Christian truth in a world of post-modernism

The following is a 2-part article I wrote last year about Christian truth. The first section engages Christian truth vs. other religions. The second part seeks to apply the same principles to Christianity and its many denominations.

Article 1: “Application for Preaching the Truth: Christians Only”

In the realm of the academic it has been deemed suitable to discuss ideals, morals, standards and creeds in hypothetical terms- or if you’re a dreamer, objective terms. The idea is that people of different backgrounds and confessions gather together to learn from each other’s experiences and grow in their knowledge and understanding of the world. This is not, I think, automatically flawed as a method of increasing wisdom in the world, because it is true that God’s creation proclaims itself to all, and so even those who are devotedly opposed to the true God will occasionally stumble onto truth. However, the fact that those who reject God nevertheless stumble upon the truth occasionally should in no way be a validation of their worldview. In other words- just because a man with a blindfold might be able to walk in a line on occasion doesn’t mean that we should follow him down any path (especially not a straight and narrow one).
This is a problem that we often run into as Christians (whether we acknowledge it or not) when we run to the embrace of events such as the World Religions Conference. The mission statement of the WRC is as follows: “We affirm the value of interfaith interaction, for educating ourselves regarding other faiths and philosophical traditions. The interfaith concept is a unifying vehicle, which can aid us in bringing the reformation of the world nearer to reality.” On the surface such a statement can be taken very innocently as an attempt to get rid of “all that divisiveness”. Surely, after all, we are all sinners and none can claim in themselves to know the truth about God. At least at this conference we can all join together to peacefully point out our views so that others may take them into consideration. And surely we can also through our heart-warming spirituality seek to make peace in the world and lift everyone’s hearts up in looking forward to the afterlife (or if you’re a Hindu, many afterlives).
The problem here that no one seems to get is that the WRC by its very name and symbols is validating the religious pursuits and ideals of its members. If all 7- no sorry, 8 if you include the token humanist they bring in to give his perspective- groups are already considered “Religions,” which is to say valid groups representing certain ideals, then there is no longer any real purpose served in coming to present your separate perspectives. There is no reason to change. Sure, it’s fun and informative- but in effect it becomes much like a group of fruit vendors who join together every year to extol their particular favorite fruit. All of them have chosen a particular fruit that they find to be especially savory, and none of them have any respect for vegetables (although they’ll let a token Brussels sprout vendor show up anyway), but at the end of the day they are all in fact supporting fruits. Whether you choose one or the other, you’re still eating fruit and it’ll be good for your body.
If the alarm bells in your head haven’t gone off yet, you need a new sound system installed.
What you have to realize- and what we as Christians cannot honestly avoid being convicted of as pariahs in a world set against the true God- is that the worship of God is not a human search for personal truth, or even corporate truth. It is most definitely not a quest for spiritual intimacy that fulfils you and gives your life purpose, nor is it simply a standard of morals you submit yourself to. This is the world’s definition of religion. This is the atheist’s definition of religion. By association, therefore, this is probably Satan’s favorite definition of religion. However, we as Christians must define religion in a wholly different manner. We must define religion as the pursuit of truth, not as WE see it, but as GOD teaches it to us. Religion is not just finding your spiritual niche, or fulfilling your needs, or finding a comfort in death. It is responding to One Eternal and All-Powerful God, who is evident in Creation and has created each and every one of us and watches over us all of our lives (however few breaths they may be). It is thankfulness for our very existence and praise for the free gift of Salvation (by grace, through faith). It is fear (yes, I said fear) and humility for our constant rebellion. Christianity is not “being born again” as the end of the story, but the constant regenerating work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, and being thankful as a chosen person for salvation. Our response must be seeking to constantly grow in the knowledge and understanding of God- and that God reveals Himself in the Bible. There is no truth about God which is revealed apart from God, and the sufficient truth for salvation is given to us in the Bible. It is the whole and complete Word of God, and its truth is testified to us in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is at constant work in us to will and to work for our salvation. We as God’s servants may expound on the Word, and make it known and understood among the people, but insofar as any human phrase contradicts the Word of God, it is false.
