I Want to be Presbyterian, But the Bible Won't Let Me

This may sound odd coming from me, but I'd really like to be Presbyterian. Specifically, I'd like to be a member of a local body of believers that are part of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). Just to avoid any confusion, please take note that the PCA is far different from the PC(USA), which is a far-leftward leaning denomination that has basically given up on the biblical gospel altogether.

I like the PCA for several reasons. First, Presbyterians tend to take the bible seriously. Second, they believe the gospel as presented in scripture. Third, they tend to be Christ-focused rather than man-focused when it comes to their gatherings. Fourth, they care about church history. Fifth, they sing the great hymns of the faith.

I realize that the above paragraph is full of generalizations. It's also based on some of my own subjective likes (hymns). So be it.

Although I like a great about this particular denomination, I just can't be a part of it (in the sense of traditional church membership). Why can I not? The reason is that the bible won't let me. Simply put, too many things about the PCA do not line up with what I read in scripture.

Five aspects of the PCA are huge roadblocks for me. They are, in no particular order:

1. Emphasizing institutional-style preaching
2. Practicing infant baptism
3. Holding to a strict, detailed statement of faith
4. Carrying out extra-biblical, local church membership
5. Governing through a multi-leveled, nonbiblical system

Of course, at least some of the above five apply to almost all denominations, so the PCA is hardly alone. And the PCA is one of the few that I actually like!

My main point in this post is that institutional-based denominations have far too many nonbiblical and blatantly unbiblical practices in place for me to consider being a part of any of them. Although they vary somewhat, almost all still maintain the institutional trio of professional pastor, "worship" ceremony, and expensive building.

As it has been for the past five years for me, so it will continue: no denominations. I'll continue to walk in the church wilderness to one degree or another, and will do so happily. I know it is the same for many of you. It can be lonely at times, but I'd rather follow God's plan for his church than man's.

A Visit with Christ Church Anglican

Most of our church family traveled about two hours away this past Sunday to spend time together at a lake in South Carolina. Although this sounded very nice to Alice and me, I am both exhausted by work and in chronic pain. Therefore, we decided to stay close to home and rest.

Since we had nothing scheduled, I decided to visit an Anglican church here in Savannah. The reason for my visit is that Christ Church Anglican has taken a strong stance for the gospel. A few years back they departed from the Episcopal Church in the USA. Christ Church left, quite simply, because the Episcopal denomination has drifted from the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Last year Christ Church was forced by the courts to surrender their building to the Episcopal Church. It is their stand for the gospel that made a visit worth it.

Another reason for my visit (our daughter Mary decided to come along with me) is that I had never been to an Anglican worship service. I knew going into it that it would be very "high churchish" and based in the Book of Common Prayer.  Although worship services are not my preferred manner of gathering with the church, I desired to express Christian unity by meeting together.

I knew I was in for something different when a number of folks walked down the aisle in robes to begin the service. It felt more Catholic than Baptistic. However, the themes were Protestant in content, focusing on the gospel of grace in Christ. In particular I loved the music. We were treated to singing "Praise to the Lord, the Almighty," "Amazing Grace," and "O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing." The recessional was to the tune of "Crown Him with Many Crowns." These are some of my favorites.

The teaching was excellent. The rector preached on the topic of the Kingdom of God. I appreciated his willingness to tackle a subject that many Christians know little about. I wish we had been able to dialog, but this was a worship service after all (no talking allowed out of turn). I was pleased that there was a time of prayer when anyone present could voice whatever prayers they had.

The entire service had an atmosphere of reverence, awe, solemnity, and majesty. There was clearly deep respect for who God is and what our place is before him. I respect the effort the staff put into arranging the service.

That said, I struggle with the very concept of worship services. I've written on this before so I won't go down that path here. Suffice it to say that this service was like any other in that it was led by the clergy, the laity were generally passive, it was scripted, and preaching was the biggest single component. There was little interaction between the people until the ceremony was concluded.

My biggest struggle was with the celebration of communion. Instead of being a full meal, it was the typical wafer and drink. The people lined up in a row, received the cracker from a rector, then handed it to another rector who dipped it in wine and then stuck it into their mouths. This reminded me way too much of a Catholic Mass. Worse than that, it looked nothing at all like what we see in the bible. Because of these issues, Mary and I abstained from taking part.

