and lifestyle. These beliefs were based on
simple, Spirit-directed interpretations of the Scriptures given through humble
men of God who sought diligently to follow the Apostle Paul's sound approach
which he expressed in his first letter to the Corinthians, "And my speech and my
preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of
the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men,
but in the power of God" (1
Corinthians 2:4, 5).
By the 1940's, after three decades of fundamentalism in
America, some theologians began to think that this approach, by being too rigid
in opposing modernism and liberalism, was losing its appeal among the growing
and increasingly sophisticated American population. Fundamentalists were
characterized as being of harsh temperament and demonstrating a lack of love and
too much rigidity in their doctrinal attitudes. It was thought that such
characteristics were dimming the chances of drawing multitudes to the gospel.
Fundamentalists were accused of being removed too far from society in their
views and, consequently, unable to deal with personal and social concerns in a
changing world or to come to grips with the realities of science and evolution4.
A new brand of Christian theology was thus being born that
would ultimately revolutionize the beliefs of many fundamentalist Christians and
change them into people with a broader view and tendencies toward increased
liberties. This force became known as "New Evangelicalism." It sought to change
a Christianity that was thought to be too restrictive into a faith that was more
open-minded, intellectual and of broader scope in order to make it more
acceptable to modern, more highly educated people and more compatible with
popular individualistic lifestyles.
The term, New Evangelicalism, was coined by Dr. Harold J.
Ockenga in 19475. He is often referred to as the "father of New
Evangelicalism." Dr. Ockenga, then pastor of the
Park Street
Church in
Boston, Massachusetts, felt that the modernist/fundamentalist controversy had
too often trampled Christian unity underfoot because of its many divisions over
doctrinal issues6.
It is instructive to note that New Evangelicalism was an
organized and planned movement that generally sought to liberalize
fundamentalism to make it more appealing to the masses of society. Several
events shaped its ascension into a prominent and powerful influence:
1. In 1942 an organization was
formed called The National Association of Evangelicals. This was an alternative
to the liberal Federal Council of Churches (which had rejected the authority of
Scriptures) on the left, and the conservative American Council of Churches on
the right. By the 1980's this new association represented 30,000 churches with
more than 3.5 million members. It consisted of 70 different denominations7.
2. A book entitled The
Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism was published by Rev. Carl F. H.
Henry in 1947. It presented an appealing message to modern society which could
readily relate to this new form of doctrine at both the cultural and
intellectual levels8.
3. During the summers of 1944
and 1945, Dr. Harold J. Ockenga convened a group of theologians at Manomet
Point, Massachusetts, "to discuss the need for the writing of new evangelical
literature, based on evangelical principles and, in particular, upon an inerrant
Scripture."9
4. In 1947, the Fuller
Theological Seminary was founded. Its goal was to be a highly academic
theological institution to give a doctrinal thrust to this new
evangelicalism10.
5. In
1955, at the suggestion of Rev. Billy Graham, a group of religious evangelicals
met at Bass Rocks, Massachusetts, and then in New York, to launch a new magazine
that would defend the evangelical faith on an intellectual level. This magazine
is Christianity Today which currently has wide circulation9, 11.
Thus, the
New Evangelical Movement was launched by a few influential theologians. It
rapidly gained momentum and soon began to exert tremendous influence on
Christianity in America. The emergence of new missionary agencies designed to
draw youth to these new viewpoints included Youth for Christ, Young Life,
InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, and Campus Crusade for Christ. These
para-church (non-denominational and often non-church affiliated) agencies
undermined the authority and outreach of many established churches. By 1986 more
than 10,000 para-church groups existed in America. Essentially, "para-church
corporations eclipsed ecclesiastical structures."12 A dramatic boost
to this movement consisted of the large production of Christian reading
materials and the extensive use of radio and television programming. Huge
audiences were exposed to New Evangelical Christianity presented in a
professional and highly attractive manner.
The New Evangelical Movement sought to retain basic doctrines
of Christianity such as the inerrancy of the Scriptures, the deity and virgin
birth of Christ, salvation by faith in His substitutionary atonement, His
physical resurrection and prophesied return for His church. However, this
movement has developed a number of distinctive characteristics and differences
in emphasis which appear to be a marked departure from precepts and teachings
embraced by true believers throughout most of the centuries since the time of
Christ. Included among these distinguishing new features are the following:
1. Shallow Concept of
Conversion. Great emphasis is placed upon a one-time declaration of
acceptance of Christ. Proof of a genuine faith by
obedience to God's Word and
faithfulness are not seen as scriptural requirements for salvation.
2. Diminished Importance of
the Church. The authority of a church organization and its leadership are
greatly diminished. Each individual
becomes his own authority based upon his
individual discernment of the spirits and interpretation of the Word.
3. Tolerance of Doctrinal
Variance. Denominational borders are readily crossed, usually without regard
for significant doctrinal differences.
Varying groups which are accepted under
this broad spiritual umbrella include: charismatics and non-charismatics, those
who believe "once saved,
always saved" and those who do not, groups which ordain
women as ministers and others which do not, as well as those who practice adult
baptism and those who practice infant baptism.
4. Casual Attitudes toward
Sanctification and Sin. There is a marked de-emphasis on works and serious
efforts to aspire to holiness in living.
Such efforts are thought to represent
legalism or earning salvation. The church is defined as a "divinely created
fellowship of sinners.13"
5. Prominence of Knowledge
and Social Activism. Great emphasis is placed on scholarship and
intellectualism as well as involvement in politics
and social programs for
community betterment.
6. Emphasis
on Individual
Liberty.
