Home » Posts tagged 'change'

Tag Archives: change

Changes in Personal Belief and the Effects on Relationships (part two)

Part One

Very often I tell people that I don’t know if I’m done changing in doctrine and practice.  As I get older, I am changing less, but I haven’t found that changing ends.  I think I’m done and then I encounter something else or another way I might need to change.

Changes

Other people always want me to change.  When I evangelize I encounter others every week who want me to change in my beliefs, and I don’t.  When I try to help others change, I cannot in good faith attempt to do that without the willingness to change myself.  If I was not willing to change in a discussion of doctrine, I would call that, being closed minded.  I expect open mindedness from others who I want to change, so I must be willing too.

In all my years of working for the Lord in and through churches, I have watched many changes on the landscape of churches and religious institutions in the United States.  As I grew up, I rarely heard an expository sermon.  Then I would attend preaching meetings and hear little exposition.  Now I hear exposition for half the sermons at the same conference.  I see this as a good change.

I have also seen many bad changes, so many that churches are worse today than ever.  The worst changes are not doctrinal so much.  They are cultural.  The culture of church in the United States changed.  It sadly followed the world, the spirit of the age.  This then affects the whole country in a very negative way.

Changes in doctrine and practice followed the culture in the United States.  Many churches don’t even know they changed.  It occurred slowly over a long period of time, like watching a toddler grow up to a teenager.  It was slow, but the outcome is very noticeable.

Change and Relationships

Because change can be bad, very bad, sometimes any change, especially if it isn’t a more conservative one, can seem bad.  As a parent, maybe you have changed the rules or the code of conduct at home.  You gave the children more liberty than they had.  You had good intentions for loosening up on the standards.  That could look like a change for the worse to some people.  In fact, a parent may change his approach to teach discernment, so a way of helping his children.

Very often someone won’t change because of its potential effect on his relationships.  Others will criticize him for changing.  They may threaten him not to change.  He doesn’t want to face that.  Almost every change I’ve ever made affected relationships and sometimes in a major way.

When someone takes one position and changes to another, it might look like something is wrong.  Why did he change?  The truth doesn’t change.  He believes and practices the truth.  Is he forsaking the truth in some way?

Sanctification

I agree that the truth doesn’t change.  It doesn’t.  We must change though.  It’s part of our sanctification.  2 Corinthians 3:18 says:

But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit.

You can see that Paul uses the controversial “C” word, “changed.”  Jesus doesn’t change.  You must though.

It is even harder to change something as a leader.  Whenever you change as a leader, people you’ve led will question the change.

Knowledge

When a leader changes in an area that he himself taught or preached, so that people followed, it might be very hard for the followers.  This is one reason why as a leader you have to be very sure about something you teach or preach.  Nonetheless, it can and will happen.  You thought you understood fully.  You thought you did.  Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:12:

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Belief and practice relates to knowledge, something Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 12-14 among the spiritual gifts.  Even though God gifts in knowledge, a person on this side of glory still sees through a glass darkly.  He has knowledge.  He still needs more knowledge until his glorification.  Not until he sees Jesus face to face will he not need knowledge anymore.

Replay

Mulligan

I haven’t played golf much, but I understand playing golf and hitting some bad shots.  It will happen.  Among those who play golf as a hobby or for exercise, they understand the idea of a mulligan.  Everyone knows you will hit a tee shot into the woods.  You tee up another ball and start over.  You give yourself a mulligan.

Even if you try to get everything right as a leader, you still need a few mulligans.  You see through a glass darkly.  You are trying to see through a glass clearly.  If you are a preacher, did you ever preach a sermon, and you had to come back and correct something you said?  I have.  I hate it when I have to do it.  Very much, I would rather not do that.  I’m always afraid that I’ll lose the trust of the people if I come back to make the correction.

Editorial Process

Readers probably relate to the editorial process.  You edit and find mistakes.  When you think you have them all,  you read again and find more mistakes.  You edit.  When you think you’ve got that all done and then give the piece to someone else to read, he finds many more mistakes.  You publish the piece.  Readers find more errors in the published document, something you hate the worst.  It’s too late.  Corrections must occur now in the next edition.

