SYNCRETISM

 

Dr. Abraham Joshua Heschel, a prominent Jewish rabbi, wrote two volumes on The Prophets (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1962). Although Dr. Heschel was not religiously conservative, his books still have considerable merit. I have used them extensively over the past twenty-eight years. One brief observation from these books will introduce our study today. "The prophet was an individual who said No to his society, condemning its habits and assumptions, its complacency, waywardness, and syncretism" (volume 1, p. xv of the Introduction).

 

What did Dr. Heschel have in mind when he used the word "syncretism?" It is not a word most of us commonly use, but it is often used in scholarly writings on the Bible. Baker's Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960), edited by Dr. Everett Harrison, provides the following definition of the word "syncretism": "The word is derived from synkretizein, (meaning)'to combine.' ... .It is a term currently used to describe both efforts to unite branches of Christianity, and attempts to harmonize Christianity with non-Christian thought" (p. 510). The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984), edited by Dr. Walter A. Elwell, defines "syncretism" as "the process by which elements of one religion are assimilated into another religion resulting in a change in the fundamental tenets or nature of those religions." Elwell's dictionary also says: "Syncretism of the Christian gospel occurs when critical or basic elements of the gospel are replaced by religious elements from the host culture" (p. 1062).

 

A simple illustration may help us to understand the meaning and danger of syncretism. A substantial number of people within the so-called New Age movement add to the gospel such foreign elements as reincarnation, psychic phenomena, astrology, necromancy (that is, pretending to communicate with the dead), witchcraft, sorcery, channeling and similar pagan beliefs and practices. Edgar Cayce, the famous psychic from Hopkinsville, Kentucky, was a member of the Disciples of Christ. And yet he embraced some of the elements of what we call today "the New Age movement," including reincarnation. When any change is made in the gospel - ­whether ideas are added to it or subtracted from it - the result is a perverted gospel, a syncretistic gospel. That is exactly what occurred among the churches of Galatia. It seems to me it would be almost impossible to misunderstand the Holy Spirit's concern about what was occurring in Galatia. Paul told those churches: "I marvel that you are so soon removed from him who called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there are some who trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:6-9).

 

The word "pervert" (metastrepho) means to change from one thing to another, to turn about, to change completely. Luke used the word when he wrote: "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come" (Acts 2:20). James urged his readers: "Be afflicted and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned into mourning, and your joy to heaviness" (Jas. 4:9). Are Universalists perverting the gospel when they teach that all men will be saved? Are radical Calvinists perverting the gospel when they teach unconditional election?

 

Jeff Dunn & Craig Brubeck have written a very helpful book with the title, The Gospel according to Dan Brown (Colorado Springs: Victor, 2008). I am sure you know that Dan Brown is the author of the infamous book, The Da Vinci Code. Dunn and Brubeck affirm: "Many well intentioned Christ followers have adopted dualistic ideas into their faith and, consequently, have their gospel stories mixed up. (In theological circles this is called syncretism.)" (p. 144).

 

There is not even the slightest doubt that the Israelites were often guilty of syncretism. They sometimes incorporated into their worship many of the practices of the pagan nations surrounding Israel. Virtually every one of the faithful prophets constantly warned the Israelites about worshipping pagan gods and engaging in unauthorized practices. Jeremiah, the seventh century B. C. prophet, severely criticized his Jewish brethren for combining the worship of the true God with idol worship. He quotes God as asking: "Has a nation changed her gods, which are no gods? But my people have changed their glory for that which does not profit. Be astonished, 0 you heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid, be very desolate, says the Lord. For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water" (Jer.2:11-13). God indicted the Jews for saying to a tree, "You are my father; and to a stone, you brought me forth: for they have turned their back on me, and not their face: but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us. But where are your gods that you have made for yourselves? Let them arise, if they can save you in a time of trouble: for according to the number of your cities are your gods, 0 Judah" (Jer.2:27-28). God's people "built also the high places of Baal, to bum their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal." God had specifically forbidden the Israelites from offering their children as burnt offerings to God, and yet some of them actually did so (Jer. 19:5).