Christian liberty is defined as individual freedom in most areas of lifestyle
not specifically forbidden in the
Word. This individualism takes precedence over
responsibility to church standards or the convictions of other members of a
church body. The
concept of brotherhood within a closely knit fellowship is
given little significance.
These views are openly promoted
as evidenced by excerpts from popular New Evangelical writings and evangelical
para-church policy statements. One leading author and radio/television speaker
urges Christians to free themselves from the restrictions of church authorities
who are referred to as "ecclesiastical captors." He writes, "Since Christ has
set us free, we dare not imprison them (Christians) behind the legalistic bars
of our own opinions, traditions, or personal preferences.14"
Several para-church leaders formed a group called the
Coalition for Revival. The Coalition for Revival adopted a Statement of Faith
which included a sound position regarding the Scriptures ''as God's inerrant
written word in the whole and in the parts not only where it speaks of matters
of faith and practice, but also where it touches on matters of interest to
science and history.15" Unfortunately, those affiliated with this
group agreed to the following typical compromise which illustrates accommodation
to excessive flexibility in the interpretation of the Scriptures on many
significant points: "As long as I am associated with the Coalition for Revival,
I will not quarrel with other CFR associates over the following issues: . . .
baptism and communion, Calvinism, Arminianism . . . , Christian freedom,
differences such as smoking, dancing, etc.; tongues and other activity; modes of
worship and methods of evangelism.16"
Impact of the New
Evangelical Movement on Christianity in America
During the
past 40 years, monumental changes have occurred in structural framework and
practice within much of Christianity in America. This is especially apparent in
the rapid growth of non-church based (para-church) religious activities,
extensive involvement in social issues (e.g. abortion, school prayer, and
foreign policy), and a much greater flexibility in personal beliefs and
lifestyles. Public awareness of evangelical Christianity has increased
dramatically due to its growth and effective utilization of the mass media. This
is evidenced by the common usage today of terms like "born again" and
"evangelical Christian." The political impact of what is referred to as the "new
religious right" is of great significance as indicated by recent cover stories
in Time magazine. The first in 1985 dealt with the growing impact on
society of fundamentalist and evangelical Christianity17. The second
in 1986 covered the powerful influence of "right-wing preachers" by their use of
television broadcasting18. It was reported that up to 61 million
Americans receive at least minimal exposure to these highly sophisticated
religious messages. Apparently, vast numbers of these individuals depend
primarily on television evangelists for their spiritual instruction and
subsequently live their spiritual lives apart from brotherhood and the sphere of
church authority.
In its August 5, 1985, edition referring to the 1985 American
Bookseller Association Convention in Dallas, Texas, Newsweek magazine
wrote, "Indeed, to stroll through the more than five acres of publishers' and
suppliers' exhibits on the Dallas convention floor was to encounter a veritable
God's plenty of commercial Christiania, all revealing an important American
subculture in the midst of rapid change.19"
Today, there are more than 3,500 Christian bookstores across
America. Religious publishing reaches in excess of 1.2 billion dollars annually.
The sales volume of Zondervan Publishing House doubled from 1980 to 1983. It is
a prolific growth industry. Religious broadcasting, too, via radio and
television, has had a profound influence on many people. A mushrooming
dissemination of Christian video-cassettes is currently providing another
powerful means of religious communication. In many instances, these promotional
endeavors have become highly commercialized and lucrative, casting a shadow upon
their ability to meet their original intent.
A tremendous re-alignment of religious affiliations has
occurred. There has been a progressive decline in membership in the modernist
mainline denominations and rapid growth of newly organized independent churches,
para-church organizations, and some
of the more fundamental
denominations as well as various charismatic (tongues-speaking) groups.
In 1982, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids,
Michigan, published Eerdmans' Handbook to Christian Belief. It is a
highly attractive, deeply persuasive, and skillfully articulated New Evangelical
version of a wide range of Christian doctrine. Contemporary in graphics and
layout (and very appealing), this book contains input from 94 theologians from a
wide cross section of evangelicalism. Some assertions found in this book
follow:
1. Christianity: "It is an
individual-centered faith." 20
2. "Jesus proclaimed a direct
personal relationship with God, with no need for the mediation of a religious
hierarchy."
21
3. "The church is a mixed
society. It is not a community of saints and dedicated persons, but a society of
sinners at every variety of spiritual development." 22
Threaded
throughout the entire book is the precept that structure and ecclesiastical
authority are irrelevant and that a "personal" and "free" Christianity is the
proper way. The organized church, its structure, and its authority, are not
given the role established by the Word and practiced in the time of the Apostles
(Matthew
16:18, 19; Acts
15;
1 Timothy 3:15).
In summary, New Evangelicalism represents a generic and
personally independent Christianity. It is inexplicit in structure, doctrine,
and authority. There are no absolutes regarding standards of personal behavior.
Each individual is his own authority. This diminishes the concept of brotherhood
and borders on spiritual and ecclesiastical anarchy. It is little wonder then,
that those involved in this movement seem to accept as their brother virtually
anyone who professes Christ, regardless of doctrine or lifestyle.
The New Evangelical Movement has now matured to the point
where some religious leaders are beginning to evaluate its progress and
acknowledge some serious inadequacies. In a book entitled The Great
Evangelical Disaster, Dr. Francis Schaeffer deplores the "failure of the
evangelical world to stand for truth as truth." He states that "the evangelical
church has accommodated to the world spirit of the age." This is reflected in a
weakened view of the truth of the Bible on the part of many who call themselves
evangelicals and in renewed use of the higher criticism methods "which destroyed
the authority of the Bible for the Protestant church in Germany in the last
century, and which have destroyed the Bible for the liberal in our own country
from the beginning of this century." He also decried the fact that "there has
been accommodation on the issues, with no clear stand being taken even on
matters of life and death."
