You can tell a lot about people by observing the patterns of their behavior. You can figure out what they think about things, and even how they do that thinking.
What is surprising is to discover what things people don’t think about. Would it surprise you, for instance, to find a bomb squad technician who never thinks to check a bomb for hidden, secondary triggering devices? Or what about a doctor who never thought about the benefits of preventing a disease (as opposed to treating it after it has developed)? Would you be surprised to find a school teacher who has never pondered the mechanics by which students learn?
Yes, we’d be fairly surprised at these things because these sorts of questions are a natural byproduct of these people’s professions. The teacher who has no clue about how people learn is simply not apt to be a very good teacher. No surprise there.
So what are you getting at, Jack?
Glad you asked.
Christianity is a religion that seems to be driven by the facts of what happened in a time period between roughly 2,000 and 6,000 years ago. During that time span, some details of which are given in the Bible as well as in some extra-biblical writings, much seems to have transpired on the Earth with regard to the dealings between God and humans. Indeed, the story of God and man starts in a cozy Garden ruled by God, and by the time we get to Jesus incarnate, he tells us that Satan was “the ruler of this world” (John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11). Obviously, a lot had changed during that span of time, and nobody seems to dispute that fact.
Interestingly, however, there is almost zero interest in what may have changed since then. Christians, who believe that Jesus himself started the churches in which they practice their faith, don’t seem to have much interest at all in questions like the following:
- What has changed since the First Century (New Testament times) with regard to Christianity?
- What was supposed to change?
- Were any changes prophesied in the Bible texts?
- Were any changes prohibited in the Bible texts?
- Why would God, who did not allow habitual division in the believers of the First Century, allow there to be thousands of competing denominations today?
- If there was a need for apostles in the First Century, why is there no such need today?
- If the believers could get their questions answered by apostles then, why not today? Are answers less important now?
- If Satan was at that time “the ruler of this world”, is he still the ruler of this world now? Just how long should it take for God and Jesus to defeat Satan, their inferior?
- Why does the book of Acts end abruptly, and why doesn’t God have an inspired author continually adding to it with accounts of the ongoing exploits of believers?
I find it exceedingly curious that in a religion based on historical facts, nobody seems to want to know “what time it is” now. Yet this intellectual exercise seems unthinkable today, for not one church wants to do it. Even the “Restoration Movement” churches, who generally claim to be about the business of restoring “The New Testament Church” do not seem interested in this exercise. Those who started that movement seem to have taken a small stab at some of the questions above, the effect of which was to quash further curiosity on the subject amongst those who would follow. As to the absence of the apostles, these restorationists would assure us that the completed Bible has fully replaced the apostles in any and every meaningful way. They assure us that in the texts, “we have been given everything we need….” for restoring the church to its First Century viability. This they way, however, while arguing among themselves as to the proper number of cups to be used in the communion, whether it is “scriptural” to have a kitchen or a piano in a church building, and whether having a church daycare is an “authorized” practice. They do not seem to notice that their actual experience belies their certainty on being fully equipped for the task.
I’ve encouraged many friends of many different denominational persuasions to work this exercise, but have never had a taker. One pentecostal among them simply broke off communications after telling me that nothing has changed. I asked him to produce an apostle for me as proof that nothing had changed, and that was the last I heard from him. Sadly, this is fairly typical of all the camps. Nobody wants to do the math.
One gets the idea, therefore, that for most, Christianity is not a matter of fact after all. Rather, it seems to be more a matter of tradition—right or wrong.
So how is it that a heritage of religion that began as a testament to all that was true and holy has now become so unconcerned with the facts that it doesn’t even care to discern them? How is it that an impeccably natural and useful question (“What all was supposed to change?”) is now unthinkable and wholly uninteresting?
Perhaps they simply don’t care. Or perhaps it’s even worse; perhaps they have a hunch that if they did that math, it might yield an answer they’d rather not know about.
Regardless, it still seems quite a good and natural question to me, and I have continued to explore it. Naturally, however, almost nobody is interested in the results of my work.
