Welcome to The Kingdom Come Where Christ is King!
Eccesiology Eschatology Soteriology Bibliology Christology Pneumatology
Hamartiology Hermeneutics History Apologetics Humor Website
 
Welcome to The Kingdom Come Where Christ is King!
Home

An Explanation to Friends & Foes

An Explanation to Friends & FoesBecause I am receiving emails from friends & foes alike wondering about my apparent sudden theological shift, I thought I'd take this opportunity to give an explanation.  Obviously it isn't just my eschatology that has changed but all of my "ologies" are being affected.  This should be expected as I have always advocated that all of the "ologies" of theology are intertwined & should not & cannot be compartmentalized.

My theology, like most American Protestants or Evangelicals had been based on a few concepts:

 

  1. That Sola Scriptura (Bible Alone) equates to private or ultimately independent interpretation.
  2. That the true Church was never represented within the Roman Catholic/Greek Catholic Church.
  3. That the creeds, councils, & confessions of the historic Christian Church are to be approached with an amount of contempt if not outright disdain.
  4. That the role of the apostles in the foundation of the Church should be downplayed or else we may sound too "Catholic".


With these typical American Protestant concepts for a basis, I was prime to accept & advocate the most outlandish, unhistoric, & unchristian teachings.

Upon more study of Christian history, I began to see that rather than being a "Reformed/Calvinistic Christian" I was really closer to the so-called "radicals of the Reformation".  The radicals, sometimes known as "enthusiasts", "schismatics", or "Anabaptists" didn't simply advocate "reforming" the Church but rather uprooting everything & creating a revisionist version of Christianity -- certainly they would appeal to the notion that they were merely trying to "get back to the original Church" -- but any student that has studied what the radicals advocated can tell it had little in common with any version of the Church.

My fall into this radical individualism reached its depth when I embraced & advocated a heresy called "hyperpreterism" (hyperpreterism advocates Jesus returned in AD70 & the general Resurrection & Judgment has occurred).  Along with my advocacy of hyperpreterism, I was also advocating an ecclesiology (church model) that was influenced by my hyperpreterism.  I was intentionally & unintentionally leading other people to embrace this radical, unhistoric, unchristian revisionism.

I repent of causing any one to fall into these lies & will work to undo any damage I have done.  However, I do still think historic Christianity needs to do a better job of addressing the various issues of theology -- but with a careful consideration of the consequences instead of hasty proof-text responses.

I will be spending much time working toward embracing & advocating the historic Christian faith -- the historic Christian faith that did NOT begin upon the nailing of 95 thesis on a Church door in Germany. (I know some people try to accuse me of being stuck in the 16th century).  The historic Christian faith that did NOT begin in the "Restoration Era/Great Awakening" of the 18th & 19th centuries.  The historic Christian faith that did NOT begin with a group of jaded theological hippies sitting in coffess shops talking about "emerging" from the big, bad "traditions" & how UNtheological they want to be.  The historic Christian faith that did NOT begin when an individual denomination began.  The historic Christian faith that did NOT begin when a few disgruntled former dispensationalists over-reacted to one falsehood just to embrace another falsehood.

I know I keep using this phrase over & over -- "historic Christian faith" or "historic Christian Church".  I am trying to show that there is a continuity that we American Protestants seem to miss.  I am trying to drill this into my friends & foes minds so that when the time comes to really start unpacking the meaning behind this phrase that they will at least start off with the notion that I am advocating NOT merely a return to "the Mother Church of Roman Catholicism" -- but rather I'm talking about a continuity that I believe can be demonstrated throughout Christian history.  It is NOT merely a look at "progressive understanding" but rather a solid, firm foundation of apostolic teaching from the time of Christ to the present.  It is NOT merely Christianity by consensus or majority rule, but a divinely, Holy-Spirit guided Church that is both visible & invisible.

So, some friends may feel slighted & some foes may feel enraged -- but for those who will have patience, I am NOT on a "journey" but with certainty & surety to arrive at the destination -- not out of arrogance or by my own will but by the Sovereignty of God to maintain His Church so that not even the gates of hades would prevail against it.  Nor do I believe the Church is hidden...except by our own false notions & our own false revisions.

For those who are tired of the arrogance, the immaturity, the egotism, the posturing, the one-up-manship, the false humility, & the feigned generosity that often passes for not only mainline Christianity but is most prevalent in factions that are barely even recognizable as Christianity -- please keep reading.  I'm not asking you to join any new movement or some "new kind of Christianity" -- but rather get back to the Church that has never left.  The Church founded by Christ & His specifically hand-picked apostles to whom inspiration was given to be Holy-Spirit guided to establish the Church in the "traditions" of the apostles.

If you do this, you may find yourself also having to give an explanation to friends & foes.

By Roderick on 2008 May 1 - 22:29 | Website | add new comment | email this page | printer friendly version | 178 reads