Timothy Kline: Thoughts and Reflections

While this article does not address the setting where you currently attend a place of worship that you have always attended because of familial ties or upbringing, if you are in that group, you may still find the information below to be of interest.

Introduction

Deciding which church, synagogue, or other place of worship to attend and become a part of is certainly one of the more important decisions that you will make in your life. And yet, the number of available options can be utterly bewildering. There are so many churches to choose from, all teaching what seems to be just as many different things. You may find yourself asking, then, how it is that if they all claim to believe the Bible, to teach from it, then why so many different religions? Why isn’t there only one to choose from? They can’t all be right, can they?

When I first encountered Jehovah’s Witnesses, this was one of the arguments they made to me, actually: “They can’t all be right, so it is a matter of urgency that we determine which one is right, and then become a part of it.” To further illustrate their point, they refer back to there only being one ark, built by Noah—therefore, there is only one group or organization of believers that will be preserved through the coming flood of judgment.

To the uninitiated, this seems a powerfully logical argument. It makes sense. Just examine the teachings of all of the Christian groups, and whichever one has the right teachings is, by deduction, the “Noah’s ark” of our day. Problem solved. The Witness then engages in a Bible study using one of the publications of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society to help the prospective householder to see what is wrong with other Christian groups, and how Jehovah’s Witnesses have it right.

The problem with this approach is that the ending is already determined for the student. All they need to do is follow the argumentation as presented in the publication to its conclusion: Jehovah’s Witnesses “have the Truth,” to the exclusion of all other Christian groups. Unfortunately, the majority of people today want to exert themselves as minimally as possible, to save themselves the trouble of finding the answer, and therefore reach the “conclusion” that Jehovah’s Witnesses are right.

But, really, would Jehovah’s Witnesses use a publication that led a potential convert to the conclusion that Catholics “have the Truth”? Or that the Pentecostals do? Or the Mormons do? Obviously, they wouldn’t. So, this has to be taken into consideration as part of one’s determination as to which group really does “have the Truth.” It can be easy to “stack the deck” in order to get a person of little discernment to agree with you. After all, you are the one that predetermines the checklist by which other Christian groups fail, and your Christian group excels. As such, you would make sure that you didn’t note those areas where you failed in comparison to other Christian groups, now would you?

Most people recognize this as a form of propaganda, but again—most people are just looking for the easiest answer. They feel an emptiness in their life, a separation from God, and know that it will remain there until they can figure out first which church to go to, and then go on from there.

In writing this article, then, I will not be focusing on Jehovah’s Witnesses’ approach to proselytism, but rather on addressing why there are so many churches surrounding us today, and how we can figure out which one is the right one. I’ll also be addressing the purpose of the church, and what role it is supposed to have in our life. My hope is that approaching the subject from this angle, I can help shed light on an otherwise perplexing problem for so many today.

Why are there so many churches today?

One can’t help but notice the number of churches around today. Some cities have upwards of two dozen or even more different churches, all offering various religious services, all with their own congregants who attend and participate faithfully. Even in much smaller towns and villages, it is rare to find just one church or place of worship. Look in your local phone book’s yellow pages and marvel at the listings!

The first question one usually asks is, Why are there so many different churches?!

While I won’t bore you with all of the details, you need to know that it wasn’t always this way. By turning back the pages of history, we find that for some time after the death of the last of the apostles, there were numerous groups of Christians spread across the civilized world, all with a diversity as much like today that we have. However, during this time, there developed a growing authoritarian movement to centralize power over Christians, and to eliminate all competitors. Biblical scholars refer to this movement as neo-orthodoxy. The word “orthodox” actually comes to us from the Greek words ortho and doxa, which translates to “right opinion” or “right thinking.” The “right” opinion, of course, came from the men heading up the neo-orthodox movement, which also brought into existence heterodoxy. The term “heterodox” simply means “any opinions or doctrines at variance with the official or orthodox position.” Used in contrast to orthodoxy, it is synonymous with the term “unorthodox” and is even closely tied to the word, “heresy”.

As neo-orthodoxy gained a foothold in the Christian movement through often brutal means, the roots for Catholicism began to take shape. “Catholicism” means “universal,” so when someone says “the Catholic Church,” they are referring to the universal (one, all-inclusive) church.

