The creeds emerged from the gospel’s encounter with a broader cultural context, through missionary expansion. The development of doctrine, as Alister McGrath notes, was “partly on account of the need to interact with a language and a conceptual framework not designed with the specific needs of Christian theology in mind.” Doctrine and creeds arise from the need to explain and defend the gospel message in the face of intellectual and religious challenges, such as polytheism, Gnosticism, or dualism.

It can no longer be taken for granted that Christianity’s historic creeds have enduring significance beyond being mere relics of the past. As we walk among the smoldering ruins of Western Christendom, we’re likely to encounter fragments of these creeds, perhaps even in complete form. They are somewhat familiar, but we feel no organic connection with them.
As evangelical Christians, we believe the creeds. We sometimes recite them to remind ourselves we do. But their power is fading. We may feel embarrassed when we collectively recite them, not because we no longer believe them but because we believe them in a different way.
For many, the creeds are no longer self-evident, together with many other religious beliefs that used to hold society together at its seams. People who reject them no longer strike us as irrational or out of the ordinary. We’ve demoted the creeds to the status of hypotheses.
But against the prevailing cultural winds and despite their contextual nature, the creeds must retain a central position in the church’s life.
Outgrowing the Creeds
Charles Taylor explained the subtle change in our rapport with our own beliefs in terms of what he calls “secularity 3”—a change in the mode of believing. In a global world, it’s almost impossible to hold one’s religious opinions as self-evident. The presence of a bewildering diversity of indigenous theologies, particularly in parts of the world where the church is growing quickly, makes the historic creeds seem small indeed.
A double movement has been slowly rendering the creeds irrelevant.
1. Rise of Historical Consciousness
In the West, the past is no longer seen as a depository of eternal truths but as a merely antiquarian interest. Leopold von Ranke’s famous 1824 statement is relevant here: “To history has been assigned the office of judging the past, of instructing the present for the benefit of future ages. To such high office this work does not aspire: it wants only to show what actually happened.” But what actually happened has no direct bearing on eternal and necessary truths of reason, which cannot be supported by history’s contingent truths.
The effect of historicization is captured by Robin G. Collingwood’s comments on Johann Gottfried Herder, the first intellectual to describe historical consciousness: “Herder, as far as I know, was the first thinker to recognize in a systematic way that . . . human nature is not uniform but diversified. Human nature was not a datum but a problem.”
The natural is ultimately temporal—it can only be recognized in time, longitudinally, never just synchronically. Time and history are the photographic developers that reveal natural patterns. Debasing the past leads to questioning one’s sense of what is natural in the same way considering very closely the shape of a word defamiliarizes it, rendering it strange and arbitrary. Slicing time carves out the space in which we discover a huge variety of beliefs. A cross-section of history reveals disparate details without any clear means of relating them.
2. Global Dissipation of Truth
While the longitudinal approach of the historical consciousness detaches nature from the past and makes it a problem instead of a datum, the lateral vision of a globalizing approach relativizes nature to various contexts. Truth becomes local, and while other local truths may be interesting, they’re often of no value outside their original contexts.
This bears directly on the creeds, as African American theologian James Cone indicates: “I respect what happened at Nicea and Chalcedon and the theological input of the Church Fathers on Christology. . . . But the homoousia question is not a black question.”
Cone complains about a uniformizing tendency in Christian theology that’s also recognized by W. A. Dyrness and Oscar Garcia-Johnson: “The inherent problem with ‘Christendom’ was its ability to impose a uniformity that ignored or suppressed alternative points of view. . . . At the very least, it sometimes proposed theological formulations that were difficult to put into other cultural frameworks, where, for example, there had been no previous conversations about ‘persons’ and ‘substance.’”
To the extent creeds operate with so-called metaphysical language—and some creeds are more metaphysical than others (e.g., compare the Apostles’ Creed with Chalcedon or the Athanasian Creed)—they’re less interesting outside their original contexts. Each context, both across history and across the globe, presents unique challenges and questions.
Read More
Related Posts:

Let’s be those who give the word, not some cheap alternative. People need real encouragement, they don’t need self help tips. We need to give that which is, “like fire, declares the LORD, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces” (Jer 23:29). God’s word is the encouragement that people need.