I hit on something in particular in that last paragraph that I know the World Religions Conference would have a problem with- that the Bible is the whole and complete Word of God. They would have you believe that each of us carries a unique and environmentally molded piece of truth, and that by coming together we can determine a greater, more holistic truth for people. They want to be the “unifying vehicle” which helps us to bring about the reformation of the world. Yet I must ask, “How can we do so if we as Christians are telling the truth, and they are lying?” A religion that denies or adds to the truth of God’s Word can not be a spiritual leader in this world. It may try as hard as it wants, and dress up its churches however it wants, but it will never be true. It has as its source false documents and prays to false gods, and so it will inevitably turn from God and lift up pursuits that are for man’s glory. A world that has no killing and is peopled with decadent folk who live to be 900 years old and who achieve great things that improve all of humanity’s lives may seem nice, but it is worthless apart from the true worship of God. I would rather live a few years and worship God gladly than sacrifice God’s Law to increase my life by one day.
Go to the leading atheists, and men like Karl Marx and Richard Dawkins, and they will tell you that religion is created by mankind to help us get through life, or to give meaning to our activities, or perhaps even to suppress the working classes. Their portrait of religion is much the same as their portrait of their own philosophies- simply another idea in a pile of “nice” thoughts on what we’re all here for. We all know this is false, and yet if we go to them and say that there is “some” God, and his name is Allah, Jesus, Shiva, or any other number of admirable spiritual creatures, then we’re just proving them right, and they have every right to laugh at us and kick us into the corner of the public eye. It is only a resolute, faithful, and God-centered Christianity, uncompromising in its acknowledgement of God’s truth and devout in all its human capacity in service to God that can possibly effectively lead the world to truth. We as God’s tools have the only key to the truth. We are the reformation.
When will we start to lead?



Article 2:
I feel it is necessary for me to continue to build upon the ideas set forth in this article from a specifically Christian perspective. I feel this not because I am divisive, but because I know that there is a constantly growing attraction to the sort of Christianity which I as a Christian must vehemently oppose. To continue the thought, then:

I said before that "It is only a resolute, faithful, and God-centered Christianity, uncompromising in its acknowledgment of God’s truth and devout in all its human capacity in service to God that can possibly effectively lead the world to truth," and also that "A religion that denies or adds to the truth of God’s Word can not be a spiritual leader in this world. It may try as hard as it wants, and dress up its churches however it wants, but it will never be true." While I think many Christians will agree with these statements at the basic level in relation to other religions- having often come from those religions or from atheism as part of their background- I also have no hesitation in predicting that most Christians would fail to apply these same sentences to the current chaotic mess of Christian denominations abounding throughout North America (as far as I know it is rather thoroughly peculiar to America and Canada).
Let me lead off my explanation with this statement: What I am engaging in here is a critique of institutions and systems of religious belief which are propagated by reverends, elders, youth pastors and the like throughout our God-blessed country. I am in no direct way laying slander upon the individuals involved in varying degrees within such churches, sheltering beneath their roofs from the storms of the outside. In other words, I'm rebuking the shepherds, not the sheep. That said, it is no less imperative for the sheep to recognize a false voice at their head and seek to change it or leave.
Disclaimers aside, I'll continue with an explanation of my belief. First, let me say that what I understand a system of beliefs to be (alternately known as a creed, a confession, or what have you) is a commonly accepted delineation of the understanding of the person of God, His work of Salvation, and our place and function in the world in regards to God and His Law. All of these beliefs are to be modeled on the Bible, which is and must be the sole timeless source of God's Word and Truth. According to such a definition, then, I make the argument that such a system of beliefs, truly modeled upon God's Word and never in contradiction to it, fairly may be seen as necessary beliefs that any Church claiming the mantle of truth must hold to. (The fact that such creeds and systems of belief are written by men, therefore, becomes irrelevant so long as all beliefs are proven in their consistency with God's Word). If you accept the above, then, you could also state fairly that a church that deviates from such a set of beliefs would be deviating from the truth of God's Word- and therefore proving itself false. If we as Christians are willing to say at any point that there is something unique, unprecedented, unparalleled, and incontrovertible about our system of beliefs in contrast to another false religion, then we have drawn a line in the sand (so to speak) and cast that other religion as being false.
