While I was pondering these facts I also read two very interesting articles that seemed to give some perspective to this. The first was called "Practical Atheism" by Tony Woodlief (World Magazine, April 25, 2009). The subtitle to his article was "Better to abandon the Christian label than make it meaningless." His point was that many who claim to be Christians are in fact hypocritical. They don't know the Bible. "It shouldn't surprise us if Christians who can't articulate what they believe have children and grandchildren who don't even bother to try."
What Mr. Woodlief observes as the problem is stated this way: "The way many churches respond to declining public interest exacerbates the problem. The Christian church grew when its leaders stressed biblical study and fervent prayer, each of which was considered, in the early church, a means of knowing God." He goes on to say, "The modern feel-good church, meanwhile, de-emphasizes both in favor of ‘messages' that are ‘relevant to my life.' That kind of offering can only be as stimulating as its deliverer, which explains why telegenic showmen find their congregations swelling, and so many other churches are shrinking." He concludes, "Eliminate the theologies of Word and prayer, and all you have left is a competition to see who can provide the best circus."
The second article I read on the same day is in Leben magazine (April-June 2009) entitled "Mr. Fundamentalis." It printed the obituary of Rev. J. Gresham Machen (a founder of Westminster Theological Seminary, PA, who died January 1, 1937, in Bismarck, ND) written by an atheist, H. L. Mencken. While Mencken did not agree with the theology of Machen, and was horrified by Calvinism, nevertheless he supported what Machen stood for in the battle against Modernism. Machen said that you either accept or reject the Bible as it stands, but you cannot mutilate it or accept it only in part. It is all or nothing. No fudging. Mencken agreed with that position, saying, "It is my belief . . . that the body of doctrine known as Modernism is completely incompatible, not only with anything rationally describable as Christianity, but with anything deserving to pass as religion in general."
Mencken goes on to say of the modernist mutilators of the Bible, "What they have left, once they have achieved their imprudent scavaging, is hardly more than a row of hollow platitudes, as empty as [of] psychological force and effect as so many nursery rhymes." This was a heathen observing what modernism was doing to the church. For him, Christianity either held entirely to the teachings of the Bible or they were no longer worthy of the name Christian.
The problems that face the Christian Church and even drive people to seek greener pastures is a lack of a solid biblical foundation in the glorious doctrines of the Word of God. In our age it is popular to abandon doctrine or fudge the doctrine so that it is more palatable to a feel-good generation that would rather have a social gospel than a soteriological gospel. Much of the Christian church has become no more than an entertainment event with a moral homily.
Facing the soggy footing of Christian commitment to the gospel of God's sovereign grace, we would do well to remember what Jeremiah wrote many years ago: "Has a nation changed its gods, which are not gods? But My people have changed their Glory for what does not profit. Be astonished, O heavens at this, and be horribly afraid; be very desolate, says the Lord. For my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewn themselves cisterns-broken cisterns that can hold no water" (2:11-13). Fudging on the Bible is a recipe for starvation.
If the church is to be blessed by God, it will come when we don't fudge-not even a crumb-from the teachings of the Bible. These doctrines are precious not just in our sight, but in the eyes of God who gave them. Let's remain committed to the Bible and prayer that places truth and life in the hands of our loving God.
