Why Christianity Must Change or Die

[kayky]

This is the title of one of John Shelby Spong's most well-known books. Spong refers to himself as "a believer in exile" because he can no longer relate to "orthodox" Christianity. Many thinking Christians identify with this position completely.

Consider the following passage from this book:

Creedal language comes out of another time. It reflects assumptions that this generation can no longer make. It thus employs a language that is not native to us. If we could just cease being believers, these problems would disappear. But some of us cannot cease believing. God is too real for us. We also cannot resign from our modern world or close our minds to its insights. We cannot pretend that we live in the first century. We cannot park our brains at the door of our places of worship in order to accept as real the words that were used to interpret God in years past but can no longer today illumine our understanding of God.

Is it time for forward-thinking denominations to rewrite the Nicene Creed in order to reflect a modern understanding of Christianity?

[CJO]

Well, you (liberal Christians in the tradition of Spong) believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit still, right?

The only passages I find troublesome in the NC (1979 Episcopal BoCP, presumably the one Bishop Spong says of a Sunday) are "became incarnate from the Virgin Mary" and possibly "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead" with its rapture-ready overtones.

My religious education was at the hand of an Episcopal priest whise views bore much in common with the good Bishop. I don't think he minded the creed very much, though I'm sure he didn't believe in the virgin birth. The language of the creed allows for a less literalistic understanding of the meaning of the resurrection and the final judgement doesn't it?

[kayky]

I too am Episcopalian. I recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday but in my mind I'm interpreting everything in a symbolic way. I feel a degree of attachment to the Nicene Creed because I like old things, if you know what I mean. But I sometimes wonder if a little tweeking is in order.

Perhaps I should broaden the question beyond merely rewriting the Creed. How should Christianity change if it intends to survive in a modern world?

[Easyrider]

This is the title of one of John Shelby Spong's most well-known books. Spong refers to himself as "a believer in exile" because he can no longer relate to "orthodox" Christianity. Many thinking Christians identify with this position completely.

Consider the following passage from this book:

Creedal language comes out of another time. It reflects assumptions that this generation can no longer make. It thus employs a language that is not native to us. If we could just cease being believers, these problems would disappear. But some of us cannot cease believing. God is too real for us. We also cannot resign from our modern world or close our minds to its insights. We cannot pretend that we live in the first century. We cannot park our brains at the door of our places of worship in order to accept as real the words that were used to interpret God in years past but can no longer today illumine our understanding of God.

Is it time for forward-thinking denominations to rewrite the Nicene Creed in order to reflect a modern understanding of Christianity?

i.e. Why Christianity Must Change or Die. Or better still,

Why God-Lite Doesnt Cut It

The most recent Religious Congregations and Membership study, published in 2000 (the study is conducted each decade) by the Glenmary Research Center, tells the statistical story. Progressive (liberal) churches are progressing, it seems, ever closer to oblivion. The Presbyterian Church U.S.A. (11,106 churches) has experienced a decline of 11.6 percent over the previous ten years; the United Methodist Church (35,721 churches) was down 6.7 percent; and the Episcopal Church (7,314 churches) lost 5.3 percent of its membership. Also, the United Churches of Christ (5,863 churches) declined 14.8 percent while the American Baptist Churches USA were down 5.7 percent.

The denominations showing growth included the deeply conservative Southern Baptist Convention, a collection of 41,514 churches, whose overall growth rate was 5 percent. The traditionalist Presbyterian Church in America (as opposed the mainline Presbyterian Church U.S.A.) experienced an impressive 42.4 percent increase, while the Christian and Missionary Alliance rose 21.8 percent. Meanwhile, the Evangelical Free Church was up 57.2 percent, and Pentecostal denominations also boomed. The Assemblies of God, with 11,880 churches, saw 18.5 percent growth, while the Church of God, with 5,612 churches, saw growth of 40.2 percent.

What is behind this traditionalist rise and progressive decline? The New York Times, in its summary of the survey, noted, "Socially conservative churches that demand high commitment from their members grew faster than other religious denominations in the last decade." Glenmary director Ken Sanchagrin told the paper he was astounded to see that by and large the growing churches are those that we ordinarily call conservative. And when I looked at those that were declining, most were moderate or liberal churches. And the more liberal the denomination, by most people's definition, the more they were losing."

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/s ... 070747.asp

Looks to me like it's Spong and his boys who are becoming "increasingly irrelevant!" Maybe he's the one who needs to trade in his God-Lite for the real thing before he becomes the dinosaur!

By the way, there's no doubt in my mind that if what was being offered up was Spong's own "Creedal language," then that would suddenly be ok.

p.s. Spong's own congregation declined in membership under his tuteledge, so he isn't a good role model to select from, IMO.

[Michael5z]

I too am Episcopalian. I recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday but in my mind I'm interpreting everything in a symbolic way. I feel a degree of attachment to the Nicene Creed because I like old things, if you know what I mean. But I sometimes wonder if a little tweeking is in order.

