Why is it that we "Christians" have to argue over the trivial? By trivial, I mean things that don't amount to a hill of beans one way or the other. Shrode at the Thinklings brought this to the forefront of my mind when he posted about the Jehovah's Witnesses assertion that Jesus did not die on a cross but on a stake. Now I don't consider the JW's a 'Christian' group (although other Christians might), but it illustrates the point. Why take a stand on that? It may be an interesting study, but it is ultimately of no consequence. Like arguing about what color His underpants were.
My church, part of the International Churches of Christ, has its roots in the Restoration Movement churches, which are famous for their splits over the trivial. Within the Churches of Christ (which my own ICoC split from around 1979) there are groups divided over one cup or many for communion, whether instrumental music is allowed in service or not, whether a church building should have a kitchen, and more. Not to minimize the passion of the convictions my brothers and sisters have on these issues, but none of them are of any importance. I mean, if Jesus came back today to judge us, do we really think He will care about our stance on the cross vs. stake or if we had a piano at church? In other words, if we come down on the 'wrong' side of any of these issues, it will not have an influence on whether we are saved or not. I'm convinced that there really isn't a wrong side, unless doing one or the other violates your own conscience (Romans 2:14-15; 1 Corinthians 8). We can discuss and debate them but to divide over them to the point of separation is just plain foolish, and even sin (Galatians 5:19-20).
Frankly, there are more important lines in the sand to draw, and from those it seems most Christians step back citing 'to each his own'. This seems backwards to me. We ought to fight for unity on the essentials and let the rest fall where it may. Didn't Jesus pray for us to be unified (John 17)? Didn't Paul urge the disciples in Corinth to be united (1 Corinthians 1)? The standards of discipleship, how we contact the blood of Christ and are forgiven, how we become saved – these are all fundamental aspects of Christianity. These are among the fundamental things that being on the wrong side of could cost us dearly in the last days.
The trick is coming together on what's truly important. How can we agree on a list of essentials if we insist on arguing about the trivial? Well, if I had the answer to that one, I'd be one really insightful guy, which I am not. Perhaps I'm naïve, but I don't believe that God is one to mince words, obfuscate and confuse. He doesn't go out of the way to make it obvious, but He's not out to make it hard to see either. So while there is no clear list in scripture of that we should hold our ground on or even a step by step salvation plan, I believe that fundamental truth is there if we are willing to see it. So are we willing? It seems to me that in order to be able to stand firmly on truth, and to be confident that we have found it, we must be willing to abandon it – everything we believe. As soon as an opinion becomes so sacred that it is unquestionable, we've abandoned the desire for truth in favor of comfort or stability. Frankly I think that there is a core we can look to the Bible and agree on, if we are willing to open our minds, set aside our own opinions, at least for the moment, and listen to someone else's. If we're not willing to be wrong, how can we be sure we're right?
In the coming days I'll try to put into words what I see as the fundamental things that we must stand on. I'll cite scriptures for my thoughts. Before I do that, however, I think I'll have to step back even further and think about how can I judge whether a certain principal is worthy of taking a stand or not. What makes it 'fundamental' instead of just 'important'?
In the mean time, I'd like to encourage you to think about what is fundamental to you and why. Please, don't list them here, write about them in your own blog (kindly trackback here or to my later posts, please). These may be controversial and we certainly won't all agree on them. This certainly won't be the first time this has been talked about, not even the first time it's been blogged. What, then, do I hope to accomplish? Well, ideally we'll come closer together or at least have more respect for the other's opinions. The few folks I've gotten to know here in the blogosphere (I really think that's a dorky word, BTW) are of a different stripe of Christianity than I. If we met be change on the street and opened the Bible, I wonder how much we'd agree on. What I don't want to see is a continuation of the divisions that have plagued Christians or centuries. Frankly, if this starts going there I'll just delete the posts and pretend it never happened. We can talk about more mundane things like what would Jesus drive.
No doubt, Jesus would drive a Volvo with turbo. It's safe (because you can't have abundant life if you're not alive!), it's fast (because God has a lot of places to be and things to do!), and it holds its value (because to do otherwise would be poor stewardship!).
Seriously, though, this is a great topic. I will heed your suggestion and think about what is fundamental to me. Look for my trackbacks, providing that paternity doesn't intervene!
Reciprocally, I would challenge you, in this process, to think deeply about why you consider the Bible the primary source of "fundamentals". The core of biblical faith--judaism--was founded at a time when scripture per se did not exist or was in formation. And Christianity itself formed prior to the writings of the new testament, and far earlier than the canonization of what you and I call the bible. So this is a fluid process, the history of which the bible records but the boundaries of which the bible does not necessarily delineate.
Most of my fundamentals would have biblical but also extra-biblical origins, and many things that Paul or Moses (for example) felt deeply about I would consider fundamentals for their situation, but not for ours. So "fundamentals" is in and of it self a contextual matter, I think.
But, of course, if you believe that pianos and kitchens can be allowed in churches, you are definitely going to Hades, my friend. No question. ;)
Boy, this has only been up for maybe an hour and I've already been challenged! I knew I was heading for trouble.
Interesting thoughts on 'extra-biblical' fundamentals. It goes against my instincts, but I'll have to think about it.
And Erik, I'm disapointed in you as a fellow Odyclub member. A Volvo? Certainly he'd drive an Odyssey! Safety, power, resale and space for all the folks He'd bring to church. :-)
I responded to your blog here on my blog, but I haven't figured out the ins and outs of your trackback thing yet. Talk to you soon.
Thanks for the comments. You can check out Thomas' comments here.