Let's carry this forward. Most of the people I know will agree that, for instance, "The Roman Catholics, y'know...they're wrong. They're just wayyy out there in beliefs." Likewise, a reformed Christian might be willing to say "Those Jehovah's Witnesses are false" or "Those Unitarians are heretics." However, I have noticed that there is ALWAYS a certain point at which people become less certain about whether a denomination, or a particular view on a doctrinal issue, is wrong. Not everyone who disagrees with praying to saints seems to be willing to stand up for predestination, for instance. Or, not everyone who stands up for predestination is willing to say they should baptize infants. The problem here is that if you are searching for the truth of God's Word- the absolute, whole truth of God's Word- then there is little to no room for divided issues. Doctrinal debates have primarily developed over beliefs central to the integrity of our overarching Christian faith.
One example of this is predestination. If I say "Salvation is granted to me by God who chose me before the beginning of the world, based on His Grace and not at all on what I do and don't do during my lifetime," but someone else says, "I come to the Lord and believe in Him and He enters my heart," then we have reached a fundamental breaking point. See, according to my belief God chose ME, and there was nothing I could do about it. Salvation was given, not earned. The other person believes in a salvation in which he has to come to and choose, and that by doing so he will receive Jesus into his heart, who will then guide him through his life. His belief teaches us that we can only be saved if we choose God. The problem with this belief is that we're naturally sinful beings. The Bible specifically says that only those who have been called and in whom the Holy Spirit is at work are able to call God their Father, and believe in Jesus Christ. Long before that person entered his first church God was in his heart, even as he was perhaps worshiping other gods. God brought that person to Himself. If you differ on this issue, therefore, you are believing in a fundamentally different God. My God chose me before the world. Your god needed you to give that last 10% of effort so He could save you. These are different gods.
Likewise, my God presents a different character and comprehensive identity to me than the god of the market-driven evangelical churches of today. This evidence of this is that while my God was the God of Israel, who on many occasions in the Old Testament delivered His people from the nations by destroying thousands and tens of thousands, the modern evangelical god (let's call it the ME god) is a god who loves everyone everywhere no matter what they do so long as they're born again at some point in their lifetime. My God is the God who promises all throughout the Psalms to prosper the righteous while crushing the wicked (Psalms 1 and 2 are key examples), and my God is the God who gave Adam and Eve life and salvation freely and then left it up to them to follow Him by responding in faith or screw up by turning away. The ME god, on the other hand, will fix your life problems if you turn to him- in fact, he's just waiting and hoping and hoping that you'll choose salvation by coming to him so he can show you how wonderful he is!
The fundamental difference between the ME god and my God is that while mine manages to be both loving AND just (and, in fact, there should not be such a separation of terms but for the sake of a world that doesn't understand the real meaning of either I must make one), the ME god is simply a friendly free-handed spiritual being. It is, in essence, a humanistic invention, on par with the efforts of Mohammed when he decided he didn't like the religions of the day and proceeded to invent one that suited him.
Now before everyone piles on, I will say that there is still a vast difference between a confused Christian and a Muslim. From a foundational point of view, a confused Christian is at least attempting to fathom a real Trinitarian God- the problem is that they're doing so armed with secular philosophies, scientific 'realism', and a self-obsessed worldview. Yes, this self-obsession is natural to all humanity, and I myself am quite thoroughly at fault for similar sins. That, however, does not disqualify either myself from speaking, nor the argument from being valid. The fact is, the majority of modern denominations have at some point deviated from what is the true worship of God, with all its beliefs and creeds and confessions. They may have started off brilliantly, as did Luther's Reformation churches, but at some point they came to accept for various reasons a number of doctrines which are in fact at odds with the Truth of God's Word. This fact leads us therefore to realize that while such churches might be historically commended for their efforts, they are in fact in dire need of further reform.
