I recently read a book by Calvin Beisner called Evangelical Heathenism?: Examining Contemporary Revivalism. In it, he reveals a contemporary heresy known as Moral Government Theology, which is basically a form of Pelagianism and open theism. Apparently many leaders of Youth With a Mission have been or are mixed up in this doctrinal error (heresy, blasphemy, etc.), actively teaching that humans are born with the internal ability to choose good or bad, that God doesn't know the future, and that God's goodness hinges on His constant choices rather than His inherent nature.
Needless to say, there's a lot wrong with this idea. What really disturbed me, however, is that such an idea exists and is largely unheard of. The fact that almost no one has heard about MGT while at the same time it is so pernicious and apparently widespread bodes ill for the watchfulness Christians are supposed to maintain in the face of doctrinal error.
How many Christians have been unwittingly drawn into this way of thinking? It would seem that a doctrine teaching a god who is neither omniscient nor omnipotent would be automatically rejected by Christians across the board, but that is apparently not the case. Obviously, there are many firm enough in orthodox doctrine that they can't or won't be dissuaded from the truth, but what makes these doctrines appealing to less well-educated Christians?
There seem to be only two factors, both working in tandem. First, the idea that we are completely autonomous free moral agents who can thwart the will of God plays on our inherited human pride and arrogance. This is likely a subconscious motivating factor, but one nonetheless that is powerful and omnipresent in all of us: every time we sin, we're asserting our own godhood.
The second factor is lack of knowledge and rejection of any kind of authority. Our churches are notoriously lax in doctrinal instruction, opting for feel-good sermons and opinion-based Bible studies rather than rigorous doctrinal catechesis and exhortation. But it's more than that: contemporary Christians are completely uncomfortable with the notion of objective absolute truth, and with the idea that humans can obtain it.
Oddly, this seems most rampant in what most would classify as conservative Evangelical churches, concentrations of Fundamentalism in its most restricted and unbiblical sense. On one hand, they cry out that there is truth and meaning, but through their behavior and teaching they deny it. How is this best demonstrated? Through the near-universal rejection of the creeds and confessions of the historic Body of Christ.
But, they argue, the Bible is our final authority! As interpreted by whom? we may well ask, to which the response is usually silence or an appeal to the Holy Spirit. Yet, if the Church is truly a body, wouldn't the Holy Spirit reveal Scriptural truth to the group as a whole, rather than to each person individually? Can we not trust anyone but ourselves? Such spiritual solipsism is not only dangerous, it's rank unbiblicism.
By it, heresies like MGT are allowed entry under the guise of proper interpretation and piety. Ultimately, if there is no objective interpretive method external to the individual, there is no interpretive method, and therefore no grounds for dismissing heresy. If, on the other hand, the Holy Spirit has revealed truth to the Church as a whole to be safeguarded by all true believers, then we have guidelines for objectively determining what is right and what is wrong, for dismissing heresy, and for training the saints in doctrine. If we let this go, we've relinquished our faith entirely, and only destruction will ensue. The only proper response is faithful doctrine and faithful living in the face of opposition from without as well as from within.
No comments:
Post a Comment