050816
 |
About a century ago the mainline denominations in America largely
abandoned the biblical doctrines of the deity of Christ, man's lost
condition as a sinner, and the need for a personal conversion to Christ.
Instead they focused on changing society's governmental and political
systems for what they thought was the good of mankind. Generally their
politics followed collectivistic and socialistic theories.
Dr. Luder Whitlock, former president of Reformed Theological
Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi tells of a denomination that in the
late nineteenth century considered a "Cup of cold water" a major
distinctive and featured that symbol on its letterhead. Following the
Fundamentalist/Modernist controversy of the early twentieth century,
however, they removed the symbol from their letterhead "to avoid any
identification with the liberals and their social gospel, although it
meant removing what had been one of their major distinctives prior to
the controversy" (RTS Reformed Quarterly, Spring 1999, page 20).
An unfortunate result of that mentality was the abandonment
of any social conscience by many conservatives for years. Preaching
against racial discrimination, for example, at a time when even churches
were deliberately, often militantly, segregated, was not thought of as
condemning sin (though it would have been, see Acts 10:34-35: James
2:9). Instead it was condemned as dabbling in politics or as abandoning
the gospel for the social gospel.
Whitlock adds, "If something is good we should embrace it,
even if those with whom we differ embrace it too. Not to do so is our
loss."
Christ faced a similar problem throughout his ministry. He
healed all who came to him, fed the multitudes, astounded people with
his teaching and in the early days of his ministry attracted throngs of
people. "The common people heard him gladly" (Mark 12:37).
Nevertheless the rulers of the people were determined not to believe
him or even to give him a hearing. When they asked him questions, it
was not because they wanted his viewpoint or would accept his
information. They were seeking ways to trap him. When they engaged him
in conversation, it was not to honestly decide whether he told the
truth, but by predetermination to find a way to destroy him.
They had lost all interest in truth. In their determination
to destroy an opponent, they missed the only really significant Truth.
Recognizing this human tendency can help us to improve our
reaction to those with whom we differ. If our ears are open to truth
and we can keep our pride out of the way, we may learn something truly
worthwhile, even from those who are seriously mistaken about other
things.
Cecil May Jr.
Faulkner University
Montgomery,
Alabama
|
Kent's Articles
Other Articles
 |