23
Recently a number of New
Evangelical leaders gathered to track the current trends facing the church.
Among their many observations was a subtle, but significant, infiltration of
humanistic values into the church. It was felt that today's fads of emphasis on
the individual (me-ism) and on personal success have led to promises from
popular preachers of "health, success, self-fulfillment, and even wealth,
especially if one supports that particular evangelist." In addition, problems
were noted with applying the democratic approach (majority opinion) to setting
church policy. Without strong leadership authority, churches are pressed to
conform to the fads of the day by the power of the people. In contrast, a
positive observation was made that a number of conservative churches have been
growing during the past 20 years and that tradition appears to be an important
key. It was stated that "emphasis on tradition may be our most important foil
for the subtle inroads of secular humanism in the churches.24"
An early promoter of New Evangelicalism, Dr. Harold Lindsell,
recently wrote, "It is clear that evangelicalism is now broader and shallower,
and is becoming more so. Evangelicalism's children are in the process of
forsaking the faith of their fathers.25"
Apparently it is being recognized that the pendulum has swung
too far in the direction of individual freedom and intellectualism and away from
Bible-based standards of church authority, with commitment and loyalty to an
established body of believers who practice discipline and value sound
traditions. It is ironic that at this very time of reassessment, some of the
questionable precepts of New Evangelicalism are surfacing within the Apostolic
Christian Church. Some brethren, perhaps unknowingly, are sympathetic to beliefs
that stem from New Evangelical influences. Unfortunately, there is not the same
degree of immunity from such influences today as existed during the turmoil in
Christianity in America throughout the late 1800's. This may be due to increased
levels of education and wealth in the Apostolic Christian congregations as well
as significantly less isolation from society - in occupation, geographic
location, and exposure to media influences. These changes all increase the risk
of developing greater independence of thinking, self-reliance, and resistance to
various forms of restraint or authority, which are strong prevailing trends in
American society today. These trends are pressing harder all the time in an
attempt to penetrate the true church. Satan, as the "angel of light," is trying
to topple every believer with his powerful and deceptively appealing "winds of
doctrine."
Part II: DOCTRINAL
DIFFERENCES
The
leadership of the Apostolic Christian Church has with deep conviction affirmed
the necessity of exerting special efforts to clarify and present to the
brotherhood the scriptural basis for many of the central beliefs and practices
of our church. It has chosen to utilize several avenues, including this writing,
to defend the faith at this very crucial time. Jude exhorted "that ye should
earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude
v3).
Following are summaries of several significant doctrinal
differences which exist between Apostolic Christians and many of the proponents
of New Evangelicalism. These subjects, and others, will be treated at greater
length in Silver Lining articles, topical Bible presentations, and
through exhortations given at the annual Brotherhood Conference.
Authority and Unity of the
Visible Church
Apostolic Christians and most
New Evangelicals share a strong belief in the infallible authority of the
Scriptures, although many of the latter are becoming more hesitant to
acknowledge that the Scriptures are totally without error. An obvious difference
in the viewpoints of the two groups rests in the emphasis placed upon the
authority and significance of the church as the visible body of Christ here on
earth. Apostolic Christians view the church as a highly influential and
doctrinally unified body of believers which is directed by the Holy Spirit in
furthering the work of Christ. The New Evangelical view tends to regard the
church as a loosely-bound group of individuals which is of lesser significance
in the fulfillment of God's plan. Greater emphasis is placed on para-church
ministries led by articulate and highly influential personalities.
There are strong, yet subtle, forces that have resulted in
diminished ecclesiastical (church) authority in the history of Christianity.
They include the general influence of The Enlightenment (human reason
overshadowing faith), the historic influence, particularly in America, of
democratic principles (freedom to choose for oneself), and the more recent
effects of secular humanism (the worship of humanity). These factors have
resulted in a profoundly negative impact on the willingness of individuals to be
submissive to all levels of authority. These influences have become so strong
that they even inhibit the submission by many professed believers to the
sovereign authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. Many today want salvation and a
Saviour but are unwilling to accept His lordship over their lives, either
through the Holy Spirit, the Word, or divinely inspired church guidance.
Modern Christian groups which lack a Bible-based tradition of
church authority have left to the people the determination of their doctrinal
interpretations and lifestyles. This is based on the idealistic view that not
only can every believer adequately discern the spirits and interpret the Word
for himself, but that he also has the liberty to apply it to any circumstance as
he sees fit. When carried to the extreme, this approach becomes a return to the
condition of Israel when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" (Judges
21:25). Evangelicals themselves have acknowledged the confusion which this
has brought about as indicated by the following statement: "To argue that the
Bible is authoritative, but to be unable to come to anything like agreement on
what it says (even with those who share an evangelical commitment) is
self-defeating.26”
Apostolic Christians believe in the Word of God as the final
authority and as absolute truth. They believe in a direct literal interpretation
of the Scriptures which include teachings such as "… let us walk by the same
rule, let us mind the same thing" (Philippians
3:16) and "… be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same
judgment" (1
Corinthians 1:10). This is made possible by the Holy Spirit who provides the
gift of discernment to humble, sincere men of God so that scriptural truths can
be uniformly understood and applied. The Word teaches that discernment is given
to the transformed mind which is not conformed to the world (Romans
12:2).
Unmistakable authority is given to the visible church body as
evidenced by Scriptures found in
Matthew 18:18 where the church is granted the powers to "bind and loose" and
in
1 Timothy 3:15 where the church is referred to as the "pillar and ground of
the truth." However, it is well recognized that the application and extent of
that authority are confined to the principles taught in the Holy Word and
fallible man is given no right to add to or take away from the Scriptures (Revelation
22:18, 19).
The Council of Elders of the Apostolic Christian Church
functions in a manner which is patterned after the Jerusalem Council (Acts
15). The elders "labor in the word and doctrine" (1
Timothy 5:17) and carry the responsibility for doctrinal stewardship within
the church.
Adherence to a "servant leadership" style (Matthew
20:26, 27) patterned after the Lord's example and a strong tradition of
respect within the church community (1
Thessalonians 5:12, 13) for this divinely established position of authority
(Hebrews
13:7,
Hebrews 13:17) have contributed to the preservation of genuine unity of
beliefs and a deep sense of brotherhood within the Apostolic Christian Church.
Church Discipline
The purposes
of church discipline are clearly described in the Word and constitute a most
noble form of love. These include helping the erring believer to become cleansed
from evil lusts and thus preventing a deeper falling away which could lead to
eternal destruction (1
Corinthians 5:5,
2 Corinthians 7:9-11); warning others so that sin does not spread like
leaven in the church (1
Corinthians 5:6); and enabling the healing of the individual as well as the
church which suffers with him (1
Corinthians 12:26,
2 Corinthians 2:6-8,
Galatians 6:1). The results are forgiveness, godly order, and restoration of
joy and hope.
This vital process can be carried out successfully only if a
body of believers has clearly established beliefs and practices and specific
Biblical standards for membership in the church. New Evangelical teachings do
not directly oppose church discipline. However, the lack of emphasis on church
authority and uniformity of beliefs and standards has resulted in a degree of
independence of thinking and permissiveness in lifestyle which has made it
impractical, if not almost impossible, to carry out these scriptural mandates;
and New Evangelical leaders are not hesitant to admit this.
The very nature of church discipline is such that it is
highly sensitive and potentially controversial. Confidentiality of the details
must be preserved, and yet judgment must be made of erring members within the
church. If the sin of the individual is not judged, it becomes the sin of the
church (1
Corinthians 5:2,
1 Corinthians 6-8). Constructive discipline cannot be accomplished unless a
great deal of trust is placed in the God-given wisdom of church leaders to
discern circumstances and to apply scriptural teachings in the handling of
individual cases. Unfortunately, the influences of New Evangelicalism have
undermined confidence in the ordained "to bind or loose" (Matthew
16:19) and have overemphasized the rights of the individual.
A very common error is the belief that discipline should be
applied only in cases of continued sin by an unrepentant believer. This clearly
violates the following scriptural teaching regarding discipline: "But now I have
written unto you not to keep company if any man that is called a brother be a
fornicator. . . with such an one no not to eat" (1
Corinthians 5:11). The definition of a fornicator is one who has committed
fornication, precisely parallel to the definition of a murderer - one who has
committed murder. There is no implication in this Scripture that the fornicator,
idolater, drunkard, or extortioner must be openly or continuously or
unrepentantly living in sin before discipline is applied. That erroneous
conclusion is reached by an unfounded assumption regarding the example given in
the first part of 1
Corinthians 5 which consists of openly known and condoned incest by a member
of the church. It is often assumed that the individual was continuing to indulge
in this sin, whereas
verse 2 refers to him as the one who "hath done this deed. " Even if
that particular individual was indeed living in sin, there is no justification
for assuming that the same condition applies to the examples listed later in the
chapter (1
Corinthians 5:11) which are simply described as brethren guilty of certain
grievous sins.
The Apostolic Christian Church continues to exercise in love
and gentleness the full range of constructive church discipline to help keep the
individual members "unspotted from the world" (James
1:27) and to maintain the purity of the church as described in
Ephesians 5:27: ". . . not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but
that it should be holy and without blemish." This may become more difficult with
the passing of time, which only underscores the truth of the Apostle Paul's
words in
2 Timothy 3:12, "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus
shall suffer persecution."
Closed Communion
A
"closed" communion consists of the partaking of the Lord's Supper in remembrance
of His suffering and death only with the members in good standing of a
particular church body. Just as a church must determine, based on the Word, what
standards it will require of individuals before administering the rite of
baptism, likewise it should maintain standards for eligibility to share in Holy
Communion. New Evangelicalism rejects the idea that anyone but a professing
Christian himself should have something to say about whether or not he is
eligible for this sacred rite. Yet the church is required by the Scriptures to
keep itself free of sin and to make judgments regarding erring members (1
Corinthians 5:11-13). If a church abandons its responsibility to keep itself
pure by failing to exercise church discipline, an open communion policy will
inevitably follow. If there are no specific standards required of a church's own
members, what is the basis for barring individuals from any other group as long
as they declare themselves eligible to partake? The Word states, "he that eateth
and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not
discerning the Lord's body" (1
Corinthians 11:29). A policy of open communion blurs the distinction of who
constitutes the Lord's body. Further, it fosters the deplorable condition of
participating in the bringing of damnation upon certain individuals. It also
opens the risk of violating another scriptural principle taught by the Apostle
Paul, ". . . neither be partakers of other men's sins: keep thyself pure" (1
Timothy 5:22).
The Lord's body consists of truly converted, faithful
followers of His teachings. The believers in the early church ". . . continued
steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship" (Acts
2:42). Christ said "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if
ye have love one to another" (John
13:35). These teachings are beautifully portrayed when a closely-knit,
likeminded body of believers shares the intimate Communion feast as a "common
union" of their hearts and lives in the love of Christ Jesus.
