The End… Or A New Beginning?

Well, it’s been awhile since I posted here.  Although I don’t usually write about myself (for my ministry isn’t about “me,” it’s about “Him”), I think a few words of explanation are in order as to what’s going on with ‘me’ at this time.  For folks who like it short and sweet, this is my last post at Preterist News. The reason?  Basically, I’m through dealing with Preterism and Hyper-Preterism.  I’ll explain in a moment.  However, permit me to say this was not a choice that I made in the span of the last few days, or the last week, or even the past few months.  It’s the final step in a series of decisions that started last year, when I began to realize the importance of maintaining an “absolutist” approach to Christian doctrine..

The Premises Will Get You

       In previous articles, I have written a bit about the fallacy of holding to an “evolutionary” view of Christian theology.  Those who maintain this view usually teach that the church’s understanding of Christian doctrine has been “developing” since the close of the apostolic age, and that consequently, the man with the latest theories is to be eminently admired, and to have the nations sit at his feet while he pontificates on what everyone “missed” for the past 2,000 years.  Although I have articulated as best I could why such an understanding is erroneous, it was not until this afternoon that the root of the fallacy became clear to my apprehension..

Unpacking “Sola Scriptura”

    Of all the doctrines most necessary for the maintenance of Christian truth and teaching, perhaps none is so important as “Sola Scriptura.”  And yet when we come to examine what “Sola Scriptura” actually means, we find that definitions differ radically among professing Christians.  The difference involves, NOT the fact that the Bible is deemed the center of authority for the Christian faith, but how one uses the Bible.  One interpreter reasons from the premise that the New Testament contains the final assessment of truth for the entire church age.  Another person believes that the N.T. only contains the “deposit” from which the final assessment must be developed.  The former views the Bible as an all-sufficient standard; the latter as the “raw material” which must be refined in the crucible of the interpreter’s “best judgment.”  The former maintains that the “finished product” is the New Testament canon; the latter that the “finished product” is a theological “system.”  Under the first theory, there is remarkable similarity of opinion among theologians regarding the truths of Christianity.  Under the second, there is little consensus.  And so theologians take arms against each other  —   the greatest divines being accounted the greatest warriors.  Amid the dust of battle, few seem to realize that despite their admirable desire to “defend the truth,” the feud is a futile one; for the simple reason that the truths of Christianity were not meant to be debated, but received and believed (Romans 10: 17; James 1: 21; 1 Peter 1: 2).  Only when fallible men stop claiming the final assessment of truth will the smoke clear away, and much-needed peace be restored to Christ’s church..

The Mainstay Of “Sola Scriptura”

    As one who is considered (at least by my friends) to be a faithful Protestant, I hold tenaciously to the principle of “Sola Scriptura.”  And yet, when I begin to articulate my understanding of what “Sola Scriptura” really is, I find that the conventional definitions fall so short that they fail to help ME clarify what I believe.  Of course, if there were some standardized formula to which I could resort, I would be “made in the shade.”  But there isn’t.  That there are certain definitions which pose as standardized expressions of the “Sola Scriptura” concept does not solve my problem, because these very definitions fail to differentiate between the actual teachings of Scripture and the inferences and deductions which men draw therefrom.  Since our inferences are fallible and uninspired, they cannot without peril be raised to an authority equal with Scripture itself.  And yet this is often exactly what is done!  Man’s deductions are unconsciously substituted for the implicit teachings of God’s word; merely through failure to distinguish between declarative and inferential doctrine.  The one is contained in God’s word, and is a constant variable.  The other is produced in the laboratory of man’s brain, and is as fluctuating as the wind.  These facts considered, a bit of sober reflection will apprise any reasonable man that the distinction must be made before we can know what “Sola Scriptura” means..

The Monologue Apologist

   There is something to be said for the old adage that in simplicity resides an inherent beauty.  At least I have found that to be so from personal experience.  Theology becomes ugly in direct ratio as it becomes more complex.  Of course, I realize that complexity  —  or perhaps sophistication is the better word —  arises in most cases from a desire to address the concerns of one’s opponents, who posit objections and imagined confutations without end, insomuch that at the end of the day all creeds and all theologies seem discredited.  But regardless of all the conflicting voices, I have not so learned Christ.  The Christian religion is one of great simplicity; and since in this property exists its main strength, Christianity has its own kind of beauty.  Beauty not sensual, nor even intellectual: but eminently spiritual..

Development Versus Demolition

   One of the prominent signs of disease in Christendom today, is the spirit of wanton revisionism pawned off as organic development.  For some reason, the distemper has taken whole sections of the professing church under its spell, so that anybody who calls for a return to historic Christianity is branded an enemy of progress —   one who would fain hustle the church back into the dark ages.  When we come, however, to analyze the modernistic tendencies, their rationale and modus operandi, we can’t help but see that they are based, not on a desire to attain the truth, but on the ambitions of those who wish to make a name for themselves in the academic, religious, and secular worlds.  As with all forms of pride and self-will, the tendency to demolish the ancient landmarks of our faith must be weeded out and pruned back, else they will plunge Christendom into a chaos of doctrinal confusion, the likes of which man has never yet seen..

Defusing Hyper-Preterism: Step #2 — Premises, Premises, Premises!

    As the first step needed to combat Hyper-Preterism is a gathering together of the right materials, so the second step will be to have the right premises and presuppositions.  Don’t let anyone fool you on this.  Premises are important.  Whether we realize it or not, we all approach the sacred text with certain premises and presuppositions which may be right or wrong.  If our foundational tenets are correct, then our interpretations will be properly guided, and we’ll be able to arrive at the objective truths of Scripture.  If wrong, then we are bound to go astray, and will eventually make shipwreck of our faith.  One of the things which many folks who fight Hyper-Preterism don’t understand, is that the main contention between H.P. and orthodoxy is not exegetical at all, but presuppositional.  They think that by debating proof-texts, flexing their dialectic muscles, or splitting hairs over Greek grammar, they will defeat Hyper-Preterism for once and for all.  But it never amounts to anything substantive, simply because the underlying premises on which Hyper-Preterism is built are never addressed..

Defusing Hyper-Preterism: Step #1 — Getting Your Materials In Order

   For the Christian who has set out to combat Hyper-Preterism in an internet setting, a proper game-plan is essential.  Not only must he know what Hyper-Preterist theology is all about, but must learn something of the premises that underlie their system of interpretation.  Hence, before even dealing with Hyper-Preterists, the student must have the proper materials in hand for refuting their heresy.  This includes a wide range of theological, historical, and presuppositional knowledge without which one is just barking up a tree.  Since Hyper-Preterists make use of the best of ancient and modern scholarship to validate their heresy, orthodox Christians must learn to do the same.  Unless the apologist is properly fitted out, he/she will not be able to effectively defuse Hyper-Preterism; and his efforts, instead of being fruitious, will prove a colossal waste of time..