A Post-Faithful Report from Lipscomb University - #2

Report & Analysis

28 July 2017 - Gospel Call Media - (Charlotte, NC) - Last month in Nashville, TN on the campus of Lipscomb University there was a pro-denominational gathering known as InterGenerate 2017 (TM).  It was a purposeful, proactive, and plotted yoking of the universities "Institute for Christian Spirituality" with the radically pro-sectarian organization known as GenOn Ministries (TM).  The director of this conference herself, Dr. Holly Allen of Lipscomb University, disclosed in my hearing that the entire conference was made possible by a $5,000.00 grant from the president of Lipscomb University, Dr. L. Randolph Lowry.(1)

This reporter was there.  I was determined to hear with my own ears any evidence of movement away from the "faith once for all delivered to the saints" at Lipscomb University.  What I heard was far worse than my greatest fears.  Though there are many faithful faculty, staff, and students remaining at Lipscomb, the leadership of the Bible Department has gone "retro."  What I heard has more in common with 2nd century Gnosticism than it does the the "pattern of sound words."

The conference essentially is attempting to replace, not only the essence of the gospel, (2) it seeks to aggressively change how that gospel is conveyed.  Paul asserts in Romans 10.17 that "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God."  The eunuch in Acts 8, when asked if he understood what he was reading, replied; "How can I, except some man should guide me?"  The spoken and heard Word of God is the chosen conveyance of God.  It has not changed.  Sadly, this conference is interested in every form of communication EXCEPT biblical preaching for "ears that hear."  Among a number of un-biblical portals, I heard conference presenters advocate uber interactivity, the use of children in worship services, and drawing out of prayers with crayons for adults.  It was like being at a "magical mystery tour" of extreme spiritual experimentation.

Sadly, Origen, Augustine, and Aquinas would have been far more comfortable at this conference than would have Peter, Paul, and John.  In the 2nd century the Gnostic's claimed both an exclusive and higher knowledge than that which was common to ordinary Christians. Now, as then, those who see themselves as the "best and the brightest of all time," have a "buzz word" language to confuse traditional and understood meanings so as to "sound" faithful as they attempt to force the "car over the cliff."  Here is a list of novis-Gnostic words and terms I heard (along with definitions) (3) while at the conference.  (I'm sure there were others, these are the ones I caught.)

• "Cross-denominational" - The transference of truth across conflicting denominational lines without objection.
• "Spiritual" - Feelings of religion in lieu of trust, obedience, and faithfulness.
• "Intra-denominational" - Conflicting doctrines within a singular denomination.
• "Multi-denominational" - All denominations are equally viable, one is good as another, truth is in multiples and not in singularity.
• "Traditions" - In lieu of the Bible, this is where conflicting denominations justify their existence.  All "traditions" are all equally worthy.
• "Faith Formation / Spiritual Formation" - Takes the place of obedience to the gospel, an evolution and not an event.  As you may have heard; "Faith is a journey, not a destination." (4)
• "Historical Roots" - The foundation of conflicting denominations is rooted in history and not upon the Bible.  The novis-Gnostic's reject the existence of singular, revealed, inerrant, and inspired truth.
• "Explosive Free Range Worship" - The 21st century version of the "silence of the Scriptures" is a license for never ending progression away from revelation.  ("We can do anything we want as long as the Bible doesn't expressly forbid it.")
• "Accommodation" - The act of dumbing down worship, preaching, and teaching to the lowest common denominator,  i.e.don't put anything over a 4th grade level.  This is also known as "Changing forms to suit the capacity."
• "Paradigm" - That which comes from the past and must be discarded at all costs.  All things from the past are counter-evolutionary and therefore must be considered useless.
• "Story" - A term that is associated with fiction that is applied to all the historical accounts found in the Bible.
• "Testimony" - "My story" trumps revealed Scripture.  What I feel is more important than what I can learn from the Scriptures.
• "Practical Theology" - The pragmatic tail that wags the theological dog.  What works is more important that what is revealed.
• "Pragmatic Academic" - Outcome based educator who practices "practical theology."
• "Narrative of Scripture" - The Bible is a story from Genesis to Revelation devoid of interpretation of the Holy Spirit, devoid of dispensation, and testament. It overtly rejects the concept of II Timothy 3.16 - 17.
• "Re-clothing Communion" - The radical change of the Lord's Supper to include, integrate and accommodate the mindset of very young children. 
• "Collaborative Theology" - In lieu of studying the Scriptures, this is the blending of many conflicting doctrines so as to render them all devoid of conviction.  For years this has been also known as the "unity in diversity movement."  It is based upon human wisdom and ignores the Scripture entirely.
• "Tribe" - A term used for referring to people of conviction as being somehow backward for the faithfulness to revelation.  When one admits to belonging to a "tribe" one can then "admit" that there are "Christians" in all "churches."  