I could go through a number of other doctrinal issues and explain how they, too, are fundamental elements of the Christian belief system and cannot be bent or broken. However, the point is, I think, sufficiently made: that we as Christians cannot afford to deviate from or prevaricate on any beliefs associated with God's Truth. There is truth, and there is falsehood. What is simply required is the willingness to discern, to test the spirits (1 John 4:1), to hold firm to and lift up the right and true Word of God above the lies of the world and Satan (Titus 1:9). Such an imperative is uncomfortable and inconvenient because it requires a perpetual vigilance against all the grand and subtle heresies that assault our churches, and it does mean that we must at times reject other systems of beliefs, and those stubbornly on the wrong side of the issue as being those who follow a false belief. This does mean that we as Christians must reject the beliefs and claims of some- perhaps even many- of the other nominal Christian organizations in our countries. This means, as well, that we as true Christians have a duty to go to those churches and guide the sheep, who have been misled by the shepherds, back to the truth. It also means that we must ourselves always be careful to examine our system of beliefs to ensure that we are following the true Word of God as well. To follow a false doctrine is no different from ignoring any other command of God (except, perhaps, for the shepherds who lead the sheep astray with such doctrines- their guilt I would think is the heaviest). I venture, therefore, as a sinful Christian who in no way can claim knowledge of the limits of God's salvation, that not all who are currently in churches that we consider to be false will go to hell. However, their earnestness must be turned to discovering the falsehoods integral to their church's worship of God, and they must continue in maturing as Christians in the knowledge of the Lord instead of stagnating in pacifistic indifference to doctrine.
My brothers and sisters, we cannot go on tolerating the blatantly ego-centric individualism sold to us by worldly philosophers that tells us that God is what you want Him to be, and spirituality is simply a matter of looking to some higher power for guidance. We cannot afford to allow earnest men and women of these false churches to earnestly follow their leaders off the straight and narrow path. It is not loving to do so. Abandoning our brothers and sisters to their beliefs under the guise of tolerance when we have been blessed with the truth ourselves is in fact sinful. It is our duty as those whom God has led on the true path, to also go to others who have been sold a bill of goods and bring them to the true path as well.
It is this duty which, by the way, fuels my intense criticism of non-denominational organizations in this country. There is a large and growing population of Christians (whether in name or truth) who have simply decided that it is better to befriend and tolerate than to pursue God's truth. Rather than deal with divisive issues and potentially lose friends, these churches have elected simply to avoid all associations entirely and isolate themselves from all debate.
I must ask my fellow Christians to consider this strongly in the next few days: Is it Christian love to tolerate a liar when he misleads your brothers and sisters, or is it Christian love to rebuke your brother when he sins, and uphold the truth? In more direct terms, if you know your friend is becoming a Muslim and yet you say nothing, is it really any different than knowing your friend is joining a denomination you know has wrong beliefs, and saying nothing about it? If convincing them of the truth would bring them back to the straight and narrow path, would you do it? Or would you let them stray under the guise of love?
I will finish with some suggestions as to what manner of conduct should be appropriate for Christians as we live our lives in thankfulness to God for His Salvation. For one, we must never relinquish the active maturing process which is integral to our being Christians- that is, we must constantly be seeking to better our faith, to flesh it out with the meat of God's Word. We must be willing to challenge false beliefs and false believers, and never compromise on issues pertaining to God's Word. While we as sinners must concede that we will never be perfect in this life either in beliefs or in actions, we nevertheless cannot afford to settle for anything less than the best standard of truth made available to us by God's working in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. We must be willing to defend in all capacity's that standard of truth, and we must even be willing in love to challenge and rebuke the lies that take away from our belief in God. If we can do this- if we can uphold God's Word to the best of our ability, then there is nothing else that could be asked of us. This is not a matter of who looks the best in church, or who does the most good things. The fact is, so long as we are obsessed with the nearest-perfect worship of our God our works WILL show it, and the sins of the flesh shall pale before our work in building up Christ's church.
This is our call, and it is a call that we all must answer.