I have been thinking for some time about this idea of what we believe as Christians and what we do as Christians. This really struck me when studying the Sermon on the Mount – from memory, I recalled that most, if not all, of what Jesus taught was based on
For the past few months, I’ve been wrestling with the differences between the ancient oriental mindset and the modern occidental mindset as molded by the Enlightenment.
As I understand it, ancient orientals conveyed truth and right action through narratives.
In the extreme, theological liberalism strips all historicity from these narratives, considering such accounts as myths that convey truths as the storytellers understood them. The supernatural doesn’t (or rarely) intrude into our reality — it’s just part of the story.
Rigid fundamentalists — my backstory — impose a Joe Friday mindset on the entire Bible: "Just the facts, ma'am." Of course, they recognize different types of literature, but the default is critical analysis from the vocabulary up.
With this dichotomy as a framework, a Methodist might see little but right actions expressed in the Gospels. Conversely, a fundamentalist-leaning evangelical sees nothing by doctrines primarily explicated by St. Paul.
Me? I keep stepping further and further back to see the big picture. The Divine Counsel, the Fall, the Flood, the Tower, the call of Abram, the Exodus, the Conquest, the Kingdom(s), the Exile(s), The Christ, The Acts of the Apostles, the Apocalypse — just to name the high points. Most are a record of obedience and failure, not doctrine. Doctrine informs conduct, but conduct is the emphasis. What are the writings of the prophets if not condemnation and correction of Israel and Judah?
At the risk of oversimplifying to the point of reductionism, the Gospels present a Jesus who could be summed up with His words, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and sin no more.” Once an individual responded to His revelation of Himself, He beckoned, “Come and follow me.” We westerners say, “What can we learn from Jesus’s words?” but those who heard His words heard challenge after challenge. “Let the dead bury the dead.” “Come unto Me, all who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you …”
Again, the epistles and the Apocalypse were written by the apostles to specific people or churches to address specific needs and/or failures and as exhortations to right conduct. The epistle to the Romans and to the Hebrews are the exceptions.
Even as I type these words, I indict myself. Conduct matters more than the ability to repeat the cardinal doctrines of the faith that were largely nailed down in the Fourth Century. My life will not be evaluated on my understanding of the range of meaning associated with the aorist tense or the stems of Hebrew, nor my ability to defend the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Errata, thank you for this thoughtful comment. To your last paragraph, I have often commented: St. Peter is not going to be standing at the gates of heaven with a 100 question quiz on doctrinal belief, which must be passed before entrance is allowed.
Yes, there are truths that must be believed. But without works, faith is dead.
One thought is that in Paul's epistles he starts with a section on orthodoxy (right belief) and following a section of orthopraxy (right action). Most times the first section is longer than the second. Romans for example contains 11 chapters of teaching doctrine and 4 chapters teaching application.
Also, you reference Revelation, which does contain instruction for action, but I would say out of 22 chapters all but 3 are mainly about belief.
But I agree with what you are saying in this article. We need to start obeying from the moment we believe in the gospel. More and more our action will be formed by what we are learning. Good stuff as always.
RMB, I think part of what is going on with me is what I am reacting to / against. Being raised in what would be described as a "Bible Believing" protestant church, the focus is overwhelmingly doctrinal teaching. Now, in truth, I can react against this perhaps only because I can take it for granted that I have been taught doctrine and the Scriptures well.
But I see in other traditions that action is a large focus - doing what God commands, doing good works, etc. So for me, this emphasis is enlightening - and the realizations of its importance is convicting. At the same time, I know many people who come out of these traditions (RCC / EO) that don't know Scripture at all - even those made deacons!
I do believe that proper belief must come first: we certainly must love the true God as He is presented to us in Scripture, else all the works in the world will be irrelevant. Recognizing His role vs. our role in our life is also important - the works is all His and all to His glory.
Like I say, I think I am just working to overcome the overemphasis I was raised on regarding doctrine...
I thank you, as always, for your comments and support.
On the day we celebrate the Resurrection of Christ, it is appropriate to remember His commandment to us - Matthew 28:18-20 New International Version (NIV)
18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
In addition, there is a segment of Christianity which leans in the direction of thinking that if one has all the doctrines properly defined and arranged in their head, therein lies the "the faith" while, in truth, life is messy and the faith is worked out in the doing.
For the past few months, I’ve been wrestling with the differences between the ancient oriental mindset and the modern occidental mindset as molded by the Enlightenment.
As I understand it, ancient orientals conveyed truth and right action through narratives.
In the extreme, theological liberalism strips all historicity from these narratives, considering such accounts as myths that convey truths as the storytellers understood them. The supernatural doesn’t (or rarely) intrude into our reality — it’s just part of the story.
