Change for Our Children?

by Tim Nichols

Much has been said in recent years concerning the self-proclaimed "change agents" among churches of Christ. Biblically, we have already shown that they do not have a leg to stand on and that the Bible is not one of the legs on which they are attempting to stand. My purpose, here, is not to fully deal with their ideas on the basis of the Bible, but to make some observations about the internal logic of this party's platform.

Plank #1 seems to be that the church must make drastic changes because culture is constantly changing and we must become more relevant for the sake of our children in coming generations. With the new millennium looming on the horizon, this idea seems to be especially significant to those who press it. This thinking was widespread at end of the last century but it may be even more so as we approach a year with three zeros.

Go back and read some old magazines. Popular Mechanics would be a good choice. Look at all of the predictions about how we were supposed to be living and thinking by now. They supposed that we would be living like the Jetson's, care nothing about birds, flowers, and trees, and have robots doing our every bidding. We laugh at what they thought our dress and fashion would be like. We are amused, fourteen years later, at the predictions that George Orwell made concerning 1984. The truth is that culture changes, styles change, people change, and even styles of thinking change among large populations within a culture, -- but almost never in ways that are very predictable. The "change agents" of the last century ("progressives") were quite certain that the church needed to change so that future generations would flock to it. They divided the church over it and started the "Christian Church." Those who failed to see their great vision for the future continued trying to simply be the church revealed in the New Testament. Contrary to the predictions of the "progressives," those who remained with simple New Testament Christianity became the fastest growing religious body in America by the middle of our current century. The "progressives" -- who felt certain that they knew what the next generation would need and want -- experienced no such growth.

Would it not be more honest for "change agents" to simply say, "WE want to make changes now because WE want them now"? Those who project their own desires onto the next generation may feel honorable and unselfish for expressing their own wishes in this way. Unless, however, their ability to predict the future far surpasses that of all previous generations, they are likely mistaken every time they anticipate the needs and movements of future generations. Since culture continuously changes, it is not reasonable to demand changes today to satisfy our children tomorrow.

Brethren, let's stick with the old plan. If there are changes that need to be made in individual Christians and independent local churches, they need to be made in order to conform to the will of God as expressed in the Bible. No reasonable man alive denies that such flaws exist and need mending. But to try to remodel the Lord's church with human hands to prepare it for the next generation to move in is both rebellious and unreasonable. Let's never forget that "his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation" (Luke 1:50).

 

Other Articles by Tim Nichols
Thoughts About the Difference Between Character and Reputation
Count Your Many Blessings and Then Weigh Them
The Futility of Communicating With Subjectivist
 

 Would you like others to read this article?

                    Please share!