|
Be Not Conformed
Reprinted from The Spiritual Sword, 1998
David R. Pharr
The gospel as it is,
without amendment, adjustment or alteration, is
suited to the spiritual needs of every human
creature in every age and every culture (Mark
16:15). He who knows “the end from the
beginning” (Isa. 46:10) and who designed
redemption “before the foundation of the world”
(I Pet. 1:20) is able to provide a plan and
pattern which are never outdated. In every age
and culture, however, questions and problems
arise among the Lord’s people as to how they
should relate to the society in which they
live. In our own time the debate over
liberalism is really a struggle with
worldliness. Can we conform to the world and at
the same time be “conformed to the image of his
Son” (Rom. 8:29)?
Accommodating Culture
That certain accommodations to culture are
advantageous and acceptable is shown in Paul’s
statements in I Corinthians 9:20-22. “And unto
the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain
the Jews; to them that are under the law, as
under the law, that I might gain them that are
under the law; to them that are without law, as
without law, (being not without law to God, but
under the law to Christ), that I might gain them
that are without law. To the weak became I as
weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all
things to all men, that I might by all means
save some.” He saw the cause as greater them
himself and was willing to adjust in many things
to be more effective in the spread of the
gospel.
When Paul went into the synagogues to teach Jews
on their Sabbath, their background with the Old
Testament scriptures made it reasonable for him
to immediately appeal to the law and prophets.
On the other hand, addressing a pagan audience
in Athens called for a different approach (Acts
17:16-34), and though his sermon affirmed
biblical truth, he did not immediately direct
the Athenians to the scriptures. He knew they
first needed a foundation relative to the person
of God before they would accept the word of
God. In neither case, however, does his
concessions to circumstances involve anything in
his conduct nor his message that would be a
perversion of the truth.
Perhaps the most striking example of his
willingness to accommodate was in having Timothy
circumcised. Timothy’s mother was a
God-fearing
Jewish Christian, but as his father was Greek
Timothy had not been circumcised. When the
apostle decided to have Timothy accompany him in
his missionary travels, he first had him
circumcised to avoid unnecessary confrontations
with the Jews (Acts 16:1-3). This was a
reasonable concession to Jewish culture and
tradition in view of Timothy’s heritage through
his mother. No such heritage applied in the
case of Titus, however, who was a Gentile, and
Paul was adamant that what was a mere cultural
concession in the case of Timothy would not be
applied as a matter of doctrine (Gal. 2:3-5).
To Change or Not to Change
Both
those who advocate change in the church and those
who oppose them sometime neglect the essential
principle exemplified by Paul. For the sake of the
gospel, we ought to be willing to make changes in
methods and styles. But the first essential is that
nothing be done that is not consistent with the law
of Christ: “being not without law to God, but under
the law of Christ” (I Cor. 9:21). The apostle’s aim
was not to see how like the world he could be.
Rather he adjusted to the world in matters that were
neutral in order to draw people out of the world (II
Cor. 6:17).
It
must be admitted that what is sometimes proclaimed
as loyalty to the truth is more a loyalty to
comfortable traditions, to being set in our ways.
Reasonable improvements in procedures are opposed
because “that is not the way we have always done
it.” We are referring to things which are in the
realm of human judgment. Of course some suggestions
which fall in the area of expediency are hardly
expedient and ought not to be adopted. Differences
over such matters, however, ought not to be ranked
as issues of scriptural soundness. It is actually a
hindrance to the cause of truth when mere customs
are preserved as if they were New Testament
essentials.
Change
agents among us delight in exaggerating the
mentality of “two songs, a prayer, and another song”
as the scriptural order. Admittedly, some brethren
may be so bound to customs, but such is not
characteristic of the vast majority of Christians
who are careful about accepting change. The reality
is that there are liberals among us whose aims are
to change much more than mere expedients. They
claim to be applying Paul’s principle of
accommodation to the needs of “baby boomers,” but
Paul limited adjustments to culture to what was in
harmony with the law of Christ.
Expedients or Fads
The
church has often benefited by adopting various
expedients employed by the world. Obvious examples
are such things as church buildings, graduated Bible
classes, the use of mass media, vacation Bible
schools, etc. The church ought to be open to any
scriptural means for becoming more effective in its
mission. This does not mean, however, that we ought
to seek new things just for the sake of newness.
