Another Denomination?
Inevitably, one of the questions that comes up when we begin talking about Christianity revolves around the issue of denominations. In particular, "Which one has it right?"
I have no idea.
Mostly I have no idea because I have yet to find a group of Christians who don't think they have it right. I mean, who would attend a church that says, "None of what we claim can be in any way validated or construed from the Bible, tradition, or anything else. We just made it up!"? I would certainly like to think the answer would be 'no one.' However, I have my doubts.
But the issue of the myriad denominations and even larger growing tradition of "non-denominational" churches largely comes from the fact that the Bible itself presents so many options of worship, style and theology. And it is the latter that really causes the rifts.
For example, there are passages in the Bible that do suggest and explicitly describe the idea of predestination. Along side of these, though, are passages that do suggest and explicitly describe the idea of free will. There are scriptures that prohibit certain actions that we do not as a culture prohibit and there are scriptures that instruct particular behaviors that we do not as a culture follow. There are rules and laws that we, across the board, pick and choose from as to which will be binding. So to claim that you are a Christian and that your theology is based on the Bible is just as likely to be true (or as true) as the other Christian group to which you don't subscribe.
That's because the Bible presents a wide variety of theologies and, in some cases, presents a series of stories and writings that detail the development of particular theologies. For example, Christians consider themselves monotheistic (that is, believing in one and only one God. I won't go into the idea of the Trinity at this point - it gets too convoluted) and they believe that because the Bible seems to stress the idea of monotheism.
However, if we read closely, we find that from some of the earliest stories in the Bible that monotheism was not the prevailing theology: polytheism (the belief in many gods) was. Yet we find that persons such as Abraham choose to follow one god among the gods of the world. This isn't monotheism, this is monolatry (that really is a word) which is the belief in the existence of many gods, but choosing to worship only one of them. Eventually, the idea from those monolatrists would become monotheism.
But that transformation of an idea took time - a long, long time.
So could you consider yourself a Bible believing person and still believe in the reality and presence of other gods? Seems to me that you could. However, the book of Acts has a great story where Paul speaks to a group of Greeks who were, more often than not, polytheists. He says, "Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you." He goes on to say that what is unknown is, in fact, God. His point isn't monolatry, but a challenge to the polytheists of the day. It would also likely be a rejoinder to persons that might be monolatrists.
However, it also provides something of a challenge to those who read the Bible for theology because in preferring one idea to the other, one has to likely dismiss one of those ideas rather than hold them in tension as reflections from two opposing traditions. It becomes a quandary, especially if one is building a theological definition. Because if you accept Paul's conclusion, then what does one make of the story of Abraham?
Maybe that's a weak argument. The theological issue is one that is far more murky. Predestination, free will, what to wear, the role of women, etc. Those have to really be sifted and then a decision has to be made. Due to the options in the Bible, though, we find ourselves having more than one possible answer. As such, there are more denominations than we might think.
Or maybe there are just more denominations than we might think could exist. But the fact is, they may very well have as much or as little veracity as the next one to come along.
I have no idea.
Mostly I have no idea because I have yet to find a group of Christians who don't think they have it right. I mean, who would attend a church that says, "None of what we claim can be in any way validated or construed from the Bible, tradition, or anything else. We just made it up!"? I would certainly like to think the answer would be 'no one.' However, I have my doubts.
But the issue of the myriad denominations and even larger growing tradition of "non-denominational" churches largely comes from the fact that the Bible itself presents so many options of worship, style and theology. And it is the latter that really causes the rifts.
For example, there are passages in the Bible that do suggest and explicitly describe the idea of predestination. Along side of these, though, are passages that do suggest and explicitly describe the idea of free will. There are scriptures that prohibit certain actions that we do not as a culture prohibit and there are scriptures that instruct particular behaviors that we do not as a culture follow. There are rules and laws that we, across the board, pick and choose from as to which will be binding. So to claim that you are a Christian and that your theology is based on the Bible is just as likely to be true (or as true) as the other Christian group to which you don't subscribe.
That's because the Bible presents a wide variety of theologies and, in some cases, presents a series of stories and writings that detail the development of particular theologies. For example, Christians consider themselves monotheistic (that is, believing in one and only one God. I won't go into the idea of the Trinity at this point - it gets too convoluted) and they believe that because the Bible seems to stress the idea of monotheism.
However, if we read closely, we find that from some of the earliest stories in the Bible that monotheism was not the prevailing theology: polytheism (the belief in many gods) was. Yet we find that persons such as Abraham choose to follow one god among the gods of the world. This isn't monotheism, this is monolatry (that really is a word) which is the belief in the existence of many gods, but choosing to worship only one of them. Eventually, the idea from those monolatrists would become monotheism.
But that transformation of an idea took time - a long, long time.
So could you consider yourself a Bible believing person and still believe in the reality and presence of other gods? Seems to me that you could. However, the book of Acts has a great story where Paul speaks to a group of Greeks who were, more often than not, polytheists. He says, "Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you." He goes on to say that what is unknown is, in fact, God. His point isn't monolatry, but a challenge to the polytheists of the day. It would also likely be a rejoinder to persons that might be monolatrists.
However, it also provides something of a challenge to those who read the Bible for theology because in preferring one idea to the other, one has to likely dismiss one of those ideas rather than hold them in tension as reflections from two opposing traditions. It becomes a quandary, especially if one is building a theological definition. Because if you accept Paul's conclusion, then what does one make of the story of Abraham?
Maybe that's a weak argument. The theological issue is one that is far more murky. Predestination, free will, what to wear, the role of women, etc. Those have to really be sifted and then a decision has to be made. Due to the options in the Bible, though, we find ourselves having more than one possible answer. As such, there are more denominations than we might think.
Or maybe there are just more denominations than we might think could exist. But the fact is, they may very well have as much or as little veracity as the next one to come along.
Comments
Post a Comment