Posts tagged "Doctrine"

The Evangelical/Fundamentalist Cold War (Long but worth it, I hope.)

Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism are two movements within Protestant Christianity in North America. They are similar in many ways, including their disapproval of modernism and liberal theology and their emphasis on orthodox Christian doctrines. Fundamentalism began as a movement within evangelicalism itself. Despite this, by the 1940’s fundamentalists and evangelicals were cutting ties. While there is overlap, the gap between the groups has widened significantly. There are many reasons for this split. But at the heart was the doctrine of “ecclesiastical separation”.

Evangelicalism is a movement within Protestant Christianity that began during the late 1600’s among the Methodists and Lutherans in Scandinavia and Germany. Evangelicalism discourages ritualism, instead emphasizing personal holiness and evangelism. Evangelicalism denies the office of a priest as practiced in the Catholic Church. Instead evangelicals adhere to the “priesthood of the believer,” which makes every Christian accountable not to a priest, but directly to God. Evangelicalism is not a denomination, but contains many denominational and non-denominational churches.

Evangelicals place high value on the inerrancy of Scripture and the doctrines of Christian orthodoxy. Like fundamentalists, evangelicals believe in separation from the world. Unlike fundamentalists, they tend not to separate from other orthodox Christian movements and denominations.

Evangelicalism came into its own in the 20th century, overtaking Roman Catholicism and mainline Protestant denominations in the United States. As of 2004, 28.8 percent of Americans describe themselves as evangelicals, while 22 percent are Roman Catholic and 13.9 percent are members of other Protestant denominations. About 10 percent of Americans attend an evangelical church service on any given Sunday.

The fundamentalist movement was a movement within evangelicalism early in the 20th century. In 1909, Lyman Stewart, a wealthy oilman, decided that the basic truths of Christianity needed to be defended against the onslaught of modernism and liberal theology. The result was a series of books titled The Fundamentals, from which fundamentalism gets its name. Sixty-four authors contributed to the series, which emphasized five basic doctrines of the Christian faith: the sinful nature of man, his inability to be saved apart from God’s grace, the centrality of Jesus’ death for the regeneration of the individual, and the authoritative revelation of the Bible. If a fundamentalist is one who affirms these five basic doctrines, then all evangelicals are fundamentalists. Indeed, at first this was true. But soon fundamentalism diverged from these teachings, and the fallout was tremendous.

Fundamentalism came to be characterized by its spirit of confrontation. As Jerry Falwell, perhaps the most influential of all the evangelical fundamentalists, put it, “A Fundamentalist is an Evangelical who is angry about something.” Soon evangelicals began distancing themselves from the fundamentalist movement. At the same time fundamentalists began to separate from the evangelicals. There were 3 main points of contention, with the last being the most significant:

(You’re a fifth of the way done! Continue reading after the break.)

Read More

Trinitarian Universalism

While I haven’t posted much recently, I have been reading everything in my stream, and there’s one thing that has caught my attention: the amount of universalism I am seeing. I am going to summarize Christian Universalism, then at the end I will give my opinion. Remember, it’s just that, an opinion. I’m not trying to judge anyone or make anyone feel guilty.

Universalism began to take root in America in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. One important founder of Universalist thought in the United States was George de Benneville. He translated the first German Bible in America. What made his version unique was that all verses supporting universalist doctrines were bolded so that they would stand out!

Trinitarian or evangelical universalism is the type I will discuss. Unlike other forms of universalism, trinitarian universalism holds to Jesus Christ being the Savior of mankind. They are conservative and reformed in most of their beliefs, except in their understanding of hell. Instead of eternal punishment, trinitarian universalists believe in eventual universal reconciliation with God. According to trinitarian universalists, all mankind will be glorified and reunited with God at the end of time.