Some might say that we don’t get any mulligans in real life.  I would say, hopefully we do.  We all need mulligans in this life.  Christians should understand that better than anyone.

Dress Rehearsals

A statement I often use is this:  “Life has no dress rehearsals.”  At various times of my life, I directed dozens of plays and programs.  I’m not promoting drama as an element of worship.  We had dress rehearsals for the plays and programs in our school.  I am glad we had them.

It’s true that life doesn’t often have a dress rehearsal.  Sometimes I thought I believed exactly right.  It wasn’t until later that I found that a particular belief came from a tradition and I didn’t know it.  I thought I had studied that myself.  Once I did study it, I wondered how I defended that position.

Defending Positions

Tradition

Sometimes what will happen is that we have a belief or practice based upon a tradition and we teach it or preach it.  At some point someone challenges the belief or practice.  Rather than admit that we got that from tradition, we scrape up some arguments to defend the tradition.  The tradition, maybe not a scriptural teaching, becomes more entrenched.

I’m not opposing all tradition.  Paul uses the word (2 Thess 3:6) in a positive manner.  Tradition isn’t enough for keeping the position though.  Bad traditions can continue when we defend all traditions.

Inconsistency or Principled?

I’m fine with the word, inconsistent.  It closely relates to another good word, principled.  I noticed that some of the same people who attacked the January 6 protestors defended the Tennessee capital protestors.  The attack was inconsistent.  It wasn’t principled.

If we get further information about some position or issue and it merits a change, it is principled to change.  It is not inconsistent.  Changing might be easier.  It could be harder.  Whether it is easier or harder to change may not relate to consistency or principle.  It relates to the reaction of other people and your future relationships.

Further Information

Let’s say that in the morning, you tell your children they must go to bed at 9pm.  You get home at 9:15pm.  Your children are still up.  You say, “Get to bed.”  The oldest child asks, “Can I ask you a question?”  You say, “Yes.”  He says, “Mom said we could stay up, because school was cancelled for tomorrow.”  That’s new information that you didn’t have.  You can change.  You can think about what you said before, understand that you didn’t have all the information, and you can change your position.  It isn’t inconsistent.

Evaluation of Leaders

Paul saw division in the church at Corinth.  One major reason for division was bad evaluation of leaders.  When leaders think of the evaluation of others, it can affect what they do in either a good or a bad way.  I am not saying that they shouldn’t listen.  Paul called the leaders, the “ministers of Christ” (1 Corinthians 4:1).

“Ministers” translates the Greek word for “galley slaves.”  The galley slaves work together on the oars, moving the ship forward, because they have one master.  He calls out the rhythm of the oars.  This simplifies the process for them.  They’ve got one person to please.  The person most important to please as a leader is Christ Himself.

The Regular History of Clever New Interpretations, Teachings, or Takes on and from Scripture: Socinianism

One way to get a Nobel prize in something, you’ve got to break some new ground or discover something no one has ever seen.  In the world, the making of a printing press or light bulb changes everything.  People still try to invent a better mousetrap.  It happens.  The phone replaced the telegraph and now our mobile devices, the phone.

Everyone can learn something new from scripture.  You might even change or tweak a doctrine you’ve always believed.   On the whole, you don’t want to teach from the Bible what no one has ever heard before.  The goal is the original intent and understanding of the Author.

From the left comes progressivism.  The U. S. Constitution, just over two hundred years old, means something different than when it was written.  Loosely constructed, it has a flexible interpretation into which new meanings arise.  Hegelian dialectics say a new thesis comes from synthesis of antithesis and a former thesis.  Everything can be improved.

Early after the inspiration and then propagation of the Bible, men found new things no one ever saw in scripture.  Many of these “finds” started a new movement.  People have their fathers, the father of this or that teaching, contradictory to the other, causing division and new factions and denominations.  Some of these changes become quite significant, a majority supplanting the constituents of the original teaching.

At the time of the Reformation, it was as if the world first found sole fide and sole scriptura.  Men often call justification the Reformation doctrine of justification.  This opened a large, proverbial can of worms.  Many could read their own Bible in their own language.  Others now dug into their own copy of the original languages of scripture.  Skepticism grew.  “If we didn’t know this before, what else did they not tell us?”  It became a time ripe for religious shysters and this practice hasn’t stopped since then.

