The Historical Problem with Creeds: God’S Counsel or Man’S Councils?

By Kenneth G. Arndt

This short book deals with the debate among Christians about the timing of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. There are several viewpoints on this topic, each with its defenders. Is Christ coming again in the future, and in what sequence of events will that happen? Or did the Second Coming of Christ happen in the past as some scriptures seem to say when it describes the time as quickly? The creeds have not really dealt with this issue in any definitive statement other than to say he is coming again. All Christians believe that there will be a final coming in judgment to sum up human history. The authority for Christians on this issue is the Bible, the Word of God.

The two viewpoints dealt with in this book are preterist (in the past) and futurist (in the future). While not an extended support of either position, although the author is a preterist by conviction, this book speaks out against the futurist writers identifying a preterist as a heretic. Often relying on the creeds, there is a lack of historical scholarship on just how the creeds were constructed. In the view of the author, a preterist (even if mistaken), does not hold to a belief or reading of the scripture that rises to the level of heresy. The attacks against preterists are unwarranted, unkind, and unworthy of Christian scholarship.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: May 22, 2018
• ISBN: 9781984526311

Kenneth G. Arndt

Dr. Kenneth G. Arndt, MA, MAR, ThM, D-Min, was an adjunct professor at several colleges in New Hampshire, USA where he taught courses on the subjects of philosophy, religion, and history. He has lectured in mainland China at several universities including Beijing Normal University on the topics of philosophy, science, and Christianity. Dr Arndt is also the author of The Chinese Christian Citizen in Contemporary China. He has created a four-day seminar for local pastors without formal seminary training on the topic of Servant Leadership and has presented this seminar in South America and Africa.

Book preview

Copyright © 2018 by Kenneth G. Arndt.

ISBN:                Softcover                    978-1-9845-2632-8

                          eBook                         978-1-9845-2631-1

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®. NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved. [Biblica]

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Rev. date: 05/21/2018

Xlibris

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

775186

Contents

Acknowledgements

Preface

Introduction

The Historical Development of Christian Understanding of Doctrine

My Creedal Concern

My Preterist Concern

My Approach

Hyper-Preterism’s Theological Errors

The second advent of Christ

The resurrection of the dead

The Trinity

Zealous Calls to Follow

Church of Christ Extremism

The Lord’s Supper

The Importance of Creeds

The Resurrection in the Creeds

Creeds Do Not Define Orthodoxy

We Have No Creed but Scripture

Creeds Are Constantly Revised

Creedalism Has Inherent Dangers

Conclusion

Endnotes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my family for their support in my adventures; Janet my wife, my children; Elissa, Emily, Ethan and Erica – one of you is my favorite (you know who you are).

I would like to thank Hal Mahar and Pastor Larry Hileman for their conversations and preaching. They do not always agree with my perspectives.

Also, I would like to thank my hard-working editor for all his good work, all remaining errors in the text; spelling, grammar, logic, etc. are not my own.

I would especially like to thank Frank Hynes for his time spent correcting the set-up of the text.

A Response to Dr. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. The Historical Problem with Hyper- Preterism et al, in When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism, Keith A.Mathison, ed., (P & R Publishing, 2004).

Preface

This essay is, hopefully, of interest to Christian scholars, pastors and students of the Bible who wrestle with the issue of the Second Coming of Christ as portrayed in the scriptures. Many believe Scripture teaches that the Second Coming promised is in the future. Some (preterists) believe that it happened in the past as taught by scripture. Both sides believe that there will be a final ending judgement yet to come.

I believe, at this time, that the preterist position on the timing of the Second Coming of Christ is most likely correct. I am also what has been called a Calvinist in that God has called and chosen His people out of this world. The decision to be a Christian and accept Christ is the result of God’s gracious choice. The chosen are chosen, the elect are elected. I will not go to the wall for these positions and I think no worse of those who might disagree with my positions. I think these positions are most likely correct. More important is that I be humbly busy serving the Lord and doing the things he has for me to do in this life. One of them is not to correct another Christian’s theology except in pleasant and respectful discussions.

A major question at issue is that if this discussion has been solved by the Creeds, does that mean that those who are preterists are heretics or merely mistaken? I hold to a preterist position and feel that it is too harsh to call me a heretic. The Creeds are, as all involved in this debate agree, not themselves Scripture. The Creeds did not actually respond to this discussion other than a simple statement that He is coming again. Scripture has many references to I come quickly. Two thousand years is not quickly. Was Jesus mistaken as some critics point out?

The bedrock of what it actually means to be a Christian is to be born again, that is, to be remade into a new creation, as yet unfinished, by the power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that unless a man was born again he would not see the Kingdom of God. Not a man’s effort or belief but a supernatural remaking of a man by God based upon the sacrifice of Christ on the cross in our place. Christians believe and trust (have faith in) the promise of God that this is so and grow in the knowledge of what this means through the careful, Spirit led, study of Scripture. All Christians are not at the same place in this pilgrimage. This calls for humility and kindness. It is not right to judge a man’s place before the Lord based upon if he agrees on all points of doctrine other than Christ died for me. This is what has led me to respond to Dr. Gentry’s. article (and others) in When Shall These Things Be? because of their harshness.

