5,000 pastors cheer Mel Gibson's 'Passion'

Washington Times ^ | 1/22/04 | Julia Duin

[Truth Addict]

I agree with Wallace; what you wrote agrees with my understanding of the historical underpinnings and doctrines of Pentecostalism. It is certainly fair to refer to us as Protestants.

[ConservativeDude]

i believe we are getting way off the original topic here, but i have always found the terms "reformed" and "protestant" to be particularly helpful, the latter being the more encompassing, the former referring to really the descendants of the first wave of reformers and who are not arminian, but "calvinists" (luther of course was a "calvinist"; but that lutherans quickly changed some of that after he died). sometimes terminology is less helpful, but, alas, it is necessary if we are ever going to communicate.

[Truth Addict]

sometimes terminology is less helpful, but, alas, it is necessary if we are ever going to communicate

It is becoming fashionable to avoid using such categories to label people, but I also find these terms useful, not for judging people, but for having a general sense of their perspective on the relevant topics.

For example, it is likely that you would find it useful in conversing with me that I belong to an AOG church, since that categorizes me as an armenian protestant, among other things.

[Truth Addict]

"arminian", not "armenian"! (slaps forehead!)

[ConservativeDude]

For example, it is likely that you would find it useful in conversing with me that I belong to an AOG church, since that categorizes me as an armenian protestant, among other things.


all i can say is, i agree and i guess this conversation was predestined to happen.....

[Wallace T.]

While Luther and Calvin both believed in the bondage of the will, total depravity, the perseverance of the saints, and unconditional election, not all of the Reformers, even the first generation, held these positions. Both the Anabaptists on the "left" wing of the Reformation and the Anglicans on the "right" wing (or at least those more influenced by Erasmus than by Calvin) did not hold to these positions. Arminius, who had been a Calvinist, expressed his position around the turn of the 17th Century, within 70-80 years of the beginning of the Reformation. Arminius' views paralleled those of Pelagius, a 4th Century British churchman who opposed the soteriology of Augustine. Both Calvin and Luther (who were also both members of the Augustinian order of the Catholic Church) championed Augustine's soteriology.

Arminius' beliefs were repudiated at the Synod of Dort, which developed the famous "TULIP" model of five point Calvinism. However, the Arminian viewpoint persisted, was evident among both Anabaptists and Anglicans of the non-Calvinist stripe and was popularized by John Wesley and his Methodist movement in the 18th Century. Those tendencies that were offshoots of Methodism, the Holiness movement and, later, Pentecostalism, retained a Wesleyan theology, and thus an Arminian and semi-Pelagian viewpoint.

Unlike other American based sects, such as Unitarianism, Mormonism, Christian Science, and Jehovah's Witnesses, most Pentecostalists (the Oneness Movement excepted) never repudiated the core Christian doctrines that are reflected in the ancient church creeds and early church councils or the Reformation distinctives such as sola Scriptura, sola fide, solo Christo, and the priesthood of the believer. Unitarians, Mormons, Christian Scientists, and Jehovah's Witnesses are not Protestants or orthodox Christians. Most Pentecostalists are Protestants and orthodox Christians.

[ConservativeDude]

perhaps i could have been more precise. "reformed" should refer ONLY to those who descend from the first wave of reformers AND who are not arminian. in other words, there were many in the first wave of the reformation who were not augustinian.

that said, back to the original point, i think the term "protestant" describes this category better than the term "reformed". there are likely not super-sophisticated reasons for this, but when one hears of a "reformed" church, or hears that such and such is a "reformed" baptist, or whatever, then it is most likely that super person is "augustinian" and not arminian (or even armenian, for that matter...). of course there are plenty of non-augustinian first wave non-roman catholics who are correctly identified as "protestant".

all in all i find those terms defined in that way as being fairly helpful.

your post correctly identifies the fascinating strand of indigenous american religions which are, in a sense, so wildly "protestant" that they have become non-christian. an interesting person with feet in both camps is of course charles grandison finney who in many respects out-did pelagius himself.

while there is no question that the radical protestants you mention are indeed orthodox christian, it also seems that these movements are a link between radically protestant orthodoxy and non-christian american religions such as jehovah's witnesses, mormonism, etc.? also interesting is that by the time you get to these american non-christian religions, the idea of calvinism (or in my opinion, biblical christianity) is so far gone it is almost undetectable.

interesting stuff indeed.