Have you ever wanted to encourage someone, but you just don’t know what to say? You want to have a good word for someone who is sad, or struggling, or having a hard time, but the words just won’t come. Well, sometimes you should be quiet and not say anything that isn’t “good for building up” (Eph 4:29). But if you are gonna share something, let me tell you the best encouragement you can give.
The best encouragement you can give is not dependent on you being the most clever or the most unique. The best encouragement you can give doesn’t need to be witty or inherently profound. The best encouragement you can give actually doesn’t rely a whole lot on you. What am I talking about? The best encouragement you can give is God’s word!
God’s word is living and active and sharper than a two-edged sword (Heb 4:12) and is wielded by the Spirit of truth (Eph 6:17).
Read More

Related Posts:

.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{align-content:start;}:where(.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap) > .wp-block-kadence-column{justify-content:start;}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{column-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-md, 2rem);row-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-md, 2rem);padding-top:var(–global-kb-spacing-sm, 1.5rem);padding-bottom:var(–global-kb-spacing-sm, 1.5rem);grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd{background-color:#dddddd;}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-layout-overlay{opacity:0.30;}@media all and (max-width: 1024px){.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}}@media all and (max-width: 767px){.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}}
.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col,.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col:before{border-top-left-radius:0px;border-top-right-radius:0px;border-bottom-right-radius:0px;border-bottom-left-radius:0px;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{column-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-sm, 1rem);}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col > .aligncenter{width:100%;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col:before{opacity:0.3;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18{position:relative;}@media all and (max-width: 1024px){.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}}@media all and (max-width: 767px){.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}}

Subscribe to Free “Top 10 Stories” Email
Get the top 10 stories from The Aquila Report in your inbox every Tuesday morning.

As for the pulpit in particular- it is big, central, and strong, for a reason. It is meant to promote the preaching of God’s inspired, inerrant, sufficient, and authoritative Word as the central activity of the Church. The pulpit is bigger than the preacher. The pulpit requires the person who brings the Word to stand up and step into it. It demands the preacher consider the solemnity of the role he is exercising when preaching the Word, leading the congregation in prayer, or otherwise leading elements of the worship liturgy.