Rigid fundamentalists — my backstory — impose a Joe Friday mindset on the entire Bible: "Just the facts, ma'am." Of course, they recognize different types of literature, but the default is critical analysis from the vocabulary up.
With this dichotomy as a framework, a Methodist might see little but right actions expressed in the Gospels. Conversely, a fundamentalist-leaning evangelical sees nothing by doctrines primarily explicated by St. Paul.
Me? I keep stepping further and further back to see the big picture. The Divine Counsel, the Fall, the Flood, the Tower, the call of Abram, the Exodus, the Conquest, the Kingdom(s), the Exile(s), The Christ, The Acts of the Apostles, the Apocalypse — just to name the high points. Most are a record of obedience and failure, not doctrine. Doctrine informs conduct, but conduct is the emphasis. What are the writings of the prophets if not condemnation and correction of Israel and Judah?
At the risk of oversimplifying to the point of reductionism, the Gospels present a Jesus who could be summed up with His words, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and sin no more.” Once an individual responded to His revelation of Himself, He beckoned, “Come and follow me.” We westerners say, “What can we learn from Jesus’s words?” but those who heard His words heard challenge after challenge. “Let the dead bury the dead.” “Come unto Me, all who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you …”
Again, the epistles and the Apocalypse were written by the apostles to specific people or churches to address specific needs and/or failures and as exhortations to right conduct. The epistle to the Romans and to the Hebrews are the exceptions.
Even as I type these words, I indict myself. Conduct matters more than the ability to repeat the cardinal doctrines of the faith that were largely nailed down in the Fourth Century. My life will not be evaluated on my understanding of the range of meaning associated with the aorist tense or the stems of Hebrew, nor my ability to defend the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist.
“If you love me, keep my commandments.”
Errata, thank you for this thoughtful comment. To your last paragraph, I have often commented: St. Peter is not going to be standing at the gates of heaven with a 100 question quiz on doctrinal belief, which must be passed before entrance is allowed.
Yes, there are truths that must be believed. But without works, faith is dead.
One thought is that in Paul's epistles he starts with a section on orthodoxy (right belief) and following a section of orthopraxy (right action). Most times the first section is longer than the second. Romans for example contains 11 chapters of teaching doctrine and 4 chapters teaching application.
Also, you reference Revelation, which does contain instruction for action, but I would say out of 22 chapters all but 3 are mainly about belief.
But I agree with what you are saying in this article. We need to start obeying from the moment we believe in the gospel. More and more our action will be formed by what we are learning. Good stuff as always.
https://thecrosssectionrmb.blogspot.com/
RMB, I think part of what is going on with me is what I am reacting to / against. Being raised in what would be described as a "Bible Believing" protestant church, the focus is overwhelmingly doctrinal teaching. Now, in truth, I can react against this perhaps only because I can take it for granted that I have been taught doctrine and the Scriptures well.
But I see in other traditions that action is a large focus - doing what God commands, doing good works, etc. So for me, this emphasis is enlightening - and the realizations of its importance is convicting. At the same time, I know many people who come out of these traditions (RCC / EO) that don't know Scripture at all - even those made deacons!
I do believe that proper belief must come first: we certainly must love the true God as He is presented to us in Scripture, else all the works in the world will be irrelevant. Recognizing His role vs. our role in our life is also important - the works is all His and all to His glory.
Like I say, I think I am just working to overcome the overemphasis I was raised on regarding doctrine...
I thank you, as always, for your comments and support.
Your emphasis is appropriate. Obedience is a critical part of Christian life. Without it, you might as well be an atheist, practically.
Jesus Christ to His Church: "Do Your JOB!" - https://crushlimbraw.blogspot.com/2023/04/jesus-christ-to-his-church-do-your-job.html?m=0 - What is our JOB? And it ain't about us all gettin' to heaven......
On the day we celebrate the Resurrection of Christ, it is appropriate to remember His commandment to us - Matthew 28:18-20 New International Version (NIV)
18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
In addition, there is a segment of Christianity which leans in the direction of thinking that if one has all the doctrines properly defined and arranged in their head, therein lies the "the faith" while, in truth, life is messy and the faith is worked out in the doing.
"...the faith is worked out in the doing."
We know that faith without works is dead. I have taken that to mean that without works as evidence, it is a dead faith. I think that is true enough.
But the way you worded it shed another light on this for me: it is through works that we develop / grow our faith.
I frequently mean to tell you how glad I am to be on this journey with you. There are many thoughtful stations along the way! Merry Christmas!
Thank you, John.