Identity
TANC Ministries is presently working on a book project leading up to our 2016 conference in August. I guess my name will be on the book as the author, but the book is really a group project. Maybe the author should be “TANC Ministries.”
Why this project? I will cite some excerpts from the project objective:
“Those who are disillusioned with Christianity, but haven’t given up on God and are looking for answers, often ask, ‘Where do I start?’ Such people who come to PPT, and are overwhelmed by the mass of information often ask, ‘Where is the best place to start?’ Andy Young recently remarked about the multiple layers of misinformation and the question of where this ministry should start with people on our end of the question…The target audience are those looking for real and truthful answers amongst the confusion; they are those trying to make sense out of life in the confusion of Christianity as we know it in our day. The book will have a theological and philosophical bent. Protestants and Catholics alike are dumbed-down by design, think that the Reformation was a theological debate, are confused about basic elements of metaphysics and being, and need a place to start on their truth journey. Those who buy the book will have this in common: they assume reason is a necessary pathway to finding truth.”
At first, it looked like the project was off to a fast start, but what seemed like great ideas were shot down by the group, so it was suggested that I start submitting free-writing articles to the group based on the usual ministry themes, and this will result in an articulation of objectives that the group agrees with. This article is one such submission to the group.
I am not crazy about Facebook, but on the other hand, it is valuable to our ministry, and yesterday was no exception. I am not going to copy and paste the whole debate here between myself and a couple of Catholics, but I am very tempted to think that it will be the crux of our project. The excerpt that encapsulates the main point follows:
“You act as if the Pope speaking ex cathedra or the council of Bishops as an authority of truth is so absurd. I understand that you disagree with it, and you are entitled to the right to disagree. But the concept in and of itself is certainly not absurd. I have to say, if it comes down to which is less absurd, a church authority instituted by Christ is much more plausible than Jesus giving us a Bible and telling everyone they can discern truth completely (error free) by themselves. (Not saying we are completely void of discerning truth, but we will never be perfect at it). Look around you: if everyone could perfectly discern truth for themselves, then why do non-catholic churches continue to split up each and every day? I think there are like over 30,000 denominations now? We are not trying to attack you, Paul M. Dohse Sr. We are just trying to get to the truth. And I have felt misrepresented by your points, so I have to ask the tough questions.”
To me, this absolutely says it all; perhaps the project group will agree. It boils down to man’s (mankind) identity and his ability to interpret reality. Universally, the goal is man’s well-being. Is the key to well-being a proper identity? What does man’s identity have to do with evaluating truth? EVERYTHING. Suppose you identify man as a being that cannot know truth? I think that makes the point.
Now, this necessarily involves a discussion about philosophy and its four major tenets: metaphysics (state of being), epistemology (how we know), ethics (the moral application of how we perceive reality), and politics (how the ethics are communicated). But what about the Bible? From my own perspective, I see the Bible as God’s philosophical statement to mankind. If you are able to defend God’s truth, or the Gospel, you must know what the Bible states about these four tenets of philosophy. No? Really? Consider the following fact: this stream of conversation on Facebook was extremely long, and complete with Scripture stacking and citation wars, but to no avail. Why? Because truth is interpreted through the philosophical prism. A Chinese person might as well be attempting to convince an English person that Chinese is better (anything Chinese) while arguing in their perspective languages. The example that astounds me the most follows: people who seek counsel and assume the counselor shares their view of reality. No wonder so few people are helped by counseling accordingly. Another example makes its own point because few Christians will even know what I am talking about. Pastors in our day view reality from two different perspectives, redemptive or grammatical, and most parishioners are clueless in regard to where their pastors stand on that issue. They assume they know what the pastor is teaching from the pulpit, but really they are clueless.
What is the philosophy of the person that I was having the discussion with? Metaphysics: man cannot know truth PERFECTLY. Epistemology: “ex cathedra or the council of Bishops as an authority of truth.” Ethics: prevention of chaos. Politics: expected obedience to authority. Words mean things, so lets examine his words carefully. The issue with man, according to this person, is he cannot know truth “perfectly.” That’s key. So then, what is the ethic? Christ has appointed an authority on earth to prevent chaos because no man can know the truth perfectly.
But wait a minute, neither can the men whom Christ appointed as an authority; likewise, they cannot know the truth perfectly because they are also men, so what gives? This is what gives: authority for the sake of UNITY is the goal, not truth per se. In fact, UNITY defines truth itself. And where does that come from? Yep, P-l-a-t-o. Among most of the classic sophists, unity itself was truth. At least in Plato’s case, this was the definition of social justice as well. Does that ring any bells in regard to churchianity, or Western society in general? Let me further the point. What was this person’s primary argument for the authority of the Catholic Church? Right, to prevent the chaos of “30,000 denominations” the inevitable result of men being free to discern truth for themselves.
But it gets better when one considers biblical metaphysics. Again, via this person’s own words, the issue is INDIVIDUAL interpretation. But wait a minute, I thought a believer is a totally new creature indwelled by the Holy Spirit? What a minute, I thought the Bible said that the Spirit will lead us in ALL truth. So, why would members of one body with one mind in Christ, and striving for that one mind in Christ be lacking in unity? Why is such a notion “absurd.” Answer: because Catholics and Protestants both fundamentally deny the new birth, that’s why. And consequently, we also hear things from Protestant pastors such as Mark Driscoll saying, “Just keep your damn mouth shut and obey.” As Pastor Chad Bresson is fond of saying, Whether an elder is right or wrong is irrelevant to unity. For those who have the audacity to question an elder, Pastor James MacDonald suggests that they be tied to a catapult and “launched into the next county.” Why are they so passionate about being agreed with? Because obedience to authority is what unifies, not truth—authority is truth.
Moreover, with Believers, “perfection” is not the issue, but LOVE is the issue. Law as condemnation versus law as love is also the difference the new birth makes, but enough said for now. I will see if any of this gets some traction with the project group.
paul
When We Use Words, Should We Know What They Mean? Truth, Mythology, Orthodoxy, and Creed
In order to control people, you have to control their minds. And in order to control their minds, you have to control the definitions of words. The meanings of words form what we believe about truth and reality. And, when it gets right down to it, a proper assessment of reality is the foundation of truth (and by the way, you can only control people by force for so long. The key is to control their minds).
Truth is not “fact.” Truth has a moral value to it. Facts are building blocks that can build any theory of truth.
I have written about all of this before, but this short essay was inspired by one of my Facebook friends. She announced that she was using The Westminster Shorter Catechism for kids to instruct her young child. Why would she do that? Because the WSC is “orthodoxy,” and that word has come to mean…TRUTH. Hence, the opposite of “orthodoxy” is “heterodoxy,” a practice that I am often accused of: meaning; untruth.
Now, the WSC is often spoken of as being “subordinate truth.” And in fact, that is a fact, but let’s think about this; why is a subordinate truth needed? Isn’t truth powerful enough by itself?
“Well Paul, a creed, or confession, or catechism, is just a form of truth that is taught on the common person’s level, it makes truth easier to understand for the average person.”
Exactly.
The assumption is that there is a truth caste system. There are those who understand Truth, big T, and then those who are only capable of understanding a revisal form of truth on a more elementary level.
Orthodoxy is NOT truth, orthodoxy is an elitist interpretation of truth by those preordained by God (or mother nature) to have a special gift for interpreting truth. People merely pick the orthodoxy of preference which ranges from A-Z of world religions. Protestantism, like Catholicism, or for that matter Hinduism, was founded on orthodoxy which has become a word fictitiously associated with the meaning of the word…truth. The title of those who penned the Westminster Confession should be telling: the “Westminster Divines.” What would be our first clue?
Orthodoxy is not truth, orthodoxy is some man’s interpretation of truth. This is what separates Protestantism from the true called out assembly of Christ: the priesthood of believers. Clearly, this states that every human being is capable of understanding truth on their own, and is culpable before God ALONE for the adjudication of that truth. This also assumes that man is created with freedom of conscience. And by the way, the horizontal political expression of this, is an idea that we call the United States of America. And by the way, there is a reason why the Pope and New Calvinists alike are brazen Socialists, confused Protestants notwithstanding. Will we be judged individually for following God, or men appointed by God? This should be evident. We only follow men who follow Christ according to our own assessment of truth.
“But Paul! That will lead to Chaos!”
Exactly.
Herein is the rub: reality, and presuppositions regarding man; ability to understand reality, or epistemological caste? That’s it in a nutshell folks. It’s the exact lie first perpetrated in the garden: Hey Eve, you really can’t understand God without a mediator. You need somebody who has special insight into the spiritual, “nay, has God really said…?”And the priesthood of believers versus spiritual caste was a major battlefront in the first century church and a major theme of the apostle John’s writings.
Right out of the gates of the garden came the declaration of the kingdom of darkness: spiritual caste enforced by government, and the ownership of truth by Plato’s philosopher kings. Philosopher, and king, and the divine right of kings. All of human history was saturated with wars over orthodoxy until 1776. The vast number of wars fought throughout human history have been religious civil wars, or more accurately, wars over orthodoxy.