Christian Liberty
True Christian liberty is
freedom from the bondage of sin and darkness, and from the necessity of
observing the rigid standards of the old Judaic law. This liberty in Christ
Jesus enables a believer to escape the shackles of his former flesh-dominated
life.
The scriptural basis for Christian liberty is
Galatians 5:1, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath
made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." Caution is
given, however, not to use this liberty "for an occasion to the flesh" (Galatians
5:13).
Liberty in Christ does not exempt a true believer from
observing and adhering to the high standards of New Testament holiness (personal
purity) and humility of lifestyle. This is to be done willingly, motivated by
love for Christ. Liberty does not mean freedom to do whatever we please. Liberty
in Christ is freedom from sin, not exemption from following biblical principles
and standards.
For the most part, New Evangelical theology defines Christian
liberty as including freedom from observance of specific norms of holiness, or
agreed-upon church guidelines for application of scriptural teachings. This
often results in a freer and more worldly lifestyle. Efforts to observe holiness
in living and to follow church-defined standards of godliness based on the Word
are criticized as "legalism" or following rules to "earn" salvation.
According to Apostolic Christian interpretation of the
Scriptures, following New Testament standards of holiness and godly living is
done only by appropriating the power of Christ within. Further, it is done as a
result of salvation, not to earn salvation. This is clearly taught by the Word,
"Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from
all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God"
(2
Corinthians 7:1). The Apostles and elders at the Jerusalem Council
established specific positions on certain matters for the sake of peace and
unity in the churches (Acts
15). The effectiveness of a believer's witness is also dependent upon
consistency of inward and outward holiness patterned after the example left by
Christ, "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works,
and glorify your Father which is in heaven" (Matthew
5:16).
The new man in Christ Jesus who is converted and liberated
from the burden of sin and is desirous of pleasing his Saviour wants to do
everything possible to observe His divine teachings: "For this is the love of
God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous" (1
John 5:3).
Perseverance
One of the
most striking differences between the beliefs of Apostolic Christians and those
of New Evangelicals rests in the doctrine of perseverance. This centers on the
question of whether one who has been truly converted can ever again lose his
salvation. The Apostolic Christian Church does not believe in the doctrine of
unconditional eternal security or "once saved, always saved." Rather, it adheres
to a simple, literal interpretation of the Scriptures which state clearly that
salvation is a gift of God which requires a true saving faith, "For by grace are
ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Ephesians
2:8), and that its retention requires a continuation of that same genuine
faith, ". . . he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved" (Matthew
10:22).
With few exceptions, groups of present-day Christians
classified as either evangelicals or fundamentalists believe in "once saved,
always saved." This doctrine constitutes one of the five major points of
Calvinism, whereas the belief that ultimate salvation requires faithfulness is
often referred to as Arminianism. The Calvinistic doctrine is based upon the
common error of taking isolated Scriptures to establish a point without basing
the interpretation upon the whole counsel of God. For example, a Scripture often
quoted to substantiate "once saved, always saved" is "My sheep hear my voice,
and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they
shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand" (John
10:27, 28). Two points must be immediately recognized: the sheep hear
his voice and follow Him (as opposed to once hearing or once following)
and, although no outside force can pluck them out of the Lord's hand, there is
no implication that the sheep lose their ability to choose to jump out of His
hand or depart from the fold by ceasing to hear or follow. Another common
defense of Calvinism is that individuals who appear to fall away from the faith
were never truly converted in the first place. This is based on Scriptures such
as
1 John 2:19, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they
had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out,
that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." This explanation
for departure applies to certain hypocritical individuals, but it obviously does
not cover other circumstances in light of
2 Peter 2:20, 21, "For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the
world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again
entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the
beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of
righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment
delivered unto them." This Scripture clearly applies to individuals who have
once truly known Christ and then later depart from that truth. Their end is
considered worse than that of the unbeliever; and the lot of one who has not
known the way of righteousness is eternal destruction!
Throughout all time it has been a basic precept of God's
dealings with mankind that He is merciful to those who seek Him and will destroy
those who forsake Him: ". . . if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if
thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever" (1
Chronicles 28:9); "The Lord is with you, while ye be with him; and if ye
seek him, he will be found of you; but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you" (2
Chronicles 15:2); "And the destruction of the transgressors and of the
sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed" (Isaiah
1:28); "Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which
fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness:
otherwise thou also shalt be cut off" (Romans
11:22); "For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of
our confidence (assurance) stedfast unto the end" (Hebrews
3:14). It is a beautiful truth that the Word provides to the sincere
believer the assurance of the gift of eternal life (John
3:36) and the right to be fully persuaded of the power of God to keep him in
His protective love and care (Romans
8:38-39;
2 Timothy 1:12). However, it is also scriptural truth that the
ultimate realization of the eternal reward is contingent on faithfulness (Revelation
17:14). God is not a rewarder of apostasy.
The erroneous doctrine of "once saved, always saved," if
applied, circumvents the need for church discipline, the making of a covenant to
be true and faithful, and ongoing concern for a careful, obedient and holy
lifestyle. Instead, it creates almost an obsessive concern for getting people to
make a one-time "decision for Christ."
Fortunately, some evangelicals are recognizing the folly of
this belief as evidenced by the following excerpt from the periodical
Christianity Today: "Many of us in contemporary evangelicalism have paid
nearly exclusive attention to passages about the believers' security - and they
are there. The Lord has spoken clearly, 'I will never desert you, nor will I
ever forsake you' (Hebrews
13:5). But we have tended to ignore the passages of God's explicit warnings
against apostasy, and they are there. We must hear and believe both the promise
of glory and the warning of judgment. The fact is, if I quit the race, I will be
disqualified. I cannot get around that truth in Scripture.27”
How a professed believer feels about this important doctrine will largely
determine his attitude toward many scriptural teachings and their application in
everyday living.
