So, now I'm . . .the guardian of orthadoxy?

When did I become the guardian of orthodoxy? I was the rebel for heavens sake! I spent my college years raging against the system. “The traditional church was not doing its job!” I yelled. And perhaps I was right. When I created The Gathering, the plan was to assist those who felt somehow marginalized by the traditional church. I am convinced it’s a good and useful ministry. But, I never said there should not be a church!

There is a move in Christianity towards avoiding church altogether. The reasons are often valid in so far as people do not feel they are growing spiritually or intellectually in the traditional church. I can very much appreciate it and have often felt that way myself. This ever increasing theology suggests that one can grow outside the local congregation just as much as they can in it. It also suggests one can learn as much and be as much outside the church as they can in the church. In theory this is true; in practice, it’s not. It’s much like the theory that suggests not all people (in theory) need the atonement of Christ for salvation. If one were to be born, live, and die without committing a sin, one would automatically be saved. This is true in theory, but as all people sin, it’s not true in practice.

Real people tend not to learn a great deal outside the church. They tend not to read, study, or seriously engage new ideas. If you are in a church that does not expose you to these things, you have a need to leave. And, for a while, I can see not spending time in the fellowship of believers, but that ought to be short lived. Truth is, strength is found in fellowship and community. Learning to lean on one another is challenging, but necessary. There is a unique unity given Christians that springs from a shared understanding and a shared indwelling of the Holy Spirit. We really are drawn to one another in a supernatural way.

Likewise, corporate worship is invaluable to the spiritual health of a believer, not to mention it is demanded by the New Testament. Now, I am as much or more the rebel than most people, but there is little point in rebelling for the sake of rebelling.

Books I've Been Reading Latest Update

H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture: (New York: Harper & Row, 1951)

Jon Meacham, American Gospel: (New York: Random House, 2006)

Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation; How the Quest for Political Power is Destroying the Church,: (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005)

Gilbert Bilezikian, Christianity 101, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993)

O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of The Covenants: (Phillipsburg New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1980)

O. Palmer Robertson, The Israel of God: Yesterday, today, and Tomorrow: (Phillipsburg New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 2000)

The Pearl of Great Price, This is a Mormon document I have been reading off and on for some time now. I have been working in the area of Mormonism and found it helpful to read the source materials whenever possible.

F.F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Revised Ed., The New International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990)

William L. Lane, Hebrews, vol. 47 Word Biblical Commentary, (Dallas: Word Books, 1991)

William L. Lane, Hebrews, vol. 48 Word Biblical Commentary, (Dallas: Word Books, 1991)
James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1-8, vol. 38a Word Biblical Commentary, (Dallas: Word Books, 1988)

Mars Hill on Christology

Faith Thinking

Well, Mars Hill was certainly interesting last night. We discussed the nature of Christ's union, his humanity, and his deity. Seems the question is as complex now as it was 4th century when it became the driving force of the churches theological undertakings.

I read to them the old creeds that come from that time and have been subsequently handed down as the closest thing the church (both Catholic and Protestant) posses to an orthodox formulation of the problem. But, 'twas to little avail. Like so many people they are still convinced they could have done it better than the early fathers. What is it about the arrogance of humanity? Why do we think ourselves so much?

I suppose one can and probably should argue that we are "much" as we are created in the image of God. I suppose we could and should argue that we are special, wonderful and all this would be true, but, the more I teach, the more I find people are also intractable at times and for no apparent reason other than "I like it my way better."

Well, I can't rant too much or Sarah Gets on my case so I will sign off now. Also, in the end I cannot express how hopeful the evening made me. Their ideas were a confused amalgam of ignorance and education but, they were passionate about the subject. This in and of itself is a powerful hope. I am dealing with real people, Christians who are passionate about a discussion in what would be considered esoteric theology in nearly any realm outside of the academy. But here they are in this little town of northern Minnesota aggressively arguing with me about the nature, doctrine, and formulation of the Christos. Now that just has to give a guy like me hope.

Joe

Books I Have Been Reading

I have been re-reading H. Richard Niebuhr’s “Christ and Culture,” for the third time since I was an undergraduate. The book still has a great deal to say and I find it helpful given the country's current state of thought regarding the subject.

H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture: (New York: Harper & Row, 1951)

Jon Meacham, American Gospel: (New York: Random House, 2006)

Gilbert Bilezikian, Christianity 101: (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993)

O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of The Covenants: (Phillipsburg New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1980)

O. Palmer Robertson, The Israel of God: Yesterday, today, and Tomorrow: (Phillipsburg New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 2000)

The Pearl of Great Price, This is a Mormon document I have been reading off and on for some time now. I have been working in the area of Mormonism and found it helpful to read the source materials whenever possible.

F.F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Revised Ed., The New International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990)

William L. Lane, Hebrews, vol. 47 Word Biblical Commentary, (Dallas: Word Books, 1991)

William L. Lane, Hebrews, vol. 48 Word Biblical Commentary, (Dallas: Word Books, 1991)

American Gospel

The following is the rough draft for the first half of a short article I am working on for publication.

I’ve been reading Jon Meacham’s 2006 release “American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation.” It’s good, it’s very good. But it’s not near complete. It pulls up short from unpacking its own theory.

Meacham is not a historian and he’s no theologian. Yet, as an investigative reporter and the managing editor of Newsweek, he is largely able to overcome his lack of historical knowledge though research “investigation.” But he is not able to overcome his lack of theology. In the end, it’s an excellent and informative book that doesn’t really make it’s own thesis. I suppose you could call it the book that almost was.

His thesis, in fact, is not easily discerned. The title of the book suggests the American Gospel is the point of interest and one does find a definition of said thesis, albeit a thin one. In his defense, Meacham is careful to point out he is writing an essay, not a scholarly research paper, but even here, one would expect a more robust explanation of the theme. Our first real taste of exactly what the author is driving at comes near the beginning of chapter 2 “And None Shall Be Afraid” Meacham is recalling a debate in the inaugural session of the first Continental Congress over opening the session with prayer, or not, and just who should offer it. The debate is settled by Samuel Adams in what Meacham calls “. . . the true birth of the culture of public religion . . . .” That is to say they voted, and agreed. This then, is the basic content of the American Gospel, we vote on it. Later, he offers a further definition, or rather gives it some content. “. . . a delicate blending of allusions to a broadly defined God and to the spirit of religious liberty with the symbolism of Christianity.” Pg. 78

Also, he seems to give credence to Tocqueville, whose analysis, Meacham suggests, is that “. . . religion in America nurtures the moral life, which in turn creates basically virtuous citizens who are able to maintain a republic that is itself basically virtuous.” (Pg 79). Anyone with the slightest background in religious sociology will instantly recognize this as a standard secular definition of the value religion plays in culture.

To his credit, Meacham is not unaware of the sorts of criticisms likely to be leveled against him. Some people, he tells us, would suggest that such a public form of religion, thin as it is, and largely devoid of content, is no religion at all. Yet he insists it’s the only form we are able to maintain in a public sphere to accomplish Tocqueville’s (and the founders’) visions of a virtuous society.

The remainder of this well written book devotes itself to the historical and very general overview of various public leaders in our nations history and their views on church and state, religion and politics, Christianity in general, but Christianity and it’s effect on popular politics in particular. His work here strikes me as well done and clear though, as a persuasive style essay, he really only offers one view on the matter which he sees (perhaps presumptuously) as the majority position. Case in point is the matter of the 1963 Supreme Court decision to remove the recitation of institutionalized prayer from public schools. Our author quotes Billy Graham as saying “’Eighty percent of the American people want Bible reading and prayer in the schools.’” (pg. 189) To the best of my knowledge, that number was accurate when offered by Graham at the time of the Supreme Court ruling. Yet, on the following page and regarding the same issue, Meacham claims generally of the opposition to the courts ruling: “The extremes, while colorful and quotable, were just that: the extremes.” (pg. 190) Apparently there is a certain blind spot in Meacham’s thinking about what defines majority, minority, and “extreme.”

He does end the book with an interesting myriad of original documents for the readers’ use. They are helpful and fun.

In the end, I found the book enjoyable and persuasive on the level that it was informative and made a clear case for the reality that the United States is not now nor has ever been a Christian nation. Yet, given this well made point by the author, he then tries hard to make a case for this thin public religion with its general God. I can see how this may be a very attractive place to stand for many. But I am convinced there is a dark side to this seemingly innocuous theory.

Joseph S. Holt M.A.C.T.