These are "smooth words" and we must be wary of them!

Remember Isaiah 30.10b: "Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:"

[Lord willing, this will be an on-going series.  The next report will deal with the theological assumptions of Dr. Leonard Allen who is the head of the Bible Department at Lipscomb University and is married to the conference chairman, Dr. Holly Allen.] - RM

NOTES:
(1) These facts were all verified in detail in our first report 13 July 2017 and available on this same blog.
(2) There were many denominations in attendance, all advocating "different gospels."  There were Presbyterians, Lutherans, Catholics, Disciples of Christ, Anglicans, Episcopalians, et. al.  The theme, stated numerous times and numerous ways was, "truth is relative, it is multiple, ever changing, evolving, emerging, and is individually defined."  The only truth I did not hear was that "truth is revealed, unchanging, singular, and is not individually defined."
(3) The definitions are mine based upon how these words / terms / phrases were used at the conference in my hearing. As there is no such thing as a "New-Gnostic" dictionary, I WELCOME your better definitions that I can use to update any mis-definition on my part!
(4) The radically emergent ETHOS CHURCH in Nashville, where Dr.'s Leonard & Holly Allen attend brags about having an atheist leading a mission team to Kenya a couple of years ago!  You see, he's on a "journey" to faith and his "journey" is just beginning.  (Verifiable on the 3rd session of Leonard Allen at the 2016 Pepperdine Lectures, if you care to look it up.  It's on YouTube.)

A Post-Faithful Report from Lipscomb University #1

13 July 2017 - Gospel Call Media - (Charlotte, NC) - I heard it with my own ears in person.  The InterGenerate 2017 (TM) conference was held on the campus of Lipscomb University, Nashville, TN and I was there June 25 - 27, 2017.  Not wanting to print "hear-say," I was there in person with reporters pencil in hand.  The purpose for going?  To verify one way or the other whether the university which claims to be "affiliated with the churches of Christ,"(1) continues to adhere to the "apostles doctrine" or not.  This is why I was there.  To claim "affiliation" without "faithfulness to the apostles doctrine" is simply existential, chaotic, and contradictory nonsense.  Sadly, from what I heard from the very opening of the conference, the answer is "no," Lipscomb is no longer faithful to what she once was.

From the very moment I arrived, I was perplexed.  I found not a single confessing member of the church of Christ on the program.  Other than brother and sister Ireland from my home congregation (present with me the first night of the conference), I did not meet even a single confessing member of the Lord's church among the 150 attending.  Most disturbing of all, we were the only ones present with Bibles.  The last two days of the conference, as far as I could comprehend, I alone came with a copy of God's Word.

The conference was a collaborative effort between the universities "Institute for Christian Spirituality" (2) and the openly pro-denominational GenOn Ministries (TM) organization. (3)  The purpose of this first ever InterGenerate Conference (TM) was to promote the bridging of generational gaps as a primary tool for more effective church growth, regardless of denominational affiliation.    

This pro-denominational / inter-denominational conference being at Lipscomb University was no accident nor was it incidental.  In fact the conference was orchestrated by Lipscomb faculty member Dr. Holly Allen (4) and overtly funded by a $5,000.00 grant from the institutions president, Dr. L. Randolph Lowry. (5) (6)  Despite the inspired apostle Paul's clear warning against "unequal yoking" in II Corinthians 6.11 - 7.1, Lipscomb University, Dr. Allen, Dr. Lowry, et al have unequally yoked themselves with the non-Christians (7) of GenOn Ministries (TM). to openly endorse and promote sectarian division.