[Wallace T.]

The heterodox American sects mostly drew their membership from the overwhelmingly Protestant population of our nation's early days.

The first, Unitarianism, was an elitist movement whose origins can be traced to the effects of Enlightenment thought patterns on New England clergy and laity. With the scientific advances of Galileo, Newton, Kepler, and others, many intellectuals began to believe that observation and reason, unguided by divine revelation, could explain the workings of the universe. Therefore, in their view, a personal and all-powerful God was both unnecessary and illogical. This viewpoint penetrated Harvard and its divinity school even before the War for Independence. Formerly Calvinist clergy and theology professors, believing that the "book" of nature was a superior source of revelation than the Bible, began rejecting doctrines such as the Trinity (hence the name "Unitarian"), the virgin birth of Jesus, the substitutionary atonement, etc. The remaining orthodox Calvinists in the Congregationalist denomination expelled the Unitarians for their heterodox beliefs, ending forever the Puritan consensus that had characterized the first generations of Yankees.

The Unitarians were proto-liberals who went further in rejecting core Christian and Reformation doctrines than did most of the modernists and liberals in the late 19th and 20th Century mainline Protestant churches. It would also be fair to say they were more honest than the modernists and liberals, who, before they took over the mainline denominations, pledged to adhere to Protestant statements of faith such as the Thirty Nine Articles or the Westminster Confession of Faith with crossed fingers. But the Unitarians made a clean, honest break from both orthodox Christianity and Reformation theology.

Mormonism and Christian Science supplemented the Bible with new revelation considered to be divinely inspired: The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price for the former, and the writings of Mary Baker Eddy for the latter. Both movements had their origins in Greater New England and most of their first followers came from Protestant backgrounds. A large number of the first Mormons came out of the Campbellite movement, initially an attempt to unify the various Protestant denominations that wound up as yet another set of denominations, known today as the Churches of Christ or the Disciples of Christ. However, the Campbellites were quick to repudiate Mormonism.

Jehovah's Witnesses did not offer a new Scripture, but interpreted it in a manner entirely outside either the historical-grammatical method favored by Protestants or the Scripture in light of tradition and the Magisterium method favored by Catholics. Later on, this group would replace the King James Bible with their own translation of the Bible that deviates in many respects from any other interpretation. For instance, their New World Bible interprets the latter part of John 1;1 as, "The Word was a god," rather than "The Word was God" found in virtually all other English translations.

The Mormons, Christian Scientists, and the Jehovah's Witnesses were all populist, not elite, movements, unlike Unitarianism. Also unlike Unitarianism, there were charismatic leaders like Brigham Young, Mary Baker Eddy, and Judge Rutherford. The churches that they founded were very much centralized, unlike Unitarianism, which was congregational in polity.

The record of these heterodox groups stands in contrast with the historical record of churches that are orthodox Christian and Protestant and that are American, or at least Anglosphere, in origin: Campbellism (mostly defectors from Presbyterian and Baptist groups), Holiness and Pentecostal groups (a Wesleyan/Methodist offshoot), and dispensationalism (most of whose founders were Presbyterian or Reformed).

To get back to your original question as to whether "radical Protestantism" bred the heterodox sects, I believe the answer is no from a theological standpoint. However, the waves of revival that America experienced in the 18th and 19th Centuries tended to weaken the authority of the established churches that came from the British Isles with the first white settlers. To the extent that many people fell away from the spiritual guidance of educated Anglican, Congregationalist, and Presbyterian clergy to less informed and more emotional Methodist, Baptist, and Campbellite preachers, the degree of Biblical and doctrinal knowledge declined. As a result, a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness missionary, well versed in the use of Biblical language and pious sentiments, could sway farmers and laborers of the truth of their positions.

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." (Hosea 4:6)

[Truth Addict]

i guess this conversation was predestined to happen.....

LOL!

Well, I guess we disagree about something.

[Truth Addict]

(or even armenian, for that matter...)

OUCH, that hurt! ;-)