Now, I realize that there is an incredible amount of variation within the evangelical/trinitarian universalist camp. I would say that there is greater difference of opinion within trinitarian universalism than there is within conservative reformed/fundamental theology, with their five hundred year old (but still unresolved) debates concerning election, limited atonement, millennialism, and covenant versus dispensational theology. I am not intending to misrepresent universalism. I am intending to summarize some of their core beliefs, beliefs that are common to most universalists.

At the core of trinitarian universalism are beliefs that conservative Christians find familiar and fundamental.

  • They believe that God is a trinity.
  • They believe that God is love. They also believe that His holiness is an aspect of His love, one could call it “holylovingkindness”. This comes into play a little later.
  • They believe that mankind is reconciled through Christ.

Well, that wasn’t so bad! These are all doctrines that conservative Christians affirm and rejoice in! But hang on, we aren’t through yet. Many beliefs of universalists contradict highly valued teachings of conservative Christians. Many Christians react violently when these doctrines are denied. So take a deep breath as we venture deeper into the mind of a universalist.

  • Universal atonement of sins.

This statement elicits two distinct reactions from Christians at first glance. Calvinists balk, because it contradicts their belief in limited atonement, that Christ died for the sins of only the elect. Those who believe in free will smile, because they believe Christ died to give all the opportunity to be reconciled to Him.

But that’s not the universalist’s idea of universal atonement. Take the universal nature of the non-calvinist’s atonement, and splice it onto the Calvinist’s election. The result: an atonement that is, well, really universal. As in, you can’t escape from it. All mankind is atoned, all mankind is forgiven, and all mankind is saved. A truly lovingkind God cannot allow His creation to be separated from Him.

Read More

Here is that last answer in rebloggable form if anyone needs it.

Here is that last answer in rebloggable form if anyone needs it.

Calvinist or Arminian?

This question came up in one of the many friendly debates we have in class. Someone wrote a paper on Thomas Aquinas and his Five Proofs for the existence of God. The word free will was mentioned. There were Calvinists in the room. There were non-Calvinists in the room.

Instantly the class was attentive. Latching onto every word, each student’s mind was a frantic beehive of primitive arguments. We were preparing for the fight we knew was coming. It was coming because free will had been mentioned.

As soon as Andrew finished with his presentation, the class exploded into a flurry of counter-statements.

“But where is free will if God is in control of everything?”

“Free will does not exclude God’s sovereignty,” I interposed.

“So you’re saying….ok I see, do you think that we can just get saved by ourselves whenever we want to? Where in the Bible is salvation our act, not God’s?”

“I never said that salvation was our act. God commands us to come to Him. We do, and He saves us. Him, not us.”

“But how can totally depraved people choose to come to God?”

“See,” I said. “This is where we’ll disagree. I define total depravity as being totally corrupted. You define total depravity as being completely dead and unable to respond to stimulus. God commands us to come to Him over and over. I don’t think He’s telling us to do something impossible.”

“But in Ephesians 2, Paul says that we are DEAD in sin.”

The debate went on, as debates tend to do. The outcome of the argument, the splitting of theological hairs, or being right are not important. We can become so right that we become wrong again. I value the Bible. We can philosophize all we want but if our conclusions don’t line up with Scripture, we’re wrong. 

That’s why I don’t call myself a Calvinist or an Arminian. First, because I don’t agree with everything they teach, and second, I don’t want my theology to be named after or defined by a person. Unless that Person is the Word of God, Christ.

I believe in election and sovereignty. I believe in free will. That’s because I believe in the Bible. God says that His ways are so much higher than ours that we can’t even begin to comprehend them. Why do we even try? Why not just accept what he says and worship in awe?

He tells us that He elects us. He tells us to come. I look at it as two points converging. God’s election and our free will and choices always converge on the exact same point, and that point is God’s will.

So, Calvinists, I believe many of the things you believe. Arminians, I believe a few things you believe in. But a true theology, or understanding of God, comes from God, not from man.

Do you have a pressing question? Ask me anything.

That Christian guy.

Follow me on twitter and Google+.

view archive



Questions?

Submit