Even more disturbing than the open acceptance of religious division, Dr. Allen on at least 3 occasions that I heard during the introduction focused, reiterated, and insisted upon the "multi denominational" and "inter-denominational" emphasis of the conference in a most overt way. (8)  Most upsetting of all, though, was the comments made by Dr. Holly's husband, Dr. Leonard Allen. (9)  He welcomed the approximately 150 participants on behalf of the university.  As the head of the Bible Department at Lipscomb he told the assembled denominationalists that the university was "affiliated with churches of Christ" which is one of three "denominations" that came out of the 19th century so-called "Stone-Campbell" movement.  In my hearing Dr. Leonard Allen purposely and overtly asserted that the Lord's Church was nothing more and nothing less than just another denomination. (10)  By so doing he surrendered ground to error and declined to share the one true gospel with those who are lost.  Of course, had both the Allen's stood up for the truth, the conference would not have been possible or even conceived of.

There are individuals at Lipscomb University that remain faithful but they are not in the Bible department. We must pray for their continued faithfulness.  We must also pray that faithful Christians, especially in Nashville, will warn others of this departure lest they come through many a "Jude's side door." (Jude 1.4)  This reporter will follow with more reports from Lipscomb University detailing their collective departure from the faith "once for all delivered to the saints." 

NOTES:

(1) http://www.lipscomb.edu/about/fast-facts
(2) http://www.lipscomb.edu/ics
(3) https://www.genonministries.org/blogs/blog/intergenerate-reflections (This links to a blushing pro denominational blog post about the conference)
(4) http://www.lipscomb.edu/news/filter/item/0/31716 (The very pro-denominational nature of this conference is admitted here on Lipscomb's own website.  Biographical info on Dr. Allen is included in the post)
(5) Per comments made by Dr. Holly Allen as she introduced the conference on the evening of 25 June 2017
(6) Bio on Pres. Lowry: https://www.lipscomb.edu/president/biography
(7) [In the New Testament sense of the word - no participating denominations present preach and teach that one must "repent and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins"]
(8) Per comments made by Dr. Holly Allen as she introduced the conference on the evening of 25 June 2017.  Interestingly, even though that both she and her husband both having backgrounds in the church of Christ, neither her or her husband acknowledged this fact at any time during the conference in my hearing.  All the other participants affiliation with sectarian denominations were clearly noted.  According to comments made at the 2016 Pepperdine Lectures, Dr. Leonard Allen, Dr. Holly Allen's husband, openly admitted to their attending the radically emergent ETHOS CHURCH (http://www.ethoschurch.org/) in downtown Nashville, TN.
(9) Bio on Dr. Leonard Allen: http://www.lipscomb.edu/www/bio/detail/1248
(10) Per comments made by Dr. Leonard Allen as he welcomed the conference participants to Lipscomb University on the evening of 25 June 2017.

12 Polemicists of the New and Old Testaments

“Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything.”

– Alexander Hamilton

A debate is an examination of the perceived benefits of one opinion as opposed to another.  At the end of a debate there is often a common ground established between the opposing parties forming a framework for a final consensus.  A good illustration of a debate is a legislative process known as reconciliation.  The Senate has a bill as well as the House.  Reconciliation finds common ground that becomes the final bill.  Everyone “wins” and everyone “loses.”  Think of a debate as “verbal negotiation” where both parties surrender some ground to the other party in order to achieve a common goal.  The result?  Two winners, no losers.

On the other hand, a polemic is a verbal contest of one conviction versus another.  There are no compromises, winner takes all.  Wikipedia defines “polemic” thusly; “…a polemic is intended only to establish the truth of a point of view while refuting the opposing point of view.”  Think of a polemic as “verbal combat” that “takes no prisoners.”  The result?  Victor and vanquished.  In fact, the word “polemic” comes from the Greek word polemos meaning “war.”  According to Merriam Webster on line dictionary the first known use of the word “polemic” is traced to 1638.  Wikipedia asserts that “polemic” did not come into common usage until 1815 – 1820.  It’s use was not common early on as it is not listed in Webster’s 1828.

In our day and time, the clear difference between debate and polemics is blurred nearly to extinction.  Our post-modern existential culture, not recognizing truth of any kind, asserts that there is no such thing as a “conviction,” there is only the ever changing opinion.  Increasingly those holding true convictions, the polemics among us if you please, are seen as “narrow minded,” “judgmental,” “bigoted” and “hateful.”  To espouse any kind of “absolute” assaults the primary “virtue” of our culture…”tolerance.”

Spiritually speaking, even a casual examination of the Bible reveals a multitude of polemic episodes from Genesis to Revelation!  The first polemic contest in the Bible takes place while Adam and Eve are still in the garden, though not for long.

 

God: “...thou shalt surely die!”

