The Contemporary Church is M – Marcionic
- 17 December 2023
Marcionism is an ancient heresy dating from around AD100. It essentially seeks to pit the God of the OT against the God of the NT. As with so many theological controversies the root problem represents a failure to properly comprehend the right relationship between God’s old covenant dealings with Israel and His new covenant project which drew in the Gentiles from every tribe and tongue as fellow heirs in Christ (Eph 2:12-13).
Now, have you noticed how Biblically illiterate most evangelicals are? Few could list the ten commandments; few could navigate their way through the minor prophets or reflect with interest on the providential rise and fall of the commonwealth under its various kings after the division of the kingdom post Solomon; fewer still have any appetite to familiarise themselves with OT caselaw as rehearsed at length in Deuteronomy; and I only know a handful of fellows Christians who recognise the centrality of Deuteronomy 28 for making sense of all OT history. Undoubtedly, there are several factors at play here, but it is surely significant that the evangelical movement identifies itself strongly with ‘New Testament Christianity’ having reduced its ‘gospel’ message to something practically novel that God revealed through Jesus and St Paul. Today, the all-consuming business is ‘church planting’ and the all-important issue involves ‘how to do church.’ Marcion himself was infatuated with Matt 9:16-17, “No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and the tear is made worse. Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.” He imagined that OT religion was inherently distinct from its NT counterpart, that a fictitious Demiurge inspired copious cruelties (the stoning of a man for Sabbath violation, the draconian conquest of Canaan, the incomprehensible capital sanctions for a whole raft of crimes, etc) quite inconsistent with the tenderness of a Jesus who commended love for one’s enemies and the turning of the cheek!
Tragically, few Christians are able to provide a reasoned defense of their faith when such seemingly embarrassing OT incidents are pointed out by cynical sophists. The agenda for ‘seeker-friendliness’ via ‘church growth’ programs tends to obfuscate when such issues are raised and focuses its efforts on just being nice whilst hoping to induce ‘guests’ to attend an upcoming ‘gospel service.’ The booklet I picked up recently from one local church meeting (‘Why Jesus?’ by Nicky Gumbel) leads the reader through a narrative largely void of Christ’s OT context. On its first page we read, ‘Christianity is about relationships rather than rules; a Person more than a philosophy.’ Such ideological reductionism is existentially appealing – it spares us of the bother of careful exegetical enquiry; and it resonates with our felt need for immediate self-fulfilment and personal motivation, etc. But I digress.
Jesus rehearsed the OT rigorously throughout his ministry. To Satan’s wilderness temptations He rebutted, ‘man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’ (Matt 4:4). He castigated the religious leaders of the day for their ignorance of OT Scripture saying, ‘You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God’ (Matt 22:29). In both instances Jesus referenced the 39 books of the OT. But central to authentic NT theology is Jesus’ statement in Matt 5:18ff: ‘Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfil. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.’ Now significantly, along with the 28th chapter of Deuteronomy, I confess I have never heard (in any church I’ve ever attended) a sermon on this passage. Why not? Because it does not fit with the accepted narrative – let’s keep the main things (i.e. Jesus’ death for my sin to procure my ticket to heaven) the main things! And alas, hoards of fickle sheep thoughtlessly follow on.
Professor Francis Nigel Lee sought to press home two correctives. First, he frequently referenced the two parts of Scripture as the ‘Newer Testament’ and the ‘Older Testament.’ The best theologians recognise the two parts as ADMINISTRATIONS of the unifying principle – the Covenant of Grace. Second, he identified himself as a Bible Christian rather than a NT Christian. I recall experiencing something of an epiphany when I came to realise (perhaps after 20 years or so, as a typical evangelical believer, that every part of my Bible was Christian. I guess I’d come to think, by a sort of unspoken osmosis, that certain parts/Books were Jewish, etc. But there are other relevant considerations:
- We’ve seen already how a Baptistic paradigm is itself symptomatic of Marcionism. The essential failure is an unwillingness to recognise the equivalent outward mark of covenantal identification with OT circumcision (Col 2:11-12).
- The designation of Christians as ‘saints’ throughout Paul’s letters is a term drawn out from the OT narrative (see 1Sam 2:9; 2Chron 6:41; Ps 16:3; 30:4; 34:9; 116:15).
- The great heroes of the Faith listed in Heb 11 are all drawn from the OT!
- St Paul’s arguments rehearsed in all his letters to the NT Churches are peppered with proof-texts drawn from the OT (e.g. cf Rom 3:10-13 with Ps 14; cf Eph 4:8 with Ps 68:18)
- The impending casting off of the nation of Israel as God’s covenantal bride and her replacement with the NT Church was comprehended by Paul in the casting out of the bondwoman and the restoration of Sarah’s son (Isaac) as the heir of promise (see Gal 4:21-28)
- Finally, and undoubtedly, God concludes the Bible with a most remarkable Book – the Revelation of John – in which every detail of specific application to the NT Churches is presented as a glorious tapestry of words and pictures drawn comprehensively from the OT. Indeed the key to proper exegesis of the various visions is an extensive familiarity with OT vocabulary. Beasts, mountains, dragons and the practice of writing on hands and foreheads points the careful reader back to historical foundations laid down over centuries from Adam to John the Baptist.
- And so briefly, we maintain simultaneously (i) the equality of status of the OT & NT whilst recognising (ii) the relative perspicuity of the NT narrative. Paul makes this point in 1Cor 13:9-12 ‘But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away. When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.’
