Chapter 22, "The Hard Choice." The choices we have left are not easy. On the one hand, we can ignore the historic evidence. If we do that, we will continue to tear apart the body of Christ, breaking Christ apart further. On the other hand, we can swallow our sectarian pride. We can admit that as a church, we evangelical Protestants have failed miserably. We have trumpeted the motto "Sola Scriptura," yet we haven't even been true to our own motto.
Instead of getting back to "just the Bible," we have added our own sectarian traditions to Scripture. The churches born out of the Reformation had been like the proverbial Humpty Dumpty, who couldn't be put back together again. We Protestants had never been able to exist together as one united body. In fact, just a few hundred years ago, we were imprisoning, torturing, and hanging other Protestants, such as the Anabaptists, Brethren, Quakers, and dissenting evangelicals.
In our great learning and wisdom, we turn our noses up at the teachings and practices of the early church. But perhaps we would do well to listen to what Irenaeus told the Gnostic sects of his day. After all, his description of the Gnostic sects sounds curiously similar to our Protestant sects. Quote: "As many of them as there are, they depart from each other, holding so many different opinions as to one thing, and bearing about their clever notions in secret within themselves.
When, therefore, they have all agreed among themselves as to the things written beforehand in the Scriptures, then they still will be refuted by us. In the meantime, in addition to holding wrong beliefs, they condemn themselves anyway, for they are not of one mind with regard to the same things. In contrast, we follow the one and only true God as our teacher; we possess his words as the rule of truth; and we do all speak alike with regard to the same things." End quote.
We are so quick to correct the early Christians for their theological, quote, "errors," yet it is we who need to learn from them. When we have shown that we can all be one, maybe then we can instruct them. Until then, what we need is some heartfelt repentance for our sectarian spirit. If the Corinthian church couldn't properly come together for communion because of their conflicts, are our communions acceptable to God?
Paul rebuked the Corinthians for their divisions, saying, "You are still carnal; for where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?" That's 1 Corinthians 3:3. Maybe that's what we are, carnal men and women in need of a godly rebuke. First subheading: "My Decision." I will tell you what decision I have made. As I have mentioned, at first I fought bitterly against the things I was finding in the historic record of the church.
But eventually, I yielded when I realized how thoroughly biblical their Christianity was. I knew that I had to be at one with them. I shared these things with my family, and we prayed about it, and as a family we made a commitment to turn our lives around. It was the only decision to make. As a lawyer, I knew how I would approach the writings of the Apostles if they had been contracts or deeds. Without hesitation, I would have looked at the course of performance, as evidenced by the 2nd-century writings.
It was the common-sense thing to do. When my eternal life and my relationship with God were at stake, could I be any less exacting? Didn't I still have to look at the course of performance? And once I read the Scriptures through the eyes of the primitive church, I knew I never wanted to read them again through the tint of my then-20th-century glasses. I realized that one of two things had happened, or was going to happen.
Either the primitive Christians had had a rude awakening after they had died and found out how apostate they had been, or I was going to have a rude awakening after I died and found out how apostate I had been. The latter seemed to be the more likely event. So I decided I would rather have the rude awakening now. So did my family. That is not to say that our lifestyle and our views have changed overnight. It has taken us several years to flush out some of our old ways of thinking.
And we still have a long way to go. But we have committed ourselves to make these changes together as a family. Some people have criticized us for moving too slowly. Others think we're extremists. However, the only opinion we care about is God's. Next subheading: "What Will Your Decision Be?" But now the ball is in your court. What will you do? The easiest course of action will be to ignore this book and to forget that the early Christians even existed.
It will be far easier to retreat back to the comfort of your denomination, safely protected by its seminaries and theological literature. Or perhaps you will satisfy yourself by finding loopholes or imperfections in this common-sense approach to understanding Scripture. Admittedly, it's not a perfect system. Winston Churchill once said, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried." The same thing could be said about my common-sense approach.
It's the worst system there is, except for all the rest. The best system would be to ask the Bible writers themselves what they meant. But that option is closed. The second-best system would be to ask the New Testament congregations what the Apostles meant. But that option is closed too. And the third-best system would be to ask the next generation of Christians. That option is available. It's the third-best system, but it's the best we have.