Despite these differences, I am very glad that we attended on Sunday. The people we talked to before and after the service were very kind. They are my brothers and sisters in Christ; therefore, I desire to be united with them. The folks of Christ Church have a love for the same Christ Jesus that I do. Spending time with them was a joy.

The worship service is something that I enjoyed, but would not want to take part in every week. It might, however, turn into something we do occasionally. The music is tremendous, the teaching solid, and the atmosphere one of awe. These are edifying aspects of their gathering.

I'm thankful for any church body that stands for the gospel of Jesus Christ. We may have significant differences in secondary doctrines, but we remain united in our head, King Jesus.

One Thing I Don't Respect About Roman Catholicism

In my previous post I wrote about respecting Roman Catholicism for honesty about its sources of authority: both scripture and tradition.

In fairness, I think I should mention something that I don't respect about Roman Catholicism. That thing is the tendency to allow tradition to trump scripture in various church beliefs and practices. Frankly, it doesn't bother me when Catholics (or anyone else for that matter) do things according to tradition when these things do not violate scripture. The problem rises when the traditions transgress in some way what scripture teaches/shows us.

I've included a photo of the pope for a reason. The Roman Catholic tradition of having a pope flies in the face of all scriptural evidence. The bible nowhere at all in any way whatsoever suggests that one man is the head of the church (other than Jesus Christ of course). Nowhere in scripture is there any hint that the Bishop of Rome will be the leader of the church. There is no "Vicar of Christ." To suggest that the apostle Peter was the first pope strains biblical interpretation to an absurd degree.

I've met many Catholics in my life. Their thoughts about and attitudes toward the pope ran a wide spectrum. Regardless, they still admitted that he is the head of the church.

This is a tradition that plainly violates what we see in the bible. Scripture tells us that Christ is the head. We are all equals within his body. There is no hierarchy. Those who are elders are called upon to lead in living Christlike lives for all of us to emulate. To be great in the church is to be a servant.

Within Roman beliefs and practices, there are many that violate scripture. There is of course the pope. Other violations include the Mass/Eucharist, the Vatican, Cardinals, priests, nuns, monks, Lent, infant baptism, penance, confirmation, holy orders, extreme unction, confession to priests, veneration of the saints, praying to saints, and various beliefs about Mary such as her being the queen of heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. Not all Catholics believe and/or practice all these things. However, they are very common within the Catholic church.

All of the above stem directly from allowing tradition to trump the bible in belief and practice.

My purpose in this post is not to bash Roman Catholicism. Rather, it is to focus on the danger of allowing our traditions to reign supreme in decision making. We would all do well to examine ourselves to see where our own traditions, whatever they may be, violate what God has shown us in the bible.

One Thing I Respect About Roman Catholicism

In a word the one thing I respect about Roman Catholicism is honesty.

I'm referring specifically to honesty as it relates to sources of authority for both belief and practice. Roman Catholicism has, at least since the Council of Trent, made it clear that both scripture and non-written tradition are legitimate sources of authority in what to believe and how to live this out.

Roman Catholics are honest about this. They do some things according to the bible, and other things according to their traditions. I realize that I'm speaking in generalities, but overall what I've stated is true. It is up to Catholics to determine what aspects of tradition and what parts of scripture to follow. When the two come in conflict, I'm not sure how they determine what to do. The popes past and present have dealt with many of these types of issues. Regardless, in the end Roman Catholicism is consistent and honest: both tradition and scripture are authorities.

(As a brief aside, I'm not suggesting that I agree with Rome in this; I'm simply stating that that Rome practices what it preaches.)

Now we turn to the broad segment of Christianity known as Protestantism. That's a big tent to be sure. However, a few things bind Protestants together. One of these is the declaration, like the Reformers, that scripture will be the highest authority in belief and practice (Sola Scriptura!). Some today go so far as to say that the bible is the only authority, but that's not what the Reformers thought. The key is that scripture takes the highest spot.

This is where most Protestants simply aren't honest. I'm not suggesting that Protestants are purposely lying, but rather that they have largely deceived themselves into thinking that they actually treat the bible as their highest authority.

