|
|
|
Have modern churches become too 'tradition oriented?'
|
|
RELIGIOUSLYINCORRECT.org
I believe many of us understand the danger of allowing what initially might have been a "good, smart church decision"—to be enforced
so long that it macroevolves into a deeply cherished tradition.
So deeply cherished, in fact, that it comes to be viewed as God's actual will.
Although such highly revered traditions often begin by not being identified as "Bible"—the insistence of certain
church leaders upon them makes it clear that they have risen to the status of the "de facto" word of God.
"Phariseeism" then reaches full bloom, with all its evils of gossip, slander, debates, and ultimately division. And not always
visible division, but often division of thought among congregations, exclusion of churches from directories, ostracizing of individuals or
churches absent of the Biblical process of "disfellowshipping," granting of the left (instead of the right) hand of fellowship—and the like.
(Matt 15; 23:23; 5:20)
Like Corinth, factions often occur within a single church, which IS division in the mind of God. And, as you know, God will not tolerate
those who seek to destroy unity (unity based on Biblical truth, that is). Christ died so that we would all be "one."
The perilous disease of "Phariseeism"
This perilous condition of "Phariseeism" can result undoubtedly in a number of ways, but one of the more obvious is this:
Christians fail to adequately grow in personal knowledge (a systemic church problem these days), they become dependent on pulpit teaching, they are
indirectly educated by osmosis on the mechanics of church function, while never Biblically understanding the "whys" and "why-nots"
of their practices and beliefs. Their actions come to no longer be based on obedience to the word of God—but
on maintenance of religious habit, traditional norms, and comfort zones.
And anything outside that comfort zone is strongly resisted—but often not from a scriptural basis
(instead, usually from a so-called "logical" one).
Eventually, the tradition becomes so entrenched that congregants begin to strongly resist
any modification of them, even going to the extent of seeking out Scriptures—not for the purpose of discovering or reaffirming
truth—but for the purpose of reassuring themselves that what they've been doing all along was God's required will. The temptation is
often succumbed to to slightly twist or modify Biblical meaning, or to ignore obvious Biblical counter logic.
Practically every liberty that evolves to tradition will eventually oppose the will of God
Almost any "liberty" allowed by God's word will eventually, if kept intact long enough, come to violate our desire to always "seek what pleases
the Lord" by giving 100%.
Initial "good intentions" can become inherited by others who have different circumstances, which would require a "tweaking" or "rethinking"
of the original decisions. This is the will of Christ: that we do what is best for His cause, rather than what makes us feel most
comfortable, or rather than what will cause the least strife among those dangerously advanced in spiritual immaturity and unspirituality.
Sadly, modern church leaders, who understand that to outright proclaim a tradition as "gospel truth" would be easily disprovable, instead
choose to "strongly insist" on certain actions by others, actions they deem to be "the only possible sensible approach."
Some tough questions in the mirror...
With all that in mind, here are a few questions I believe the modern church needs to consider:
Could it be true that our churches, in large part, have habitually come to elevate tradition over the word of God?
Could it be that—from the church signs we're "allowed" in front of our buildings to the translations we use—our
actions are based more on maintaining comfort zones than on what's best for Christ?
Could it be that much of what appears to be lukewarmness among us is actually the manifestation of traditional norms of Christian behavior?
Could it be that we've lost track of the clear line of delineation that must exist between liberty and law?
Could it be that we have come to insist on some liberties as though they were law?
These are questions modern churches should sit down and ponder, because it seems there is no other logical explanation
for many of our church actions and decisions—than that we have become, in some congregations, tradition-based.
And surely we must know the danger of falling into the tradition trap, which doomed the Pharisees of Jesus' day. (Matt 15; Matt 5:20)
If the shoe doesn't fit, we certainly shouldn't wear it. But if it does, then perhaps it's time for a change of attitude in some our churches.
That's because reliance on tradition, instead of Biblically provable truth, is an extremely dangerous path to travel.
Nothing good comes from it. Division, separation, unspirituality, and the like—can be guaranteed to result.
"Speaking where the Bible speaks..."
It's long been a motto in some churches that we "speak [only] where the Bible speaks, and are silent where the Bible is silent."
Could it be true that repeating this motto has itself become a tradition—but sincerely subscribing to it is being ignored?
Are we often finding ourselves unable to produce clear and logical Biblical evidence to back what we insist upon?
The Bible is abundantly clear that God desires that we strive to truly obey everything in His word, and that we must be careful not to add to it or subtract from it. (Mt 4:4; 28:18-20; Dt 4:2; etc, etc)
Please note: We must neither ADD to it nor SUBTRACT from it. Both are equally important.
We must understand where law ends and liberty begins.
"Do not call 'sin' what God has not called 'sin'"
We must never substitute the teachings of the Holy Spirit with Biblically untenable personal positions.
And, if we cannot make a clear, logical case for what we insist others must do, we sin if we force our viewpoints upon them.
We also sin if we withhold full fellowship from those who frankly have not sinned, but instead have merely disregarded a tradition—or
a cherished traditional (albeit Biblically illogical) teaching.
Should Christians be thoughtful and considerate of those who possess different views? The Bible is clear that we should, that we must (Rom 14).
But in the process of doing that, those who believe they are "the strong" must prove this by their actions; by never
insisting upon traditional "requirements" they could not possibly prove logically from Scripture.
Nor must we give those who choose to not follow our traditions the "left hand of fellowship."
This sin too has become traditional behavior in far too many churches. Men, and churches, who have not
undergone any Biblical disfellowship action (because, frankly, the process would expose the inanity of doing so)
are treated as though they had been formally disfellowshipped. Indeed, such targets of dissatisfaction have
never been Biblically informed of the reason(s) for their exclusions. They are left to assume.
This is Satanic, divisive, and evil.
We sin egregiously if we actually disfellowship those who frankly have not sinned, or those we cannot Biblically prove have sinned, or those
we never Biblically and clearly inform. The inability to make Biblical cases is a disturbing sign that "tradition" has become the god of our servitude.
Those who do these things will be accountable to God.
Imagine how many Christians today will feel when they find out they had condemned someone Christ approved? Paul specifically condemned this in Romans 14.
We must staunchly hold the line of truth
While, on the one hand, we should despise the god of tradition—conversely, we must still hold firmly the line on
actual, Biblically provable truth.
Sometimes people can think that just because they've heard something so many times from someone they love, it must therefore be true.
So many modern false Christian religions are fueled by this false sense of security.
All, including those we love, must present Biblically
logical proof for anything they want to force upon us.
Likewise, if what they are saying is true, then it's God's will—it must be obeyed.
If our case cannot be clearly made from the Bible, it should not be insisted upon. Of course, when it comes to liberty (which is what tradition actually often is), we cannot condemn that so long as the decision was based on a sincere desire to do what truly pleases Christ our Lord—rather than a desire to remain in one's comfort zone.
By the same token, if others don't go along with our view of "liberty," we cannot oppose them, or withhold any fragment of our fellowship.
I plan to have much more to say about all this in the near future.
In the meantime, please join me in reaffirming our need to truly allow Christ to be Lord in all our decisions and actions!
He is the one we must be trying to please, not man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
