Recent Theological Inventions

[canadyjd]

The "altar call"
The encouragement/leading of others to "pray to receive Jesus into your heart".
"seeker friendly" churches
The "Jesus movement"
The "ecumenical movement"
Sunday School
Oh, Oh, Oh, how about all the literature for those Sunday School classes, instead of everyone studying a certain passage of scripture during the week?
Deacons having authority in the church, instead of being "servants" as the word indicates.
The modern Charismatic movement with its speaking in tongues, "holy laughter", "slain in the Spirit", etc.
"Word of Faith" theology
so-called "higher" critical thinking concerning scripture/historical accuracy etc.
The "enlightenment"
Evangelical "crusades"

peace to youraise:

 

[preachinjesus]

uh...a recent one which existed in the good ole RCC for far too long and has raised its head in the Baptist church:

The unification of nationalism/patriotism with Christianity (i.e. you can't be a "good" Christian if you don't support the United States)

I'll just stick with that one right now...

 

[Marcia]

Considering also that the Reformers typically held views that we would consider either amil or historic premil, I'd say that dispensationalism is "recent". (Admittedly, I'm not terribly familiar with midieval Catholic eschatology, but I don't believe they would embrace a system that considers them to be a harlot.)

Do you think all Dispensationalists think the RCC is the harlot? I'm afraid this shows you don't know much about Dispensationalism.

 

[Marcia]

If memory serves correctly, early Christians could spell. In Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, even. So a recent innovation/invention might be the spelling one finds on these boards in English. :tongue3:
_________________________

:laugh: Boy is this true! I wish I had a dime for every time I've seen "altar" (as in altar call) spelled "alter."

 

[John of Japan]

This is an interesting thread, but the basic premise neglects early church history, if I read the OP right. The first few centuries of Christianity are replete with conferences in which pastors and theologians struggled to define their doctrine and to fight heresies. Then there was a totally new ball game in the Reformation in which old doctrines were opposed and more Biblical ones fought fo.

So if the OP or any poster is suggesting that any doctrine or practice is suspect simply because the "early church" didn't do it, he is falling into the same trap as the "Church of Christ" movement and many other groups that have tried to "return to primitive Christianity." It is simply impossible.

 

[Marcia]

You go, John-boy! :thumbs: :thumbs:

I ditto your post. :applause: ....Ditto

 

[Pipedude]

"We pray this in your name..."

Praying to the Father in the name of the Father. How new is that? Twenty years?

 

[Rex77]

I'll wave to you all as we go up in the rapture.:laugh:

 

[John of Japan]

You go, John-boy! :thumbs: :thumbs:

I ditto your post. :applause: ....Ditto

As the man said when he saw the bear sniffing at his tracks in the woods, "You like ma tracks? I make ya more!"

In my view, down through the history of the church there have been three aspects in which "new" things have of necessity come into the church: doctrinal, practice and social issues.

An example of a doctrinal problem in the first century and second centuries was the assault by Gnosticism. Some even say that John wrote his epistles to combat Gnosticism. At any rate, the early church had to deal with syncretistic Gnostic cults that borrowed from Christianity, and so "new" teachings had to be learned from Scripture, such as a doctrine of angels.

An example of a doctrinal problem in the 21st century is open theism. Present day theologians have had to find "new" ways to affirm and teach the omniscience of God in order to defeat this false doctrine.

An example of an issue of practice in the early church is seen in the Didache, a document from about 100 A. D. Prophets and "apostles" (like our modern missionaries on deputation) were traveling from church to church, and there were a few that were greedy. So the Didache says to reject those who asked for money!

In the 21st century church, we have the "seeker sensitive" philosophy, in which the service is adapted to lost people. Agree or not with the philosophy (I disagree), it is "new" and those opposing it must use "new" arguments.

In the social area, Christians in the early church had to deal with emperor worship, something that has occurred almost nowhere in modern times except in Japan. However, in our times we have to deal with institutionalized abortion. Abortion itself is not new, of course, but modern science has made it such an easy procedure that we have had to find "new" ways to oppose it!