Socinus

The Italian, Laelius Socinus, was born in 1525 into a distinguished family of lawyers.  Early his attention turned from law to scripture research.  He doubted the teachings of Roman Catholicism.  Socinus moved in 1548 to Zurich to study Greek and Hebrew.  He still questioned established doctrine and challenged the Reformers.  Laelius wrote his own confession of faith, which introduced different, conflicting beliefs.  They took hold of his nephew, Faustus Socinus, born in 1539.

Faustus rejected orthodox Roman Catholic doctrines.  The Inquisition denounced him in 1559, so he fled to Zurich in 1562.  There he acquired his uncle’s writings.  His doubt of Catholicism turned anti-Trinitarian.  The Reformation did not go far enough for Socinus.  His first published work in 1562 on the prologue of John rejected the essential deity of Jesus Christ.

Socinus’s journeys ended in Poland, where he became leader of the Minor Reformed Church, the Polish Brethren.  His writings in the form of the Racovian Catechism survived through the press of the Racovian Academy of Rakow, Poland.  His beliefs took the name, Socinianism, now also a catch-all for any type of dissenting doctrine.

Socinianism held that Jesus did not exist until his physical conception.  God adopted Him as Son at His conception and became Son of God when the Holy Spirit conceived Him in Mary, a Gnostic view called “adoptionism.”  It rejected the doctrine of original sin.

Socianism denied the omniscience of God.  It introduced the first well developed concept of “open theism,” which said that man couldn’t have free will under a traditional (and scriptural) understanding of omniscience.

Socinianism also taught the moral example theory of atonement, teaching that Jesus sacrificed himself to motivate people to repent and believe.  His death gave men the ability to be saved by their own works, who weren’t sinners by nature anyway.

Unitarians

The work of Socinus lived on in the belief of early English Unitarians, Henry Hedworth and John Biddle.  Socinian belief was helped along also by its position of conscientious objection, a practice of refusing to perform military service.  This principle was very popular with many and made Socinianism much more attractive to potential adherents.  The First Unitarian Church, which followed Socianism as passed down through its leaders in England, was started in 1774 on Essex Street in London, where British Unitarian headquarters are still today.

As the Puritans of colonial America apostatized through various means, Unitarianism, a modern iteration of Socinianism took hold in the Congregational Church in America.  After 1820, Congregationalists took Unitarianism as their established doctrine.  The doctrine of Christ diminished to Jesus a good man and perhaps a prophet of God and in a sense the Son of God, but not God Himself.

Spirit of Skepticism

I write as an example of the diversity in the history of Christian doctrine and why it takes place.  When you read the beliefs of Socinians, you easily see them in modern liberal Christianity.  They influence on religious cults that deny the deity of Jesus Christ.

A limited amount of skepticism wards away the acceptance of false doctrine.  Better is a Berean attitude (Acts 17:11), searching the scripture to see if these things are so, and what Paul wrote in 1 Thessalonians 5:21, proving all things, holding fast to that which is good.

As I grew up among fundamentalists and independent Baptists, I witnessed regular desire to find something new in the Bible.  Many sermons espoused interpretations I had never heard and didn’t see in the text.  A preacher often said, “God gave it to me.”  You should know God used the man because no one had seen such insights into scripture.

The same spirit of doctrinal novelty continues today in many evangelical churches.  The same practice led Joseph Smith in his founding of Mormonism.  Many cults arose in 19th century America under the same spirit of skepticism of established historical doctrines.

The Temptation of Novel Teaching

The temptation of novel teaching preys on anyone.  Faustus Socinus accepted many orthodox doctrines of his day. He rejected Christ as fully God and fully human because it was contrary to sound reason (ratio sana).  This steered Socinians toward Enlightenment thinking, where human reason took the highest role as arbiter of truth.

Warren Wiersbe wrote that H.A. Ironside, longtime pastor of Chicago’s Moody Church, said, “If it’s new, it’s not true, and if it’s true, it’s not new.”  Elsewhere I read that Spurgeon first said that.  I don’t know.  Clever new interpretations, teachings, and takes on and from scripture corrupt and overturn scriptural, saving doctrines in the hearts of men.  They condemn them through all eternity.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives