Beginnng with Adam, after the fall, it has been man's nature to deny God's sovereignty and rebel against His authority and, from denying the sovereignty of God, man moved on to the next level - denying God's existence. Atheists claim that there is no God, yet they spend much of their time and effort denying a god that, supposedly, does not exist. When I ask them to relate to me regarding the god they believe does not exist, I find that they are correct. The god, of which they speak, exists only in the minds of those who do not believe in the God of the Bible. Most of them have not so much as opened a Bible, because they have been negatively influenced by disbelievers, who claim to know God, but who have not studied the Scriptures, for themselves, to see if what they believe is so. Their perspectives are often based on a false premise, errantly disseminated, and their own fabrications are added to the, already distorted, view. They are, thereby, kept ignorant of the true nature of God. In this manner, many, who call themselves Christians, make it easier for atheists to deny that God exists, because they misrepresent Him. I will be discussing some of these errant beliefs later in this document, but first, I would like to briefly explore a few of the factors that have created an environment in which scepticism can flourish and a social gospel, pleasing to the majority, can run rampant.
I was once a doubter, but I can not say that I have ever been an atheist. I could never understand how someone could be against something that didn't exist. After 30+ years of intense Bible study, I have come to understand that the final conflicts on planet Earth, will be a direct result of rebellion against His authority, in regard Earthly matters and the denial of God's existence. We can deny His existence and rebel against Him during our Earthly life, but there will be no escaping His authority, when we stand before His judgment seat. I can not “prove” that God exists, even though there is a great well of evidence, but He has proven his existence to me. The existence of God can only be proven by the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of truth), Who was sent to guide us into all truth. (See John 16:13) This includes the truth about God's existence and authority. However, if we deny the work of the Holy SPirit of God, it places a barrier between us ant the truth.
The Bible teaches that God is,
“...merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, 7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin” Exodus 34:6-7
That is the way I have found Him to be, but I also realize that this does not obligate Him to “clear” the guilty, which is recorded in the same passage of Scripture.
However, many of the things that are taught today, from the majority of pulpits, make God out to be an ogre and/or cause people to say in their hearts,
“Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man.” Matthew 25:24
What does this have to do with ecumenism and the rise of a social gospel?
Ecumenism is only one factor that has brought about the move toward a social gospel, but because of the close relationship that is being formed between protestant evangelical denominations, it has had a great influence in the formation of society in general and churchianity in particular. There is a great and growing, socialistic movement toward a one world government and, in order for it to succeed, it is necessary that people of all religions be brought into “the fold” and ecumenism is one of the tools/instruments by which the merging of religions/denominations is to be accomplished. Many think that the ecumenical movement is a new idea, coming about in the last fifty to seventy-five years, but it actually began much earlier. Even in the first two hundred years, during the formation of the Christian church, there were numerous attempts by the very powerful and wealthy to forcefully merge all religious bodies into one religion. During the Dark Ages, the crusades and inquisitions, initiated by the Roman Catholic Church, were an attempt to accomplish its ecumemical purposes. The reformation, in the 16th century, impeded the advance of ecumenism for a time, but efforts were never fully abandoned - they just move to another arena and established a different mode of operation. For many years, the Roman Catholic Church espoused a more “friendly,” less aggressive, approach to its ecumenical endeavors, but recently, during a visit to South America, Pope Benedict declared that the Roman Catholic Church must return to its “traditional values” and announced,
“...the Roman Catholic Church is the 'one true church', ... Other ecclesiastical communities are not churches in the truest sense, and they lack the 'means of salvation.'”
According to Pope Benedict,
“The Catholic church is the one true church because Jesus only established one church on earth, and it’s his church because he is the successor to St. Peter, who Catholics recognize as the first pope.”
At first hearing, this attitude may seem to be devisive, but, in reality, it is a definitive move toward ecumenism. The reason I say this is because, once the ecumenical movement, among the protestant/evangelical churches, has accomplished its purposes in America, Europe and other nations around the world, all is left is to merge the two great “Christian” religions. Even though there is plenty of rhetoric, among Catholics in regard to the conversion of “all departed brethren,”
the Muslims are a sect apart in regard to ecumenism. The Roman Catholic Church and Islamism have been dire enemies, since Mohammed established it in early 600 A.D. Little consideration is afforded them in regard to an attempt to convert them. Israelis have their own religious agenda and, although the Roman Catholic Church desires that they surrender to their tradition, they are not a part of the “Christian” ecumenical movement. A plan/plot to also ijn progress to integrate other religions, that are not accepted by most Christian leaders as being Christian, such as Scientology (followers of Ron L. Hubbard), Christain Scientists (followers of Mary Baker Eddie), but there are a large number of obstacles that would have to be overcome.
In America, early in the 19th century and since, ecumenical ideologies, imported from Europe, began to penetrate the religious American phyche and, for the most part, found their way into all denominational strongholds. At that time, the War of 1812 had just concluded, and there was an active call for "all" to join together in both religious and patriotic unity. Then, the Mexican War erupted (May, 1846), fostering an even greater call for unity and the Civil war followed, challenging Christians to be an important part of mending the fabric of America's torn garment and helping bring about "peace" in the war-torn land they loved. Many denominations combined their efforts to work through these troubling times, cultivating the ground where ecumenical seeds had already been planted.
