Dennis Diehl recently posted an article as part of his "Adult Sabbath School" series over at Banned by HWA that was subsequently withdrawn. In the post, he asked for advice to help folks who may now feel trapped within one of the descendants of the Worldwide Church of God. In addition to offering some of my own advice along those lines, it later occurred to me that this phenomenon touches on a much broader problem within the Christian community. In short, there are a lot of folks out there who have serious doubts about their beliefs and/or have profound disagreements with some of the teachings of the church/group with which they're associated; but they feel compelled to keep those doubts/disagreements private.
Whether they're motivated by a desire to conform, preserve unity, a fear of damnation or a combination of all of these, I suspect there are a great many folks who have simply chosen to go along to get along. In some cases, they have seen the ridicule, abuse and rejection that folks have experienced who didn't toe the party line. In other instances, folks genuinely feel that expressing their doubts and disagreements will result in the loss of their salvation (or cause someone else to lose theirs) - that those doubts and disagreements must be the product of some faulty reasoning on their part. As a consequence, they push down the feelings of cognitive dissonance and pain that their thoughts have engendered within them. For many of these folks, there is TRUTH and there is ERROR; and they must be on the wrong side of the equation!
The problem is that this amounts to a suppression of conscience. Scripture tells us that fear and doubt are NOT good motivators, and that anything that doesn't spring from personal conviction is basically useless (even sinful). In the fourteenth chapter of his epistle to the saints at Rome, Paul said that everyone should be "fully persuaded" in his/her own mind, and that anything that isn't motivated by faith is sin! In other words, your behavior and salvation should NEVER depend on the acceptance of what other people believe to be true. And, as Martin Luther is reported to have said long ago still applies today, it is DANGEROUS to go against one's conscience.
There are folks out there who will tell you that the Bible is like a jigsaw puzzle, and that the pieces can only be made to fit one way - meaning their way. They present this as a question of whether or not you have God's Holy Spirit - the evidence that you do being your complete acceptance of the way in which they have assembled the puzzle.
Nevertheless, Scripture clearly states that God is NOT going to condemn anyone for their failure to comprehend or understand "His" will in some matter. Jesus spoke in parables, so that only his disciples would understand his message. He also said that no one could come to him unless the Father draws him/her to Christ. Paul said that God had concluded everyone together in disbelief so that "He" could have mercy on everyone. Hence, if God truly is the revelator, then doesn't that make "Him" responsible for what is revealed and to whom it is revealed?
Moreover, doesn't true comprehension/understanding involve acceptance and integration of that knowledge by the person receiving the information? In other words, if you don't really see or believe what has been revealed, how can you be held responsible for rejecting it? Doesn't condemnation require complete understanding/acceptance/integration at the time of rejection? How is it fair and just to condemn someone for rejecting something that they don't believe? Doesn't the anonymous epistle to the Hebrews teach us that belief is a necessary prerequisite to pleasing God? And, if that's so, doesn't that suggest/imply that anyone who lacks that belief hasn't even begun the process?
I remained within the Armstrong Church of God for much longer than I should have for a number of reasons that obviously seemed legitimate to me at the time. For a long time, I repressed/suppressed my doubts, questions and disagreements about/with Armstrong's theology. For a long time, I was even in denial about my feelings - I couldn't even acknowledge them to myself. When I finally came to terms with the cognitive dissonance (the disparity between my own experiences/knowledge with the "TRUTHS" of the church), I was finally able to begin the process of resolving those disparities to my own satisfaction/relief. Likewise, coming to terms with my own turmoil, finally gave me the strength and ability to face/confront the hostility of others within my community.
Still, even after I had reached that level of personal resolution, I lingered for several years. Like many of the folks before me who have continued to participate in groups/organizations in which they've lost confidence, I continued to work within the community in the hopes of ameliorating the negative consequences of those teachings or trying to persuade my associates that those teachings were flawed and unworthy of their allegiance. Over the years, I came to understand that this was a fool's errand. The old adage that "one convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" is absolutely true.
In the final analysis, our relationship with God is a very individualistic one. And the more collective in nature that we attempt to make it, the greater the potential for cognitive dissonance. If you believe in something, then live it! That also applies to me. I'm not going to reach my potential by trying to live your beliefs, and you're not going to reach yours by trying to live by mine or anyone else's!
Lonnie Hendrix
22 comments:
Lonnie needs to study Calvinism. There are millions of mainstream Christians who would disagree that "Scripture clearly states" what Lonnie through his personal filter thinks it does. I'm happy for him if he is satisfied with his journey, but although he writes about individuality he shows the zeal of a convert who believes that he has found a truth unknown to many others.
Anonymous 12/14 @ 4:39,
Calvin and Knox believed that they had assembled the puzzle in the correct way, and that other Protestants and Catholics were just plain wrong. The thesis of my post is that the Scriptures which they profess to follow plainly state that each one of us is responsible for what we know. I'm not responsible for what you think you know, and you're not responsible for what I think that I know. Personally, I've left proof-texting behind, but I understand that you're not going to get anywhere with folks who use Scripture in that fashion.
If you need that, I'm happy to supply the following for your perusal:
"Accept other believers who are weak in faith, and don’t argue with them about what they think is right or wrong. For instance, one person believes it’s all right to eat anything. But another believer with a sensitive conscience will eat only vegetables. Those who feel free to eat anything must not look down on those who don’t. And those who don’t eat certain foods must not condemn those who do, for God has accepted them. Who are you to condemn someone else’s servants? Their own master will judge whether they stand or fall. And with the Lord’s help, they will stand and receive his approval. In the same way, some think one day is more holy than another day, while others think every day is alike. You should each be fully convinced that whichever day you choose is acceptable. Those who worship the Lord on a special day do it to honor him. Those who eat any kind of food do so to honor the Lord, since they give thanks to God before eating. And those who refuse to eat certain foods also want to please the Lord and give thanks to God." - Romans 14:1-6, NLT
Paul concludes the thought/principle with this statement: "if you have doubts about whether or not you should eat something, you are sinning if you go ahead and do it. For you are not following your convictions. If you do anything you believe is not right, you are sinning."
For the sake of space, I won't quote it here, but you may also want to check out the eleventh chapter of the same epistle.
In the book of James we read: "Remember, it is sin to know what you ought to do and then not do it." - James 4:17, NLT
I may be wrong, but these seem like fairly straightforward statements that personal conviction is an essential component of the Christian life.
And, finally, one of Herbie's old favorites seems particularly appropriate here: "These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship is a farce, for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God." - Matthew 15:8-9, NLT
Christ's disciples didn't accept/believe that Pharisees traditions represented the TRUE will of God, so they ignored them - AND CHRIST WAS OK WITH THAT!
We must all see Scripture through our own "personal filter." Those millions of mainstream Christians who disagree with me should follow their own convictions about how THEY should conduct themselves - just don't try to impose them on your brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree with you!
Isn't that the way inspiration and enthusiasm spreads, 4:39? We all bring our different perspectives to the table.
BB
Can we know the reason why the post was withdrawn.
Anon 4:39 PM is correct to point out that Lonnie is slamming Armstrongism for making personal/subjective leaps of logic that are similar in presumption, though not in content, to the leaps Lonnie now makes. It would be fair to assume, however, that Lonnie's leaps are far less toxic, and serve his own psyche far better than Armstrongism. The important difference, however, is that although their theologies are equally subjective and self-serving, Lonnie isn't making HWA suffer under Hendrixism.
Don't you just love it when folks resort to a paraphrase bible to "prove" their point?
What Herbs church and most other denominations refuse to accept is that the parable of the talents also applies to choosing ones beliefs. Everyone has a duty of care to 'prove all things.' This is a serious, lifelong, ongoing responsibility. This gives a spread of results, as explained in the parable of the talents, with reality having the final say in everyday life. The more peoples conclusions conform to reality, the better the outcome. The more irrational people are in their conclusions, the more they suffer. It's no different than everyday financial investing. People become rich, poor, or go nowhere.
The only alternative is lording it over peoples faith. This has been the historic model. The fruits have been religious wars, inquisitions, bum theology, and the banning of the Galileo's of the world.
I recall one of my ministers lamenting from the pulpit that their are two hundred people in the hall, and two hundred interpretations of the bible. That is in fact Gods system.