And, as most readers know, this neo-orthodoxy, after finally becoming Catholicism, eventually became the state-sanctioned Roman Catholic Church. Too, most are very familiar with the brutality of that period in Christianity’s history as power over Christians continued to be further centralized and exerted over the masses under penalty of death. Even the “Holy” Crusades owes its horrific origins with Christianity during the heyday of Catholicism’s control over Christianity.

During those centuries, you only had one church to choose from. So, it was the complete opposite of what we see today. To be more clear: there was no choice during that period of Christian history. And, once the Roman Empire made Catholicism the state-sponsored religion, the empowerment of orthodoxy was complete. If you disagreed with the Roman Catholic Church, too bad. If you were found out, you very likely would face the loss of property ownership, employment, social status, and even death. You had no recourse. You were powerless.

That all changed when a man named Martin Luther took a stand against the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. The result of that confrontation led to the fracturing once more of Christianity, and Lutheranism was born.

Since then, Christianity has continued to fracture as people realize that they have it within themselves to disagree with the authorities of their given Christian affiliation, and to go off and form their own church. These splits or fractures came to be known as Protestantism, due to its “protest” nature.

Of course, I am vastly oversimplifying history, for brevity’s sake, and you, the reader, are more than welcome to research Christian history post-CE 1 (Common Era 1) in order to get a fuller idea of how things have developed. But the process happened like this:

Judaism → Jewish Christians → Gentile Christians (diverse) → neo-Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy → Catholicism → Roman Catholicism → Protestantism (starting with Lutheranism)

What I omitted was the division of Roman Catholicism into Eastern and Western Orthodoxy, but the point is that at first there was a great diversity within early Christianity as Gentiles were brought into the Christian movement, and then Catholicism centralized power and authority for itself until Protestantism. Today, we again see diversity in Christianity. This is meant to demonstrate why there are so many different churches today.

Having the freedom to arrive at a conclusion different from one’s church’s leader or leaders has been a hard-fought struggle. It used to mean death for the layperson. Now, it means that you can go looking for another church, or, perhaps, form your own. But, just as with any other freedom, it can be abused. Some go off to form groups or churches that become a cult of personality, where they attain their own following. Others successfully congregate and continue in their walk as Christians. And, still others, form their own Christian group, only to once again centralize power and authority over others—and censure or excommunicate anyone who in turn questions them.

But they can’t all be right!

If it’s perplexing to someone that there are so many Christian churches, then it is all the more so when you add into the mix the simplicity of this question: They can’t all be right, though, can they?

It’s a fair question. A reasonable one. However, it is also a question that has the potential to be misguiding.

First of all, how does one go about determine what is right and wrong? The answer, of course, is by turning to the Bible. But isn’t that what every church does? Don’t they use the Bible as their guide? In turn, they can probably show you where other churches are in error, thus justifying their own existence. Some even go so far as to insist that they alone are “the Truth” or that they alone “have the Truth” and that all of the other churches aren’t truly Christian (and therefore, are false).

Even so, such groups, when pressed, admit that they have been wrong in the past about certain teachings, but, they quickly add, they have since corrected them—adding that the ones that they were wrong in are of little consequence anyhow. Still, they show a remarkable reluctance to admit that there may still be teachings and views that they hold and preach that could, in time, be found to be in error. If asked whether a person is free to disagree with a particular teaching or view if they can provide scriptural grounds for said rejection of the “orthodoxical” view, they have to admit that the person is not free to do so, that one should not “lean upon” their own understanding, that the group’s teachings are determined by those in authority.

This last aspect seems to escape their notice: the eerie similarity to the centralization of power and authority that was held during Catholicism.

In examining such groups, one finds that anyone that arrives at a different conclusion from that of the group’s leaders is usually censured swiftly, and potentially excommunicated from the Christian group to the extent of being cut off from friends, relatives, and one’s own family except for the barest minimum of interaction. What is all the more remarkable is such ones, if the group later changes its “orthodox” view to that shared by the excommunicated individual, are not then welcomed back into the congregation unless they first repent of the sin of “running ahead” of the group’s leaders. The similarity bears an uncanny, unsettling resemblance to the stonings and burnings conducted by the Catholic church during its holding of power over Christians.