Part of the difficulty is that Protestants in general actually are biblical about beliefs related to salvation. The gospel of grace, as taught in scripture, is well beloved and embraced by the vast majority of Protestantism.

However, and this is a big however, most Protestants do not actually adhere to scripture as their authority when it comes to church life. A cursory glance around American evangelicalism makes this fairly obvious.

It's interesting to look at the church we see in scripture, the church we see in Reformation days, and the church we see today. If scripture was actually Protestants' highest authority, then today's churches would look more like the first century church than the church of Luther's and Calvin's time. However, that's not the case. Today's Protestant churches in this country look, with modernization, much like the church from 500 years ago. There is some resemblance, but only some, to the first century church.

Protestants would do well to do one of two things. Either they should embrace scripture as their highest authority for both salvation and the church, or they should be honest (like Rome is) and state that both bible and tradition determine why they do what they do. What we have today is a dishonest ignorance on the part of most Protestants.

Let's at least be honest. We all, even if we aren't part of the institutional church, still do many things because of man-created tradition. It's healthy to admit this. Then we have a decision to make. We can either change to conform to biblical teachings or we can stay as we are. Let's at least be honest and not delude ourselves.

Rome is honest about this issue. For this I respect them. What about the rest of us?

Denominational Humor

Click directly on the graphic to enlarge.

Borrowed from thomasthedoubter.com (via John Armstrong) for a funny way to begin the work week.

Unity in Church Planting

I've heard it said that churches from different denominations can and should partner together to evangelize the world, but cannot plant churches together. What's the reason for this? Answer: they agree on the gospel message, but disagree on what the church is and should look like. For example, the thinking is that those who hold to infant baptism cannot plant churches with those who hold to believer's baptism because they disagree on the meaning of the church.

I used to agree with this line of thinking. Then we moved to South Asia.

When we arrived, we immediately craved interaction with other Christians. We soon met both South Asian Christians and foreign missionaries (the missionaries came from various countries, various sending agencies, and various denominations). We found that we wanted to work with all Christians, not just in evangelism but also in church planting.

There was one particular Christian Indian man who loved the Lord a great deal. We began talking about working closely together to spread the gospel in various places in India. Now that I think back on it, I have no idea what he believed about secondary issues.

How would this have worked? How can Christians of differing secondary beliefs also plant churches together? If we keep a few things in mind, it is no problem at all. First, we must remember that it is ultimately the Holy Spirit who plants churches, not us. We must follow His lead. Second, we should avoid trying to plant specific denominational churches that are defined by certain secondary beliefs. Third, we ought to sit with the new believers, open our bibles together, and trust the Spirit to guide the group decision making.

The Holy Spirit can be trusted. He will lead the new Christians to make right decisions about the church. Once they are indwelt by the Spirit, they can understand what God wants from His church as He has stated in the pages of the bible. It is the local believers who must make important decisions about church life.

As foreigners, we can give small amounts of guidance here and there, but we must avoid taking leadership roles. The decisions must come from the group. They need to decide how to carry out the one anothers, how to meet together, where to meet, how to celebrate the Lord's Supper, how to care for the poor in and out of the church, who and how to baptize, etc. It's very possible that they may make some decisions that we disagree with. So be it.

We can be united in church planting. We must simply let the Spirit lead, get out of the way, and encourage new Christians to let the scriptures inform their decision making. If we follow this pattern, we can work together with any other Christians

Doctrine Matters. So Does Unity.

We have all seen many Christians divide over doctrinal matters.  This is the primary reason for most of today's denominations.

Because of dissatisfaction with the disunity in the church, other Christians have downplayed the importance of doctrine altogether.  What we have is a false "either-or" situation; some Christians believe we must separate in order to preserve doctrine, while others emphasize unity to the point of ignoring doctrinal importance.

We must reject both of these extremes.  Doctrine is important.  So is unity.  In fact, the unity of the church is an important doctrine.  All  we have to do is read passages such as John 17 and I Corinthians 1 to see this.

House Church - Unity

One of the goals within the house church / simple church /organic church is to embrace unity and avoid division.  Specifically, all Christians are united in the person of Jesus Christ.  Since we are in Him, we are one body.  Everyone who holds fast to the biblical gospel is part of Christ's body, His church.