Satan: “…thou shalt NOT surely die!”[1]

 

God took no prisoners, as the polemic promise of Christ striking Satan’s head took place on Resurrection Morning!  Nearly every page of the Bible is polemic in nature.  Good vs. evil, light vs. darkness, bitter vs. sweet, truth vs. falsehood, obedience vs. rebellion, faith vs. unbelief.  Many scriptures set the Christians polemic paradigm but two are prominent, II Corinthians 6.14 – 18 and I Peter 3.13 – 16.  In the II Corinthians passage Paul sets the polemic stage in the most stark contrast possible in the rhetorical question format. Peter pulls out his “metaphorical sword” and challenges us all to be ready for the polemic contest.  For those inclined to “tolerance,” “coexistence,” “opinion” and “accommodation,” the Bible will prove unsettling.  If one finds polemics uncomfortable, one will certainly find the Bible even more disturbing.  Polemicists abound in God’s Word!   Let’s examine 12 of the Bibles most prominent polemicists:

1.   CHRIST – Our Lord and Savior uttered the most polemic statement of all time: “I am THE way, THE truth and THE life.  NO MAN comes to the Father EXCEPT by me!” – John 14.6

2.   PAUL – Paul had polemic encounters nearly everywhere he went: “The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent…” – Acts 17.30

3.   JOHN THE BAPTIST – The tenacity of John was admired by Christ as he truly was a polemicist “faithful unto death.” – “…Herod had seized John and bound him and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, because John had been saying to him, “It is not lawful for you to have her.” – Matthew 14.3 – 4

4.   PETER & JOHN – After being threatened by the Sanhedrin for speaking in Jesus’ Name, Peter and John offer up a polemic remembered by many even today: “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” – Acts 4.12

5.   STEPHEN – Having been arrested for speaking in the Forbidden Name, Stephen issues a polemic challenge to the Sanhedrin: “You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did.  Which one of the prophets did your fathers not persecute?  They killed those who previously announced the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become; you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it.” – Acts 7.51 – 53

6.   JEREMIAH – The “Weeping Prophet” never converted anyone but his polemics are still honored by God’s people.  He stood up to the king and his entire nation issuing one polemic challenge after another.  “Thus says the Lord, “Behold, I am giving this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he will burn it with fire.  You will not escape from his hand, for you will surely be captured and delivered into his hand; and you will see the king of Babylon eye to eye, and he will speak to you face to face, and you will go to Babylon.’” - Jeremiah 34.2b – 3

7.   MOSES – The polemic war between Moses and Pharaoh is iconic.  Who could ever forget; “The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, sent me to you, saying, “Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness.  But behold, you have not listened until now.” - Exodus 7.16

8.   ELIJAH – As polemics go, no confrontation between good and evil is more poignant than the face off on top of Mt. Carmel between Elijah and the 450 prophets of Baal! – Observe  his polemic public prayer shouted out loud for all to hear; “O Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that You are God in Israel and that I am Your servant and I have done all these things at Your word.  Answer me, O Lord, answer me, that this people may know that You, O Lord, are God , and that You have turned their heart back again.” - I Kings 18.36 – 40

9.   SHADRACH, MESHACH & ABEDNEGO – It was like a spiritual “shoot out at the O.K. Coral.”  With a backdrop of the “Fiery Furnace,” Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego drew a line in the sand for King Nebuchadnezzar, the most powerful man in the world: “O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to give you an answer concerning this matter.  If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the furnace of blazing fire; and He will deliver us out of your hand, O king.  But even if He does not, let it be known to you, O king, that we are not going to serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.” – Daniel 3.16b - 18

10.               JOSHUA & CALEB – Jesus enjoins us all to remain “faithful unto death.”  When Joshua and Caleb were faced with death by stoning they continued to lay down their polemic challenge to the rebellious Israelis; “The land which we passed through to spy out is an exceedingly good land.  If the Lord is pleased with us, then He will bring us into this land and give it to us – a land which flows with milk and honey.  Only do not rebel against the Lord; and do not fear the people of the land, for they will be our prey.  Their protection has been removed from them, and the Lord is with us; do not fear them.” Numbers 14.1 - 10