Within such a Christian group, it is costly to disagree with the “orthodox” views held by the group (as determined by the group’s leaders)—even if the individual’s own view is later discovered to be correct.

But for the majority of Christian groups, if you disagree with something being taught by that church, you usually seek out a different group that more closely resembles views you personally agree with.

This can create more problems than it solves. For one thing, we have a tendency to want to be able to do as much as we can without religion infringing on our lives. For that reason, there is a tendency on the part of some to seek out a church that allows for whatever indulgence we are partial to. This is as much the fault of the church as it is the individual.

Even so, let’s go back to the argument that all of these hundreds and thousands of different churches can’t all be right. Indulge this thought for a moment: Isn’t what you’re really saying this: there has to be one church out there that’s positively correct? After all, you have to admit that every Christian church out there is right to a certain extent.

By “right,” you are looking for what used to be called orthodox. And clearly, one cannot say that every single church is orthodox, especially when you take into consideration the fact that “orthodoxy” is determined by the individual group. Martin Luther found certain of the Roman Catholic Church’s teachings to be unorthodox, and broke off from Roman Catholicism. But then some found not only some of the Roman Catholic Church’s teachings to be unorthodox, but Martin Luther’s as well, and broke off from Lutheranism. And so has gone ever since.

And yet even today, after centuries of this process of splintering off, there remains not a single church that can declare itself the definitive, truest, accurate embodiment of Christianity. At best all they can hope for is to have a more accurate understanding than most. That is still a far distance from the implication behind saying that all these churches can’t all be “right.” Each and every one of them is going to be wrong about something at some point. The issue becomes, at that point, how they, as a Christian group respond to someone within the congregation pointing out a doctrinal or theological problem—and it is in this area that nearly every Christian group fails so miserably. If it was not so, then people would not leave off to go find another church or start their own.

Another facet of the question is what standards will be used to determine the “rightness” of a particular Christian group? I mentioned at the start of this subsection that every one of the Christian churches in your neighborhood looks to the Bible as their guide, and yet it is clear to the outsider that every one of the Christian churches believe differently.

But do they?

There are specific beliefs that are held in common among all Christian groups. These are core, fundamental views that you can find in every church. Some of these include, but most certainly are not limited to:

• The Bible is the Word of God;
• God alone is Supreme, and created Man;
• Jesus is the son of God, died as a perfect man, was resurrected and returned to heaven;
• Jesus, before returning to heaven, gave his followers the commission to go forth with the Good News, and baptize those that accepted that Good News;
• That the only means of salvation available is that of accepting Jesus as our Savior, repenting of our sins, and dedicating our life to the way of Christianity.

Very likely, you can put together a much better list of commonalities shared among all Christian churches—and you might even be surprised at just how much they have in common when it comes to Christianity. At the same time, if you make the effort to continue with your list-making, you’ll start to come up with things that are less and less common amongst the vast diversity of Christian groups, such as below:

• Trinitarian view
• Binitarian view
• Unitarian view
• Pre-Millenialists
• Post-Millenialists
• Preterists
• Futurists

Really, the list can go on and on. The point being that if you start with the common system of beliefs first listed above, you arrive at the core teachings of Christianity. Those are areas in which every Christian group, whether they are Catholic, Protestant, or whatever other denomination, are in full agreement and hold in common. It is these particular values or beliefs that form the orthodox view. Go past this point and you start getting into the variations, some of which include the second list above. And go past that and you start getting into the variations of those variations, and so on.

So when we say something like “Well, they can’t all be right,” the fact of the matter is: Yes, they can and are. At least in the core teachings. And aren’t those the most important?

What, then, about the areas where they aren’t all in agreement? Well, then we have moved past the core teachings of Christianity and have moved into sectarianism, which, simply put, is a division within Christianity caused by a difference of opinion or conclusion in regards to a given Bible passage. When there is no agreement, and division takes place, it is because both sides insist that they are right. But, as already shown, these are in matters that fall outside of the core body of teachings (that is, those held in common by all Christian groups). These secondary and tertiary views are given sufficient weight so as to cause division. In many cases, they become so important that they are assigned as “salvation” beliefs—where you must adopt a particular view in order to be found as a “true” Christian, or to have any sort of chance at salvation. They are not optional: they are mandated.

