The Evangelical Church

[Devils Advocate x 2]

Ok so we have established earlier that the Evangelical Church is not perfect. And if it has in the past over-emphasized some sins and under-emphasized others, Then how do we know what is being preached in the church today legitament? Ofcourse everyone is going to say what is being preached is biblical but how do we know their emphasis is correct? And if the Evangelical church can get things wrong then what's the big deal if various denominations or even the Catholic Church get some things wrong from time to time as well? How do we know the evangelical church is not like politics where the people with the power are pandering for the votes and contributions to keep the power? And they don't preach against the base but rather the minorities on the outside as they don't count on their support to begin with. How do we know the church hasn't been hi-jacked so to speak? How do we know there isn't 3rd party canidates out there who preach the truth that aren't being given a seat at the debate and the lay people are none the wiser? So anyway I am regressing, back to the original question if the evangelical church has made mistakes in the past how does it regain its legitamacy going forward?

[Mike Miller]

Ok, so if I understand your question, you want to know how the evangelical church can be considered legitimate or trustworthy if it has made mistakes in the past. You also bring up a comparison to the Catholic church.

First, if you or I have ever made mistakes, can we be trusted? Fallibility is not the same as untrustworthy or illegitimate. My answer, then, is that we are not to put our faith in the church, but in Jesus Christ. The church will always make mistakes, but there is also always a corrective element. That element is the Bible as read and interpreted by Christians. I regularly tell people, "Don't take my word for it. Study the Bible yourselves." As the Holy Spirit works within the body of Christ (the church), we find understanding and unity. This, of course, breaks down when Christians stop reading their Bibles and stop attending church. And this is where we are today. Most professing Christians are biblically illiterate. Most don't study the Bible, don't know the books of the Bible, don't understand basic theological concepts like propitiation, substitutionary atonement, or justification, and most can't even define and explain the Gospel. As long as that is the state of the church, preachers can say and get away with anything they want.

How do we know what is being preached today is legitimate? We study our Bibles. Anything that does not line up with Scripture is no good. Do we as humans err and at times over- or under-emphasize some things? Yep. And it's usually not a big deal. But as for the core doctrines of the faith, looking at 2,000 years of Christianity, we have solid ground to stand on. The problem is when we major on the minors. That's why I so emphasize expository preaching and preaching large chunks of Scripture instead of picking verses here and there to support some idea. The more we are exposed to all of Scripture, the more correct we will be.

The difference with the Catholic church is that the priests hold all the authority. Official Catholic doctrine states that only the magisterium can interpret Scripture, and the Catholic church claims infallibility. I know Catholics whose priests tell them not to read the Bible. In fact, a lady in our church had her priest tell her that if she read the Bible she would become demon possessed (that's not official, I'm aware). Simply put, the Catholic church makes claims that the evangelical church never makes. We want the corrective; the Catholic church does not.

Now, as for the political questions, I will say that politics are definitely present, and some preachers will preach what they need to in order to gain standing and position. In fact, that's one reason for the bandwagon against homosexuals. Anyone who seems to be soft on homosexuals won't go very far in some circles. The same is true for other moral issues. In fact, I had a denominational leader tell me that he could never work with anyone who holds my position on alcohol (that drinking isn't itself a sin, but that it's best to abstain). If my goal is to climb the denominational ladder, then I will change my position to his. Even so, however, that man and I still agree on core doctrines. We agree on the Gospel. It's not such a matter of one of us preaching truth and one preaching heresy. It's a disagreement over a peripheral issue.

So, to come full circle to the original question. Making mistakes does not undermine legitimacy. Making mistakes while claiming infallibility destroys legitimacy. We cannot look to the evangelical church--or any other church--for perfect interpretation. We must each commit to studying our Bibles, listening to other believers, and seeking wisdom from God. We are human and imperfect. But 2,000 years of this has nailed down the most important elements. Anything outside the core doctrines is peripheral, and anything contrary to the core doctrines is heresy.

[Another devils advocate]

Okay, why should we be evangelistic if God has already pre-chosen whom He will save? If He does not give us the freedom to choose, then why should we as Christians even bother trying to win others to Christ? If they have no choice in the matter then it seems evangelism is a waste of time....

[Mike Miller]

Well, the Devil's Advocates abound. Fun stuff.

To begin with, I believe your first question is that if you believe in the doctrine of election, what is the point of sharing the Gospel? Three reasons (at least). First, God said to share the Gospel. If we believe that God is who He says He is, then we should do what He says to do. Second, no one can be saved apart from the Gospel. As Romans 10:13-15 makes very clear, we must preach the Gospel if people are to hear the Gospel and be saved. Does God need us? No, but the preaching of the Gospel is the means by which God will save the elect. People cannot be saved without believing, and they cannot believe without hearing, and they cannot hear without someone telling. Third, the purpose of the proclamation of the Gospel is not only so that people will be saved, but also so that that the glory of God will be made known. We preach the Gospel--certainly so that people can hear, believe, and be saved--but also so that God is exalted over the earth. Moreover, sometimes the proclamation of the Gospel serves as a message of salvation, but sometimes it serves as a message of judgment to those who reject Jesus Christ.

Next, you state that if people have no choice to begin with, proclaiming the Gospel is a waste of time. My answer is two-fold. For one thing, proclaiming Jesus is never a waste of time. Any time the good news of Jesus Christ is declared, God is glorified, and that is time well spent. For another thing, the Bible never teaches that people have no choice. People either choose to follow Christ, or they choose not to. Because of the depravity of mankind, we choose to sin. We love sin (John 3:19), and according to John 6 and Romans 3, we will never choose to follow Christ on our own initiative. However, if we are of the elect, then in God's time, through the preaching of the Gospel, He regenerates us (gives us a new heart and a new spirit) so that we are free to choose Him. Again, let me be clear, people are lost because they freely choose to reject God. People are saved because they freely choose to accept Him (precipitated by the work of the Holy Spirit). We must preach the Gospel so that people can be saved. That is God's plan to redeem the lost world.