The evolution of Orthodoxy

It struck me this morning. The definition of what a Christian is has changed significantly over time.

The Apostles Creed is this,

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Maker of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried;

He descended into hell.

The third day He arose again from the dead;

He ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost;
the holy catholic church;
the communion of saints;
the forgiveness of sins;
the resurrection of the body;
and the life everlasting.

Amen.

This creed has long been the very basics to claim orthodoxy. If we were ecumenical in this, and made this our basis for communion, we could really claim to believe in "the holy catholic church." As it stands, each of us, and especially institutionalized bodies, add to this creed their own bits. And then they make the claim that these additions are essential to the whole matter, and their understanding is the one true understanding which is "biblical" and authoritative. And in doing so, they're already disposed of the belief in the "holy catholic church."

It may be anything here. I'll just provide a few examples from my own personal experience.

• The bible is inerrant and infallible
• Biologic evolution is incompatible with faith
• Marxist economic theory is contrary to Scripture
• American Conservative political ideology is godly (I've literally heard someone say, "I'm not a Democrat, I'm a Christian.")
• Women must not have authority over a man in any way
• "Big bang" cosmology is demonic
• The Trinity is hierarchal
• God must not be addressed with a feminine name or virtues
• You must receive the gift of tongues
• Baptism is fully submerged, and never of a child

I'm sure all of us can add in things to this list. My point is that every tradition includes their own demands to be included in orthodoxy, essentially cutting the holy catholic church into bits.

I know a lot of people who don't really "go to church" anymore. They're not withdrawing from the church, they're being pushed away. They don't fit into the pastor's agenda, their beliefs are toxic, or they voted for the wrong person. Maybe they watch movies with the wrong MPAA rating, or listen to the wrong kinds of music. Maybe they want real fellowship instead of kowtowing to the agenda of the church expansion plan.

They're making it harder to enter the Kingdom of God. By including so many litmus tests, we're preventing people from fellowshipping with us, adding schism into the body in place of unity.

The irony is, Jesus made it hard to enter the Kingdom of God, telling those who would enter it to "count the cost." Yet his litmus test was to love God and love others, in a sacrificial way. We're turned this around completely, and we make it hard because others aren't sacrificing enough for us.

Their hearts are far from me

It is not enough that we worship the Lord with a fervent heart, and a steadfast loyalty. The prophets reign down woes on those who worship the Lord with all of the proper religious fixings, yet remain callous to the social inequality and suffering of the poor outside their doors.

James writes these words to us today, when the world is smaller than ever, and our doorstep reaches all the way around the world,

Religion deemed pure by our heavenly Father is this: When we care for the orphan, the widow and oppressed. When we do not conform to the powers of this world.

A question of Universalim

The internets are abuzz with criticism of Rob Bell's new book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. They are accusing Rob Bell of Universalism. Is this true? I don't know, I've only read two reviews of his actual book (not the teaser video) and one said he was and one said he wasn't. Regardless of what I think, everyone has to struggle with these questions.

Our modern view of hell has been shaped by writings of fiction or allegory outside of theological purview, like Dante's Divine Comedy. The Reform movement lead to a binary belief in "one saved always saved" and the opposite, "once damned, always damned." Yet the Bible itself isn't a systematic theology book, no matter how strongly people suggest it's "clearly" detailed. There appear to be different views on both heaven and hell in the Bible. To hold such a narrow view of both is to discount other passages in the scriptures.

This isn't surprising, because every dispensation of the Church on earth holds up some passages and ignores others.

So I simply have a series of questions for those who hold that Heaven is where faithful Christians go when they die, and Hell is where unbelievers will suffer for eternity once they die.

What do you make of 1 Peter 3:19-20?

After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits — to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.

What about the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds, still the benchmark for orthodox faith?

He descended into hell.

If hell is eternal, when Christ ministered to the souls imprisoned there, wouldn't all souls past present and future have been there?

If Christ indeed ministered to only the spirits from the past, why would he be excluded from doing the same for those of the future? After the advent of Christ on earth the rules changed, so after the resurrection everyone is held account differently?

What about the traditional view, held long before Christ's coming, that Sheol was a place all souls went in waiting for judgement? Christ himself uses this view in the Parable of Lazarus. (Luke 16:19-31) The Apocalypse of Zephaniah (which predates Christ) describes Sheol this way.

The Book of Enoch (approx same date range as the Apocalypse of Zephaniah) describes Sheol has having four sections: one where the faithful saints blissfully await Judgment Day, one where the moderately good await their reward, one where the wicked are punished and await their Judgment at the resurrection, and the last where the wicked who do not even warrant resurrection are tormented. Wouldn't an ancient Hebrew text have been influenced by the views of Sheol of the ancient Jewish faith?

These are things to ponder.

The violence of religion

Over the past decade, the Christian church in America has been so distracted attacking Islam, it has failed to provide a witness to this extremely large segment of global society. There is outright hate for these people.

This is a video of some Americans seething hate at their neighbors:



How is that a loving witness to the gospel of peace? How is that being an ambassador for Christ?

With that said, consider what the Christian response would be when a venerated leader of a powerful Islamic community writes to his followers,

Anyone who can be proved to be a seditious person is an outlaw before Allah and the country; and whoever is the first to put him to death does right and well. For if a man is in open rebellion, everyone is both his judge and the executioner; just as when a fire starts, the first man who can put it out is the best man to do the job.

I can imagine the criticism he would face, and rightly so. This isn't a proclamation for the law to suppress criticism, or imprison offenders. This is vigilantism.

Recently in Pakistan, one of the nation's Christian leaders was assassinated. This is a real problem we face in this world. So what should our face be, as representatives for the Sovereign Lord?

Humility.

The quote above is actually from Martin Luther. I just changed a few words from the English translation, though they would be similar words if it was in the original German. The English translation is,

Anyone who can be proved to be a seditious person is an outlaw before God and the emperor; and whoever is the first to put him to death does right and well. For if a man is in open rebellion, everyone is both his judge and the executioner; just as when a fire starts, the first man who can put it out is the best man to do the job.

The Christian world is looking at violent Islam and being appalled at the violence, and condemning the whole religion and its adherents (whether they're practicing or not), completely forgetting our own religion's violent past. Christian extremists even exist today. It seems like we've completely forgotten the Christian terrorism in the 80s and 90s. Or even recently the assassination of Dr. George Tiller recently. Or even this year we had Christian extremists planting bombs in Washington state. The list is very, very long.

Jarrod McKenna said sometimes Christians "treat grace as a dogma and not a practice." I think that's a very stunning phrase.

We need grace, long-suffering, humility, and compassion.

The different views of salvation

It's West vs. East. Not really. It's more like Protestant (substitutionary atonement) vs. Eastern Orthodox (Cristus victor). Roman Catholic is kind of in the middle of these two.