Posted on 10/31/2014 5:14:22 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
When we consider the predicament that the evangelical church of the twenty-first century faces in America, the first thing we need to understand is the very designation “evangelical church” is itself a redundancy. If a church is not evangelical, it is not an authentic church. The redundancy is similar to the language that we hear by which people are described as “born-again Christians.” If a person is born again of the Spirit of God, that person is, to be sure, a Christian. If a person is not regenerated by the Holy Spirit, he may profess to be a Christian, but he is not an authentic Christian. There are many groups that claim to be churches that long ago repudiated the evangel, that is, the gospel. Without the gospel, a gathering of people, though they claim otherwise, cannot be an authentic church.
In the sixteenth century, the term evangelical came into prominence as a description of the Protestant church. In many cases, the terms evangelical and Protestant were used interchangeably. Today, that synonymous use of the adjectives no longer functions with any accuracy. Historic Protestants have forgotten what they were protesting in the sixteenth century. The central protest of the Reformation church was the protest against the eclipse of the gospel that had taken place in the medieval church.
If a church is not evangelical, it is not an authentic church.
When we turn our attention to the first century, to the churches about which we learn from the biblical record, we know that all of the churches addressed in the New Testament, including the churches in Ephesus, Corinth, Thessalonica, and the seven churches of Revelation, were evangelical churches. They all embraced the biblical gospel. Yet at the same time, these churches were different in their strengths, in their weaknesses, and in their compositions. An evangelical church is not necessarily a monolithic community. There may be unity among evangelical churches but not necessarily uniformity. The distinctions of the seven churches of Revelation are set forth clearly in that book. They manifest different greatnesses and frailties, but they all faced perils. Each confronted the dangers that assaulted the church in the first century. They faced hazards of varying proportions, but there was a common threat to the health of the New Testament church from many sides. Those dangers manifested in the first century are repeated in every age of the church. They certainly loom large at our time in the early years of the twenty-first century.
Among what I see as the three most critical perils the church faces today are, first of all, the loss of biblical truth. When the truth of the gospel is compromised or negotiated, the church ceases to be evangelical. We live in a time of crisis with respect to truth, where many churches see doctrine merely as something that divides. Therefore, they stress relationships over truth. That is a false distinction, as a commitment to truth is a commitment that should manifest itself in vital, living relationships. Relationships can never be a substitute for embracing the truth of God. So the either/or fallacy of doctrine or relationship cannot be maintained under careful biblical scrutiny.
A second widespread peril to the church today is the loss of any sense of discipline. When the church fails to discipline its members for gross and heinous sins, particularly sins of a public nature, that community becomes infected with the immorality of the secular culture. This occurs when the church so desperately wants to be accepted by the pagan culture that it adopts the very morality of the pagan community and imitates it, baptizing it with religious language.
The third crucial peril facing the church today is the loss of faithful worship. There are different styles of worship that can be pleasing to God. However, all worship that is pleasing to God is worship grounded in Spirit and in truth. We can have lively worship, manifesting great interest and excitement, with doctrine and truth eliminated. On the other hand, we can have what some call a dead orthodoxy, where the creedal truths of the historic Christian faith remain central to the worship of the church, but the worship itself does not flow from the heart and lacks spiritual vitality.
Another element that threatens the evangelical church is the ongoing erosion of evangelical faith by the impact of liberal theology. Liberal theology saw its heyday in the nineteenth century and raised its head again with the neo-liberalism that captured the mainline churches of the twentieth century. Yet it is by no means dead. Perhaps the place where liberalism is manifesting itself most dangerously is within the walls of churches that have historically been strongly evangelical. David F. Wells describes the crisis of the twenty-first century church as “vacuous worship.” A vacuous worship is one that is empty of content. It is satisfied with platitudes, pop psychology, and entertainment. Such worship is devoid of the Word of God and of the authentic sacrifice of praise.
Dr. James Montgomery Boice, before his death, lamented his concern that the church was being enticed “to do the Lord’s work in the world’s way.” We try to transfer principles of success drawn from Madison Avenue and from other secular institutions and imitate them in the life of the church. Such a process is deadly.
In every generation, including our own, the same perils to the spiritual strength that Jesus rebuked in the seven churches of Revelation threaten us anew. These include such things as a lack of love, a lack of truth, a compromising spirit with the world, a lukewarm devotion, and a double-minded conviction, to name but a few. There were rebukes and encouragements given to these churches by our Lord that every church in every age must take seriously, examining ourselves to make sure that we are not manifesting the same departures from biblical truths that these churches were. We must be vigilant and diligent if we are to maintain a godly witness in our day.
This post was originally published in Tabletalk Magazine.
Unfortunately, I’ve heard of ELCA pastors using the same words, “There may be unity... but not necessarily uniformity” as their wedge to justify their denomination’s pro-homosexual position. I guess anyone can twist words.
According to this Christianity Today article/poll
...27 percent of self-described “evangelicals” are Arians (condemned at the Council of Nicea, AD 325) and well over half believe the Holy Spirit to be an impersonal force rather than the third PERSON of the most Holy Trinity.
Kyrie Eleison!
And these people go around telling everyone they're "bible believin' Christians". Bizarre.
No need to bash fellow man, encourage greater love for Christ and an ever truer love, eh?
They have not been properly educated in theology.
thestateoftheology.com shows the results of a survey of 3,000 people. margin of error is less than 2%...
interesting, but scary, stuff.
Pointing out that people who don’t believe the Holy Scripture is wrong is bashing them?
Could you help me out by stating their wrongdoing in a way that isn’t bashing?
The word twisting began after the death of the immediate Talmidim (disciples) of the Nazarine. The gentile converts began to blend their pagan beliefs with the true message of Torah that he taught. Once the Torah was modified, it was eventually outlawed (pun intended). It was rejected by corrupt leaders who said, “We will not walk in it!” It was replaced by man-made law, syncretic law. The traditions that were not displaced became the foundation and strength of the Christian Epoch. That foundation, removed from its root in Torah, is failing and the entire structure is now in jeopardy of collapse. There is a solution, but it is not a return to some set time in Christian History. The answer is in “Teshuvah” or as the Nazarine and his predecessor are quoted, “Repent” which in their world meant only one thing: “Return to G-D and return to His Torah, for it is your life!”
“Repent” is another tenet of the faith being jettisoned by the ELCA. For them, it is increasingly the Gospel of Acceptance. God loves you to the point of “overlooking”/embracing your deficiencies (no longer called sin).
Of course, if God overlooks sin, then there is no need for a Savior whose blood makes payment for and blots out my sin.
Unfortunately the historical record set forth in the gospels and letters of his disciples does not support your false claim. The proclamation of the Resurrection is the central event announced by his disciples. Sorry that it does not match what you want to believe.
Was told by the local Evangelical Bishop last week that “the Church needed to evolve it’s interpetations of the teachings of the Bible”. That its teachings were outdated, and were difficult for the congregation to comprehend.
Apparently the Word Of God is not conforming to what the Church teaches any more.
Seek out a Bible believing church.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.