We had the opportunity to build a new sanctuary fifteen years ago and we opted for an Old School style complete with wooden pews, kneelers, choir in the back, digital pipe organ and a big central pulpit. This post is not trying to convince anyone they should do what we did, but rather to offer an explanation for those who wonder and even an encouragement for those who worship in older buildings that have a similar set up. The various features of our church architecture and layout are based on things we see as biblically important. Our building looks a certain way for a specific reason. Our choice of furnishings and the particular layout of the pulpit, baptismal, and communion table are purposeful.
It is not that other types of church buildings or layouts are unbiblical or wrong. For example, it seems the big, central, wooden pulpit is often rare in newer church buildings. Many modern churches opt for a large stage for a worship band and a portable stool or chair in front of a Plexiglas lectern for their casually dressed pastor to sit and teach or “talk with” his congregation. I do something similar on Sunday nights and in other teaching venues. Certainly, the Word of God can be taught or preached in different set ups. Jesus taught in various settings throughout his ministry, as did the Apostle Paul. The Bible doesn’t prescribe the arrangement of furniture in a church worship setting.
The pastor, sitting with small Plexiglas lectern on Sunday morning, definitely communicates casual, informal, personal interaction. It seems such a setup is intended to make the pastor come across as non-threatening, even a bit less authoritative. The pastor in that posture is about to have a conversation or fireside chat with his family and friends, it would seem. I suspect this approach might be a reaction to the yelling, pulpit-pounding, white-suit wearing, hanky in one hand, fire and brimstone preacher. The stool and lectern approach is meant to put people at ease as they listen to a “message” from the Bible. The pastor’s choice of casual dress while teaching or preaching Sunday morning tells the congregation- “Hey, I’m one of you! Let me tell you what I’ve learned this week.” I think much of the trend toward a casual set up for teaching and preaching Sunday morning has come from current generational pressure. Millennials and Gen Zs are characterized as being skeptical or dismissive of authority. The traditional big, central pulpit with the pastor wearing a suit or robe is a bit offsetting to a generation that doesn’t acknowledge levels of authority readily.
Let’s be honest-whatever your set up, something is being communicated.  Our intention is to communicate importance and authority by the chancel arrangement we have. The most important activities of the church are signified by the furnishings we have the pulpit, the baptismal, and the communion table. The ministry of Christ’s church is the ministry of the Word and Sacrament. Our furnishings are meant to make a statement about the priorities of the church.
As for the pulpit in particular- it is big, central, and strong, for a reason. It is meant to promote the preaching of God’s inspired, inerrant, sufficient, and authoritative Word as the central activity of the Church. The pulpit is bigger than the preacher. The pulpit requires the person who brings the Word to stand up and step into it. It demands the preacher consider the solemnity of the role he is exercising when preaching the Word, leading the congregation in prayer, or otherwise leading elements of the worship liturgy. Yes, the big, central pulpit is meant to exude authority-the authority of the preached Word primarily. This authority is not based on the preacher, but on the Word that is preached. In our church, the pastors wear robes so the congregation’s attention is not on his clothes, but rather the role he is filling for that hour. Some will say, The robe distracts me…it reminds me of when I was Catholic.”  Possibly. But I am guessing a good number might say, “Skinny jeans on Gen Xers, untucked shirts, and preachers in sneakers are distracting too”. The pulpit manned by a minister in a robe communicates reverence and authority. But this article is not really making a case for robe-wearing, so forgive the rabbit trail!
Back to the big central pulpit set up. Preaching is proclaiming the word of truth and exhorting the congregation to believe and obey. The pastor is commanded to “preach the Word” (2 Timothy 4:2) as part of his essential shepherding duties and the central pulpit arrangement can serve to encourage this practice. The central pulpit set up is a reminder to the pastor and the people about God’s authoritative Word. There is a sense in which pastors come and go, but the big, solid pulpit from which the Word is preached, will remain for generations. A preacher “filling the pulpit” is a great way to describe what a faithful pastor should be doing. He should know what the pulpit is meant for (preaching the Word) and do the task. In other words, many important messages can be relayed by architecture and setup.
To be clear, I would rather go to a church that has a modern set up with the stool and Plexiglass lectern where the pastor believes and preaches the Bible faithfully than a church with a traditionally arranged big, central pulpit, but the pastor does not believe or faithfully teach the Bible. The essential priority for a biblical, healthy church, is a right view and teaching of the Bible, which can be done with no pulpit at all. My purpose here is to offer explanation for a big central pulpit set up like ours and possibly provide some ideas to share with your church members if you have a similar arrangement.
Dr. Tony Felich is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and serves as the Pastor of Redeemer PCA in Overland Park, Kansas.

Related Posts:

.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{align-content:start;}:where(.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap) > .wp-block-kadence-column{justify-content:start;}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{column-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-md, 2rem);row-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-md, 2rem);padding-top:var(–global-kb-spacing-sm, 1.5rem);padding-bottom:var(–global-kb-spacing-sm, 1.5rem);grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd{background-color:#dddddd;}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-layout-overlay{opacity:0.30;}@media all and (max-width: 1024px){.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}}@media all and (max-width: 767px){.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}}
.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col,.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col:before{border-top-left-radius:0px;border-top-right-radius:0px;border-bottom-right-radius:0px;border-bottom-left-radius:0px;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{column-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-sm, 1rem);}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col > .aligncenter{width:100%;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col:before{opacity:0.3;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18{position:relative;}@media all and (max-width: 1024px){.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}}@media all and (max-width: 767px){.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}}

Subscribe to Free “Top 10 Stories” Email
Get the top 10 stories from The Aquila Report in your inbox every Tuesday morning.