"God Isn't Going to Condemn You for Being Wrong!"
that's why there is a resurrection after the millennium....to give everyone the opportunity to understand, so they won't be "wrong" in their attitudes and actions.
the only people that understand God and His ways today are those He has called and given the ability to understand....which is why there is so much confusion out there. so many are trying to attend a party that they have not been invited to....but their invitation will arrive... at a time God chooses.
Hmmmm, "I've left proof texting behind" but I'm going to proof text because that's how you ignorantly reason (said sarcastically) and it also proves my point! (Meaning I still proof text)
Anon 6:55 AM, you are holding on to the unproven assumption not only that God is fair, but that He is fair according to your personal standard of fairness.
The Gnostics, like many non-Christian religions, didn't assume that the God of this world is fair. Even ACOGs say that Satan is the god of this world at the moment. It is the height of arrogance and presumption to assume that God is the way I want Him to be.
Actually, theodicy is a real problem for most naive theists. The universe is much easier to understand if we start with the premise that God is NOT fair.
Hosea 2:1
Say to your brethren, ‘My people,’/'Ammi'
And to your sisters, ‘Mercy is shown.’/'Ruhamah'
Hosea 2:16-17
“And it shall be, in that day,” says the LORD/YHVH, “That you will call Me ‘My Husband,’/'Ishi'
And no longer call Me ‘My Master,’/'Baali'
For I will take from her mouth the names of the Baals,
And they shall be remembered by their name no more.
Hosea 2:19-20
“I will betroth you to Me forever; Yes, I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and justice, in lovingkindness and mercy; I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness, and you shall know the LORD/YHVH.
Anonymous 12/15 @ 4:17 - They're not leaps of logic from my perspective - that's part of my point in writing this. Are you in complete agreement with any groups theology/doctrines? We all have questions/differences/disagreements. We can choose to ignore those, suffer in silence or attempt to resolve them to our own satisfaction.
Anonymous 12/15 @ 4:49 - The principle shines through in whichever version you prefer - I like the wording in the King James Version as well! (and NLT is not just a paraphrase)
Anonymous 12/15 @ 7:47 - The proof-texting was for the benefit of those who swing that way. If you completely reject the Bible, then your argument is kinda academic isn't it?
It has been my experience that most folks fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, between the two extremes. In other words, it's more natural to have some doubts and questions than to be fully convinced of something. In the final analysis, were having a conversation about how best to deal with that reality.
" (and NLT is not just a paraphrase) "
Yeah, yeah, yeah and the sky is green.
How often do we read in the book of Acts, when asked, "What must we do to be saved?" and the response is very simple. "Believe. . .!" Real belief will result in works, but works are the result of real conversion, not its means. I for one am very glad that I won't have to take a Theology examination to gain entrance into the presence of God. I think that heaven is non-denominational. We will get our theology straightened out in time.
Do you actually believe that the KJV isn't a paraphrase, 1:04??? The very act of translating from one language to another is in reality paraphrasing! You need to read up on the activities of King James's committee who performed the translation, particularly the activities of Erasmus. Shakespeare was a committee member and even embedded his name in Psalm 46.
Some of the new, fresh translations of the New Testament from the most authentic texts which are a byproduct of exhaustive textual criticism are much more accurate and reliable than those translated from Textus Receptus.
Of course it is heresy within the Armstrong movement to impugn the honor of the KJV, which lends itself most handily to the support of the Armstrong doctrines. The best Armstrong proof texts always come from the KJV!
BB
I concur.
And, in exactly the same way, Santa isn't going to put a lump of coal in your stocking for being naughty.
BB said... “Shakespeare was a committee member and even embedded his name in Psalm 46.”
Ah but who was Shakespeare? ;-)
BB man you assume a lot!
@8:13am
so you are saying that since false gods (created by corrupt men, who seek to satisfy their own bellies and therefore are inherently unfair) are unfair, the Creator must be unfair too?
seriously?
any standard of fairness that I use is from God, as revealed in the bible.
hmmmm, Shakespeare in Psalms?
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=925
Another drive by? So I have to draw you out every time? What did you mean by that, 2:54?
BB
Anon Dec. 16, 12:09 AM asks,
"Ah but who was Shakespeare? ;-)"
He is widely credited as the author of *Romeo and Juliet*, *Hamlet*, *King Lear*, many other famous plays, and other poetic works besides. However, it has recently come to light that the writings attributed to him were actually written by a different man of the same name.
Post a Comment