Nonresistance
Apostolic
Christians and most other groups of the Anabaptist heritage have practiced a
distinct, separation from social and civic involvement, including abstention
from bearing arms (non-resistance). This is based on the New Testament
description of believers living as strangers and pilgrims in this world (1
Peter 2:11) and as a peculiar people (1
Peter 2:9) who lead a separated life (2
Corinthians 6:14-18).
Nonresistance toward evil is taught expressly by Christ in
passages such as the following: "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil:
but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew
5:39) and "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you,
do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you" (Matthew
5:44). John the Baptist said to a group of soldiers, "Do violence to no man"
(Luke
3:14). Christ's teachings on how believers should treat others is perhaps
best described in His exhortation, "As ye would that men should do to you, do ye
also to them likewise" (Luke
6:31). Surely, no man would invite violence and killing toward himself (Matthew
26:52).
The believer is directly addressed by the Apostle Paul in
Romans 12:19 and forbidden to seek vengeance: "Dearly beloved, avenge not
yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is
mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." In the very next chapter (Romans
13:4), God authorizes governments, not the church, to execute vengeance
against evildoers on His behalf. Christ established a clear example of
non-involvement in the social ills and civil governance of Israel during His
life on earth. His mission was the salvation of the souls of individuals and the
perfect portrayal of the love of God in His life as an example for all true
disciples to follow (John
18:36).
Modern evangelicals and some fundamentalist groups believe
that they must assume their share of responsibility for dealing with the
problems of society, even to the extent of participating in fighting a war to
establish justice. This is rationalized by defining broadly the "peacemaker" to
include one who wins military campaigns decisively enough to preserve justice
and prevent another challenge to the civil order for a long time28.
Once again, a simple, literal interpretation of the Scriptures teaches
otherwise: "Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good" (Romans
12:21).
Overcoming Sin
Doctrinal differences sometimes
develop simply because of the emphasis placed on certain scriptural passages to
the exclusion of others. Attitudes regarding sin in a believer's life vary
greatly depending upon the amount of emphasis given to particular Scriptures.
Christians generally agree that Christ's death provided atonement for man's sin
and that God hates sin. It is also recognized widely that a believer is not
immune to temptation and may succumb to sin. A primary distinction exists
between various groups concerning the question whether believers are expected by
God to remain free from sin as much as possible and whether or not they will
suffer loss when it is allowed to gain a foothold in their lives. The degree of
potential loss is linked directly with the doctrine of perseverance vs. "once
saved, always saved." The one holds to the belief that continued indulgence in
sin until death constitutes rejection of Christ by an individual and would lead
to eternal condemnation, whereas the other holds forth the promise of salvation
no matter how far or how long the individual falls back into sin.
The Apostle Paul explained the subject most thoroughly in
Romans 6. One
is either a servant of sin or a servant of righteous- ness (verses
16-22). If one is a servant of righteousness, he is no longer a slave to
sin, "But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your
fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life" (Romans
6:22). The believer may choose to sin, but he doesn't have to. God has
promised a "way to escape" from every temptation (1
Corinthians
10:13). He has provided sufficient power through the Holy Spirit and
instruction in His Word so that we can be fully on guard against sin and not
yield. "Let everyone that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity" (2
Timothy 2:19). "My little children, these things write I unto you,
that ye sin not" (1
John 2:1). Significantly, it is also immediately pointed out that there is a
remedy for sin in a believer's life should this occur, "And if any man sin, we
have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1
John 2:1).
Satan uses very effectively the tactic of minimizing the
seriousness of sin. This was his approach in deceiving Eve. He claims all sin is
the same and causes people to misinterpret the passage "all unrighteousness is
sin" (1
John 5:17) to justify this opinion. Conversely, the Apostle Paul described
at length the reasons why fornication is unique among all sins (1
Corinthians
6:15-20)
and Christ acknowledged degrees of seriousness of sin when he said to Pilate:
“... he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin" (John
19:11).
One of the striking contrasts between Apostolic Christian and
the New Evangelical beliefs is reflected in the attitude toward sin.
It is a question of
accepting defeat or claiming victory. As mentioned previously, churches are
referred to by modernistic Christians as "fellowships of sinners." Bumper
stickers are displayed proclaiming, "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven."
Although the statement is true, the implication is that Christians are sinning
daily just like the unconverted. The deception is that this is acceptable, and
the consequence is the abuse of grace. This is soundly condemned in the Word (Romans
6:1-2), "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may
abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer
therein?" To give in to temptation with the attitude that the sin will be
repented for later and forgiven betrays an impurity of heart (Hebrews
10:26). Jesus said, "Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God"
(Matthew
5:8).
Apostolic Christians teach and cultivate an overcoming life,
an attitude of abhorrence of sin, and intensive utilization of all scriptural
strategies to promptly remove the stain of sin when it touches a believer's
life: prayer, confession, repentance, correction, and when appropriate, church
discipline and restoration in relation to the degree of sin.
The
Conversion Experience
Immediate justification based on a simple
acceptance of Christ versus a thorough conversion experience is indicative of
another major theological difference between Apostolic Christians and New
Evangelicals as well as Fundamentalists. The belief in certain salvation without
evidence of the fruits of a genuine faith has developed into a doctrine that is
popular and readily accepted. It is asserted that a person is not "made"
righteous, but is "declared" righteous. Carried to the extreme, it says that man
need do nothing more than make a one-time declaration of faith in Christ. Also,
this doctrine implies that even after "justification" a believer is considered
as a "saved sinner," and lifestyle is unimportant because of Christ's atonement
for all sin: past, present, and future. In this vein, the fruits of repentance
and conversion (the exchange of a sinful life for an obedient life) are
considered to be of little, if any, importance with regard to salvation.