I view the members of the Church in this life as a great Kingdom of God Citizen Orchestra. A world community, in each nation and time, warming up as separate instruments to find their notes as individuals to create a harmony directed under the guidance of the conductor (the Holy Spirit) following the score (the Word of God).

I look forward in Heaven to my first class in Theology 101.

Introduction

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

— 2 Peter 1:20-21, New International Version¹

In order to be able to expound the Scriptures … you will need to be familiar with the commentators: a glorious army … whose acquaintance will be your delight and profit. Of course, you are not such wiseacres as to think or say that you can expound Scripture without assistance from the works of divines and learned men who have laboured before you in the field of exposition. . . It seems odd, that certain men … should think so little of what he has revealed to others.

— Charles H. Spurgeon, Commenting and Commentaries, Lecture 1, A Chat About Commentaries

The story is told of a group of senior Jewish Rabbis who were discussing a point of Mosaic law. Discussion turned to debate which turned to argument which turned to raised voices and hands. Suddenly there was a violent thunderclap and a voice from heaven stating, THIS IS THE WAY IT IS. After a moment of stunned silence, the Chief Rabbi cleared his throat and said, Now we will vote.

The fictitious story above, along with the quotes from St. Peter and Spurgeon, highlight what appears to be a constant issue between preterists and futurists. What is the balance between Scripture (God breathed) and creeds, traditions, and commentaries (man breathed)? The very basic issue raised by preterism asks if one can question past exegesis on the basis of a reexamination of Scriptural texts and disagree with a traditional doctrine/opinion that appears to be taught in some or all of the traditional church creeds. Not all doctrines, note carefully, but those around the issues of the timing of the return of Christ and the attendant events during the return as taught in Scripture by Jesus and the apostles. If new exegesis differs from the exegesis of the Fathers in the historical creeds does that constitute de facto and even damnable heresy, disruption, and fracture of unity in the Church?

It is well known that religious differences and religious debates can become acrimonious and even lead to such charges as heresy. This can make a mockery of Christ’s call for unity among believers. Surely a heretic is one who denies that Jesus the Christ had come in the flesh which is a mark of antichrist teaching.² Such a person believes and teaches, says John, the error that Jesus is not the expected Christ. A heretic is not someone who has a different opinion about some aspect of prophesy such as the timing of the Second Coming. He is one who denies the true identity of Jesus. There are many serious questions to be asked if there is only one true position allowed among the saints on other aspects of the faith because there are too many saints who do not always agree on secondary issues. Are all those who disagree with you heretics?

The Apostle Peter does talk about false prophets and false teachers among the people. But he identifies them "They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even deny the sovereign Lord who bought them – bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up."³ Note that the preterist position does not make up stories or try to get rich, but deals with the exegesis of the scriptures concerning the timing of the Second Coming in light of the many statements about the quick return of Christ.

The proper response to differences of opinion and conviction among Christian scholars and laymen is to be humble, listen, and entertain even the remote possibility that they may learn something from another Christian’s position. Walter Brueggemann in a book review warns us against taking self-assured position or arrogant position in words that could apply to Dr. Gentry’s writing. [A] question might be raised about the absolutist tone of the book, the high interpretive ground characteristically assumed by canonical readers. The readings [Moberly] proposes seem to be offered without any recognition that they and allied textual decisions as right interpretations are, in fact, shot through with subjective judgements that are covered over by self-assured appeal to the tradition of authority. More to the point, Brueggemann goes on to state that This is not to say that Moberly’s judgements are wrong, only that his style tends to settle by dictum what is in fact quite open to question and to variation from inside the community of reading for the Church.⁴

If the new exegesis differs from the statements, decisions, or exegesis of the Fathers in the historical creeds, does that constitute de facto and even damnable heresy, disruption and fracture of unity in the Church? Another overarching and very important question that must be faced by all students of the Scriptures is how do we arrive at a correct understanding of prophecy? Is it through textual analysis in the original languages, the teaching of the creeds and the commentaries of Church leaders past and present, or does Scripture itself teach us that our study is guided on an individual basis by the promised work of the Holy Spirit? It is a question of authority. Who or what is my authority to teach me as I pick up and read the Scriptures? Is it not the work of the Holy Spirit in our very lives working through the Scriptures? Let us not forget the word of Jesus when he promised his disciples: But when he, the Spirit of truth comes he will guide you into all truth.⁵

To use the historical sources known as the creeds and the commentaries of the church fathers as authorities can be a weak reed when improperly used. It must be remembered that the Protestant Reformers objected to the authority of the Roman Catholic Church both in its practice and its doctrine based upon Scripture alone, rather than upon tradition, Councils and pronouncements of Popes. As Pelikan states the fundamental issue was the nature and locus of authority in the church; Because the church was ‘built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets,’ the consideration of what made the church one or holy or catholic led to the question of what made it apostolic. ⁶ Some thing, someone, has to be the authoritative voice of God to and for us. Is it the Scripture, the apostles, the fathers, theologians, bishop, pope, pastors, or the private individual in his or her study? It is the position of this study that it is, none of the above. Rather it is, according to Scripture itself, the very voice of the Holy