Doctrines are established beliefs / teachings that a
particular church espouses. They are all
said to be based solely on scripture (with the exception of the Catholic faith
which adds insights from the Pope, and the Mormons who have an additional Bible
of their own). Mainstream protestant
faiths all make the same claims about their respective doctrines; of truth, and
basis in scripture. Logic dictates that
they cannot all be right. Somebody must
be mistaken right? Which one?
Take a closer look at the various protestant faiths and
several common themes emerge. The actual
doctrines that separate faith’s tend to be less than expected, and some seem
downright meaningless. Take the teaching
of Tithes and Offerings for example, almost every Christian faith puts the
teaching of giving to the church and to others, as a part of its central
tenants. This is not just for self
preservation, but all claim to have Biblical basis for the teaching, and in
point of fact, all do. Worship on a
weekly basis in church is another very common theme. Styles may vary radically, as do the day to
worship on, but the weekly assembly of believers is understood and shared by
all. Obviously the divinity of Christ is
shared by all Christian faiths, as is His role in our salvation (for the most
part). So a casual observer might
conclude that he should believe all the common teachings, and leave the unique
ones for later / further study.
Then there is the lesson of email. Ever sent an email note intended to be a
“nasty-gram” to someone else? The point
is to chew-them-out for something they did, or intentionally did not do. The notes are usually short in nature, to the
point, terse. They reflect a tone that
is negative, accusatory, matter of fact, or hard. The point is to verbally (albeit in writing)
chastise the recipient for his/her misdeeds.
You have to be careful what all you say in a “nasty-gram” because
typically the recipient copies the entire world on their reply hoping to
embarrass you for your obvious misinterpretation of their supposed
misdeeds. Once written and sent, a
“nasty-gram” is nearly impossible to delete.
They can last a long time, and crop up when you least expect it.
But then there are the times when you do not intend to send
a nasty-gram at all; when you are just asking a question; or making a comment
on some recent event; or just intending to make small talk with a
co-worker. Even though your intentions
were far from the typical nasty-gram, your reader interprets the note as an
outright insult to their entire being.
They interpret your ‘tone’ as hostile, aggressive, and disrespectful
even though you did not mean any of those things. They misread or only partially read what you
said, and jump to conclusions about your intentions, motives, and real
agenda. Now the recipient writes back
blasting you for your nasty-gram, and you get a response you had NO idea would
be coming.
What went wrong? Was
it a subconscious thing when you wrote your innocent note that came out badly? Did you use some sort of key words or
phrasing that went terribly awry? What
was it that caused your reader to become furious at your otherwise
inconsequential note? Chances are, it
was the vantage point of your reader.
The first things advertisers say is “know your audience”. While you may have been in a perfectly fine
mood while writing your note, your reader may have been having the
day-from-hell. One of those ‘Murphy’
days when everything that can go wrong, does go wrong. A day all of us have had, and none of us want
to repeat. After such a day, or perhaps
during it, they open up your note and begin reading. Their vantage point is radically different
from yours.
Now, unless the phrasing is crystal clear, each nuance, each
possible innuendo, each little read-between-the-lines tone is interpreted to be
negative. Not because you intended it
that way, but because your reader is having an otherwise horrific day, and is
not inclined at all to read innocence into your note, but malignancy. Is the Author responsible for the
interpretation of the angry reader? You
could argue that the Author should have been more clear, but depending on just
how bad a state of mind the reader is in, clarity may have been completely
ignored. The Author cannot anticipate
the mood of his reader. And if the
reader were to leave the note unopened that horrific day, and open it up on a
‘normal’ day, the point of the message might have gotten through absent the
drama.
So it is with scripture.
We do not need others to interpret scripture for us, though we may study
it together to learn from each other’s vantage points. We are fully capable of reading it on our
own, but do we drag into it, the mood of our particular day? Could it be that we develop our own ideas
about what a doctrine SHOULD teach and THEN open the Bible to prove out our own
theories. If so, who is leading? If scripture teaches something completely
contrary to our belief system are we willing to adjust our belief system, and
what’s more should we?
Email can be used to hammer others if you are inclined to
use it that way. It can also be used to
uplift others if that is your intent.
Scripture can be read with predisposition, and extraordinary negativity,
such that all manner of hurtful beliefs are engaged. This is the basis for how ‘cult-like’ groups
spring up. They begin with a charismatic
leader who reads scripture and interprets it for singularly unique purposes
(namely the promotion of him/herself).
They use the Bible to reinforce the idea that they alone are the ‘true’
leaders and representatives of God, and that they alone are capable of
understanding the word He gave us all.
Once under the influence of a powerful, aggressive spiritual
leader, many sheep fall right into line.
They do not have the backbone to challenge their own beliefs, or the
intelligence to reason out the answers and affirmations. Deep down they want to be controlled
spiritually by another, because it eliminates the self-responsibility they have
always felt about their own conditions with God. In this way, you can transfer the guilt and
burden of your repeated failures, to the new ‘prophet” or leader, and make it
all ‘his/her’ responsibility. This
immediate relief in the soul of the follower is worth the eccentricity of the
leader, and the sacrifices he may demand.
After all does not the scripture say to follow the advice of Prophets,
give your money to the church, and obey the voice of the Lord?
But the truth is anyone can begin reading and learning from
the Bible with just a few simple prerequisites.
First, take a minute and let go of the cares of the day, adjust your
mood so that you are not stooped in negativity.
The easiest and therefore most effective way of doing this is simply to
offer a prayer that the Holy Spirit lead in your study of the word. Don’t expect mind blowing 3D visions of the
apocalypse, or panoramic dreams of past Biblical scenes in history. It is often not the earthquake, but the still
small voice that guides the mind and heart to God. Be willing to adopt truth as you discover it,
in whatever form it comes in. The great
lessons of the people in the Bible itself are about them changing their own
minds as truth is revealed to them – Saul becomes Paul, David becomes King,
Joseph becomes ruler of Egypt, Jonah does actually go to Ninevah and his
preaching works … the list goes on.
When we realize we are children, opening up a book with the
secrets of the universe revealed within its pages, we begin to understand our
place in its study. Truth is an
absolute, but only God can really know it all.
What we learn in our lifetimes of study, is little perspectives of
truth, different vantage points of truth, glimmers, reflections. When we know Him face-to-face the entirety of
truth can then be revealed. We do not
need prophetic leaders who claim sole ownership of truth, we need prophetic
leaders who in humility reveal only a bit different or more enrichment of the
truth already in the word. We are not
redefining God based on the ideas of a charismatic leader, we KNOW who our God
is, and put our trust in Him to lead us to an even deeper understanding of who
He is. When religion is focused on God
it is focused well, when it is not, there is little light in it …
No comments:
Post a Comment