I realize that I have addressed some matters in this book that many of my readers will find disturbing. These very same things unsettled me originally. However, I have shared these painful things with you only because I want something very wonderful for you and for the entire church. Next subheading: "If You Have Decided to Ignore This Book." If you have already decided to reject this approach to Scripture, I want to ask you: what is your solution?
What system of interpretation do you propose that can bring together in one body all of us who love God and believe the Bible? Please don't say, "Well, if everyone would just go by the Bible, we could all be one." We've already hashed that out. That was plan A. That's what the reformers tried. That's what millions of Christians have been trying ever since. Plan A hasn't worked because we can't agree on what the Bible teaches. If plan A had worked, I wouldn't have bothered to write this book.
But since it didn't work, we need to try plan B, the common-sense approach. But if you're not willing to try plan B, let me ask you again: what is your plan? After all, if you and I aren't working for a solution to the divisions in the body of Christ, we are part of the problem. We can't plead innocence to Jesus and say, "It wasn't our fault your body was so divided; there was nothing we could do about it." There is something we can do about it. We can try plan B.
Or if someone has a better plan, he or she can let us all know about it so that we can try that plan. Next subheading: "We All Once Had Open Minds." At one time, every one of us had a mind that was open to hear God's truth. This may have been when we were children. Or it may have been when we were converted from godless lives to Christianity. Or perhaps it was when we grew disillusioned with the group in which we were raised. Whenever it was, our minds were once truly open to hear what God had to say.
But when our minds were open, did anyone bother to explain to us what the early Christians believed? Were their beliefs and practices ever set before us as an alternate course to follow? I know that nobody ever gave me that opportunity, nor is it likely that it was ever given to you. So our entire belief systems were formed without our ever having been given the opportunity to try out historic Christianity.
Unfortunately, now our belief systems are already established, so it's difficult for us to objectively look at early Christianity. Yet we owe it to ourselves to take at least one honest, objective look. We deserve to see what Christianity was like in its primitive years. Last subheading: "Of White Rats and Men." In college, our science professor once told us about an experiment with white rats.
The purpose of the experiment, he told us, was to provide additional evidence that children who are abused or emotionally starved do not learn as quickly as more privileged children. The researchers wanted to demonstrate that principle using two groups of white rats. The researchers hand-fed the rats in group A. They gently petted them several times a day and even spoke softly to them. In contrast, they had no personal contact with the rats in group B.
Those rats had been dumped into a cage and were fed through a sliding door. After about a month of this treatment, it was time to see how quickly the two groups of rats would learn their way through a maze. So the researchers called in a group of college science students. They introduced the students to the two groups of rats and explained to them the differences in treatment. They demonstrated the series of tests the students were to run on the rats. The students were then left alone to conduct the experiments.
To no one's surprise, the students found that the rats in group A learned more quickly than the underprivileged rats in group B. But then came the real surprise. The entire experiment was a hoax. There never had been two groups of rats. Rather, until the day of the maze, all of the rats had been together. All of them had been treated alike. They had been divided into groups A and B only moments before the students had arrived. Why, then, did the experiments show group A to learn faster?
Because the students already had a preconceived notion that those rats would learn faster. They let their preconceptions affect their observations of the rats. The real experiment had been to demonstrate the effect of preconceived notions. And it had demonstrated well. Like those students, you will only be wasting your time if you read the early Christian writings through the tinted glasses of your preconceived theological views. Your biases will color everything you read.
So before reading, it is essential that you temporarily set aside all of your beliefs. Then simply listen to what the historical record has to say. Let your mind be transported back to the 1st and 2nd centuries. Breathe in the culture and thought patterns of that age. As you read, remember that these writings are not some kind of second canon. The personal views and idiosyncrasies of each writer are not particularly important.
Your quest is to find out how the primitive church in general understood the New Testament. In other words, what was the course of performance of the first generations of Christians? As you have read enough of their works to have a good feel for their culture, mindset, and overall Christian beliefs, go back and reread the New Testament. Read it through their pattern of thinking. See what new things you will discover. When you're all through, you're free to go back and pick up all of your former beliefs if you like.
But perhaps you never will.