Before there was the 21st Century Downgrade Controversy, there was the “infamous,” but probably now forgotten, 19th Century Downgrade Controversy confronted by none other than Charles Haddon Spurgeon. What was Spurgeon’s issue? His issue was clarity, for one—or rather the lack of clarity... typified in his mind by a studied or practiced ambiguity. Spurgeon wrote:
“We cannot hold the inspiration of the Word, and yet reject it; we cannot believe in the atonement and deny it;… we cannot recognize the punishment of the impenitent and yet indulge the ‘larger hope.’ One way or the other, we must go. Decision is the virtue of the hour.[1]”
To quote one source, “Spurgeon was comfortable being in denominational fellowship with men with whom he held numerous disagreements on second-tier doctrinal matters and on social, political, and cultural issues as long as he shared basic agreement with them on matters that were essential to evangelical orthodoxy. However, Spurgeon believed that in order for true gospel unity to be authentic, there had to be a basic foundation of agreement on matters of primary doctrinal importance, particularly on those doctrines that were at the heart of the gospel itself.”[2]
Spurgeon left the Baptist Union and was ultimately vindicated by history (although tarred and feathered by some of his contemporaries).
What’s that got to do with churches today? This isn’t so much a denominational issue as it was back then. It’s a larger, more troubling issue involving denominations, with an “s” and churches (you may wish to read the previous article here or simply scroll down).
It works this way. In the late 20th century, in the midst of a number of controversies associated with both the Pauline and General Epistles, there emerged a group of Christians calling themselves “Red Letter Christians.” In summary, “Red Letter Christians” emphasized the teachings of Jesus found in the Gospels over the rest of Scripture. Somehow the words of Jesus, or rather the writings of the Gospels where they directly quote Jesus, are “more inspired” than the rest of the Bible. Ironically, there were no red letter renderings in the Greek Text. Red lettering of Jesus’ quotes is a recent innovation. And Jesus’ words are Genesis through the end of Revelation.
Loosely associated with this stream of thought was a movement in the direction of Christians “unhitching” from the Old Testament, championed today by Andy Stanley but in the past by Harry Emerson Fosdick. Fosdick and Stanley’s thesis was (is) that Jesus and the Apostles, like James, sought to disconnect from the Old Testament, and so should today’s church. The obvious problem with this notion is that Jesus quotes the Old Testament as authoritative more than anyone in the New Testament (cf. Matthew 19:1-6). Paul follows as a close second (just read Romans) and Peter also quotes the Old Testament, “’the grass withers and the flower fades but the word of the Lord stands forever,’ and this is the word that was preached to you (1 Peter 1:24-5—quoting Isaiah 40:8).”
The next manifestation of this 21st Century Downgrade is churches and denominations being “Gospel-Centered.” What could be wrong with that? That’s like the Christian version of “mom, apple pie, and the national anthem.” But…
While in many cases, there’s nothing wrong with being Gospel-Centered. In other cases, we find a practiced or studied ambiguity that is problematic. Increasingly, this new mantra relies on a perversion of Augustine’s principle of “in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.” The realm of non-essentials keeps expanding. One wonders if “in all things charity” should be modified to include “in all things clarity” in order that we could understand what another’s meaning of “Gospel Centered” and what it really means.
It seems that the next step in this problematic 21st Century Downgrade is that today’s church should consider avoiding references to the Bible and emphasize belief in the resurrection of Jesus. What could be wrong with that? That “sounds good.”
Stanley and others argue that the Bible contains too many divisive things, so just start with the resurrection power of Jesus Christ to change your life. Some call this transformational Christianity. This is a positive Christianity or a winsome Christianity. However, this increasingly leans more toward the mindset of self-improvement guru Tony Robbins or “your best life now...” We do well to define terms. Gospel centered and transformational increasingly have many meanings. It depends who you talk to.
Ultimately, here’s where the “downgrade” comes in. We are moving away from the theological-structural moorings of “the Good News” or “the Gospel” rooted into the whole counsel of God (while paying lip service to the Bible). Are we to base our “presentation” on an event that many say is not a historical fact? On what basis? You need the whole Bible to reason from faith to faith (Romans 1:17).
Unhitching the Gospel from the Bible may enable some to enjoy the broadest of all possible fellowship, building bridges over the widest possible gulfs, but it begs the question, “What is the Gospel?”
We must be careful not to build bridges to nowhere. Without the bad news of the Fall in Genesis 3, there is no good news of the Gospel. Without understanding the ramifications of the “wages of sin is death” there is no need for the gift of eternal life. And how then shall we live (skim Ephesians or Romans for insight). What about the challenges of today’s culture? How do we make sense of our existence (Psalm 119:105)?
Eventually, the resurrection story becomes just that, another story that is metaphor for something less—like “rebooting your life in your own resurrection (yes… believe it or not someone preached that sermon). And we know where that leads. It leads to a place that is neither winsome, transformational, or Gospel-Centered.
Let’s be clear… clarity in all things so that we can be biblical as an act of worship in our daily lives and as the gathered visible church.
[1] C. H. Spurgeon, The Sword and the Trowel (London: Passmore and Alabaster, September 1887): 465.
[2] https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/blog-entries/what-was-the-downgrade-controversy-actually-all-about/