Apostolic Christians embrace the scriptural truths of
justification by faith and Christ's atonement, but they give a different
definition to faith. True saving or justifying faith implies action. Even the
devil has a form of faith and trembles. Faith without works is dead (James
2: 17). A faith and belief that is void of obedience to God's Word is false.
If one's faith does not result in works and obedience, it is not a justifying
faith. "And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto
all them that obey him" (Hebrews
5:9).
Peter taught, "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that
your sins may be blotted out" (Acts
3:19). Also, the Lord Jesus said, "Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at
hand" (Matthew
4:17) and "… Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall
not enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew
18:3). A justifying faith compels a soul to repent of his sinful ways and
become converted.
Repentance embodies humility, sorrow for sin, submission,
contrition, and a new attitude of willingness to take instruction, direction,
exhortation, and admonishment, both from the Word and from God-given, earthly
authority. Further, it includes restitution (Luke
19:8), confession (Mark
1:5), and a breaking off from the old life of sin (Romans
12:2). One thus becomes a new creature in Christ with a transformed mind.
New, godly attitudes predominate, and the fruit of the Spirit is evident in a
changed lifestyle.
Conversion from sin does not occur in an instant but is an
experience which varies in length of time with each individual. God justifies an
individual when He sees authentic faith in the shed blood of His Son, Jesus
Christ, which is manifested by obedience to the Word. The exact moment when
salvation occurs is known only to God since He alone can discern the intent of
the heart. Man cannot make this supernatural discernment as to the moment when
salvation occurs in another person's heart. The fact that a superficial, false
conversion can appear valid to man is documented in Christ's parable concerning
the seed which fell on stony ground. It sprang up immediately, but "because it
had no root, it withered away" (Mark
4:6). Simon the sorcerer believed and was baptized by the followers of
Christ, but shortly thereafter it became apparent that his "heart was not right
in the sight of God" and he was "in the bond of iniquity" (Acts
8:13,
18-24).
Repentance is made valid by conversion. One does not merely
have faith and remain as he was before. He becomes converted by the grace of
God. He begins a new lifestyle
that is evident, both inwardly and outwardly. "And they that are Christ's have
crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts" (Galatians
5:24).
Confession of Sin
Confession
of sin to God in the presence of man at the time of conversion has a clear
biblical foundation. Prior to baptism by John the Baptist, souls came
"confessing their sins" (Mark
1:5). Also in the Apostle Paul's time at Ephesus, "many that believed came,
and confessed, and shewed their deeds" (Acts
19:18). Already in the time of Joshua, sinful Achan was called upon to
confess his deeds in detail to God and man (Joshua
7:19-21). Also in the time of Nehemiah, the "seed of Israel separated
themselves from all strangers, and stood and confessed their sins. . . ." (Nehemiah
9:2).
To many modern evangelicals and fundamentalists, confession
is more of a profession of faith than an actual confession of sins before man.
Sins are confessed to God only (who already knows). However, Scriptures teach,
"For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth
confession is made unto salvation" (Romans
10:10).
The Scriptures are clear that individuals are saved by grace
through faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ (Ephesians
2:8-10). Yet James writes, "faith without works is dead" (James
2:20). Confession of sins and restitution are fruits of repentance or works
which result from a true saving faith (Matthew
3:8). The fruits do not of themselves earn salvation, which is a gift from
God. The fruits are motivated by faith and are visible evidence of its presence.
Many times initial faith is very weak. Acting upon what little faith does exist
helps faith to grow and commitment to deepen. Confession and restitution are
very important aspects of spiritual development. Humility and truthfulness are
nurtured by these experiences (James
4:6,
10). Confession of sins in the presence of man at the time of conversion
results in great relief. Sins brought out in the open are brought to judgment (John
3:20-21), and the essential realization of forgiveness and cleansing from
unrighteousness is enhanced (1
John 1:9).
One of the greatest concerns facing the New Evangelical
movement today is a lack of commitment by many of its adherents. This may be in
part the result of a superficial spiritual experience which lacks many of the
scriptural aspects of a true conversion. Apostolic Christians strongly embrace
confession of sins before man as one of the integral aspects of a true
conversion.
Part III: CONCLUDING
EXHORTATION
The New
Evangelical Movement constitutes one of the most sweeping and profound
revolutions experienced by Christianity since the Reformation of the sixteenth
century. Its modernistic approaches are being widely and powerfully promoted by
effective use of every conceivable form of communication. Unfortunately, to some
extent, these influences are beginning to appear within the Apostolic Christian
Church. This writing has attempted to set forth some of the significant
differences in beliefs and practices between New Evangelicalism as well as
Fundamentalism and Apostolic Christian doctrine.
Sometimes Apostolic Christians may think the only difference
between their beliefs and those of evangelical groups is the emphasis on
tradition. Most Apostolic Christian traditions, however, reflect the application
of carefully interpreted biblical principles which are clearly more important
than the traditions themselves. Thorough examination has revealed that the major
differences between the Apostolic Christian Church and the predominant beliefs
of modern evangelicals and fundamentalists are in significant areas of doctrine.
These differences center around the following basic doctrinal
areas:
1. The nature of the conversion
experience
2. Attitude toward sin and
application of discipline
3. The role of the church in a
believer's life
4. Eternal security
5. Biblical inerrancy coupled
with doctrinal unity
The leaders
of the church, like the watchmen on the walls of Zion, have the scriptural
responsibility to be vigilant, to apply every effort to warn the members about
deception, and to help them avoid being "carried about by every wind of
doctrine" (Ezekiel
33:1-16;
1 Peter 5:8;
Ephesians 4:14).
It would be totally inexcusable on the part of the Apostolic
Christian Brotherhood to give in to these modernistic influences at the very
time some of their failures are being acknowledged by evangelicals themselves.
Although this movement was initiated as a sincere effort to reach the world by
making Christianity more acceptable, it is a sad commentary that in many
instances Christianity has been compromised and has changed more than the world.
The Apostles left no doubt about the fact that there should
be an intense loyalty and likemindedness within the body of believers (1
Corinthians 1:10;
Philippians 2:2). The Lord often used the example of judging the quality or
validity of service for Him by the visible fruits. "Wherefore by their fruits ye
shall know them" (Matthew
7:20). The most prominent evidence of the work of the Holy Spirit in the
Apostolic Christian Church includes: true conversions of lost sinners,
submission to the Word, love for Christ and the brethren, compassion for the
unconverted, simplicity of faith in an inerrant Word, a servant leadership, and
the blessings of strong and stable Christian homes. May these precious,
God-given attributes never be eroded away by the enticing deceptions being
offered by the crafty enemy as an "angel of light."
Thus, this exhortation is presented with fervent love and as
a clear sounding of the trumpet at a crucial time of doctrinal influence and
challenge. It is a sincere warning for the Brotherhood to become alert to the
undermining influences of modern evangelicalism and to resist them with the
"sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God" (Ephesians
6:17). It is a call to unite together as never before around the biblical
truths embraced by the early church fathers, by true believers throughout the
ages, and by our recent faithful, spiritual forefathers, both in Europe and in
America, who have left us with a marvelous spiritual heritage, to the praise and
honor of God.
This exhortation is based on loving concern for all mankind
with no intent to discredit the motives of any individuals or groups who
sincerely seek to serve the Lord. The purpose is to identify and warn against
beliefs and practices which are unscriptural and potentially deceptive to the
true believer. Effort has also been made to provide information on historical
patterns in Christianity which can help predict the consequences of movement
away from the model of the early church as it was established by the Apostles
under the direction of the Holy Spirit. The ultimate consequences of these
increasingly liberalized patterns, which have occurred repeatedly throughout the
ages of Christianity, consist of the following tragic deceptions:
1. A loss of confidence in the
Holy Scriptures as inerrant, absolute truth
2. Surrender of many scriptural
doctrines as the church and the world draw together
3. Replacement of submission to
the Lord Jesus Christ with love for self
Our Saviour,
the Lord Jesus, explained in very simple terms to His followers the most
important attributes of the true church. He said, "A new commandment I give unto
you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one
another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love
one to another" (John
13:34-35). He also made clear the ultimate source of wisdom and truth, "… If
ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed" (John
8:31).
REFERENCES
1. Douglas, J.D., Editor, The
New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, Zondervan Publishing
House, 1979, p. 336.
2. Douglas, p. 1033.
3. Selvidge, Marla J., Fundamentalism Today, Brethren Press, 1984, pp.
11-12.
4. Ajemian, Robert, "Jerry Falwell's Crusade," Time, Sept. 2, 1985, p.
50.
5. Elwell, Walter A., Editor, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Baker
Book House, 1984, p. 381.
6. Shelley, Bruce L., Evangelicalism in
America,
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing,
1967, p. 86.
7. Quebedeaux, Richard, The Worldly Evangelicals, Harper and Row, 1978,
pp. 23, 42-43.
8. Erickson, Millard, The New Evangelical Theology, Fleming H. Revel Co.,
1968, p. 31.
9. Lindsell, Harold, The Battle for the Bible, Zondervan Publish- ing
House, 1976, Foreword.
10. Erickson, p. 38.
11. Quebedeaux, p. 22.
12. Eerdmans' Handbook to Christianity in America, Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1983, p. 466.
13. Erickson, p. 16.
14. Swindoll, Charles R., Growing Strong in the Seasons of Life,
Multnomah Press, 1984, p. 242.
15. Cloud, David, "Fearing the Destruction of Fundamentalism," Sword of the
Lord, April 5, 1985, p. 17.
16. Cloud, p. 17.
17. Ajemian, pp. 48-57.
18. Ostling, Richard N., "Power, Glory-and Politics," Time, February 17,
1986, pp. 62-69.
19. Lyons, Gene, "Let There Be Books," Newsweek, August 5, 1985, p. 65.
20. Keeley, Robin, Editor, Eerdmans' Handbook to Christian Belief, Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982, p. 51.
21. Keeley, p. 267. 22. Keeley, p. 382.
23. Schaeffer, Francis A., The Great Evangelical Disaster, Crossway
Books, 1984, p. 37.
24. Marsden, George, "Secular Humanism Within the Church,"
Christianity Today, January 17,1986, p. 15-1.
25. Lindsell, Harold, "Evangelicalism's Golden Age," Moody Monthly,
December, 1985, p. 114.
26. Johnston,
Robert K., Evangelicals at an Impasse: Biblical Authority in Perspective,
Knox, Atlanta, 1979, vii-viii.
27. Gillquist, Peter, "The Christian Life: A Marathon We Mean to Win?"
Christianity Today, October 23, 1981, pp. 22-23.
28. Culver, Robert, "Justice Is Something Worth Fighting For," Christianity
Today, November 7, 1980, pp. 14-25.
|