The divine right of kings is responsible for chaos, not kings who protect a reasonable freedom of conscience. This was the crying out of small voices in the wilderness of a European culture drenched in blood.
In ancient times, spiritual caste was expressed in mythology. To see mythology as ancient superstition shrouded in ignorance would be an incorrect assessment. Mythology is merely stories (parables) created by philosopher kings so that the unenlightened masses can understand principles of society for purposes of social justice. For Plato, that was UNITY period. Whatever “truth” unified was the proof in the pudding; unity equals truth.
Mythology is no different than orthodoxy, and the various teachings thereof: creeds; confessions, and catechisms. Of course it is “subordinate truth.” Of course there is a “higher truth,” but the rub is that the common folks can’t really understand THE Truth…capital T. Hence, you follow the orthodoxy of your choice…presumably to heaven. Pick well, the choices are vast, and the various enlightened choices are better than yours because of the reality that you have accepted: orthodoxy.
The prime example of this in our evangelical day is the Redemptive Historical hermeneutic that dominates the institutional church. It is, Bible as story. Bible as “gospel narrative.” This is absolutely NOTHING more or less than mythology itself dressed in uppity European intellectualism.
Christ promised YOU that you would find truth if you seek it. This isn’t a seeking to find the right man to follow, this is between you and God Himself. And this issue goes way, way back in time. It was a major issue with Moses, and the apostle John, and it is a major issue in our day. Therefore, I close with these words from Moses:
The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law… For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
paul
This is Huge: “The Little Blue Christian That Could”; A Niche Market for Pithy Christian Truisms
Certainly, I will make millions with my discovery of a niche market among Christians. Whether on Facebook, in Christian bookstores, or the back bumper of a minivan, we see a constant parade of colorful placards that remind us of how pathetic we are as Christians. Ironically, pastors promote these placards to keep the sheep manageable, but then go to their Monday golf outings and whine about “10% of the parishioners doing 90% of the work.” Hey, there is a price to pay for being in control.
Today’s Christians remind me of my former stint as an installation manager for one of the largest security companies in the world. As a Christian manager, I was at first surprised by so much humbleness among the unregenerate. The technicians routinely touted themselves as the least among their peers, and constantly sang the praises of capable technicians other than themselves. I soon realized that this was a ploy to get out of doing the more difficult and challenging jobs. If you sent them on a difficult job, they would make you pay by going there and playing dumb. This would turn the whole day upside down for someone in my position. I eventually got around the problem by sending two or three technicians to do the job of one.
And let there be no doubt about it, this kind of laziness is at the core of much Christian humbleness in our day. Pastors are the worst offenders, claiming to be “unqualified” in helping people with the more difficult life problems. The way the “mentally ill” have been relegated to the closets of the church is the “scandalous gospel” indeed. It is having a form of godliness while denying the power of it.
These little jpeg posters that appear on Facebook are all the rage in our day and only represent totally depraved Christians. So, I am starting the Little Blue Christian That Could Productions. This, of course, is a tribute to the children’s story, “The Little Blue Engine That Could.” My niche market is the born again crowd. Here is what Wikipedia states about “The Little Blue Engine That Could”:
The Little Engine that Could is an illustrated children’s book that was first published in the United States of America in 1930 by Platt & Munk. The story is used to teach children the value of optimism and hard work. Based on a 2007 online poll, the National Education Association named the book one of its “Teachers’ Top 100 Books for Children.”
The story’s signature phrases such as “I think I can” first occurred in print in a 1902 article in a Swedish journal. An early published version of the story, “Story of the Engine that Thought It Could”, appeared in the New York Tribune, 8 April 1906, as part of a sermon by the Rev. Charles S. Wing.
Shazaam! This idea has Christian roots! This is huge! Therefore, I proudly unveil the very first pithy truisms of the Little Blue Christian That Could Productions:
Interpretation
Christians like information. Between church, K-Love radio, and cable, we receive information nonstop. We also live in the Information Age. Never before has mankind received so much information.
But all information has a source, and the source of any given information is disseminating the information with a goal in mind, and that goal will depend on how the disseminators interpret realty. They have an agenda. Sure, some Hollywood producers merely want to entertain, but most want to educate according to their own good intentions. In Religion, agenda-driven education is always the goal. That’s us.
So, all information that we hear as Christians has an agenda. There is no exception here in this venue. And there is an all pervasive belief among Christians in regard to discernment: knowing how the teacher interprets reality is not important, I can take from the shelf what is true and leave on the shelf what isn’t true. The goal of the teacher based on how he/she interprets reality is not important. Every teaching has good and bad in it, but we can benefit from what is good. Hmmmm, really?