11.               SAMUEL – One man of God transitioned Israel from foreign subjection to the dawn of power and prosperity.  The first king of Israel, Saul, turned out to be a rebellious apostate requiring Samuel to polemically challenge him.  “Is it not true, though you were little in your own eyes, you were made the head of the tribes of Israel?  And the Lord anointed you king over Israel, and the Lord sent you on a mission and said, ‘Go and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are exterminated.’  Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord, but rushed upon the spoil and did what was evil in the sight of the Lord?” - I Samuel 15.17 – 19

12.               NATHAN – One can imagine just how difficult a polemic is when    the opposition is a good friend and brother.  Such was the case with Nathan the prophet.  He was the personal prophet and confidant of his good friend, King David.  Despite his personal feelings towards the king, Nathan does not shirk from his polemic responsibilities.  "You are the man! Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul.  And I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more.  Why have you despised the word of the LORD, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites.  Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.'  Thus says the LORD, 'Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun.  For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.'"  - I Samuel 12.1 – 14

 

Thank God He speaks to us through His word polemically, candidly, forthrightly and clearly!  We are challenged by Him to speak the same way to those who are outside of Gods will for “faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God!”   May those hearers have “ears to hear” the polemics of God.

 

-      Russ McCullough / 9 April 2013

---

[1] All Scripture references are from either the King James, English Standard or New American Standard versions.

Growing Papal Influence Within Emerging churches of Christ – Apostasy Redux?

How the “Tail of Tradition” is Wagging the “Theological Dog” in a Growing Number of Congregations Among Us

Benedictine Papal Coat of Arms rendering courtesy of Wikepedia.com

All over our fair city one is finding advertisements for many “holy week” observances. Here, and elsewhere, congregations claiming to be churches of Christ are advertising “holy week” observances such as  “Good Friday” and / or “Easter” worship services.  We must, therefore, ask the question; “Are these celebrations biblical?”  Did Jesus and His Apostles command such celebrations?  Did the Apostles celebrate these things themselves?  Did they even infer that such celebrations were allowed?  The answer is a resounding, NO!

From Matthew to Revelation we find nary a trace of anything called “Holy Week.”  To add such celebrations to the Holy Scripture would be presumptuous, arrogant and wrong.  How, then, did the several observances of “Holy Week” come into being?  The so-called “Holy Week” has six components:

·         Ash Wednesday

·         Lent

·         Palm Sunday

·         Maundy Thursday

·         Good Friday

·         Easter Sunday

What do all of these celebrations have in common?  They are all Roman Catholic in origin and have “meanings” that are allegorically assigned.   Allegorical interpretive methods were adopted by the apostate church beginning in the 2^nd century based most notably upon the teachings of the so-called “church father,” Origen.  Origen taught that all Scripture has multiple meanings and each individual can interpret the Scripture based upon their own individual experiences, understandings and stories.  The RCC then began to assign “meanings” to Scripture erroneously (in error.)  Strangely, even the Catholic Encyclopedia admits that these celebrations were unknown in the first century:

…there seems much to suggest that the Church in the Apostolic Age designed to commemorate the Resurrection of Christ, not by an annual, but by a weekly celebration.[1]

Before you take umbrage at your writer, the claim that Origen’s Platonic philosophy[2] is the foundation of “tradition over revelation,” please note that such is not my claim but the claim of Pope Benedict XVI himself!  Here is what the self-proclaimed “vicar of Christ” said about Origen just five years ago this month:

In our meditations on the great figures of the ancient Church, today we will get to know one of the most outstanding. Origen of Alexandria is one of the key people for the development of Christian thought. He draws on the teachings he inherited from Clement of Alexandria, whom we reflected upon last Wednesday, and brings them forward in a totally innovative way, creating an irreversible turn in Christian thought.  He was a true teacher; this is how his students nostalgically remembered him: not only as a brilliant theologian, but as an exemplary witness of the doctrine he taught.  In substance, he grounded theology in the explanations of the Scriptures; or we could also say that his theology is the perfect symbiosis between theology and exegesis. In truth, the characterizing mark of Origen's doctrine seems to reside in his incessant invitation to pass from the letter to the spirit of the Scriptures, to progress in the knowledge of God.  And this "allegoristic" approach, wrote von Balthasar, coincides precisely "with the development of Christian dogma carried out by the teachings of the doctors of the Church," who -- in one way or another -- accepted the "lesson" of Origen. In this way, Tradition and the magisterium, foundation and guarantee of theological research, reach the point of being "Scripture in act."[3]

Just what does the pope mean when he uses the phrase “Scripture in act?”  He means that, based upon Origen, church tradition in practice…over time…becomes “revelation.”  In other words, church tradition practiced over time TRUMPS Scripture!  Thus, even though NONE of these “holy week” observances are commanded, exampled or inferred in the Word of God…they are “Scripture in act” due to their centuries old practice by papal directive…according to the pope. 