We strive to live out Ephesians 4:4-6, where Paul writes, "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, who is over all and through all and in all."

Along these same lines, the house church attempts to avoid any division related to what are commonly referred to as "secondary doctrines." Although doctrines of this type are important, they are not seen as worth dividing over.  They may include baptism, the Lord's Supper, spiritual gifts, church polity, etc.  Through the years many Christian denominations have formed because of division over secondary doctrines.  The house church rejects this idea.

I Think He Thinks I'm An Alien

Last night I met a man who probably thinks I'm an alien.

I was mopping when the owner of the daycare came by (we had never met; I'm employed by a cleaning company that contracts with the daycare). I was introduced to him by another worker as, "the preacher man." When I heard this, I purposely glanced behind myself as if to look for anyone else who could be a "preacher man." The owner then said not to be ashamed and to preach if God has called me to it (he does appear to be a Christian). I then said that all Christians should proclaim the gospel of Christ. He proceeded to give me a blank look. I could tell this conversation probably wasn't going to go anywhere profitable. He was beginning to think I'm an alien.

The daycare owner then asked if I'm Baptist, Methodist, etc. Sigh. I told him simply that I'm a follower of Jesus Christ. He responded, "Ahh. Non-denominational." Upon hearing that, I said that denominations can't be found anywhere in the bible. He gave me another blank look. This was further conformation to him that I'm an alien.

A couple minutes later has was talking with the worker who had introduced us. The owner was saying something about how having a lot of kids was too much work (ironic since he owns a daycare). Keep in mind that the other worker has five kids and I have three. When he pointed this out to the owner, the owner acted like we were both crazy. I guess he thinks even three kids are a lot these days. I responded to all this by saying that kids are a gift from the Lord. That statement went nowhere. Instead, the owner just looked at me. He was now convinced beyond a doubt that an alien is cleaning his daycare each night.

As I thought about this, I began to realize that although we both claim to be Christians, the daycare owner has a very different worldview than I do - at least as far as church and family are concerned. He believes in the popular "preacher man" view of the pastor. I clearly do not. He seems to support the existence of denominations. I do not. He thinks more than two kids equals a burden. I do not.

If I had known him better, I'd like to have asked him to support anything he said with scripture. Of course, he would not have been able to do so. His worldview, as is so often the case, is based on cultural norms instead of scripture.

What does the bible say about these things?

The bible tells us that all Christians are responsible to proclaim/preach the gospel. The bible also shows this proclaiming happening in the presence of non-Christians. We never see anyone preaching to the church during a gathering.

As for denominations, the bible does not mention them. Instead, the emphasis is upon unity in the church. All followers of Christ are to be one in Him. Division amongst believers is never portrayed as positive in scripture.

Finally, the bible tells us that children are a gift of God. He is the giver of life. The man with many children is seen as blessed. Children are never described as any sort of burden in the bible.

What should I now do? First, I hope to get to know this man better. If he is a Christian, I'd like to encourage him. I'd also like to eventually challenge some of his beliefs mentioned above.

Also, this experience was a good warning to me. It is so easy to simply adopt cultural values about all sorts of things instead of asking what the bible says about them. We can claim to have a biblical worldview, but in order to do this we must ask questions and seek answers through the pages of the bible. Instead of being prideful, my hope is that this man's views will challenge me to take a hard look at what I believe about a whole range of things.

Is what I believe actually biblical? And, is how I act actually biblical? Instead of falling into pride when seeing others' faults, we should be warned to look closely for our own. I hope I have the chutzpah to do so.

Angry About Sola Scriptura

I don't post all of the comments that people leave on this blog. The reason for this is that some are very angry in tone. Interestingly, some of the angriest people are those who oppose the doctrine of sola scriptura (When I use the term "sola scriptura," I'm referring to the belief that scripture alone is authoritative for belief and practice).

I find the whole thing fascinating. I've written several posts dealing with sola scriptura, and almost every time a few folks leave comments that are clearly driven by anger. I suppose the reason for this is that sola scriptura opposes unbiblical traditions. We all know that people, regardless of denomination, do not like it at all when you call their favored traditions into question.