This shows a fundamental lack of understanding in how words work in communication. If you do not know how a teacher interprets reality, regardless of agreement on elements, through word replacement, and emphasis on certain words over others, you can be led to a functioning belief of the teacher’s choosing. I have watched this happen in Reformed circles firsthand. I know of churches that gleefully follow men that they would have run out of town ten years prior. I have watched this concept in action.
All of the words that form the ideas of any teacher you are listening to are framed according to his/her interpretation of reality. In the English language, the alternative use of words to put forth an idea are literally innumerable. No pun intended. Anybody’s best guess is that the English language has about 470,000 primary words. Generic words can be used to put forth an idea that would normally be dismissed out of hand in a certain venue by avoiding the specific word etc.
A classic example in Christian venues is the use of the word “gospel” to put forth certain ideas about justification that would be dismissed out of hand if the word, “justification” was used. Initially, that is. Once the idea is assimilated into the group’s minds, “justification” can then be freely used which seals the deal. If a teacher doesn’t believe in a particular biblical truth, he/she can simply never teach on it while assimilating nuanced antithetical ideas into the general curriculum. Hence: “One man’s account seems convincing until another comes forward.” Well, the other guy never comes forward, and you are therefore convinced.
The idea that we can glean helpful truth from any message is naïveté on steroids. Every word is an accomplice to that teacher’s interpretation of reality and the goal’s thereof. That is what “teaching” is. It is purpose-driven. 900 people liked what the words of Jim Jones seemed to say, but didn’t understand that his interpretation of realty would leave them dead and rotting in the hot sun of Guyana.
This also speaks to the scandalous reality of systematic theology not being taught in the churches. Congregants are left to accept whatever caveats are dished out from the pulpit.
Which can lead to anywhere.
paul
Loving The Truth is Often Bittersweet
“Part and parcel with being made a new creature in Jesus Christ is love for the truth.”
This is something that I don’t write about enough. Loving the truth and upholding the truth can be a rough life. I don’t think about them much, but when I do in a thoughtful way I find myself in tears; those who have lost almost everything over truth. I feel their pain when I read their emails and published articles. We are social creatures and losing all of your friends is not a pleasant experience. It causes us to long for the day when we will gaze upon the personification of truth among enumerable truth lovers.
Today this hits close to home. Someone very dear to me is once again faced with a choice: the comfort of compromise, or standing by the truth at all cost. The Bible has much to say about this. Let me repeat that another way: God has strong opinions about this issue.
2 Corinthians 10:5 – We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ, 6 being ready to punish every disobedience, when your obedience is complete.
Truth is God’s opinion about what makes the world He created tick, and apparently, those who know more about life than He does are very annoying to Him. Equally annoying to Him is the idea that His truth is ambiguous and not near to all. Listen to what Moses had to say about that:
Deuteronomy 30:11 – “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it? ‘ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it? ‘ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you today, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. 17 But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish.
God doesn’t appreciate the implication that His truth is not near to us—that it is ambiguous and difficult to ascertain—that we need orthodoxy from a host of mystic academics. No, and by the way, we can’t blame those who we chose to listen to in the end; the truth is near to all of us—we are responsible for the sum and substance of our own lives.
Part and parcel with being made a new creature in Jesus Christ is love for the truth. The apostle Paul, in his apocalyptic letter to the Thessalonians, warned that those who perish have not “received the love of the truth.” Receiving this love also comes part and parcel with an attitude: read about Daniel’s three friends and the bunch in Hebrews 11.
This attitude might also be influenced by something believers know about God. When God made a covenant with Israel as stipulated in the Book of the Covenant, and they broke it with defiant flare while Moses was on Mt. Sinai receiving the “tablets of the testimony,” we observe the following scene when Moses returned:
Exodus 32:25 – And when Moses saw that the people had broken loose (for Aaron had let them break loose, to the derision of their enemies), 26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp and said, “Who is on the Lord’s side? Come to me.” And all the sons of Levi gathered around him. 27 And he said to them, “Thus says the Lord God of Israel, ‘Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor.’” 28 And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses. And that day about three thousand men of the people fell. 29 And Moses said, “Today you have been ordained for the service of the Lord, each one at the cost of his son and of his brother, so that he might bestow a blessing upon you this day.”
Christ said God’s word is truth, and ONLY truth sanctifies (John 17:17). Sanctification is separation from the world, and hence, when separation occurs—it is often difficult to distinguish naive Christians from worldly false confessors. A stand for the truth is seen as fanaticism. Perhaps rock legend Alice Cooper said it best:
Drinking beer is easy. Trashing your hotel room is easy. But being a Christian, that’s a tough call. That’s real rebellion!
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
1 comment