July 2024 - Pastor Rich Eddy

The Debates Go On: #4, the Final Chapter!

As we move through the history of the Christian Church, we now come to the present day. Fortunately, since all the controversies over the doctrines of the Church have been resolved over the preceding centuries, we no longer have any debates to consider. No, wait. . . there may be one or two debates still unresolved, just a few issues that are new to modern times that divide Christians today. In this, the last of my series about debates in the Church, I will present just a few current issues. Because any one of these could take entire books to discuss fully, they will just be summarized here.

The Return of Christ. Beginning in the early 1800s, people began to try to calculate when Christ will return. Using biblical prophecies about Christ’s return, a popular preacher named William Miller predicted 1844 as the time of the return. There was widespread anticipation of that date, but when it came and went with no return, it was called the Great Disappointment. Some sects interpreted Miller’s theory in news ways, leading to groups like the Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Since that time there have been many date-setters, but none have been right (“But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” Matthew 24:36) The various views today agree on the biblical texts, but interpret them differently in the following ways:
- Pre-millennials: After a period of Great Tribulation, Christ will return in the future, then rule on earth a 1000 years. After 1000 years Satan will be released to deceive the nations, leading to a final battle before Christ wins and issues in the eternal reign.
- Post-millennials: The Gospel will spread, the Church will rule over the earth in peace for 1000 years, then when Christ returns, the Church will present the world to him as his kingdom.
- Amillennials: The 1000 years refer to the Church Age, when Christ rules over his people. Christ will return at any time to end history and rule eternally. This is the general Lutheran view.
- Preterists: Christ already returned in judgment in 70 AD, destroying Jerusalem (by way of the Romans) and ending Israel, which had rejected him. Jesus warned the Christians to flee when they saw the battle coming; they did, and survived the destruction. There may be a second coming when the unrealized prophecies will be fulfilled.
- Pre-tribulation: Christians will be raptured out of the world, followed by seven years of the Great Tribulation, then return with him to rule during the Millennium. During the Millennium, the Jews will accept Christ in mass. This is the popular view espoused by the Left Behind books and movies, but was only introduced in the 1830s through purported visions.
- Mid-tribulation: Christians will be raptured out of the world half-way during the Great Tribulation, sparing them from the worst of that period. Jews will convert, and Christians will return during the Millennium.
- Post-tribulation: Christians will go through the Great Tribulation, then be raptured to be with Christ to rule during the Millennium.
- Pan-millennials: A made-up term meaning, “I don’t care which view is right; it will all pan out in the end.” Trust God for his timing!
Liberal vs Conservative. These terms refer to views of the Bible and doctrines, not to political terms (though in practice, there is much correspondence). Conservative theologians and pastors believe the Bible is God’s word, inspired, infallible and inerrant, and therefore the only rule for faith and life. Liberal pastors teach that the Bible records what people wrote about God, but must be interpreted by modern understanding and science to find what truth it may contain. Thus, for example, a conservative pastor teaches that God restricts sexuality between one man and one woman in marriage. A liberal will interpret that because God is love, he accepts all kinds of sexuality as long as people “love” each other. This debate has caused splits in every major denomination over “gay” marriage and ordination. To a liberal, truth is relative and may be found in all religions.
Charismatic Gifts. The historical understanding of the spiritual gifts (charismata) is that the sign gifts (tongues, prophecy, and healing) ended with the death of the apostles and their immediate disciples in the first century. On the other hand, gifts like hospitality, love, and faith have always been active in Christians. This view is called cessationism. But a different view called continuationism became popular around 1900 with the start of Pentecostalism, which taught a second baptism of the Holy Spirit. In that second baptism, gifts such as tongues, prophecy, and healing miracles were said to be bestowed on all Christians; implied by this teaching was that the lack of speaking in tongues meant a person was not really saved. Since the early days of Pentecostalism, there have been several waves of charismatic revivals. Today we are in the “Third Wave” which teaches miraculous signs and wonders to reach unbelievers with powerful acts. Some in this group claim to be like the original apostles, speaking words of God with the same authority and power. Churches opposed to this, claim the power of God is in his Word, which the Holy Spirit uses to convict the heart without flashy signs and wonders. A middle view is that while the Spirit may endow a person with a supernatural gift, the Spirit gives as he wills, and no gift is required as a sign of salvation. (Hebrews 2:4 – “gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.” and 1 Corinthians 12:11 – “All these [gifts] are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.”)
Egalitarian vs Complementarian. One controversy which has ties to the liberal/conservative dispute is the question of the roles of women in the church. While everyone agrees that men and women are both created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27 – “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”), that Jesus died to save both, and both are called to minister in various ways, the disagreement is whether women are called to be pastors in the Church.
- Egalitarians point to Galatians 3:8 (“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”) and to the example of women in the Bible who had some leadership role (Deborah, Priscilla, and Anna). They want the Church to be in line with modern feminism.
- Complementarians teach that while both men and women have roles in the church, their natures and roles are complimentary, and not identical. Specifically, only men are allowed to be pastors. They point to Paul’s instructions in 1 Timothy 2:12- “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man.” They also point to the instructions for elders and overseers as being male-specific (“Husband of one wife” -1 Timothy 3:2) and that the 12 Disciples were all men. They also point to once a church adopts women pastors, they soon will be open to gay ordination and marriage. The AALC holds to the complimentary view.*
Creation vs. Evolution. For millennia, Jews and Christians accepted the first words of the Bible: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1 and the chapters that followed). There were occasional skeptics, but the Church taught creation ex nihilo, that God created everything in six literal days out of nothing by the power of his word (Christ) and therefore all creation belonged to him and was sustained by his will. But beginning with the publishing of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (1859), the theory of evolution grew to dominate the scientific world and many churches as well. Churches’ “old time religion” was rocked to its core, because it was evident that a recent, six-day creation by God could not be reconciled with the theory of millions of years of evolution of man and the animals. As Christians wrestled with the contradictions, several ideas were adopted:
- Theistic evolution: God created everything, but did so using evolution over vast periods of times. (This was my view in junior high, when I “thought like a child” – 1 Corinthians 13:11).
- Day-age creationism: the days of Genesis 1 are not literal 24 hour days, but are much longer periods. (But how could green plants created on Day 3 survive for ages before the sun was created on Day 4?)
- Gap theory: there is a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, which gave the earth a long time to evolve before God intervened to create man. In Genesis 1:2 the earth was made chaotic (“without form and void”). From verse 3 everything was put in order. God chose one hominid to be given special intelligence and spirit.
- Apparent Age: God created everything with apparent age. If he intended for us to see the stars, for example, their light had to be created en route even if they were set at astronomically great distances.
- Scientific Creationism: Uses information collected by creation-believing scientists to disprove evolution and confirm the biblical account. Some are new-earth creationists (the earth is really only 10,000s of years old), while some are old-age creationists (accepting millions of years as per secular scientists). I believe the new age creationism is correct, having read much of their literature and data.**
- Finally, some churches accept the secular theories of evolution as being true, while saying “the Bible is not a scientific text” but just tells of man’s spiritual development by encounters with God. By this choice, these churches lift the current theories as the authority above the Bible; where a conflict exists, they choose evolution as the real answer.