As far as I can remember, the angry commenters have almost all been Roman Catholics. This is no surprise in light of Rome's multitude of traditions that have no biblical basis. The interesting part is that these Catholics have all tried to use scripture to make the case that sola scriptura is not, in fact, biblical. This seems inconsistent to me. If they don't hold to sola scriptura, then why are they basing their arguments on scripture in the first place? It seems like they would refer instead to a statement from the Vatican about scripture and tradition both being authoritative.

The reality is that the bible can be an inconvenient book. It calls us to lives of self-sacrifice and suffering. In general, we don't like this. Instead, we create traditions around ourselves that make us feel comfortable. Roman Catholics are clearly guilty of this; this is why they despise the doctrine of sola scriptura. If Catholics suddenly adopted sola scriptura as true, they would have to immediately jettison many of their dearly held beliefs and practices.

Before we Protestants get too happy with ourselves, we had better be honest. Although we may say we believe in sola scriptura, we also have plenty of traditions that are based more on personal preference than on scripture. One example that I talk about quite a bit on this blog is church gatherings. What we see happen in most churches on Sundays bears little resemblance to what we see in scripture of the gathering of the church. Why the big difference? Traditions have developed over the years that we like. We don't challenge these.

I'll say this for Catholics: they are consistent. They say they don't believe in sola scriptura and act like they don't believe it.

We Protestants say we hold to sola scriptura, but we don't really act like we believe it. If we did, many of our traditions would quickly have to become extinct.

Instead of getting angry, let's be willing to really live according to sola scriptura. Let's compare all our beliefs and practices with what we see in the bible. Let's honestly keep what is biblical and get rid of the rest.

Let's be careful not to be like the Pharisees of Mark 7. In Mark 7:8, Jesus says, "You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men."

Let's reject traditions and instead truly hold to scripture alone.

Disagreeing But Still United

Division over secondary doctrines is widely accepted in the modern church. Division over secondary doctrines is also blatantly unbiblical. We give a fancy name to divisions over secondary doctrines: denominations.

When we look to the bible, we see very clearly that the dividing line is the gospel.

In Galatians 1:8-9, Paul writes, "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed."

When we look to John 17, we very clearly see Christ's desire for the unity of His church. In John 17:20-23, Jesus prays, "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me."

So, according to the scriptures, it is the gospel that unites brothers and sisters in Christ. Technically speaking, of course, it is God Himself who unites us and is our Father. His gospel is the way that we are united. This is God's plan.

The bible speaks of NO secondary doctrines around which we should divide from other Christians. We are never told to divide over issues such as baptism, the Lord's Supper, spiritual gifts, church polity, views on predestination/free will, bible versions, etc.

When churches in the N.T. (see Corinth and Philippi for example) were dealing with division, Paul told them to stop it. Division over issues lesser than the gospel is always seen in a negative light in the N.T.

Today, however, our churches are splintered into many different denominations. Some of this needs to take place because some denominations have rejected the gospel. However, there are also many denominations that adhere to the gospel yet remain divided.

For example, many Christians refuse to meet with one another because they hold different beliefs on baptism. Baptism is certainly an important issue. However, the bible nowhere even suggests that we should separate over it. The same can be said for a whole host of other issues.

Some Christians will say that they really are united, but just don't gather together. I find their reasons for not gathering together to be completely pragmatic and unbiblical.

What is a better way? My suggestion is that we, as Christians, unite around the gospel of Jesus Christ. Based on this and this alone will we unite or be divided. We should make this clear and be firm about. Let us agree that nothing sub-gospel will divide us.

Basically, we will be saying that while we may disagree on some things, we will still be united.

Once we make this decision, then we will be forced to start talking through some of these other issues. As we do so, we will gain deeper understanding of why others believe differently than we do about issues such as baptism, spiritual gifts, etc. We may come to gain greater respect for their positions, even if we still disagree with them. The more we talk, the more likely we are to find that our positions are closer than we thought.

Division within the church is, quite simply, disobedience. God expects His children to be united.

I hope denominations eventually go the way of the Dodo Bird.

Unity is not an option. Let's embrace our unity in the gospel of Christ.

Interesting Map

This map is not "news," but I still find it interesting. Click on the image to see it in detail.