Here is a short history of these allegorical additions to God’s complete Will…“the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”  -  Jude 3 (KJV):

1)    1) ASH WEDNESDAY – Ash Wednesday is the beginning of the 40 days of Lent.  The name comes from the practice of taking the ashes from the previous years burnt palm leaves form “Palm Sunday” and spreading them on the foreheads of parishioners in the form of a cross.  This is said to be representative of “mourning and repentance.”  This supposedly prepares the adherents for the 40 days of Lent following. Historically, Ash Wednesday was first celebrated annually beginning around the year 960.

2)      2) LENT – The word “Lent” is from the old English word lencten which means to “lengthen” and was used to describe the longer days of the spring season.  The time span of “Lent” was totally allegorical and imaginative.  It was based upon the fact that Jesus spent 40 days in the wilderness as He prepared for His temptation.  Other allegorical assignments were also made:

The duration of the season of Lent is based on the ancient church custom of requiring catechumens to undergo a forty-day period of doctrinal instruction and fasting before being baptized on the evening before Easter.  This probationary period was called the quarantine (from the Latin word for forty). [4]

The annual celebration of Lent dates to the mid 5^th century and is noted by several church historians of that time; Leo, Socrates and Jerome.

3)      PALM SUNDAY – Palm Sunday was never celebrated in the apostolic era and apparently not annually celebrated until the 6^th century at the very earliest.[5]

4)      MAUNDY THURSDAY – Thursday is the traditional day of the Lord’s Supper.  “Maunday” comes from the Latin term mandatum novum, meaning new commandment.  It is also known as “Holy Thursday” or “Green Thursday.”

Zelený čtvrtek (Green Thursday) is how the Czechs and Moravians refer to Maundy Thursday. One explanation is that in many places, before the thirteenth century, green vestments were used for the Mass that day. Another is that this is a reference to "the Green Ones," the penitents who, being re-admitted to the Church, wore sprigs of green herbs to express their joy.[6] 

5)      GOOD FRIDAY – The annual celebration of both Good Friday and Easter date to, at the earliest, the 2^nd century A.D.  Though unknown in the 1^st century, these two festivals were the earliest of practiced “Holy Week” observances from a historical standpoint.

6)      EASTER – The word “Easter” comes from the old Anglo-Saxon word, eostre.  The word generally came to refer to the “spring season.”  It has clear pagan overtones since the word was the name for the so-called goddess of spring:

This mythical figure is said to have been the goddess of the sunrise and the spring. She is the Teutonic goddess of the dawn. The direction of the sunrise, East, is named for her. In Norse mythology, the name is spelled Eostare. Another considered the Norse/Saxon goddess of spring is Ostara. Eastre is believed to be an ancient word for spring.[7]

CONCLUSION:

Any and all “Holy Week” celebrations are at best extra-biblical and at worst un-biblical.  They are all allegorical, presumptuous and self centered.  They were created by men for men and do not glorify God in any way, shape, matter or form.  We were called, not to “Holy Week” but to holy living!  We celebrate the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ EVERY Lord’s Day during the Lord’s Supper and not during an annual celebration of so-called “Holy Week.” 

With all due love and respect for our erring brethren, the embrace of Roman Catholic “holy week” (or significant parts thereof) tradition constitutes a theological un-equal yoking with un-believers.  Sadly, a large number of churches of Christ are now heeding the words of Pope Benedict XVI more than the words of God’s Holy Word by accepting, instead, the magisterium.  For a biblical perspective on how God wants us to remember the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, read I Corinthians 11. 23 – 34.  Let us go back to the Bible and avoid an apostasy redux.

– Russ McCullough – 8 April 2012

---

NOTE: An "Emerging church of Christ" is a congregation focusing on it's own "theological evolution" rather than eternal and static truth.  For more information on the "emerging church," read Brian McLaren's 
A Generous Orthodoxy.


[1] http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09152a.htm

[2] Plato understood Homer allegorically and so Origen taught that God’s Word could be understood allegorically as well.  An allegory is a fictional illustration of a point of fiction.  Such allegories have multiple meanings and multiple interpretations – after all, it’s only fiction!