Perhaps I should broaden the question beyond merely rewriting the Creed. How should Christianity change if it intends to survive in a modern world?

The question seems rather futile to me. The dogma of Christianity does not allow for compromise. 1st century beliefs are incompatible with the modern world. Spong was right on the money when he said the problems would cease to be if the belief ceased to be. There can be no reconciliation.

[Michael5z]

God-Lite Doesnt Cut It

The most recent Religious Congregations and Membership study, published in 2000 (the study is conducted each decade) by the Glenmary Research Center, tells the statistical story. Progressive (liberal) churches are progressing, it seems, ever closer to oblivion. The Presbyterian Church U.S.A. (11,106 churches) has experienced a decline of 11.6 percent over the previous ten years; the United Methodist Church (35,721 churches) was down 6.7 percent; and the Episcopal Church (7,314 churches) lost 5.3 percent of its membership. Also, the United Churches of Christ (5,863 churches) declined 14.8 percent while the American Baptist Churches USA were down 5.7 percent.

The denominations showing growth included the deeply conservative Southern Baptist Convention, a collection of 41,514 churches, whose overall growth rate was 5 percent. The traditionalist Presbyterian Church in America (as opposed the mainline Presbyterian Church U.S.A.) experienced an impressive 42.4 percent increase, while the Christian and Missionary Alliance rose 21.8 percent. Meanwhile, the Evangelical Free Church was up 57.2 percent, and Pentecostal denominations also boomed. The Assemblies of God, with 11,880 churches, saw 18.5 percent growth, while the Church of God, with 5,612 churches, saw growth of 40.2 percent.

What is behind this traditionalist rise and progressive decline? The New York Times, in its summary of the survey, noted, "Socially conservative churches that demand high commitment from their members grew faster than other religious denominations in the last decade." Glenmary director Ken Sanchagrin told the paper he was astounded to see that by and large the growing churches are those that we ordinarily call conservative. And when I looked at those that were declining, most were moderate or liberal churches. And the more liberal the denomination, by most people's definition, the more they were losing."

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/s ... 070747.asp

Looks to me like it's Spong and his boys who are becoming "increasingly irrelevant!" Maybe he's the one who needs to trade in his God-Lite for the real thing before he becomes the dinosaur!

By the way, there's no doubt in my mind that if what was being offered up was Spong's own "Creedal language," then that would suddenly be ok.

p.s. Spong's own congregation declined in membership under his tuteledge, so he isn't a good role model to select from, IMO.

And there you have it. Those most ready to compromise are losing ground. Those who are adamantly opposed to compromise are growing stronger. Without compromise they are no better than the 1st century primitives who were first deluded with these superstitions. There's no room for reason, there's no room for balance and negotiation. Any other organization (such as a political party) with this kind of ruthlessness would be considered a grave danger to civilization. Christianity won't change. It must die. And that goes for all Abrahamic faiths. Every day we watch them push one another and modernity towards the brink of disaster. The chaos and unrest we see every day in the middle east is a direct result of the uncompromising creedal language and dogma that we're discussing. A refusal to compromise is an especially dangerous thing in the realm of unprovables such as religious tenets.

[CJO]

For myself, I enjoy Spong's writings on the New Testament. I learned a lot from Liberating the Gospels.

I'm afraid. however (afraid for your sake), that this version of Christianity will survive in the long term only by separating yet further from the hard-line denominations. Too many Christian communities are too attached to their literalism and their apocalyptic, us-against-the-world orientation to come around to your views.

I see a tripartate tradition: Liberal Protestantism, Conservative Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. As someone who is not a member of any faith community, outside looking in, I just don't see very much common ground between these groups. And the divides just seem to grow wider. I hear that Calvinism is enjoying a resurgance among young people raised in conservative churches.

[Easyrider]

God-Lite Doesnt Cut It

The most recent Religious Congregations and Membership study, published in 2000 (the study is conducted each decade) by the Glenmary Research Center, tells the statistical story. Progressive (liberal) churches are progressing, it seems, ever closer to oblivion. The Presbyterian Church U.S.A. (11,106 churches) has experienced a decline of 11.6 percent over the previous ten years; the United Methodist Church (35,721 churches) was down 6.7 percent; and the Episcopal Church (7,314 churches) lost 5.3 percent of its membership. Also, the United Churches of Christ (5,863 churches) declined 14.8 percent while the American Baptist Churches USA were down 5.7 percent.

The denominations showing growth included the deeply conservative Southern Baptist Convention, a collection of 41,514 churches, whose overall growth rate was 5 percent. The traditionalist Presbyterian Church in America (as opposed the mainline Presbyterian Church U.S.A.) experienced an impressive 42.4 percent increase, while the Christian and Missionary Alliance rose 21.8 percent. Meanwhile, the Evangelical Free Church was up 57.2 percent, and Pentecostal denominations also boomed. The Assemblies of God, with 11,880 churches, saw 18.5 percent growth, while the Church of God, with 5,612 churches, saw growth of 40.2 percent.

