Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
I hope that you are accurate in these statements.
My mind is relatively closed overall. Meaning that I am a Christian. Despite being OK with these discussions that look elsewhere, I will try to argue (reasonably, I hope) in line with what I think is true.
But I have some significant questions concerning the overarching view of the Bible by almost all within the Evangelical side of the Protestant branch of Christianity. Not only the issue of inerrancy. And the conservative politics (I'm conservative, but not like the political among them). Also the overall view of the gospel. Evangelicalism seems to think that the Bible is all about preaching the gospel of salvation through faith/belief in the death and resurrection of Christ.
But Jesus taught a lot about living before he went through that ordeal. That does not diminish the importance of the cross. But it was not the sum total of his teaching. And he did not teach that everyone who believes should be a disciple in the way that the 12 were. Or even the slightly more distant group that comprised the 70 that were sent out. Rather, the bulk of the public teaching was on living. The private teaching was on leadership. I see a break in the teaching and to simply assert that everything is for everyone, followed by ignoring the parts that were clearly for the flock, is to miss the whole of the ministry of Christ.
We are so prone to exalting heroes of extraordinary religious activity, but ignore those who are examples of ordinary living in accordance with the teachings of Christ. It creates for too many the idea that the only thing that we "do for Christ" is in evangelism, mission trips, being a missionary or preacher, etc. It marginalizes the flock in favor of the shepherds. It chastises sheep for being sheep and not shepherds. Not intentionally. But it still does it.
And for many of us, having a system in which we were encouraged to participate made us feel more like we were important and not just spectators. But teachers should teach and the students should learn. There is nothing dishonorable in that. Getting to chose a song (which I understand is essentially a thing of the past) made us feel like we were directing the meeting. But was that ever intended to be our gift?
And not just talking about the LCM. Is being an active preacher of the gospel everyone's calling? Do we presuppose that this is one of the gifts that is given to everyone? Then maybe we should argue that every gift is given to everybody and we should simply be self-teaching, self-motivating, fully righteous examples of the full-grown man.
I don't know where this shakes out or what the balance is. But it is truly out of balance right now. At least from my viewpoint in the cheap seats.
|
It's interesting to read your perspective. As for myself, I consider myself a Unitarian Christian ala James Luther Adams (the most important Unitarian Theologian of the 20th Century). Basically I consider Jesus' overall message (e.g. Sermon on the Mount etc) important but I don't consider the Bible inerrant nor do I consider the virgin birth, the Trinity, Christ's death, resurrection and ascension credible etc. In my opinion, the Bible shows that Jesus taught a coming heavenly kingdom which he expected would happen within his generation and Paul thought and taught the same but it didn't happen in his generation. The NT Bible authors reflect their changing viewpoints as the nature of events changed (e.g. failure of the heavenly kingdom to arrive during their generation) as you see the dates when different gospels/epistles were written. There were more futuristic proclamations ala the book of Revelation as time waned on in the first century. I can't deny God but not in the same way that is common among Christians. I see God in nature and in the inevitability of our lives.
The local church casts tremendous doubt on the truth of Christian faith. When I was in Bible College I was convinced at the time that Christians could do better in helping new Christians grow and preaching the gospel. I had read Watchman Nee's book the Normal Christian Life and it had a significant impact on my Christian life. I was living in Santa Cruz and I preached the gospel every chance I could and I would spend my Saturday nights (my wife stayed at home) with a friend walking the boardwalk handing out tracts and sharing the Christian message. Previously I had worked with Teen Challenge in Detroit and I took the Christian message seriously.
One Saturday preaching the gospel Karl Hammond came up to me since he was also handing out tracts and we talked. When I found out that he had published the Normal Christian Church Life and that Witness Lee was a co-worker currently in the U.S. I was dumbfounded and excited. I started meeting for prayer with Karl every morning at 6am from then out, quit Bible College and enrolled in state College, and worked with him to build up the local church in SC.
To make a long story short---SC was great and exciting and we grew more than anyone expected but after moving to Detroit the elders who were closer to WL changed the message and made the Christian experience more onerous. However, like everyone else, we believed we had found the ultimate in the Christian experience only to discover that the LC was no better than the denominations it condemned. After I left the LC I went back to the AOG and became very involved. In the end, I arrived at the conclusion that I wanted to take a look at where I was in my life and the journey to my current thought has been a long process. I am very active in the Unitarian church but my perspective is a great deal more comforting especially since I don't have to be pigeonholed into one frame of thought. I am not criticizing those who have a system of belief that is written in stone but it is not a place where I want to go.