Zeal for what is novel can become a temptation
toward digression and what is touted as a better
method may be little more than a passing fad. There
is merit to the suggestion that there may be just a
ten-year time lag in our adoption of denominational
fads.
| Remember when we bought everyone else’s used
“Joy Buses”? And do you not find it interesting
that we are only now beginning to raise our hands
during praise songs and to punctuate the worship
with clapping?[i] |
The
late H. A. Dixon, president of Freed-Hardeman
College, often reminded his students regarding such matters that we
should heed the advice of Alexander Pope:
Be not
the first upon whom the new are tried
Nor yet the last to lay the old aside. |
Even
acceptable expedients should be examined as to
whether they are really helpful or merely the latest
fad.
Be Not Conformed
“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye
transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye
may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and
perfect, will of God” (Rom. 12:2). The Lord’s
purpose is that the church change the world, not
that the world should change the church.
Worldliness has no place in a Christian’s personal
conduct. Neither is there a place for it in the
doctrine, organization or worship of the church (I
Jn. 2:15; Jas. 4:4). Yet many of the trends and
innovations which contaminate the church come not
only from concessions to, but also from admiration
of, the world. We are astonished that various
denominations have abandoned Bible teaching on moral
issues (i.e., divorce, homosexuality, etc.). These
concessions to carnality have their roots in the
earlier abandonment of the scriptures on religious
questions. Those among us who want to mimic
sectarian innovations need to consider how short a
step it is from unscriptural worship practices to
unscriptural moral positions.
Regardless of our reaction to some of their
positions, we have to agree with many of the
statements made by the authors of The Worldly
Church. “. . . [T]he church struggles under the
weight of countless subtle accommodation to the
secular spirit of the age. The immediate problem is
not so much the unbelief of the world outside the
church as it is the insidious presence of the world
inside the church."[ii]
Evidences of secularization include the following:
| . . . congregations more concerned with growth and
numerical success than with preaching the gospel in
its purity and simplicity.
. . . church leaders speak of “making churches
grow,” as if they were the ones to give the
increase.
. . . church leaders seriously defend the
construction of exercise facilities and basketball
courts as absolutely essential to evangelism, as if
God could not work apart from these facilities.
. . . ministers, who should know better, contend
that the church cannot reach the lost in this modern
age through serious Bible study but only through
“meeting needs,” as if the Word of God alone is
impotent. . . .[iii]
|
A utilitarian, rather than scriptural, approach can
be devastating. In the early days of Crossroadism
many ignored doctrinal implications in their rush to
learn and adopt their methods. The defense was, “It
must be right because it works.” The “discipling”
movement among churches of Christ, however, was
little more than copying things learned from
religions that had long since abandoned biblical
bearings.[iv]
Ours is an entertainment oriented society and
religion has not escaped. Worship is viewed more as
something to be done for the congregation rather
than what is done for God. As Dan Chambers says in
his excellent book, Showtime, Worship in the Age
of Show Business:
| And
since many modern worshipers are focused largely on
having fun and feeling good when they worship, it is
usually suggested that if churches hope to see the
younger generation in their assemblies, they must
reshape their service to make them more exciting.[v]
|
Thus a “contemporary format” for the assemblies,
Chambers continues, “seems clearly to be attempting
to bribe the modern generation to worship."[vi]
Drama, choirs, solos, clapping, praise teams, songs
with questionable lyrics, celebrating Easter, etc. are
examples of conformity to culture rather than to the
New Testament pattern. A quintet performing among
some churches of Christ, called “Full Access,” was
originally a capella, but decided to add
instrumental music in order to be more accepted among
denominational churches.[vii] Such
things do not come from scriptural convictions, but
from conformity to the world.
Endnotes:
i. F. LeGard Smith, The Cultural Church,
(Nashville: 20th Century Christian, 1992), p. 209.
ii. C. Leonard Allen, Richard T. Hughes,
Michael R. Weed, The Worldly Church,
(Abilene: ACU Press, 1991), p. x.
iii. Ibid., p. 40.
iv. The irony is that other groups had already
seen the problems and abandoned these methods.
One leader in a charismatic sect observed: “What
you are experiencing in the Church of Christ is
what the charismatic movement vomited up.” Quoted
by Don Vinzant in The Discipling Delimna,
(Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co., 1988), Flavil R.
Yeakley, Jr., ed., p. 136.
v. Dan Chambers, Showtime, (Nashville:
21st Century Christian, 1997), p. 49.
vi. Ibid., p. 50.
vii. http://www.fullaccess.com Jan. 6, 1997.
Back to
Articles Menu
Carolina Messenger
Spiritual Sword
|