Bishop Spong is simply wrong, The Charlotte Observer: 2002/04
Print Version
E-mail This Article
Leave CommentTHE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER
Posted on Monday, April 08, 2002
Page 13A
Bishop Spong is simply wrong
DAVE JOHNSON
Special to The Observer
It was fascinating to attend the "Theological Weekend" held recently at Dilworth United Methodist Church at which retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong spoke. The sessions were well attended, with about 700 people participating.
While the church should be commended and the people applauded for wanting to understand how faith and reason go together, the teachings of Bishop Spong did more harm than good. Bishop Spong, who is well known for his clear and vigorous denials of every essential doctrine of historic Christianity, is simply wrong on what he believes for many reasons.
To summarize his teachings:
He declares the concept of a theistic God (an all-powerful Being who is separate and distinct from His creation but can intervene in it) is not only dead but immoral. He denies the virgin birth of Jesus, rejects his miracles, scoffs at his bodily resurrection and mocks the idea that He died for the sins of mankind. He calls the fall of man into sin a biblical myth, hence there is no need to be reconciled to a non-existent theistic God since man is not sinful. He says the Bible is not the Word of God and the church should stop trying to convert unbelievers to Christianity.
So he disagrees with the historic positions held by the church for 2,000 years concerning the nature of God, the unique deity of Christ, and the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone. He does all of this while asserting he is a Christian who "is a deeply committed passionate believer" in Jesus.
Following German theologian Paul Tillich, Bishop Spong asserts that God is "the ground of being," meaning that rather than existing external to man, God is found "deep within us." "Humanity and divinity are not two separate categories." This view is basically pantheism, which says that everyone and everything is God.
This worldview leads to a logical and philosophical contradiction. While Bishop Spong rails against things he considers to be evil (rape, certain moral positions, etc.), he has no basis with which to judge what is evil. If there is no supernatural God and no external standard of morality, then good and evil ultimately become a matter of individual opinion.
If God is "deep within" each of us, then the bishop has no right nor reason to condemn the actions of a Muslim terrorist or the teachings of a Christian "fundamentalist" who are likewise guided by this God within. He may disagree with them, like one who prefers vanilla over chocolate, but he cannot say they are objectively wrong.
In fact, if Bishop Spong wants to be a consistent pantheist, he should embrace the absurd Hindu view that good and evil are merely illusions; ultimately there is no distinction between cruelty and non-cruelty.
Bishop Spong claims it is "barbaric" for God to send His Son to die for the sins of others. Why should the innocent die for the guilty? However, at the same time he maintains that he loves his wife so much that he declares, "I would die for Christine." This, he says, is virtuous.
Herein lies the inconsistency. Suppose Bishop Spong and his father were driving up to his house and discovered it was in flames with Christine inside. The elder Spong might say, "Son, I'm too old to be much help, but you go in there and save your wife, even if it costs you your life!" The bishop says he would freely do so. Yet this is precisely what Jesus did for us, willingly laying down His life to save all who would trust in Him. How is it that for Bishop Spong to do this it is virtuous, but for Jesus (who is God the Son) to do this it is barbaric?
Bishop Spong's use of the Bible is very similar to the methods of the cults. He uses the Bible as a drunk uses a lamppost — for support, not illumination. He will quote a verse (or even part of a verse) to support his teaching, then ignore the other words right next to it. For example, he quotes Paul as saying "God was in Christ" to claim that God is deep within us. But the entire verse (2 Corinthians 5:19) says "God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation," a doctrine the bishop explicitly denies.
Bishop Spong gives an intoxicating message to people who love to hear they are not sinful, so there is no need to be reconciled to a supernatural God who does not exist and from whom we are not estranged. We must instead worship the God within who is the ground of being. The end result: God is demoted and man is elevated to a point where he worships himself.
Bishop Spong is fond of teaching that we need to move "beyond literalism," "beyond theism," and "beyond incarnation and atonement" to embrace his new understanding of Christianity. However, my concern for him and his followers is that they will get beyond this life only to discover a literal, theistic, risen Messiah in whom they have not trusted who will usher them into an eternal, literal Hell that is more real than they ever imagined.
Dave Johnson of Charlotte is president of Contend for the Faith. Write him at Dave@ContendfortheFaith.org
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/3019855.htm
