In continuing the examination of a teaching I recently heard, I want to address the second of the points that I laid out out in the opening post concerning this.
Here was the first of them: 1. When we first believed by hearing the Gospel we all received the same Spirit.
The second, the one that I will be addressing in this post, is: 2. Since we have all received the same Spirit, there is no difference among believers.
In the second point we can see the clear logical progression following what was asserted in the first. That is, having all recieved the same Spirit, there is now no difference among believers.
As I sought to show in the first point, the teaching already began with the emphasis in the wrong place. The emphasis was put in the right place for the purpose that the ensuing logical progression achieves the desired result. The ‘moral of the story’ if you will. But in regards to Christianity’s purpose, the emphasis was put in the wrong place. For Christianity is concerned with the salvation of each individual believer. This focus that Christianity has upon the individual is confused when the emphasis is placed on the whole. That is, that instead of encouraging the whole group individually, this teaching attempts to encourage the whole by destroying the individual. As if the whole was an individual. This might be more appropriate if applied to the Roman Catholic church, but certainly not in regards to Protestantism. For Protestantism has no unifying factor except Christ.
You might say: “But, that is how it is supposed to be!”. True. But when Paul speaks of Christ being the Head of the church (the body), he is speaking in very ambiguous terms. This does not make Paul’s teaching untrue, but there must be a structure of unity that can be understood in more concrete terms; not merely as an abstract concept.
But, getting back to my purpose; the emphasis on ‘there is no difference among believers’ not only is untrue, but also does not lend itself to any logical continuation in bringing one from the beginning(opening assertion) to the end(’moral of the story). I will continue in laying this out as we go from point to point, but I want to stop here and answer any questions or recieve any input before I go further.
David,
There is so much wrong with the whole line of thinking in the sermon, but this second point (”Since we have the same Spirit, there are no differences.”) is so flawed it seems there is no recovery. The point should read “Since we have the same Spirit, our differences shouldn’t matter all that much, and are certainly not worth dividing over.” There ARE differences, and it really should be ok.
His second point doesn’t really follow that logically from his first, in my never-to-be-humble opinion.
I’ll challenge you a bit on the “Protestantism has no unifying factor except Christ” idea, if for no other reason than the fact that most Protestants I know get really excited about unifying against Catholics (there’s a reason we’re called by that name). Protestants are more easily defined by what they’re against than by what they’re for.
Keep up the thread! This is fun.
Ooooohhh yeah. This statement is indeed true. What a shame. Worse than that; every one who follows such a mass ought to be gripped with fear. It is in line with the Protestant view concerning morality. That, if we can agree on what we won’t do, surely that will make up for the fact that we aren’t doing anything!
The statement concerning the unifying principle being that of our Lord Jesus Christ, is the Protestant ideal. But as we have both pointed out it is a unification of rebellion. And some people are still rebelling. Agianst what? Everything! Absolutely anything that ought to be honored as authoritative. Oh, it pains my heart to see these rebellious people who don’t know when to submit. They are like the stubborn child who after the parent has explained the reason for their punishment, boldly asks: “Well who made you ruler and judge?” I will have to start a seperate thread concerning the matter of authority. Oh, this is one of the most terrible aspects of our culture; and perhaps other cultures as well.
Thank you for your comments Byron. I will continue with the thread.