|
In the end times the apostasy of the age will creep into God’s
church, sometimes in the form of blatant unbelief, but also in a coldness toward
the things of God and a love for the things of the world. While the world takes
its downward spiral toward the coming judgment of God, the church seems to
follow, not lock-step with the world, yet not too many steps behind. Hegel’s
dialectic of thesis,
antithesis and
synthesis seems to work for human
beings, whether as leaders of a corrupt generation, or imitators from afar.
The Parable
Your
own generation has its thesis, that
orthodoxy of belief and morals which have shaped the world in which you live
(let’s say 1 on a scale of 10). There is always a protest or rebellion, an
antithesis (a 3 on a scale of 10)
promoting those things that have always been disdained and usually rejected.
But once the younger generation has been exposed to the rebellion, the original
thesis becomes old and out of date. At
that point a synthesis is formed (a 2 on
a scale of 10), not taking that generation all the way to the extreme of the
antithesis, but settling rather on a
convenient in-between place—the synthesis.
Once the older generation gets over its “fussing and complaining” about
compromise everyone can settle into the new way of thinking.
As the
younger generation gets older their wonderful
synthesis (the 2), which they once found to be so exciting, new, and
different, has, out of shear time, become their own
thesis. Because the world is what it
is, a new form of protest obediently comes along, another
antithesis (this time a 4 on a scale of
10) to rebel against their thesis (the
2). Now the parents know not to be alarmed at this challenge. They have seen
it in their own youth and realize that it never catches on. They watch,
amusingly, as their children rebel, complain, push back at the older
thesis (the 2) and then settle into
their own new found synthesis (now the
3). The parents are even proud of their children for sowing their wild oats and
then coming up with their own way of doing things. Grandparents remain
skeptical.
Now
this third generation begins to get older also. They didn’t really think it
would happen to them but it has. They have enjoyed living in their
synthesis (the 3) which they made but
now they must realize that their wonderful
synthesis has unfortunately, like their fathers before them, become the
thesis of their generation (the 3).
They are even a little shocked to discover that there are some who would protest
against their present thesis (3). After
all, their thesis (a 3) is the same as
the original antithesis (the old 3).
But now a new antithesis (now a 5) has
come along and all the kids are screaming and clamoring over it. But wait, the
thesis (3) remembers how this happened
before. It’s a sort of metamorphosis that evidently must continue generation
after generation, almost in a religious way. This is change, progress, a
necessary molding of generations into peaceful cooperation. So the parents
again watch with pride and certain nostalgia as their children play with the new
antithesis (5) and then, almost
predictably, settle into their new synthesis
(this time a 4).
But,
you guessed it, even this fourth generation watches themselves get older. They
have been a 4 for a long time. They don’t even remember anyone who was a 2,
much less a 1. What was unimaginable to the 1st generation, so far from the
first antithesis, is now normal. And,
you guessed it again, a new antithesis
(now a 6) dutifully pops up and the new generation of parents watch with
anticipation as their children imitate the once unimaginable and eventually
create their new synthesis (now a 5) . .
. And the dialectic repeats itself over and over again. Its only motto:
Change! Oh, did I forget to define “dialectic” by the dictionary? I’m sorry:
“The Hegelian process of change in which an entity passes over into and is
preserved and fulfilled by its opposite” (Webster’s 7th).
The Observation
It is
the day after Super Tuesday. Conservatives did not do so well in the most
important primary day of the election season. Within the “conservative”
Republican party there seems to be three groups of people. There are the Reagan
conservatives who are trying desperately to make their case for the core values
of their movement. Some even argue for a static constitution in the midst of
changing ideas. At the same time John McCain is proposing a new kind of
conservatism that is drawing lots of protests from the Reagan conservatives. It
appears more like an anti-conservative position. Mike Huckabee is trying to
find some middle ground between the two. He is hoping that the party is ready
for an agreeable middle. But it seems that the party is ready to go all the
way with the new “conservative” look of McCain.
Liberal commentators and other Democrats can’t understand the problem that
conservative Republicans have with McCain. Good grief, they think, John McCain
IS conservative (and compared to them this is true). But the Democratic party
is taking liberalism far beyond what is acceptable even to McCain (we hope!).
Today the Reagan conservatives were trying desperately, on radio, TV and the
Internet, to make their case. It has been hard for them to explain to the
liberal media why they are so alarmed by John McCain and dissatisfied with Mike
Huckabee’s middle of the road position. They come across as mean-spirited,
whiners, selfish people who aren’t willing to give and take for the betterment
of the country. For some reason, they just can’t seem to give up on (or at
least reinterpret) their old Reagan conservative values.
Of
course, these conservatives were, not too long ago, the innovators and
revolutionaries. But their antithesis, even synthesis has become an old
worn-out thesis that young people can’t bring themselves to adopt. Obama will
win the day. Why? Because he has good ideas? No, he has no ideas that I have
heard. But he will win the day because he is the antithesis to all that has
gone before. He only has to cry “change” and younger voters will obediently
follow. “Unity,” “Freshness,” “Vitality,” whatever, but thoughtful ideas are
not really necessary to win elections.
The Application
I said
at the beginning that the churches follow the culture just a few steps behind.
It may be that they follow very closely but just travel on parallel tracks.
They go through the same dialectic generation after generation but talk in
religious, not political, terms. What was once considered religious liberalism
now is accepted as orthodoxy. Older Christians, who have seen the compromises
of the past, are alarmed by the cry for change in churches, in life-styles, and
in other doctrinal convictions. As long as it is change, no one seems to care
what the change is to or from.
I’ve
said before that it is much easier to be the liberal in the crowd than the
conservative. The liberal always appears to be the thinker, the innovator, the
one with vision. The conservative just gets on everyone’s nerves. He is always
trying to draw in the reins, to caution not just to change for change’s sake,
because he knows you’ll have to do it again soon. And the conservative is
usually older, and necessarily so. He has to have been around long enough to
have seen these things happen before. If you’re the liberal in the crowd, you
can just laugh at your conservative brother because you think he is silly or
nit-picky. But if you are the conservative, you know you have been put in a
compromising position and that is no laughing matter.
Someone pointed out that McCain is very conservative compared to either of the
democratic candidates and therefore conservatives should not complain. But that
is no consolation to the political conservative. He knows his core values are
being slowly but surely eroded, that his thesis is quickly becoming a
synthesis. Similarly, conservative Christians are often reminded that Rick
Warren and others are conservative also when compared to atheists, agnostics and
blatant liberals. In the whole world of viewpoints anyone who calls himself an
evangelical seems conservative. But that is no consolation to a truly
conservative Christian. He sees his core convictions and the details of his
doctrine being slowly given away and he knows that somehow he must stop that
from happening.
What
is most difficult for the conservative political observer is to hear platitudes
and “positive” language when, in fact, nothing of substance is being said. You
see crowds of young people cheering for Obama because he speaks like a
cheerleader or an activist and yet few policies are being delineated or
positions taken, just promises made for something new. When money from the rich
is promised to the crowd or when they are assured our troops will no longer be
fighting, hands are raised, tears begin to flow, and dancing begins.
It
becomes very difficult in the church to ask the youth and spiritually immature
to take a lower seat, to not assume to lead the fathers in worship, to accept
the fact that worldliness cannot be overcome by talent. Sometimes it is
difficult for parents to admit that the worldly ways of their children
disqualifies them from leading in worship even if it would keep Johnny in
church a little longer.
Unlike
politics, the church cannot say one thing and do another. Its message is
intrinsically linked to its actions. A politician can ask you to vote a certain
way because it will make life easier or cause you to be happy in some way you
haven’t been before. But Christianity must present its message as truth whether
it will profit you in this life or not, whether it will make you happy or not.
It will never win a popularity contest or attract the ungodly. It is not enough
fun for that. Attendance averages have never been the point of God’s House.
Few people can worship just as truly and richly as many people, maybe better.
But politics and showmanship must have attendance and votes, and those can
usually be bought.
And So . . . .
There
is one large and dynamic difference between the world and the church. That is
the presence of the Holy Spirit. The church does not dictate to or bargain with
Him, He leads the church. He absolutely will not lead contrary to His Word or
to the Father’s will. He is as a dove which desires the dry and quiet places.
His job is to restrain sin in the world, not promote it or flirt with it. He
seeks and desires humility and backwardness and resists the proud and haughty
spirit.
Because of the Spirit the church can repent. It does not have to always create
the synthesis or continue sliding into the antithesis. It can confess its sin
and return to the thesis. The Godhead is the same today as He was yesterday or
the first day He created the world. His values have not changed nor any aspect
of His character or person. If He deals differently with people in different
dispensations, He still cannot change who He is, what He thinks, or what is
truth. Sinners must come back to Him. He will convict, persuade, and draw but
He will not give and take.
We may
ask whether our thesis is the right one. There is only one way to find out—by
whether or not it is Biblical! When it is pointed out to us that “then it
becomes a matter of interpretation,” we should answer, “Yes, of course, it
does! It is our responsibility to read, translate, interpret, and rightly apply
the Word to every situation in every generation. But giving up is no option.”
The Spirit will always act in accordance with the Word which He wrote. He is
eternally the same and so is His Word. When we meditate on it and become
convicted that worldliness is not pleasing to Him, and become convinced of the
truth we should proclaim, then let us turn from our sins and practice that which
is pleasing to God.
The
world is not our standard. It will continually find new measures for its
truth. This postmodern generation may be the one which ushers in the
Anti-Christ himself; one which believed not the
truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thes 2:12); one which is
deceived because they received not the love of
the truth (vs 10). The church of Jesus Christ has the Spirit in its
heart and the Word of God in its hand: let us be a standard for truth in our own
generation!
| 