Yes, it is arguable that both sides can’t be right—that one of them is wrong. Even so, there are times when it is impossible to determine which side is right. And it is just as possible that they are both wrong. Or, both may be right from their own particular point of view. The point here being that unless the individuals discussing and debating the topic recognize that what is at stake falls outside of the core teachings, both sides of the argument will become entrenched and willfully divide the congregation over it—even going so far as to make the disputed argument suddenly a salvational issue, forcing others to choose sides. At the point of division, a given argument becomes part of the subsequently resulting group’s body of teachings, and is no longer a candidate for debate. It is how they differentiate themselves from the group of Christians that they parted ways with—some even going so far as to claim that they are the real or true Christians.

Does it matter what a church teaches, then?

Given the fact that all of the different churches in existence today hold as many different views, even though they share a common core set of beliefs, the next logical question we need to address is whether it matters, then, what a church teaches? Does it mean that we can pick any church whatsoever and it’ll be fine?

The fact is: this is exactly what most people do. They pick churches for convenience, for example. It’s just down the street. It’s within their own neighborhood. Within their own town.

Similarly, they select a church because they can go dressed as they want. Or because it focuses on singing, or plays, or focus groups.

There are as many reasons why people select certain churches as there are churches to choose from. There is a church for every flavor, one might say. So, no, for the majority of people it really doesn’t matter (much) what a church teaches, so long as it has fantastic social activities.

However, perhaps it does matter to you personally. If that is the case, then you need to take the time to figure out what beliefs you personally hold, and then look for a church that is most in agreement with your own beliefs. Or, if you aren’t sure what you believe, and you know very little about the Bible, then you can either take the time to get familiar with your Bible so as to become acquainted with Christianity, and then go looking for a church—or visit various churches in your area until you find one that is willing to help you to learn the Bible and that welcomes questions and examination. Regardless of the church you decide to go with, find out how they handle scriptural disagreements. Ask them about their core beliefs—those beliefs that they have in common with other churches, and how they handle the secondary beliefs that differentiate themselves from other Christian groups. If they are more insistent in talking about how different from all the other churches they are, rather than what they have in common, then consider that a red flag because they will hold the same view of you if you ever find yourself disagreeing with that group’s leaders or body of teachings.

If you are an individual who is fairly well-versed in what the Bible teaches, then it will be more difficult to select a church that suitably matches your own views because you have already established your own views and conclusions and would compare those of a potential Christian group to your own. As an example, I would find it next to impossible to affiliate myself with a Christian group that extols Trinitarianism, because my own examination of the Bible finds that particular doctrine lacking and therefore unacceptable to me personally.

It becomes even more difficult when you have left a Christian group that always insisted on rightness and “accurate knowledge” and “having the Truth.” Such groups have an overwhelming tendency to create judgmentalism in its members, such that you turn your nose up at all other groups, smugly convinced that your group alone “has the Truth” and is, therefore, the true Christians. Even after leaving, this mentality is not easily dispensed with. You will be critical of everything everyone else teaches—which is ironic, since such groups that instill this critical attitude also bar its members from exercising that same critical examination towards its own teachings and practices once an individual officially becomes a member of the group.

For some, yes, it is very important what a prospective church teaches. But we have to know our Bible well enough to have formed our own thoughts and conclusions if we’re going to be in a position to examine a Christian group’s teachings. It is not enough to allow a church to teach us they teach, and stop there. Human nature, such as it is, will put its best face forward, and you won’t find out until much later what lies behind that façade that is presented. That is why it is of utmost importance that you know beforehand how that particular group of Christians handles disagreements about secondary and tertiary doctrines. And expect them to minimize such things, implying that they are of little consequence, or rarely happen in their group.

Having said all of the above, it now behooves us to ask ourselves, “Well, what’s God’s view on this? Doesn’t it matter to Him what a church teaches while it’s claiming to be Christian?”

I will address that facet of the discussion, along with the remaining issues, in the next part of this article.