Publications
 |
Little, Dale W., editor. Japan Evangelical Missionary Association ad hoc Theological Commission Response to the Japan Evangelical Association Theological Commission's Pamphlet No.6, Fundamentalism: "Affirmations and Questions for Discussion." Tokyo, October 2007.
Link to pages: [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ]
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION (continued)
5) Theological reductionism
Watanabe seems to understand that historical events play an important role in the formation of public opinion, including the opinions of evangelicals. However some other contributors assert a causal relationship between certain theological positions held by many American evangelicals and support for American militarism.(5) The cause of American evangelical support of the Iraq War is thus reduced to theology. The suspect theological positions include premillennialism, dispensational eschatology, and the young earth theory which is dependent upon a literal interpretation of the Bible (absolute inerrancy?). Doubtless, many American evangelicals and Christian fundamentalists who hold these theological views do indeed also support the American war effort in Iraq. However, there are many other American evangelicals, and perhaps even American Christian fundamentalists, who hold these same theological convictions but are opposed to the Iraq War. Among American evangelicals, theology does not conclusively determine one's political stance, including one's position on any given war. Does the JEA Theological Commission recognize this variation among American evangelicals who might hold to the same theological positions?
6) Bibliology
One article encourages Japanese evangelicals to shift from absolute inerrancy to full inerrancy in order to arrive at a moderate understanding of inerrancy and in order to avoid the American fundamentalistic extreme of literally interpreting the Bible.(6) This implies that Japanese and American evangelicals generally hold to absolute inerrancy. However, most American evangelicals actually hold to full inerrancy. If the typical American evangelical position has been full inerrancy, how would the shift from absolute to full inerrancy among Japanese evangelicals help achieve a Japanese theology of peacemaking? Full inerrancy has not apparently accomplished this feat in America. Or does the suggestion to move toward a more moderate view of inerrancy actually mean that a broader view than full inerrancy is being suggested (e.g., limited inerrancy, inerrancy of purpose, accommodated revelation, or nonpropositional revelation)? What is the JEA Theological Commission's understanding of its own stated position on inerrancy?
7) JEA Theological Commission exclusivism?
Fujimoto shows how an “us versus them” mentality results in the confrontational posture often associated with fundamentalism. At least one of the articles in the pamphlet creates just such a posture of exclusion in order to distance Japanese evangelicals from their American counterparts.(7) Does the JEA Theological Commission see the irony of identifying this exclusive mentality in what it has described as American Christian fundamentalism but not recognizing this tendency within its own commission?
*************
(5)
Okayama: “The third reason Christian fundamentalism spurs the church on toward war is eschatology. According to the right wing of American religion, before the eschatological tribulation Jesus will return in the sky to gather Christians together.” (II.C.)
Okayama: “Christian fundamentalists have a great interest in Armageddon, the final world war, which according to some is identified with a nuclear war. And because the final world war will occur before the return of Christ there is a tendency to perceive war on earth positively as an eschatological sign.” (II.C.3.)
(6)
See Sekino (V.B.). It is interesting to note that theologians generally refer to both absolute and full inerrancy as a literal hermeneutic, whereas Sekino thinks only absolute inerrancy can be called a literal hermeneutic. His repeated criticisms of a literal hermeneutic should therefore be understood as directed against absolute inerrancy rather than full inerrancy.
(7)
Okayama implies that Japanese churches should not cooperate with any overseas churches other than pacifist churches: “The Japanese church should continue to cooperate with historically pacifist churches…” (Summary, and III.A.)
Note Fujimoto's warning about this possible exclusive mentality in the JEA: “…as an evangelical association positioned within a larger church, we ought to ask ourselves if we have fallen into exclusivism, or, in maintaining our own distinctives, whether we are judging others.” (Conclusion)
*************