 

Manasseh was unquestionably one of Israel's worst kings. The sacred text says concerning him: "He did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, after the abominations of the heathen, whom the Lord cast out before the children of Israel. For he built up high places which Hezekiah his father had destroyed: and erected altars for Baal, and made an Asherah, as did Ahab king of Israel; and worshipped the host of heaven and served them. And he built altars in the house of the Lord, of which the Lord said, In Jerusalem will I put my name. And he built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house of the Lord. And he made his son pass through the fire, and observed times, and used enchantments, and dealt with familiar spirits and wizards: he wrought much wickedness in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him to anger. And he set a graven image of the Asherah that he had made in the house, of which the Lord said to David, and to Solomon his son, In this house, and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, will I put my name forever" (2 Kings 21: 2-7).

 

What I have read to you about Manasseh can be duplicated in the lives of many of the kings of ancient Israel, like Ahab and Jeroboam. And Ahab's wife Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Zidonians, vigorously promoted Baal worship among the Israelites. The Old Testament does not use the term "syncretism," but that was the condition that existed in the nation. Is that not one of the reasons God rejected Israel as his chosen nation?

 

The early church faced the danger of syncretism. I shall give you two examples: The temptation to return to some parts of the Mosaic covenant and Gnosticism. Most of the early Christians came from a Jewish background. It almost certainly was difficult for many of them to believe that the gospel of Christ had completely replaced the Law of Moses. Tragically, it is hard for some modern preachers like John Hagee to understand that the gospel has replaced the Law of Moses and the church has replaced Israel. But that is precisely what the New Testament teaches. The author of Hebrews affirms: "He takes away the first (that is, the first covenant) that he may establish the second (that is, the second covenant). By the which will (that is, the new covenant, the gospel of Christ) we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (Heb. 10:9-10).

 

I have already read to you from Paul's letter to the Galatians. He knew some of the churches in Galatia had already added some elements of the Mosaic covenant to the gospel of Christ. That meant they were preaching, believing and practicing a false religion (Gal.1: 6-9). He asked the Galatians: "0 foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ has been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now made perfect by the flesh? Have you suffered so many things in vain, if it yet be in vain? He therefore who ministers to you the Spirit, and works miracles among you, does he do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith" (Gal. 3: 1-5)?

 

Paul used the word "foolish" (anoetoi) in verses 1 and 3. That word in the Greek means senseless, without thinking, mindless. Paul did not accuse the Galatians of being intellectually dull, but of a refusal to understand the seriousness of their spiritual condition. But adding parts of God's Old Testament law to the gospel cannot really be all that serious, can it? If you have even the slightest doubt, please listen carefully. Paul commanded the Galatians: "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man who is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ has become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you would be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace" (Gal. 5: 1-4).

 

Paul is not arguing that circumcision for health reasons or as a cultural act means that one has forsaken the gospel. You know that is true if you have read other passages from 1 Corinthians and from Galatians. Paul informed the Corinthians: "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of God" (1 Cor. 7:19). The same apostle told the Galatians: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything nor uncircumcision; but faith that works by love" (Gal. 5:6).

 

Both Romans and Hebrews warn of the danger of adding parts of the law to the gospel. I shall give you one example from each letter. "Now we know that what things soever the law says, it says to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets" (Rom. 3:19-21). "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also in the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertains to another tribe, of whom no man gave attendance at the altar" (Heb. 7:12-13). Since Christ is a priest after the order of Melchizedek and not after the Levitical order, the law had to be changed. We are not under the Law of Moses - not any of it - but under the gospel of Christ. An attempt to join the Mosaic covenant to the new covenant is called "syncretism."

 

The early church also faced the threat of Gnosticism. The word "Gnostic" literally means the knowing one. The Gnostics believed they had a special pipeline, figuratively speaking, into the very mind of God. Many of the so-called "lost gospels," like the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Philip and others are Gnostic writings and are full of error. In one of her latest books, The Mystical Life of Jesus: An Uncommon Perspective on the Life of Christ (New York: Dutton, 2006), Sylvia Browne, the infamous psychic, calls herself a "Gnostic Christian" (p. viii of the Preface). The term, "Gnostic Christian" is an oxymoron. Reading Sylvia Browne's book should convince any knowledgeable Christian that Gnosticism is unchristian and anti-Christian.

