Unity, Freedom of Inquiry, and Humility Or ... Of Gnats and Camel Swallowing. A Look in the Rear View Mirror for Today's Church

Quotable Quotes
“There is a great need to stress the importance of maintaining freedom of speech in the kingdom of God. Intolerance is dangerous to the future growth of the church . . . All progress of truth – scientific truth, political truth, or religious truth – all truth - has always depended on free speech and progressive teachers who were not afraid to teach their honest convictions.” (J. N. Armstrong, For Freedom)

"The fatal error of all reformers, has been that they have too hastily concluded that they knew the whole truth, and have settled back upon the same principles of proscription, intolerance and persecution, against which they so strongly remonstrated.” (John Rogers, Christian Messenger, 1830)

Stoned-Campbell Thoughts in the Rear View Mirror

It seems certain to me that one of the biggest hindrances to shalom in God's church is the notion that we have arrived at an infallible understanding of truth ... even "revealed" truth. Comments on my recent blog post, Of Popes in the Belly" point to a considerable rift in attitudes toward each other and the text and thus serves as the inspiration for this particular post. I argued in my book with John Mark Hicks, Kingdom Come: Embracing the Spiritual Legacy of David Lipscomb and James Harding that freedom is a gift from God to his children and it flows in our veins and DNA through the Stone-Campbell tradition ... especially the Nashville Bible School Tradition. Spiritual arrogance breeds war, disunity and kills the desire to learn. This plea surfaces a number of times from various writers within the sphere of the NBST. I thought I would share, briefly, three more this morning.

The first comes again from the pen of J. N. Armstrong. On July 9, 1914 in the Gospel Herald (pp. 3-4). Armstrong penned a piece called "Gnat-Strainers and Camel Swallowers." The opening paragraph is a "mouthful" to say the least:

"A man may be very correct in his doctrine, may teach a perfect gospel, may dot every 'i' and cross every 't' in his faithfulness in teaching what is written: he may be a good man and be able to say as the rich young ruler: 'All these I have kept from my youth up,' and still not be the Lord's servant."

How could this be? Well Armstrong argues that biblical Christianity is not simply about getting forms correct and observance of ordinances. There is a "spirit that must permeate and saturate the lives of those keeping the forms, lest the keeping be an abomination in our Master's sight."

With a lengthy review of the history of Israel, with emphasis given to such passages as Isaiah 1.11-15 and 29.13,24 and Hosea 6.6 and finally Mt 23.23, Armstrong believes we need to heed the warning. He says

"I wonder if we are not repeating the sins of Israel. Are we neglecting the 'weightier matters.' Have we gone and learned what God meant when he said: 'I desire goodness and not sacrifice?' (Hosea 6:6). How many of us are straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel? How many of us have been guilty of gagging over a gnat until we have destroyed the comfort and peace of the whole congregation, while at the same time we were gulping down camels? Let us not forget that there are small and large, lighter and weightier matters of the law."

Another voice is that of Samuel Parker Pittman. Pittman was first a student at the NBS and then, like Boll, became an instructor. Indeed Harding baptized Pittman in 1886. S.P.P became a quiet channel for the NBST as the 20th century progressed. Pittman rarely crossed swords but in 1919 he did register a protest about the way some things were going in the Churches of Christ. He wrote a piece called "What's the Matter?" for the May 22 GA. He begins the essay with a review of the degeneration of the church into centralization of power in the Roman papacy. He praises Luther for his courage in speaking up. He thanks the "learned" John Calvin and the dissenters in the English Reformation. He then states:

"The caption of this article is, 'What's the Matter?' What is the matter with what? With the movement started so auspiciously by the Campbells and others? Why, the trouble is not in the movement, nor in the men who inaugurated it. The trouble has been with us, who have espoused the movement, while refusing to wear the name of this great reformer and while denying that we are his followers (it would be better if some did follow him more scrupulously than they do)." 

So what is wrong with the generation Pittman is addressing? He explains:

"In our belief that 'we are right,' that we occupy 'infallibly safe grounds,' we are prone to become (have become) narrow, bigoted, intolerant. It is not the novice alone who is this; it is the more experienced brother, whose life and influence should be a benediction. I deplore the attitude of our older brethren who feel that they are the arbiters of the faith of the younger, who feel called upon to condemn in bitter terms the mistakes they may make, and who are ready to ostracize those who cry for a deepr spirituality, because they are guilty of some doctrinal irregularity."

Since my post has grown considerably I will perhaps add the letter from a "Young Preacher" later. It is a fascinating letter though.

Shalom,

Bobby Valentine

Read More

Of Popes in the Belly

I have been reading Barton Stone's writings. This is not my first journey through his writings but I think I have gained more understanding than previously . . . or at least I see things now that I did not before. Stone began publishing his journal, The Christian Messenger, in November of 1826. The very first article, which is untitled, covers the first four pages of the journal . . . it is on barriers to Christian union which Stone relates to personal spiritual growth.