[3] Origene: il mondo, Cristo e la Chiesa," tr. it., Milano 1972, p. 43. (Benedict XVI. Homily On Origen of Alexandria. Vatican City. Zenit - April 25, 2007).  [RM NOTE: According to the Catholic Encyclopedia On Line, Magesterium & Tradition is defined thusly: “The word refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another sometimes to the organ or mode of the transmission.”]

[4] http://www.stpaulskingsville.org/lent.htm#WHAT DOES THE WORD "LENT" MEAN?

[5] http://www.orlutheran.com/html/holyweek.html

[6] http://www.myczechrepublic.com/czech_culture/czech_holidays/easter/green_thursday.html

[7] http://www.allabouthistory.org/origin-of-the-word-easter-faq.htm

Un or Non Denominational?

The current issue (April 2012) of the Christian Chronicle leads with this headline:

Declining Numbers, but Signs of Hope?

NEW DIRECTORY for Churches of Christ in the U.S. shows a loss of members and congregations.  At the same time, interest in non-denominational Christianity soars.

What does reporter Erik Tryggestad find as “signs of hope?”  Here are some quotations from the story:

They (young Christians) just don’t see why it (the Lord’s church) must have the words “Church of Christ” on its building…

Our generation wants more Jesus and not more tradition.

We’re all about relationship…

…many Lipscomb students attend ETHOS CHURCH, a congregation started by a former campus minister for the university.  The church meets in the Cannery Ballroom, a downtown Nashville bar and music venue and has multiple worship services, all with instruments.  The Harpeth Hills church of Christ in Brentwood, TN. helped fund the church as it began.

Young Christians don’t look for the name “Church of Christ” when choosing a place to worship…And we’re not looking for instrumental music…We’re looking for how we can connect with God.

We used to say, “We are Christians only but not the only Christians.”  What happened to that?[1]

Two things are disturbing here.  First of all, with one exception, specific Scripture citations are missing.[2]  In addition, history has been rewritten to suit the present day.
 

First and foremost, the church of Christ is not a denomination nor is it "non-denominational."

The blood bought Body of Christ is UN - denominational.

Jesus promised to build His church (singular) in Matthew 16.18 - 20.  In Acts 2.41, 47 we read that His promised singular church was established on the Day of Pentecost and "God added to that church (singular) daily those who were being saved." Words mean things.  The word “denomination” is a mathematical term meaning “division.”  The bottom number of a fraction is known as the “denominator.”  A denomination, by definition, is a division from the original. 

The phrase "non-denominational" is bandied about by those denominationalists (in current semantical usage) who advocate religious pluralism.  In reality, “non-denominationalism” is the mixing together of many denominations together into a singular setting.  It is not the rejection of denominationalism, it is the acceptance of multiple denominations! 

This view is marketed by some among us with the phrase; "We are Christians only, but not the only Christians."  In real history, this phrase was used to describe the fact that un-denominational Christianity was springing up all over the American frontier and those finding the truth of the gospel did so without any knowledge or contact with other New Testament Christians in other locations. Today this quotation has been co-opted by many departing churches of Christ who embrace the so-called "emerging church" theories of non-Christian theologians. 

To those who celebrate these "other Christians," please consider these questions: 1) Who are these "other Christians?"  2) How did these "other Christians" become such?  3) When did God begin adding Christians (those who have repented of their sins and have been baptized for the remission of those sins in the Name of Jesus) to churches other than the church of Christ? 

The purpose and mission of the singular church of Christ was clearly articulated by our Lord in Matthew 28.18 -20.  We, too, should “be about our Father’s business.” We are to make disciples, baptize and to teach all things taught by Christ in the gospels, the Acts, the epistles and the Revelation for “all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God.”  Our mission is to preach and teach the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, the very same gospel proclaimed by Peter and the rest of the apostles on the Day of Pentecost.  It is NOT for us to become just another “non-denominational” denomination. 

---

[1] All quotations are from: Erik Tryggestad in “Declining Numbers, but signs of hope?” The Christian Chronicle, Vol. 69, No. 4, April 2012.  From page 1 continued on page 10

[2] The only Scripture citation is a generic reference to the Pentecostian congregation in Jerusalem.  (Acts 2)   The text is used as a “proof text” that this congregation was prototypical for all congregations which would follow.  Such Is not the case.