 

Gnosticism did not become a real threat to Christianity until well into the second century. But there were probably some Gnostic ideas circulating in the latter part of the first century. In his commentary on Saint Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1879, a Reprint), J. B. Lightfoot says: "A mere glance at the epistle suffices to detect the presence of JUDAISM in the teaching the Apostle combats.... We may say that along with Judaism there was a GNOSTIC element in the false teaching which prevailed at Colosse" (pp. 73-74). The following verse may indicate Gnostic influence among the Colossians. "Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind" (Col. 2:18). The Essenes, a minor sect of the Jews, also had some connection with angel worship. The point I must stress is very simple: We cannot add to nor take from the word of God without bringing his curses on our heads.

 

I have two questions I must ask about modem syncretism. Does it exist within modern denominationalism? Does is also exist in some left-leaning churches of Christ? Within the denominational world, there are enormous departures from the faith once delivered to the saints. But I want to mention one really radical group that claims to be Christian. Some Latin American liberation theologians, such as, Gustavo Gutierrez and Jose Miguez Bonino, seek a synthesis between the teachings of Jesus Christ and those of Karl Marx. Gutierrez argues that God will grant salvation to Marxists. He believes that Christians ought to join the Marxist movements scattered throughout the world. Bonino, one of the six presidents of the World Council of Churches, virtually denies any doctrinal foundation for acceptance with God. According to Bonino, men are pleasing to God and know God only through justice, primarily economic justice. The liberation theologians are working for the advancement of Marxist causes. Many Protestant churches in the United States are supporting the liberation movements. Incidentally, a substantial number of the liberation priests in Latin America actually carry guns with them on their travels. Are they more committed to Marx than to Christ?

 

Time does not allow for a full discussion of the trend toward entertainment in the denominational world. Many modem churches have dance troupes, special music, drama, athletic performances, and similar activities. One church sponsored a wrestling match at its Sunday evening service. Is there no limit to what churches will do to increase attendance and contribution? Should not people who call themselves Christians have a strong desire to follow the explicit teaching of the New Testament or does that matter?

 

Have some churches of Christ fallen in with fleeting fashions of the world (Rom. 12:2)?  Some left-leaning churches of Christ have used the "The Andy Griffith Show" for their Bible classes. Would they not be better served by using stories from the Old Testament and from the New? Will they next use "The Beverly Hillbillies Show?" Are they really trying to teach or to entertain?

 

One congregation in Huntsville, Alabama, keeps the Jewish Passover. In fact, according to their marquee, they invited a Jewish rabbi to speak to the congregation to tell them how to observe the Passover. Do you believe the church is guilty of syncretism? Will their next step be to observe the Sabbath and other Jewish feasts and festivals? If a church is authorized to keep the Passover, are they not obligated to do the whole law (Gal. 5:3)? We have no right to invent a religion and call it Christianity. True Christianity is based on the New Testament-not on the fertile imagination of some preacher or theologian. And where are the elders in these congregations?

 

One preacher among churches of Christ has introduced the counting of beads as a substitute for scriptural prayer. Another church with which I am acquainted practices testifying in the worship of the church. What is the value of such practices? They have absolutely no basis in scripture and make no scriptural sense. People who know and love the scriptures are not going to put up with such foolishness.

 

As every serious student of the Bible knows, there is a proper way to use the Old Testament. We can learn from it that God means what he says. When he gave the Israelites commands, he expected them to obey them explicitly. Does he not demand the same of those of us who live under the new covenant? Why did Paul tell the Colossians: "Whatsoever you do in word of deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him" (Col. 3:17)? Can we truly be Christ's friends if we fail to do whatever he commands us to do (John 15:14)?

 

Winford Claiborne

The International Gospel Hour

P.O. Box 118

Fayetteville, TN 37334