Here is an excellent article by Pastor Bob Dewaay on the growing apostasy within Evangelicalism proper. Just some excerpts:
In a cover article for Christianity Today, The FUTURE lies in the PAST, church history professor Chris Armstrong examines the trends in evangelicalism that have resulted in current evangelicals looking to ancient practices and teachings from church history from which to draw inspiration. He cites a D. H. Williams comment on “the almost overnight popularity of bishops and monks, martyrs and apologists, philosophers and historians who first fashioned a Christian culture 1,500 years ago,” and correctly identifies Robert Webber and Richard Foster as key early leaders of the movement that takes us back to ancient Christian practices and ideas.
...
... But where do they end up? My research suggests that mysticism is a key uniting factor amongst all the diversity of this movement. The “ancient-future Christians” want a spirituality that has no Biblically set boundaries. Armstrong writes, “From Dallas Willard, Richard Foster, and living practicing monks and nuns, they must learn both the strengths and the limits of the historical ascetic disciplines.”
...
This brings us to the debate at the time of the Reformation: has God spoken in a binding, authoritative way only through Scripture, or does He speak throughout history through the Roman Catholic Church and her traditions?
If the Reformers were correct, then the article in Christianity Today is senseless. Why would we believe “Christ” is guiding a process that is not spelled out in Scripture? Why consult church history rather than search the Scriptures for the beliefs and practices God has ordained?
The only answer to these questions is that these postmodern “evangelicals” have rejected the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. They want to reject “rigid propositions” but refuse to do the hard work of learning the Bible and learning how to determine what are or are not valid implications from Scripture. It never even occurs to the article’s author to ask whether the Bible ordains asceticism and mysticism (they are condemned in Colossians 2 and Deuteronomy 18).
And this is one more reason why Christians should separate from what is called Evangelicalism today. Christianity Astray is sliding further and further into apostasy, and will bring many professing Christians down together with her.
I will blog more about this when I tackle the contemporary "reformed evangelical movement", but this is one of the things I am concerned about. How can one continue to drink from the toxic waters of modern Evangelicalism and not be contaminated at the very least? Is there truly anything to be gained at all from seriously considering the answers of postmodernism, the Emerging Church Movement, and consider legitimately the whole idea of "contextualization" in the area of evangelism? Or how about the entire neo-Kuyperian slant? It is not a matter of just throwing the words "Fundamentalist", "hyper-____", or any theological labels, especially those which are meant to smear the opponent as being hateful or unbiblical or extreme, but a matter of true fidelity to Scripture. Honestly, I care less about labels; I only use them for descriptive purposes. Anyway, more to come later.
There is, of course, a massive difference between taking the writings and teachings of the church and of Christians down the ages as a useful resource where we can learn from the experiences of the saints who have gone before us, but one that is non-authoritative and must always be judged by Scripture and held under the authority of Scripture, and on the other hand elevating that tradition to the status of an authority.
ReplyDeleteAs long as church tradition is held in its proper place as sometimes helpful but always fallible, to be placed beneath the authority of the Bible, then I think that this recovery of the past can be of great benefit. Sola scriptura is about the sole authority of scripture, but that doesn't mean that Christian teaching and thinking outside the Bible is worthless.
Caleb:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. What the article is saying of course is that instead of examining Traditions according to Scripture, modern (post-)evangelicals are embracing Tradition because it is Tradition, without it being derived from Scripture. And I am convinced that the contemplative prayer movement is Tradition and not biblical, so that's why I agree with Pastor Dewaay's article.