One of our Bible College professors use to state that most error within the Church involves a truth carried to unbiblical extremes. The percentage of situations in which such may, or may not, apply is presumably subject to debate. In many instances, however, there is an obvious degree of truth.
One example that readily comes to mind concerns the concept of Christ's existence as both God and man. While vociferously argued in times past, Christian orthodoxy, despite the limitations of human understanding, presently (and rightfully) experiences little difficulty here. But to continue...
Within the realm of present religious profession, some would so emphasize Christ's humanity as to essentially ignore - or even, in some circles of the more radically liberal, simply deny - his divinity. At the other extreme, an early Church heresy known as "docetism" so focused on Christ's divinity as to deny his humanity. Christ, they insisted, merely appeared to possess a physical body. In either case, our Lord's having become "God manifest in the flesh" (I Tim. 3:16) so that he might "reconcile the world to God" (II Cor. 5:19) is rendered essentially meaningless. Such, of course, is an extreme example of "going to extremes."
There are, however, numerous other instances in which legitimate spiritual concepts have been carried to detrimental extremes. This has frequently involved efforts to reduce such interests to exercises of the formulaic and routine - methodologies often falling little short of supposedly learning how to "work God" for one's desired ends. Some, for example, will recall the "Praise God for Everything" movement of some years ago, or again, the "Positive Confession" philosophy in which vision of a hurting world was often lost as believers enthusiastically "confessed" wealth, riches, Cadillacs and the like. Other examples could obviously be cited.
Our present concern involves the intensifying need for revival within our personal lives, our churches and our land. We would again propose it an evidence of divine grace that more than a few are coming to recognize the futility of humanly devised programs, schemes and plans.
At the same time, however, we shall in all likelihood eventually find ourselves again seeking the latest "surefire" formula for revival (with pretty much the same results) should we fail in maintaining our guard. This will require our ongoing commitment to a biblically based sense of balance, objectivity and dedication - combined with a continuing dependence upon divine favor and, perhaps most of all, sensitive openness to divine sovereignty (a point typically lacking in the adoption of formulaic routines).
An emphasis presently being heard in some settings relates to the need for repentance and confession. Such, in terms of both relevance and needed mplementation, has long been lacking. Should we, at this point, nonetheless slip into patterns of the merely ritual and repetitive, benefit at this point will likely be forfeited to an ongoing exercise of spiritual self-flagellation driven by a self-perpetuating sense of guilt and condemnation. Scripture's promise in relation to repentant confession is forgiveness and "cleansing from all unrighteousness" (I John 1:9). This too, needs to be heard. We shall, as individuals, contribute little to the needed revival until we have first reached such point of personal renewal.
Burl Ratzsch