What is behind this traditionalist rise and progressive decline? The New York Times, in its summary of the survey, noted, "Socially conservative churches that demand high commitment from their members grew faster than other religious denominations in the last decade." Glenmary director Ken Sanchagrin told the paper he was astounded to see that by and large the growing churches are those that we ordinarily call conservative. And when I looked at those that were declining, most were moderate or liberal churches. And the more liberal the denomination, by most people's definition, the more they were losing."

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/s ... 070747.asp

Looks to me like it's Spong and his boys who are becoming "increasingly irrelevant!" Maybe he's the one who needs to trade in his God-Lite for the real thing before he becomes the dinosaur!

By the way, there's no doubt in my mind that if what was being offered up was Spong's own "Creedal language," then that would suddenly be ok.

p.s. Spong's own congregation declined in membership under his tuteledge, so he isn't a good role model to select from, IMO.

And there you have it. Those most ready to compromise are losing ground. Those who are adamantly opposed to compromise are growing stronger. Without compromise they are no better than the 1st century primitives who were first deluded with these superstitions. There's no room for reason, there's no room for balance and negotiation. Any other organization (such as a political party) with this kind of ruthlessness would be considered a grave danger to civilization. Christianity won't change. It must die.

Who's going to kill it? Rome tried. China tried. A whole bunch of kings and rulers tried and it just kept on flourishing.

It's like the guy in scripture who said (paraphrasing), "If it's not of God it will die of itself; but if it is of God you will not be able to stand against it - you will just find yourself fighting against God."

And that goes for all Abrahamic faiths. Every day we watch them push one another and modernity towards the brink of disaster. The chaos and unrest we see every day in the middle east is a direct result of the uncompromising creedal language and dogma that we're discussing. A refusal to compromise is an especially dangerous thing in the realm of unprovables such as religious tenets.

I've read the Book of Revelation. Israel is still there at the end, but the godless, the corrupt, the Christ-deniers, etc., are the ones who get nailed.

It's like Obama yesterday. He said people need to "find common ground" regarding abortion. In other words, somebody has to compromise their beliefs. I guarantee you that will not happen. He's dreaming.

And a funny thing about all that: Obama doesn't think abortion is wrong, but he does think the practice should be more rare and occur less frequently. But two things: If there's nothing wrong with abortion, why should it need to occur less frequently? And if there is something wrong with abortion, why is Obama not pro-life?

So, traditional Biblical Christianity isn't going anywhere (Spong is grossly deluded if he thinks it is), I don't see how anyone can "kill" it, we're not about to compromise our beliefs, and I venture to submit that it will be Spong's liberal political correctness that buys the farm in the end.

Cheers...

[Wellington]

Who's going to kill it? Rome tried. China tried. A whole bunch of kings and rulers tried and it just kept on flourishing.

It's like the guy in scripture who said (paraphrasing), "If it's not of God it will die of itself; but if it is of God you will not be able to stand against it - you will just find yourself fighting against God."

Drugs don't seem to go away either...they must be of God.

[True Believer]

For me, one thing that made believing in Christianity hard was the fact that we were still relying on the Bible, a document written well over two thousand years ago by people in a culture that is so different from our it is hard to comprehend.

I find the report that more conservative churches are growing to be interesting. Where I live, in Southern California, Calvary Chapel churches are growing at an incredible rate. Some of my local churches have gone from 500 members to 5000 members in only a few years. While one of the largest Southern Baptist churches has shrunk. I understand that where I live can be very different than other parts of the country, and this is a good example.

But to me, there is something more important than the rate of churches growing. It is the fact that, according to a study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life called "U.S. Religious Landscape Survey", there are two very abnormal things happening. The first is that nearly 44% of believers have switched denominations in the past decade. Most every denomination showed both dramatic growth and dramatic shrinking at the same time. The only one that seems to have gotten smaller is the Roman Catholic church, with the majority of new members being immigrants.

But I like the second part better: the percentage of Americans that consider themselves unaffiliated or nonreligious has gone from 5 to 8 percent in the 1980's to 16%, making it the United State's fourth largest religious group. Unfortunately the study does not go beyond the US, as I would very much like to see a global view, especially of what is happening in the EU.

This speaks volumes to me, both of the parts that I mentioned. Not only is denomination loyalty down, but people are actually and finally leaving their faith on a national trend. In all honesty, I think it is very good. I think we need to spend our Sundays with our families outdoors, instead of hauling everyone to church for an hour. If all those people spent just that extra time together as a family doing something fun and relationship-building, we could see a huge change in our country.

Does Christianity need to change in order to survive? No, it does not. Well, rather, it cannot change to a point that will save it. It will eventually become completely lost in our society. I see the nation's attachment to Christianity as a shackle, holding us down. People are going to more conservative churches because they feel they need that security. It is something that will pass with the coming generations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/us/25 ... .html?_r=1