Then came Darwinism, followed closely by the theory of evolution. Both of these systems of belief, opened doors all across the globe, providing sceptics, both inside and outside the church, with even more evidence that God didn't, doesn't and never did exist. Another result of these "discoveries," God's sovereignty was increasingly questioned and, ever since, there has been a purposeful move to replace His sovereignty with the sovereignty of man. The trend has continued to the point where man has become center-stage and God has been relegated to a lesser position, as One, Who just "helps out," when we get ourselves in trouble. I am not only speaking in regard to secular minds, but also the minds of many church-goers. (I could say in the minds of many Christians, but I choose to not defame those who are true worshippers of Christ.) Many who claim to be Christians, today, and even faithfully attent church, have been influenced by secular/social thought to such a degree, that it is difficult to distinguish between the two. Many Christian churches have become societies of agreeable adherents, rather than a body of believers, pretending to be Christians or "acting" like Christians, instead of striving to be Christ-like. It can be argued that the fault lies not in the acceptance of the individual, who ar simply caught up in the transformation, but in the end, it will be realized that, while God's Good News is to reach every kindred, nation, tongue and people, He saves His children as individuals. But then, of course, that is one of the teachings that has been obscured. Individual salvation equates to individual accoutablility and most of mankind evades and avoids this reality.
The title of this paper, implies that there is a direct connection between ecumenism and what is, today, called the social gospel. Many may find it hard to appreciate what the connection(s) might be, but I would, first, like to propose that, because ecumenism is a coming together of people from different faiths (denominations), common ground must be established upon which they can agree. Secondly, a denominational merger requires that one or both, compromise discordant doctrinal and theological beliefs and focus on those things they have in common. What common denominator do they have? - Themselves. The more God is removed from the center of focus in the realm of spiritual life, the more man becomes the center of focus - self-centered in this case church-centeredness. Third, when man comes together and disavows the form of worship to which they are accustomed (with Christ at the center), their “religion” tends to become socialized. They begin to preach and teach only that which will not cause a rift in ecumenical goals. Hence, they teach a social gospel. The Bible warns us that this would happen, one day, and that day has arrived.
We are told in 2Timothy 4:3 & 4,
"...the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."
The change in Christendom's direction was not sudden and the degree of change has not always been traceble. Many factors, indirectly influence the direction of religious practice, because they influence society as a whole, and a lot of the changes in christendom have been the result of falling prey to these "outside" influences. War, for one, has greatly affected the stance of the church in these latter days, and it has been forced to devise means and methods to cope. The Bible warned that there would be wars and rumors of war, but until xxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxx
Everything seems normal and as though "things have always been this way," until it as been realized (if it ever is) that a leap or a bound has occured that has taken from god's intended path. Oftentimes the changes take place over generations and children just find themselves doing "it" the way Mom and Dad or Grandma and Grandpa did "it." Even when a common form of worship is instituted - "voted in" by the majority and usually by the ruling heads - it is considered acceptable, because it is the friendly thing to do and the "brotherhood" of believers is, seemingly, both widened and deepened. This presents problems that are not recognized as the changes take place. Soon, people find themselves centered in the church, which was never Christ's intent, and the Bible is, like God, relegated to a lesser postion. Christ intended that He be the center of our salvation, not the church. This is not to say that the church has no importance in the plan of salvation or the life of the Christian, but the plan of salvation is meant to be centered on/in Christ, not the church. When these changes come about in the form of worship patterns, doctrinal nuances and theological perspectives, congregations begin learning exclusively (excluding the Bible) from the pastors, reverends, priest and the like, neglecting a personal interest in, and personal focus on the Bible.
It is man's nature to throw off the shakles of God and changes are welcomed, if they allow man to become less accountable and/or responsible to for their actions. Changes have taken place in regard to basic beliefs, worship practices, political causes, and Darwinism and evolution have all played a role in the process. Some by way of the introduction of "new theology" and some as a result of secular influence.
We are told in Romans 8:7 that,
“...the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”
With the decline of man's accountability to God, replaced by their adherence to particular church-assigned behavior, has resulted in a decline in morality. God's standards (laws) are laid aside and/or forgotten for lack of mention and people begin to agree that they were always a little too strict, anyway. Churches become the instrument that dictates behavior, based on their newfound principles, and people begin to believed that all they have to do to be saved is be a good citizen. This equate to a society of agreeable believers and, again, this is what is called a social gospel. The term "social gospel" is a misnomer, to say the least. a gospel that is based on social norms is not the Gospel of the Bible, but who would know that, seeing as how the Bible is no longer the ultimate rule of faith?
Mankinds view of God (I speak in general) has also resulted in many other liberties. Men have written books, declaring that Christ had sexual relations with his disciples and/or that He had an adulterous affair with Mary Magdalene. These books have been turned into movies and the spiritual atrocities have continued to grow in direct relationship to the overall decline in morality. Adultery has become an acceptable practice in the minds of many (even to the point that it is called "common law" marriage) and homosexuals believe that Christ will save them "in their sins," when, in fact, He came to save them "from their sins." (Matthew 1:21) Do I hate homosexuals? No! Christ died for homosexuals, just as he died for murderers, rapists and adulterers, but I despise the pracitice of homosexuality, mainly, because it has ensnared so very many fine people in a pit of immorality from which they may never escape. Many consider homosexual behavior to be acceptable, even if they, themselves, don't pratice it. Just as God does, I hate Sin, but I love sinners.
Please understand, I realize that what I am saying does not fit in with what is termed the “social gospel,” because what I am saying is not considered very sociable, but then, that, in itself, makes my point. Furthermore, those who believe that a homosexual is spiritually qualified to stand in a puplit and represent a sinless Savior are victims of the social gospel that has befallen a fallen mankind.
I will be adding comments to this page, soon. It is a wide subject, some of the related topics I will be discussing are:
Church/State Union
Political Religiosity
Churchianity
Religious Evils
If you would like to comment on this article, please contact the Webmaster.
|