Since this is the first article in Stone's journal it seems that he places some importance on its content. Freedom is essential to both Christian growth and unity. Stone had witnessed first hand the intolerance of those who would cast one out as a heretic for simply studying the Bible and coming to his own conclusion that may differ from one traditionally held. Freedom is a sword that cuts both ways however. If I truly grant it I allow for the possibility one will come away with a different understanding on some things than me. How do we handle this in others and in ourselves? In practice we have a tendency to assume a position of infallibility. Hear Stone:

"We must be fully persuaded, that all uninspired men are fallible, and therefore liable to err . . . Luther, in a coarse manner, said that every man was born with a Pope in his belly. By which I suppose he meant, that every man deemed himself infallible . . . If the present generation remain under the influence of this principle, the consequences must be that the spirit of free inquiry will die -- our liberty lie prostrated at the feet of ecclesiastical demagogues." (Christian Messenger 1 (November 1826), 2)

Do we not suffer from this malady today? Do Christians have a "Pope in the belly?" Why is it that when a brother or sister disagrees with a position we take we assume that they disagree with God . . . when all they disagree with is our interpretation.

I survey the doctrinal war zone of the Churches of Christ. In many ways it looks like the wasteland of Verdun . . . congregations alienated, bodies of brethren who are casualties, armies exhausted from the bloodshed, no one is a victor . . . except Satan. The issues range from cups, to singing groups, to marriage and divorce, to (fill in the blank).

Just as in the religious wars of the Seventeenth Century, rooted in Pope in the Belly malady, so our divisions testify that it is still around. We have nothing to fear from the freedom to think and study and learn . . . and even change our minds. The first step, Stone says, of defeating the Pope in the Belly is being able to see the need to GROW. If I admit that I have not yet arrived . . . there is hope. I admit that I, at times, suffer from this cancerous blight.

Seeking Shalom,

Bobby Valentine

Ut omnes unum sint (John 17.21, Vulgate, 'that they may all be one')

Read More

Marcionism & Churches of Christ: What Value, REALLY, is the "Old Testament?" #5: The Loss of the Hebrew Bible

In previous essays under the working title "Marcionism & Churches of Christ" we have asked basically why are we here. Now I want to explore what happens when we actually "loose" the Hebrew Bible as a shaping/grounding source for "sound doctrine" (a phrase btw that cannot be reduced to the "marks of the church" as is so frequently done).

A word on the word "loss." By "loss" I do not mean to say a preacher never does a character study of a person which is one of the more frequent uses of the Hebrew Bible or quotes from it from time to time. By "loss" I mean the doctrine/theology of the Hebrew Bible that formed and shaped Israel, Jesus and the early church are no longer the primary "glasses" that we view all doctrine and life through. Are we shaped by the worldview that the "bible of Jesus" creates with its distinctive story of God?

First, a failure to take the Hebrew Bible seriously causes us to fundamentally misread the New Testament itself. This is exhibited in a number of ways. The authors of Pagan Christianity, which is often a fine book, speak disparaging of how some "Christian" practices or ideas "reflect the thinking of other religions--primarily Judaism and paganism" (p. 10). I will be the first to admit that Christianity has often been a Chameleon. Yet the issue that bothers me most is the authors fail to realize that Christianity is in fact "Jewish." The "New Testament" is literally written on the soil and in the atmosphere of the "Old Testament." This anti-Jewish vein of thought that has a long pedigree in Christian anti-semiticism. This goes so far in some folks that they have actually denied the Jewishness of Jesus himself. Jesus cannot be understood apart from the Hebrew Bible, a point to which we will return.

Second, if it is true that the "NT" was birthed with the blood of the Hebrew Bible flowing through its veins then that should move us to step back and see what this means. One scholar who has helped me think some of these issues through is G. Ernest Wright. In the middle of the 20th century Wright published a book entitled God Who Acts: Biblical Theology as Recital (1952). The first chapter of that book (The Church's Need of the Old Testament) should be required reading for every potential theologian in the church ... and every preacher is a theologian (the only question is whether one is a good one or not). One of the most astonishing claims made by Wright is that the Hebrew Bible is a "bulwark against paganism" for the church (p. 19). And it was an "enlightened" paganism that made such a profound resurgence in Modernism and has been embraced in the trappings of Christianity today.

How does the "OT" function in this regard? First through its doctrine of Creator and creation (the Bible has no theology of nature but only of creation). God is not part of creation though he is intimately involved with it, and creation has a purpose and goal. This may sound esoteric but it is not ... indeed it is of fundamental importance. The modern Christian cut loose from the Hebraic roots of faith reads the NT through a vaguely defined "spiritual" worldview. The knowledge of God is reduced to a feeling or an "experience." This spiritual experience is defined in radically individual terms (almost) completely separated from communal life and the program of God revealed in the narrative of Scripture. This "spirituality" instead emphasizes prayer (which is not bad btw) and the immortality of the soul. Wright states plainly, and correctly, "this represents the paganizing of the Gospel ... This Gospel is no scandal nor stumbling block" (p. 23). It is a reversion to "pagan normalcy."

The more carefully we study the Hebrew Bible the more clearly a distinctive view of God as Creator and Redeemer emerges and his relationship to his creation and humanity. This worldview is absolutely essential to biblical faith and is totally absorbed into the New Testament. The results of this loss are, in my view, the hyper individualism we see today and a neo-platonic spirituality that is alien to the entire Bible. The loss of the "bible" of Jesus births a Reader's Digest religion.

More to come.

Seeking Shalom,
Bobby Valentine

Read More

A Good Cheerful Video

A good and cheerful video for a change. I love this song on lots of levels ... I offer it to God and my girls

Read More

Stress Relief...



A Work of Art ...



Learning to Cook With Dad

Read More

Reflections on "Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church"

N. T. Wright has proved to be not only one of the most influential New Testament scholars of the present generation but also a committed and passionate churchman. Few have had the impact on contemporary scholarship that Wright has had. One of the most articulate presenters of what has been dubbed the "New Perspective" on Paul, he is also probably the greatest authority on the "historical Jesus." There are few if any equals to Wright when it comes to mastery of the Jewish world of Jesus and insisting (rigorously so) that Jesus and Paul be understood in that first century context. Through such tomes as The New Testament and the People of God, Jesus and the Victory of God, and the Resurrection of the Son of God Wright has basically set the agenda for contemporary NT scholarship. You either argue with Wright or against Wright but there is little middle ground.

Repeatedly though Wright has left the "academic" ring to join with Christians in articulating what that ancient faith means for the contemporary world and life. Here Wright is sometimes apologist (as in his exchanges with Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan and Judas and the Gospel of Jesus) and sometimes pastoral theologian. In this latter capacity Wright publishes sermons and books.

In his newest book, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (HarperOne 2008), Wright combines the hat of NT scholar and pastoral theologian to address the issue of the substance of the Christian hope. As Wright has argued in his academic books there is a constant connection between creation, covenant and eschatology throughout the Story of God in Scripture. In this work Wright gives the fullest exposition of any of his writings on what that looks like. He says he sets out to answer two questions of paramount importance:

1) What are we waiting for?

2) What are we going to do about it in the mean time?

Wright begins by examining contemporary beliefs about the afterlife both in the secular world and among the churches. He subjects the common equation of "resurrection" with the vague idea of "life after death" to severe criticism ... refreshingly and biblically so.

Wright then examines, from a historical perspective, what it was that early Christians believed about "hope." The look at the setting in Judaism and the contrasts with Paganism is well done. One of the questions that keep coming to mind as this section is ruminated upon is "Which of these looks more like what is commonly held by Christians today?" The answer is often disturbing!

Through a series of chapters Wright shows how Jesus himself is the embodiment of God's new creation. That new creation is wedded to the old through the incarnation itself ... and the bodily resurrection of the Son of Man. The doctrine of resurrection of believers both in the NT and in the early Fathers is directly tied to what happened to Jesus. Jesus is the New Adam and just as the fallen world is tied to the old Adam so we are connected to the New. Our bodies, like that of Jesus, are to be redeemed ... ahh ... What HOPE.

Wright so far, in my view, is not only convincing but expresses biblical faith wonderfully. But that only answers question one. In Part 3 of the book he moves to how that teaching effects the life of the sojourning People of God both in Scripture and (perhaps) more importantly NOW. Just how does eschatology shape what Christians teach, and PRACTICE, concerning justice, beauty, evangelism and spirituality. These are not mere esoteric subjects in Wright but rooted concretely in the bitter (at times) grind of life. Eschatology is not simply a peripheral issue but of incredible importance because it does teach us how to live, though contemporary Christians often turn it only into an argument about the millennium (sadly and mistakenly). To quote Wright,

"From Plato to Hegel and beyond, some of the greatest philosophers declared that what you think about death, and life beyond it, is the key to thinking seriously about everything else--and, indeed, that it provides one of the main reasons for thinking seriously about anything at all. This is something a Christian theologian should heartily endorse."

I think Moses, Jesus, and Paul would say "amen" to that opinion.

I cannot recommend Surprised by Hope enough. For those who do not want to wrestle (or are intimidated) with the massive tome The Resurrection of the Son of God this book is a refreshingly engaging text (Surprised, btw, is not simply a condensed version of RSG). It is laden with insight into the biblical text and into bridging the hermeneutical gap between the ancient faith and its contemporary meaning. Wright has no masters and few peers in this area.

There will be some who will not read this book simply because it is not written by a "Church of Christ author" as the phrase goes. This is, sadly, a purely denominational and sectarian stance. Our restoration fathers and mothers in the faith challenged us from Alexander Campbell to J. W. McGarvey to Everett Ferguson to interact with the very best scholarship in the world. In that tradition I recommend Wright as a way of seeing the biblical message afresh and critiquing the incipient paganism and neo-Gnosticism running through contemporary piety.

And from the standpoint of my own personal journey at the moment I found this book to be refreshing and encouraging. I think you will too.

Seeking Shalom,
Bobby Valentine

Read More

Please Lord ... Send your healing rain ...

[I]t is amid the disappointments of life, in the days of mourning and desolation, in the hours of self-abasement and penitential love, that we meet with Jesus. It is in the home of poverty and in the lowly mansion of the wretched that we have fellowship with Christ.

Robert Richardson, Communings in the Sanctuary, p. 77

Read More