The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum How Broad is the Christian Faith Tent?

Pilgrim, Tom, I was in high school in the 1950s and gone through quite a spiritual journey. Raised in fundamentalist, independent Baptist dispensationalism; I studied through several theological textbooks starting with A. H. Strong, The Hodges, Gill's Body of Divinity, J. L. Dagg, J. P. Boyce, R. L. Dabney and a couple others. I visited various churches and spent some time in several, even an Assemblies of God for a spell in my 20s. I've come to see I have a great generational gap with the churches of today and I presently do not attend any, period. We have our Bible studies and prayer, daily here at home.

I early came to believe that the true faith, the biblical doctrines would be as unchangeable as God's word is; so I expected to see the same teachings today as were taught 300-400 years ago. I also read various books on Covenant Theology and as it was touched upon by the Baptists in their writings. In my journey I attended both OPC and PCA churches but the Bible studies seemed to be more about young men competing with each other over who could get into the deepest areas of esoteric theology and discuss that and debate it, when it had very little meaning or importance to most believers in attendance.

The Calvinistic Baptists who had come out of fundamentalism were so busy focused on correcting all the errant Baptists and beating the drum on Calvinism so much things seemed to get side tracked away from the gospel. I've come to the conclusion that the members of the body of Christ may not all be attending any churches in this day. I see things began to fall apart in the following manner.

Along came Charles G. Finney the heretic, and his revivalism, feminism, abolitionism, 'new measures', etc. Humanism had started infecting the churches. Then came the War Between the States which is grandly represented by that heretical piece of garbage, the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" when the Union decided it was God's arm to set things right, free the slaves and be God's army. The seeds of humanistic, governmental post-millennialism had appeared. Next came the nutty idea of prohibition, women's suffrage, etc., just more humanism; along with the influence of Communism. Either the men of God in the latter 19th century were ignoramuses, or maybe women did indeed need to have equal say with the men who God had made the leaders. Back to abolitionists; I know J. L. Dagg and J. P. Boyce both either had slaves or saw nothing sinful about that fact in itself. So, I feel disgust when the likes of Albert Mohler condemns them when theologically Mohler can't come to close to their grasp of the Scriptures. I find it amazing how the churches of today have decided slavery in and of itself was sin when the Scriptures state no such thing and they fall all over themselves apologizing for the humanist determined sin.

Along with this was the higher criticism coming out of Germany and infecting the churches here in the USA. Then the 1946/1952 RSV came on the scene; supposedly translating the OT as they thought the Jews would have understood it, rather than from the Christian view; yet they ignored the LXX on Isaiah 7:14 which is how the Jews understood it. They were infected by the higher criticism believing men wrote what they thought of God, instead of what God inspired to write without error. They became very modern and even changed the translation in 1 Cor. 6:9 to blend two words into a modern sexual concept that was really odd and out of the historic line of more literal, word for word translations such as in the KJV & RV, ASV.

In reaction to the RSV along came the evangelical/fundamentalist translations that translated to support their right wing fundamentalist and social agenda. Ex. 21:22 suddenly became born prematurely so as to support the idea that a human being exists at conception, just one view of Christians historically. The NRSV modified the RSV translation of 1 Cor. 6:9, then the evangelicals went the other direction and read into the verse detailed ideas from modern gay rights type terminology.

In my home church when I was in high school, there was a married member who got into trouble in his queer nature; and it was then "queer". I heard gossip about one young man who worked in the hospital and supposedly he was queer, but the reactions then were more pity and curiosity about such things. It would have been as much a shock to hear of them getting legally married to another male as it would have been to hear them preached into hell because of their queerness. On miscarriage and abortions, that sort of thing was a private family matter, between husband and wife, or parents and daughter. Yet, having in my own family a situation of repeated miscarriages due to genetics, the sadness and hurt of such a thing caused great reflection about the matter. But, I do not recall the nasty hatefulness in that day as there is today on these complex and difficult matters.

I have no doubt that I was regenerate as a teenager in dispensationalist fundamentalism; but, I've wondered, did the Holy Spirit bring me out of that heresy because I was truly elect, born from above and indwelt by His Spirit? I just do not know how many attending the modern churches of today are regenerate, nor do I know if a Roman Catholic can be truly regenerate. But, when I witness so many people who seem to take such heretical trash as is on TBN and believe it; I really fear few are regenerate in this day.

I've had a busy couple of days and I admit I've been a bit 'wound up' of late, so I guess I've popped off on various things. Maybe I'm just a cranky, ill-tempered old man. But, I imagine today is similar to the days prior to the Protestant Reformation, so I'm not ready to set dates for the last day. ;-)