There you have it! No more debates. Just one church, united in every way. (Not!) But Paul tells us what we have is “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all,” (Ephesians 4:4-6). Therefore, let us proclaim the one true Gospel that saves us all – “that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Let us have unity where possible, and charity where we disagree. But in all things, let Christ be proclaimed!

Now may the Lord bless you, the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you, the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace. Amen.

Read: Your choice of passages listed above!

* The complementarian view is supported by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood at CBMW.org for more information.

**The scientific creationist position is presented by several organizations, including: The Institute for Creation Research which has an awesome museum in Dallas, TX (ICR.org); and Answers in Genesis, which as a museum and a life-size replica of Noah’s Ark in Kentucky (answersingenesis.org).

The Debates Go On, Part 3!

The Protestant Reformation was one of the most significant events in both Church and World history. During its early years, many debates arose between the established Roman Catholic Church, and those who tried to correct what they saw as incorrect beliefs and practices in the established Church. At first, the reformers hoped to convince Church leaders, such as the pope, to make improvements, but soon it became apparent that the Church would resist their demands, even to the point of violence and excommunication. Because most political leaders were on the side of the Church, they used force to enforce the Church’s condemnations.

It wasn’t until some princes began to side with the reformers (such as Frederick the Wise in Luther’s state of Saxony), that the protestors were free from persecution and able to continue their reform movement. Eventually, the disagreements turned to full scale war between Protestants and Catholics in what was called the Thirty Years War, which lasted from 1618 to 1648, resulting in the deaths of up to 8 million people. In the end, a treaty would allow each ruler to determine whether his realm would be Catholic or Protestant.

Pre-Reformation movements. Beginning over two hundred years prior to the Reformation, there were similar attempts to reform the Church. One was in the 1300’s led by John Wycliffe, called the “Morning Star” of the Reformation, who translated the Bible into English. He said the Scriptures held authority over the Pope and the Church, and that the elements in Holy Communion remained bread and wine. He was condemned as a heretic, and after he died, his bones were dug up and burned.

A second attempt in the 1400’s was by a Bohemian (Czech) named Jan Hus. Hus agreed with John Wycliffe about the authority of Scripture, argued against the sale of indulgences, the appointment of Church officials based on payment of money (called simony), and the Church’s political ambitions rather than the preaching of the Gospel. He denied that the Pope was head of the Church, claiming that only Christ was the head. He established worship services in Czech instead of Latin. Finally, he was commanded to appear at the Council of Constance (Germany) in 1415 to answer charges of heresy. Though given a safe conduct pass, when he got there he was arrested and burned at the stake. His followers, called Hussites, continued to resist the authorities, until they were defeated by Catholic armies in 1434. But the spirit of Reformation continued.

The Protestant Reformation. October 31, 1517 is the date given as the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, as this was the date when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Saxony (Germany). His questions (which he offered up for debate – maybe he read my blogs?) were critiques of the Church’s sale of indulgences. Almost immediately, copies of his theses were printed and distributed across Europe. While a lot could be said about Martin Luther and the other Protestant reformers, we’re only going to look at the issues which came up for debate between the Catholic Church and the reformers, and between the reformers themselves.

Justification: by faith or works or papal decree? The Catholic Church taught that when God gave grace to people, it enabled them to do good works which in turn saved them. The Pope also claimed the power to forgive sins here and in the hereafter, thus allowing people to go to heaven. As holder of the keys to the kingdom, the Pope claimed authority over forgiveness and condemnation. Against this doctrine, the reformers claimed that we are justified by God’s grace through faith alone. The Lutheran confessions call this “the chief article of the Church,” and they appeal to Paul’s words in Romans 3:28 – “For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law,” and Romans 1:17 – “For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.””
Baptism. The meaning and practice of Baptism was hotly debated. Both Catholics and Lutherans agreed that baptism was a sacrament, by which God bestowed saving grace on his people. But to the Catholics, baptism only forgave a person’s original sin (what they were born with); subsequent sins required communion or a priest’s absolution for their forgiveness. On the other hand, Lutherans said all of a person’s sins were forgiven in baptism. Contrary to both of these were the other Protestants (called Reformed) who denied the sacraments and just said baptism was just an “ordinance,” done to show one’s faith by obedience to Christ’s command. Many of the Reformed churches refused to baptize infants, calling their practices “believers’ baptisms”, even re-baptizing their members who had been baptized as children. During the Reformation, such churches were called “anabaptists,” where the prefix “ana” meant “again.” These distinctions continue to this day.
Holy Communion. This period saw major debates over the meaning and practice of the Lord’s Supper. To the Catholic Church, during Communion, the priest would call down Christ into the elements and sacrifice him all over again. Only the priest drank the wine to prevent the lay from spilling Christ’s blood (although the first time Luther served communion as a priest, he shook so hard he spilled the wine himself!). They also taught transubstantiation, the turning of the bread and wine into flesh and blood. They also “reserved” the leftover elements as the transformed body of Christ. The Lutherans rejected the re-sacrifice of Christ, distributed both elements to everyone, and though treating the unused bread and wine with respect, denied that Christ was in them apart from when they were given out in Communion. Lutherans and other Protestants also rejected the doctrine of transubstantiation; Lutherans teaching that we receive the true body and blood supernaturally “in, with, and under” the bread and wine, while Reformed saying it is just symbolic, an ordinance and not a means of grace.
Other Sacraments. How many sacraments (means of grace) are there? The Catholic Church claims there are 7: baptism, communion, confirmation, absolution, marriage, ordination, and last rites. Lutherans and some protestants say there are only two: baptism and communion. Other protestants call those two sacraments, ordinances, that is done by obedience to Christ but not conferring any grace.
Purgatory. The Catholic Church taught the existence of Purgatory, a place after death between heaven and hell, where a person would pay the consequences of their sins by having them burned out of them (purged) so they could then go to heaven. Only the pope could shorten a person’s time of “purging.” This unbiblical doctrine was rejected by all the protestant reformers, since Christ declared on the cross that his work was “finished.”
Indulgences. A real argument was whether the Pope could forgive sins (and let people who died out of purgatory) in return for a person’s payment of money or doing some worthy work. This was a great fundraiser for the Church, which at the times was building St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican and funding a war against the Turks in eastern Europe. Protestants rejected such a practice.
Authority. The question was, who had the final authority for Christians: the Bible, the Pope, or Church Councils (controlled by the pope). The Catholic Church said that the Pope stood in the place of Christ, and could decree what was true based on “oral traditions” passed down from Christ but not written in the Scriptures. Luther and the other reformers claimed that only the Scriptures had that authority (Sola Scriptura).
Celibacy of Priests. The Catholic Church demanded that priests could not marry, in that they were “married” to the Church (the Bride of Christ). Luther disagreed and married a former nun to prove his point.
Ordination of Clergy. According to the Catholic, Anglican, and Episcopal churches today, communion cannot be real unless a duly ordained priest “confects” the mass by his words calling down Christ into the elements. (The magicians’ phrase, “hocus pocus” is a corruption of the priest’s words when he blesses the communion bread: “Hoc est corpus meaum.” Say it aloud!) These churches believed in Apostolic Succession, the idea that only men who were ordained in an unbroken line from Peter to the popes to bishops, could be priests. The reformers said that the local congregations had the power to ordain, based on the “succession” of the apostles’ teachings (the Bible).
Election. No time to go into it here, but the major protestant churches divided over the question of God’s election of who will be saved. On one side were the Calvinists, who held to double predestination (that Jesus died only for the Elect, whom God chose to be saved, while God also predetermined that everyone else will be damned); and the Arminians, who taught that Jesus died for everyone’s sins, so all people could be saved through faith. (1 John 2:2 – “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.“). Lutherans believe a middle position, saying that man cannot save himself, apart from the work of the Holy Spirit through the Gospel. Luther put it this way in the Small Catechism: “I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel.”

We need to stop here. As you can see, many of these debates that began during the Reformation continue until today. In addition, there are a number of new debates that have arisen in the “modern Church.” We will look at those new debates in the final blog of this series: “The Debates Go On: The Final Chapter!”

Now may the Lord bless you and keep you, the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you, the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace. Amen.

Read: Ephesians1:11-14; Ephesians 2:1-11; 1 John 2:1-2.

The Debates Go On, Part 2!

The recent Presidential debate so inspired me, that I decided to look into famous debates that have happened over the centuries in the Christian Church. My previous blog began that study, looking at issues the Church faced in its first few centuries, deciding a number of doctrines in the light of various heresies which cropped up and threatened to destroy the Gospel. For example, the debate whether Jesus was just a divine being that only had the appearance of man (the Docetists) or a mere human who had been endowed with some divine attributes (Arianism). The Church rejected both ideas, affirming that Jesus was both true God and true man, as stated in the Nicene Creed.

Coincidentally, the Christian satire site, The Babylon Bee, just posted an article with the headline, “Scholars Now Believe Apostle Paul Spent Five Hours Per Day Arguing Online With Other Christians.” Considering all the problems his letters to the churches address, if the internet existed back then, he could well have spent that much time trying to correct them!

Before we consider the Church in the Middle Ages, there is one more ancient debate to consider: the Donatist Controversy. The question here was what happens when a priest is forced by the Roman Emperor to make a “donation” to a pagan god under punishment of law: does that render the acts of that priest (baptism and communion) invalid? The Church decided that no, the Christian sacraments are still valid, regardless of the priest’s sins or even lack of faith. This means that even today, the means of grace are still valid, even if the pastor is a fraud and an unbeliever. It is God who makes the sacraments valid, not the man.

But, now we leave the ancient church and move into medieval times, to see what debates the Church had to resolve. Unfortunately, some debates were not resolved in universally accepted manners, leading to church splits and the rise of new denominations that are still with us today.

1. First, there was the debate over the preeminence of the Roman Pope. When the Bishop of Rome tried to assert his authority over the entire Christian Church, his claim was rejected by many bishops in other regions of Christendom, such as in the areas which came to be known as the Eastern Orthodox Church, and in the Northern African Churches, all of which had their own bishops. The split was formalized in the Great Schism of 1054, when East (Greek) and West (Latin) churches condemned each other and broke communion. This condemnation was not removed until the Catholic-Orthodox Joint Declaration of 1965. The split, however, continues to this day.

2. The debate over predestination. Most theologians of the medieval Church believed in predestination, the doctrine that God determines ahead of time who will be saved (Ephesians 1:11, “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will. . .”). The debate arose over what came to be called double predestination, whether God had also predestined certain people to damnation. According to this, a person’s faith was irrelevant, other than God determining whether that person would have faith. This debate arose as early as the 800’s, but continued through the Reformation (which we will consider in the next blog).

3. The debate over Holy Communion. What do we receive during Holy Communion? Do we eat bread and wine, or the actual flesh and blood of Jesus? Do the elements miraculously transform on the altar by the priests’ words? Or is what we eat merely symbolic of Christ’s body? This became an important debate in the Church. One view was called the “realistic” view, which said the bread and wine turned miraculously into actual flesh and blood (transubstantiation); the other, the “symbolic view,” said that the elements remained bread and wine and gave spiritual benefits when eaten. This debate arose in the 850’s, and continues to this day, even though the Roman Church decided on transubstantiation.

4. The debate between Faith versus Reason. As a result of the Crusades beginning in the 1o00’s, the works of ancient Greek philosophers became known through the Arabs who had preserved them. One that had an enormous impact was Aristotle and his call to reason. The impact this had was on the question reason played in our faith. Eventually this would give rise to the Enlightenment (1700’s), and to humanism, which made man the source of knowledge and truth, but for centuries before that, there was a huge conflict between truths learned through reason (including science and philosophy), and God’s revealed knowledge through the Scriptures. That’s why Galileo could be imprisoned for his scientific discoveries as being “opposed to faith.”

In the Catholic Church, St. Thomas Aquinas formed what became known as “Scholasticism” that employed a critical method of philosophical analysis predicated upon Aristotle’s teachings. By doing so, scholars sought to learn all attainable truth, whether revealed or not. Many of the universities of this time were founded on such teachings and philosophical methods. One of the products of this school of thought was the theory of transubstantiation, which used the Aristotelian categories of “essence” and “accidents” to describe the mass. In that view, the elements, when blessed, retained their accidents -(their physical form) but changed their essence (their actual nature). Luther argued against this view, saying that the Church should not base its doctrine on a pagan philosopher, but on the words of Christ in Scripture. Luther recited Jesus’s words at the Last Supper, when Jesus said, “This is my body, this is my blood,” as proof we receive Christ’s true body and blood.

5. The debate between Church and State. The Christian Church went from being persecuted, to tolerated (Constantine’s Edict of Milan in 313 AD), to become the official religion of the Roman Empire in 380 AD with the decree of the Edict of Thessalonica. But when the Roman empire was sacked by the barbarians, the Christian Church became the default unifying force in Europe. For one thing, it was a Pope (Leo I) who saved Rome from Attila the Hun in 451 AD, not by force of arms, but by prayer and persuasion. Also, when Europe was united under the Emperor Charlemagne, it was another pope, Pope Leo III, who crowned him Holy Roman Emperor on Christmas Day in 800 AD. That set the pattern for the church as supreme over state.

However, throughout this period, tensions and struggles for power between kings and Popes continued. Part of this was philosophical/theological, but much had to do with money and political control. For example, German bishops of the period had castles and lands, and could enforce taxes and river tolls on boats.

Problems occurred when the Church tried to enforce allegiance to the faith or to religious authority by the power of the State, such as through various Inquisitions, and when the State claimed power over the Church, such as when Henry VIII of England formed the Church of England and declared himself as the head of that Church (and disbanded Catholic convents and monasteries in England, Wales, and Ireland, and seized their wealth and assets).

One doctrine which arose was the idea of God’s two hands: his right hand the church, and his left hand the state. Each had its own God-ordained roles to play in the affairs of men. One to proclaim the Gospel, the other to use the Law to refrain evil. Luther called this division the “proper” work of God (by the Church’s proclaiming salvation through the Gospel), and the “alien” work of God, restraining evil by the power of governments. This is also called the “Two kingdoms” theory. Both are instituted by God to do his works and must be respected. (Romans 13:1 “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.“)

These and other debates continued through the medieval period, and affect us even today. Our First Amendment addresses the Church/State debate by establishing freedom of religion, saying: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” However, most recently, the State ordered churches to be shut down for the COVID pandemic, citing public health reasons. Some churches refused to do so, claiming freedom of religion, which is in keeping with the “Two kingdoms” doctrine.

We have now come to the end of medieval times. Before us now are the debates of the Reformation, which we will consider in the next blog, known, to no surprise, as Part 3 of The Debates Go On!

Now may the Lord bless you and keep you, the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you, the Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace. Amen.

Read: Romans 13:1-7; 1 Corinthians 11:22-24; Ephesians 1:11-14.