The Preacher said, "There is nothing new under the sun," and of course he was right. However, there are new combinations of old errors that need new strategies to combat them.

 

[gb93433]

reiterate instead of iterate

 

[EdSutton]

I'd love to comment, but refuse to play in a rigged game.

Ed

 

[drfuss]

How about Pastor as a position in the church? In the N. T., pastor was a ministry and a gift to the church, not a position.

 

[John of Japan]

How about Pastor as a position in the church? In the N. T., pastor was a ministry and a gift to the church, not a position.

Huh? What does that mean? What is wrong with the term "position"?

 

[Ed Edwards]

R&R in the Opening post (OP):
//It seems that many Baptists contend that "we" are right
and that the Christians who came before us for 1500+ years
simply had it wrong.
...

//ps. Just in case I wasn't clear...the first time
the words "rapture" or "alcohol" are used
in reply...I'll ask the mods to delete the thread! ;-) //

Tee Hee!!

Actually i want to talk about 'rapture' and talk about
it NOT being a new invention/doctrine.
OVer 1500 years ago the Latin version
of 2 Thessalonians 4:17 ('caught up' in the KJVs) had
a form of the Latin word 'raptos'. We get our English
word 'rapture' from that Latin word 'raptos'. So the
idea of a 'rapture' or a 'caught up' has been around
well over 1500 years - that is NOT new.

Now I understand what the 'CAUGHT UP' means comes lots
of places with lots of baggage. Some of those meanings
are new. But that is a debate for another topic, not the
IS IT NEW OR NOT (Doctrine category).

If one wishes to debate 'rapture' is a new doctrine,
then they better do their homework, I know I have

As for 'teetotaler', being a responsible alcohol user
is taught in the Bible and the principles therein
pertain also to any other mood drug since invented.
HOwever, the Mormons have taken the moral highground
prohibiting also 'tea'. So 'Teetotalism' has been
superceeded by non-use of the mood drug 'caffeine'.

RandR: //In the NT, there was much to say about enduring through
tribulation and little about getting away from it before
it begins.//

Unfortunately you fail to discern that the
NT is writing about five different 'tribulation(s)'
and 'Tribulation'.
See my writing: Five Tribulations in a post
in this topic.

There is a SIGNIFICANT difference between
'tribualtion(s)' with a small 't'
and 'Tribulation' with a captial 'T'.
We Christians have to endure through
small 't' tribulations (or die & go to heaven)
but will NOT have to suffer through
the capital 'T' TRIBULATION.

Small 't' tribulation(s) is/are a CONDITION
Capital 'T' TRIBULATION is a TIME PERIOD.

Small 't' tribulation(s) is/are measured in woes
Capital 'T' TRIBULATION is measured in 7-year increments.

 

[John of Japan]

Well said, Brother Ed. Kudos!:thumbs:

I would like to also say (without getting into another of too many alcohol discussions on the BB) that there were teetotalers in the Bible, for whatever reason:

(1) John the Baptist (Luke 1:15)
(2) The Rechabites (Jer. 35:6)
(3) Anointed priests (Lev. 10:9)
(4) Nazarites (Num. 6:3-4)
:flower:

 

[drfuss]

John of Japan writes:
"Quote:
Originally Posted by drfuss
How about Pastor as a position in the church? In the N. T., pastor was a ministry and a gift to the church, not a position.

Huh? What does that mean? What is wrong with the term "position"?"

I did not say it was wrong. I said in the N.T. church, pastor was a ministry and a gift to the church, not a position. They had elders (plural) and deacons. Churches are organized different today than in N.T. times. I see nothing wrong with the position of pastor in today's church.

 

[John of Japan]

I did not say it was wrong. I said in the N.T. church, pastor was a ministry and a gift to the church, not a position. They had elders (plural) and deacons. Churches are organized different today than in N.T. times. I see nothing wrong with the position of pastor in today's church.

Thanks for explaining. :thumbs: