Now that we have worked our way through large systems of thought by both assembling and disassembling them, we have arrived at the place where we can apply these skills to the task of assessing different ideas by relating them to each other on a point-by-point basis and determining their merits and their shortcomings.

            In an earlier version of this series, I called this section “comparison/evaluation,” because the main value of this kind of study is the objective means it provides for us to have an understanding of how a set of ideas can be assessed against the Scriptural standard.  After all, we are dealing here with God’s truth, not merely subjective opinion.  So as we look at the three main ways to apply these concepts, we can see how to measure any religion, philosophy, doctrine, or other spiritual teaching against our only legitimate yardstick, the Bible.

Before we start

            There are two things that should be done before you get started with any of these studies.  First, some very helpful and practical tools to have in your reading arsenal are books that survey religions and philosophies in general—some written from a Christian point of view, others from an objective academic perspective.  If available, get at least one of each type, or check on the web for on-line resources.  Most well-stocked Bible bookstores have on hand at least a few books on comparative religion, but sometimes a public library has something worthwhile such as a textbook for a college class on world religions or philosophy that you can check out (which will save you money).  Other good books to keep on hand if you can get them are books by Christian authors that survey variant Christian faiths, or “cults.”  There are several of these available ranging from brief summaries to those of a much larger scope.  Individual books for each religion or cult are abundant, but unless you really need to own them, consider borrowing or checking them out.

            Second, you will need to have an authoritative summary of Christian tenets of faith that you can compare and contrast with the other beliefs which you will be studying.  History provides us with some excellent statements known as creeds, and the two most basic and useful are the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed.  Each of these is a synopsis of key statements about Christianity that genuine believers will adhere to and will recognize as true Biblical ideas.  (I have adapted them from Creeds, Councils and Christ—for a full citation see the citations page which I have linked at the bottom.  Also note that here the term “catholic”—with a lower case “c”—is used to mean universal.)

The Apostles’ Creed: I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ His Only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy Christian (catholic) Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.  Amen.

The Nicene Creed: I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God; begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God; begotten, not made; being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried, and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the Prophets; and I believe in the one catholic and Apostolic Church; I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the Resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.  Amen.

            These creeds show us the basics for an understanding of what are the doctrines that make up the necessary beliefs for Christian orthodoxy.  Some may suggest other creeds or tenets of faith that would be equally valid; but always be certain that any set of statements you may choose to adopt for this purpose does not compromise the essence of what all genuine Christians hold true.  Only after you can comprehend and adhere to standards such as these will you be ready for evaluation studies.

6a. Christianity vs. other religions and philosophies

            The approaches taken by other religions and belief systems are often based in the thought patterns of other cultures and as such can seem foreign to our Western way of thinking, sometimes to the point of appearing ridiculous.  Therefore the objectives of such a study as this tend to be very broad and general; details may be fascinating, but in a study like this the fine points tend to be a distraction unless they either illustrate the historical development of a facet of that way of faith or reflect an influence on the person who created that particular philosophy.  The approach would be as follows:

1)  First, attain a general familiarity with the subject of your study by reading a summary of the belief in one or two general textbooks on religions or philosophies.  Those written by Christians will be more specific about the points you are looking for, but those written by secular scholars may add a degree of objectivity; look at one of each type if available.  Often a short book or magazine article dealing only with the subject can be helpful, but many are too detailed for a first look.  Avoid reading the literature of the subject itself until after you have been prepared for it by your other reading and study.

2)  Summarize the subject by putting together the following information: a) who the central figure is (or figures are); b) the primary literature on the subject written by these or other major figures; c) its history and development; d) a summary of the core ideas and concepts; and e) the most common expressions of the philosophy or religion that are around today.  Again, an outline format is usually a helpful approach here.

3)  In a two-column or “T-bar” format, list the contrasting points of your subject side-by-side with their Christian counterpoints (quoting from the standard creeds can help at this stage).  Where similarities are found, list them separately so that that section does not interfere with the two-column section.  It is up to you as to how far into detail you go, but it is also wise to set a reasonable limit based on any previous study or experience you may have with the subject.  Don’t try to go too far and get bogged down.

4)  As a Christian, the application comes when you see how the differences with other belief systems become a good opportunity to reaffirm your own faith.

Example:  Confucianism (very different from Christianity, makes for a good comparison)

1)  My initial information comes from a very helpful paperback I found at the local bookseller called The Everything World’s Religions Book by Robert Pollock (see the citations page for the full info as linked at the bottom), which is not necessarily the most scholarly work but suits our purposes very well.  The relevant section is chapter eleven, which provides a concise ten-page synopsis of Confucianism which is particularly helpful for our study.  I then read chapter four from Huston Smith’s The World’s Religions, which deals more with the character and effects of Confucianism than the particulars (again, see the citations page).  Searching the web for “Christianity + Confucianism” yielded the usual mixed bag of viewpoints, most of which were not very helpful except for a table I found at persecution.com showing a side-by-side comparison similar to 3) below.

2a)  Of course, Confucius (551-479 BC) is the central figure; but after his death his followers split into eight different schools (today there are six), the most influential was led by Mencius, who is credited with giving Confucianism the intellectual credibility and lasting influence it has enjoyed in Chinese culture throughout the centuries.

2b)  The literature consists of the more basic Four Books followed by the more advanced Five Classics.  The Four Books are The Analects, The Great Learning, The Mean, and The Book of Mencius.  The Five Classics are Shu Ching (Book of History), Shih Ching (Book of Poetry), I Ching (Book of Changes), Li Chi (Collected Rituals), and Ch’un-ch’iu (Spring and Autumn Annals).  The Analects is said to be a collection of quotations from Confucius himself, while the Spring and Autumn Annals are a compilation of his thoughts as written by his students just after his death.  The other books are mostly authoritative writings by himself or his early students; it is unclear exactly which parts may have been originally his, although it is known that he wrote extensively during his later years.

2c)  A brief history of Confucianism begins with the humble life that Kung Fu-tzu (the non-Latinized version—meaning Kung the master) led as a young man who sought learning above all else, and continues with his early days as a minor government official before he became a teacher.  He soon cultivated a philosophy of education which suggested that it must involve the development of character at least as much if not more than the acquiring of skills and knowledge.  The critics of his day thought of him as overly idealistic, but when he had become the prime minister of his home principality of Lu, the students who continued with him soon venerated his work to the point that they put forth Lu as the model state.  After his death, his reputation continued to grow due to the efforts of the first two generations of his followers; some of his later students even worshipped him with sacrifices as to an ancestor-god.  Soon all prospects for Chinese civil service were required to study his works, and eventually all education in China was centered on his teachings until the Maoist takeover in the Twentieth Century.

2d)  The ideas inherent in Confucian teaching were born of his reaction to the backdrop of political upheaval and violence in Chinese society in the sixth century BC.  As a teacher he saw the need for a calming social ethic interwoven with the learning of academics.  According to Pollock, the principles of virtue could be summed up in five areas: 1. love, goodness and human-heartedness; 2. moral achievement and excellence in character; 3. loyalty to one’s true nature; 4. righteousness; and finally 5. filial piety.  Smith also brings up the Five Constant Relationships: husband and wife, parent and child, elder and junior siblings, elder and junior friends, and ruler and subject.

2e)  The six modern schools of Confucianism are: Han, Neo-, Contemporary Neo-, Korean, Japanese, and Singapore.  Although in China it is largely forgotten today due to the rise and subsequent takeover by Communism, much of its influence can be felt in the cultural undercurrents of modern Chinese society as well as many other Asian cultures of today.

4)  So is Confucianism a religion, or a philosophy, or an ethic, or something in-between?  It is obviously a noble and powerful way of life that is more than a mere philosophy, but since it does not deal with deity it falls short of any of the common definitions of religion.  The teachings center on spiritual and moral development, yet overall they come across like the Biblical book of Proverbs—collections of pithy statements and short parables.  Christianity in its fullness runs much deeper, answers more profound questions, and is ultimately more satisfying than what an ethic alone by definition can encompass.

6b. Orthodox Christianity vs. cults and variant forms

            It is all too easy to label a group as a “cult” when there is a disagreement with a doctrinal particular or a variation of semantics.  However, our popular culture tends to associate the term with some form of dangerous behavior or some leader-figure who mentally is less than stable.  The Christian sense of the word, however, has a slightly different definition—not all cults are Christian cults, and not all Christian cults are made up of crazy people.  For our purposes, a better working definition of the term cult would be a group that claims to adhere to a genuinely superior approach to the Christian faith, but actually has a system that is so diverse from Biblical doctrine that their dogmas cannot be considered to be a true form of Christianity.  Most of the time, cultists contend that theirs is the only correct version of Christianity, and that the historic Church has been deceived about the truth about Jesus for most of its existence.

            The steps in studying cults are the same as those listed above in section 6a, which are used in studying other religions and philosophies.  Books by secular authors usually do little good here; stay with Christian writers for the most part.  Pay particular attention to semantics—often a cultist will use a Biblical or other term in a different way than a Christian will based on a faulty interpretation from the original language or on a statement taken out of context; often the literature of the cult will betray the fact that their use of logic and language is different from the conventional standard.

            Many will say that it is reckless to engage in this type of study without a careful reading of the group’s own resources; others say that this approach is too dangerous and could lead to confusion.  It is always good to be able to pursue the knowledge of ideas from a perspective of academic distance—in other words, you only want to know in their own words what they think and believe, but you must not allow yourself to be affected by it.  Therefore, I recommend that when you decide to take a look at the cult’s own literature, it is best to do so only after you have read a sufficient amount of Christian review on the subject and its philosophy so that you will know what to expect from any particularly tricky or persuasive statements.

Example:  Jehovah’s Witnesses (this could become very detailed if I took it to the full measure, so I’ll keep to the most basic and important differences as listed below)

1)  Some of the sources I read for this study included watchtower.org (their own main website), the Wikipedia article about them, the relevant chapter in a small but helpful book entitled Confronting Popular Cults by M. Thomas Starkes (see citations page), a few good pages on carm.org (Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry), a very helpful chart on ReligionFacts.com, a web article called Christian or Cult? at the Biblical Discernment Ministries site on rapidnet.com, a couple of good articles by Randall Walters on freeminds.org, and last but not least, the hundred page chapter dedicated to the subject in the formidable and standard reference work The Kingdom of the Cults by Walter Martin (see citations page).  There is obviously no shortage of information if you know where to look.

2a)  Though the Witnesses would tell you that the central figure is Jehovah God, the key instigator of this group was Charles Taze Russell.  Later, the mantle passed to Joseph “Judge” Rutherford, then eventually to N. H. Knorr, who authorized the New World Translation.  Later presidents of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society have utilized a more team-oriented, corporate leadership style.

2b)  The primary literature is their own New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, but they will usually accept use of the King James Version for the purposes of reasoning and comparison.  They also view Russell’s Studies in the Scriptures series as the “light of the scripture,” and each publication of The Watchtower magazine is also seen as a source of fresh revelation and current authority.

2c)  The history of this group begins with the formation of a Bible class by Russell out of some disaffected Second Adventists in Pennsylvania.  The group grew alongside the expansion of the publications started by Russell as he began to promote such ideas as the rejection of the doctrine of Hell and the prediction of the battle of Armageddon in 1914.  After Russell’s death in 1916, Rutherford became the main leader of the group and adopted the name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in 1931 as primarily a way to distinguish the main group from the other, smaller splinter groups that had appeared.  Throughout the twentieth century, they have become more ingrown as their position against “Satan’s organizations” such as governments and other churches has gotten stronger and the Society’s leadership has tightened its grip on the dogmas believed and promoted by the group.  Nowadays, personal Bible study that does not follow the Society’s rigorous standards is discouraged, and questioning the beliefs as promoted by the various Watchtower publications could easily result in disfellowship.

2d)  The main doctrines in brief would begin with the concept that Jesus was actually Michael the Archangel come in the flesh and was “impaled on a torture stake” for our sins.  Being virulently anti-Trinitarian, they deny the Deity of Christ in favor of a belief that He was a created individual who was then resurrected only in a spiritual form, not a physical one.  The Holy Spirit is written off as an impersonal force, leaving the Father as the only true Deity figure they accept.  Jesus had to be a perfect man for purposes of the atonement, but that atonement is not enough—works are as important as faith.  Even so, only the 144,000 best from among mankind will be promoted to reign alongside God in heaven.  Hell is seen as annihilation, not eternal torment, and souls awaiting judgment are in a state of “soul sleep.”  Jesus is said to have returned to Earth invisibly in 1914 and is reigning over Heaven until His physical return, which will trigger the battle of Armageddon.  Final judgment will occur during the 1000 year reign which follows, during which time the resurrected dead will be given a second chance to adhere to the beliefs of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.

2e)  Because the Witnesses are such a relatively new group, there have been relatively few changes in its form since its inception, except for the constant changing of their predictions for the year of Christ’s return until it was settled on as the invisible return in 1914.  As far as splinter groups go, there are still an insignificant handful of them now in existence, each having fewer than a thousand adherents, but most seem to have altered the belief system very little.

4)  One central question in any cult study must be: are these differences basic enough or numerous enough to qualify them as a cult?  Clearly from the above sections 2d) and 3), they would qualify, especially on the points of who Jesus is and how our salvation comes to us.  We should take comfort in the concept of faith by grace rather than the stress of having to perform for our salvation.  Another question becomes one of confrontation—if I happen to encounter a Jehovah’s Witness (most likely at my own front door) how should I proceed?

6c. Doctrinal controversies within Christianity

            Throughout the history of the Church, differences of opinion about the Biblical positions on particular subjects have ineluctably sprung up from time to time.  There are many possible reasons for this—but whatever the reason, most, if not all of them, can be resolved by being thorough in compiling the components of the topic and taking into account all the Scriptures.

            It can be all too easy to forget about objectivity at this point and to look at a topic through the tint of a doctrinal idea that we grew up with or through the mental filter of the teachings of a particular person whom we admire greatly.  This usually results in the error of either ignoring Scriptures which may appear to support an opposing view or else acknowledging them, but with a disclaimer that they need to be explained or interpreted in a certain way, while the Scriptures you tend to favor mean what they say and say what they mean.  However, “all Scripture is inspired by God,” even the parts we don’t like or understand.  Hopefully, by the time any one of us is ready to tackle this type of study, he or she is also ready to accept correction from the Word of God, and to also be loving enough not to allow such differences to drive a wedge into their relationships in the church.

1)  Summarize the point of contention into a simple statement or question, the answer or response to which will be the goal of the study and can be summarized in a concise way so that it can represent accurately your conclusion (if you reach one—please do not be disheartened if you do not) and can be defended logically and Biblically by the study which led you there.

2)  Using Church history books or theology textbooks, attempt to trace the development of the opposing ideas and determine how particular conditions or situations may have contributed to the foundation of the concepts expressed by the different schools of thought (or the two sides of the debate) and how they arrived at their conclusions.

3)  Assemble a list of Scriptures which address the subject.  But this time, instead of using a two-column or “T-bar” format, attempt to find the common threads which can reconcile the totality of the Scriptural witness.  Obviously, some passages will seem to support one position over another, and proponents of one may refer to Scriptures used for another as “problem passages.”  But since the Bible does not contain any “problem passages,” your solution needs to adhere to all the texts without resorting to intellectual gymnastics to get you there.

4)  Ask God to help you ascertain the resolution, but keep an open mind.  Persons of integrity often disagree on minor points, but wisdom can keep you above the fray.  Keep all of the things you study “on the shelf,” for there may be times when a situation would suggest that the rationale behind a certain view needs to be expressed as a matter of personal ministry or of balance, even if it differs from the view you adopt.  In any case, it is never worth the bitter disputing that often accompanies the defense of a position on a controversial topic.

Example:  The procession of the Spirit (I have managed to find for my example an archaic controversy which was one of several minor factors that led to the Schism of 1054, when the Greek Orthodox Church separated from the Roman Catholic Church—the first major split in western Christian history)

1)  In the Nicene Creed (listed above), the reference to the Holy Ghost includes the statement that He “proceeds from the Father and the Son.”  The phrase “and the Son” is called the Filioque clause, and some in the Eastern branches of the Church asserted that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father, and therefore that clause should be stricken from the creed.  Who sends the Spirit to us, Jesus and the Father, or the Father alone?

2)  In the fourth century, Arius (an elder at the Alexandrian church, d. 336) was involved in a dispute over the Trinitarian idea that Jesus was deity, and not merely a man who had achieved divinity.  Arius took the view that Jesus had been created rather than being pre-existent with the Father, and that He was not of the essence of God, therefore He could not participate in the sending of the Holy Spirit.  In the church council that followed (Nicea in 325) Arius was excommunicated and Jesus’ deity was later affirmed in the creed by the inclusion of the Filioque clause.  Several centuries later, the controversy was revived by the argument of some of the leaders of the Eastern churches that the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father without the necessity of the participation of the Son.  Thus the Eastern churches accused the Western churches of heresy because of the way they worded the creed, and departed.

3)  Some of the relevant Scriptures would include:

   Matthew 3:11—John the Baptist says that the One who was to come after him would “baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.”

   John 14:16-17—the Holy Spirit is here described as both the Comforter and the “Spirit of truth,” Jesus says that He would “pray the Father, and He” would send His Spirit to us.

   John 15:26—obviously the same Spirit is described here by Jesus, but a different phrasing is used: “I will send to you from the Father.”

   John 16:7, 15—Jesus says here that He would send the Comforter, and in verse 15 it is the Father who will take from that which is of Jesus to show to us.

   Romans 8:9—here the Spirit is called both the “Spirit of God” and the “Spirit of Christ.”

   Galatians 4:6—God sends forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts.

4)  A complete study of the Scriptures will reveal that Jesus did not intend to omit the mention of His own role in the provision for our spiritual lives, including the sending of the Holy Spirit.  When He spoke of it in reference to the Father in the passages in John’s Gospel, His intent was to emphasize His unity with the Father.  This dispute is obviously based in the confusion of some early church scholars as to the idea of the Trinity, which, if properly understood, will show us that there is no substantive distinction about where the Spirit comes from.

Epilogue

            By now the benefits of self-study of the Bible ought to be obvious.  There are of course many other acceptable procedures that can be used, most of which are simply combinations or variations of these.  Many other good Christian authors have books out that have similar goals; my problem with most of them is that they seem to lack a proper balance between the academic and intellectual elements and the more personal and spiritual side.  The safest way to see this come into focus is to do the “head work” first, then use it as part of the foundation for the “knee work;” that is, allow the things learned from the Scriptures to direct your prayers.  A few common-sense things to always keep in mind during these studies:

1)  Stay organized, using the method most appropriate to your goal.  This allows others with whom you may compare notes to easily follow along, and it allows you to quickly pick up on a thought and continue without confusion at a future session.

2)  Don’t be too ambitious—avoid the frustration of getting in over your head by setting goals that are not achievable.  Prepare to spend the time necessary; don’t rush.

3)  Keep a notebook or some other written record of your activities.  Also take notes at church meetings or other Bible studies so that you can have a commentary of sorts available for future reference.  Marking your study Bible won’t always be enough.

4)  If you are able to juggle more than one study at once, it can be profitable in that you have options for having studies at different levels at the same time and can move back and forth as you are led by the Spirit, and as you feel the need to keep things fresh.