An Apostolic Response to David Arthur Reed 2

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Reed chooses to define the emphasis of AP upon the person of Jesus
Christ as Jesus-Centrism (Reed 1978:78).  In contrast to the
Christocentrism characteristic of Protestant Evangelical Pietism, which
gives the person of Christ the preeminent place in the articulation of a
systematic theology, Jesus-Centrism gives a theological expression to
the person of Christ from a Pietistic perspective.  Jesus-Centrism is
practical theology concerned with the relationship of the believer to
Jesus Christ, avoiding any speculative theology (Reed 1978:27).  While
the deity of Christ is affirmed there is no effort made to understand
its eternal or universal significance.  This results  in an obscuring of
the identity of the person of Christ within the Trinity  (Reed
1978:28).  Jesus-Centrism is "primarily devotional and inspirational in
nature rather than theologically abstract"  (Reed 1978:28).  Because
Jesus-Centrism is not theologically abstract Reed believes that it
presents a truncated view of God and the World  (Reed 1978:28).
	Jesus-Centrism was prevalent in the American Pietism of the late
nineteenth century from which AP emerged.  Revivalism focused its
attention on the absolute deity of Jesus Christ often obscuring the
distinctions within the Trinity.  Their religion could be described as a
practical monotheism of the son  (Reed 1978:30)  A Jesus Centric focus 
was apparent in prayers, hymns, sermons, and teaching which lacked any
Trinitarian reference (Reed 1978:31).  The intense study of the Acts of
The Apostles, Hebrews, and Revelation fostered the widespread use of
"Jesus Only" terminology.  Jesus-Centrism strongly influenced the early
Pentecostal movement creating the environment from which AP was to
emerge (Reed 1978:45-56).  The founders of AP drew on the emphasis upon
the name and deity of Jesus found in nineteenth Pietism.  AP, according
to David Arthur Reed, should be defined as Jesus Centered Pietism.
	Theology in the nineteenth century was not only characterized by Jesus
Centered Pietism, but by a Jewish Christian expression (Reed 1978:86). 
Among the communities of Christians within the New Testament were those
with a Jewish heritage who expressed their faith in terms borrowed from
Judaism.  Their theology, latent within the New Testament, creates the
possibility  for a revival of Jewish themes throughout Christian
history, especially in reformationist and resorationists movements. 
(Reed 1978:87).
	In the ninetieth century a Jewish Christian theology was expressed in
the use of sabbath terminology and restrictions, in the millenarian
movement with an emphasis upon the restoration of national Israel, in
the restorationist movement stressing a return to primitive Christianity
and eschatological fulfillment, and in the use of Old Testament
categories to interpret Christian experience  (Reed 1978:92).  But a
Jewish Christian theology was most evident in the rise of heretical
sects whose reason for existence was a "Judaistic perversion of the
Christian faith" which limited salvation to their own fellowships (Reed
1978:92).  These include the Jehovah Witnesses, the Mormons, the Seventh
Day Adventists, and "Sacred Name" or Yahwehists groups.  Such communions
utilize Old Testament concepts to formulate an explicitly heretical
expression of Christianity.  The emphasis upon the name of Jesus by
nineteenth century Pietists reflects the Jewish tendency to venerate the
name of God in  the Old Testament (Reed 1978:94).  AP embraced this
Jewish Christian expression as well as the Jewish emphasis upon the
radical unity of the nature of God (Reed 1978:205-212). 
	Upon the basis of its origins in the Jesus Centered Pietism of the
ninetieth century, its usage of concepts which are described as Jewish
Christian in nature, and its failure to embrace "prevalent theology", AP
is labeled a sectarian movement (Reed 1978:1).  In his interpretation of
the theology of AP Reed consistently uses these criteria to assess its
validity.  For this reason we will now evaluate Reed's criteria of
interpretation with an understanding that in so doing we are evaluating
the credibility of Reed's thesis.