I think that the church, like any institution, is bound together by the things it share in common amongst its members. We can see commonality as a binding factor in nearly every set of relationships. On a small level friends share experiences and time/space together, in a slightly larger and more focused way clubs share a commonality in their interests or passions. Sports teams share a common goal in seeking victory over their rivals, whereas political parties share a common vision of the future (at least in principle). It is important for us as relational beings, to share things in common with those whom we surround ourselves with and work with. Without common ground fellowships, plans, and friendships all fall apart.
The easy part is saying that commonality something that should be striven for, the most difficult part is ascertaining how this is to be done. Although I do not have the answer to that most difficult and ageless question, I will outline two ways in which we can mentally frame this idea so that we can better understand the ways in which this problem is often made even worse than it has to be and how debates are lost before they even begin.
Foreword: An overwhelming truth about humanity is that we have the desire to be right. We get into fights as kids over who is right, we get into fights as adolescents over who is right, we get into fights as adults over who is right, we even get into fights as nations over who is right. There seems to be a driving force inside of us that compels us to state that we are right. This arrogant and selfish attribute of humanity is the undoing of much that would result in commonality. Instead of looking for ways which we might be wrong, and thus for opportunities to learn and grow, we look for ways to be 'right' and thus fail to see any new perspective that might have otherwise enlightened us. This is not something that one side does and another side doesn't, all sides of all issues do this. The primary tool needed for constructive dialogue is humility. Without humility we cannot learn from any source, nay, not even the Holy Spirit. The Lord commands us to practice humility, and this needs to be present in all of our lives and at all times, including (and maybe MOST importantly) during theological debates and church politics.
Having established the importance of finding commonality and the integral role that humility must play in any active dialogue that is to be of any worth, we move on to two concepts that should help us focus our attention on where we differ in ways which move us towards understanding one another, and thus hopefully in ways which allow us to come to terms more easily. These two concepts are 1. Order of Importance and 2. Relevance. Although these two ideas often intermingle and there can even be debate as regards to the concepts themselves, if we set the field with these two terms we are more likely to at least understand the position of our counterparts more clearly, and thus a better dialogue will be produced.
1. Order of Importance
For over a thousand years the Christian Church was one. There were differences in thought yes, there were Eastern school and western schools, monastics and popes, Patriarchs and saints, but all were united under the single banner of Christianity. Although many currently do not know it (for we are bad historians) the Reformation which resulted in the creation of Protestant churches was not the first schism in church history. East split from West (into what we now know as the Orthodox and Catholic churches) during the Crusades of the Middle Ages, after Christians from the West attacked those in the East for spoil. I mention this because this split was over something just as fundamental to Christianity (if not more so) than those things of the Protestant reformation- this split was over (to radically simplify things) blood. To an extreme level the command of "turn the other cheek" had been forgotten, and "kill thy neighbor" instead became the 'Will of God'. If there ever was a reason to break ranks, mass murder and unnecessary war would be that reason. Nothing else stinks so much in the nostrils of God.
The Protestant reformation came at the end of centuries of Papal and Catholic corruption. It was a populist response to several issues, including differing ideas on the theological concepts of grace, church authority, scriptural authority, regulations on just about everything, baptism, and even the rights of different genders (the Mennonites). As is hopefully obvious to any concerned Christian, these things are nearly all individually very important for how one understands God, and when the differences of all of these concepts are put together one could easily make the case that a break from Catholicism was needed. One thing the split did do, however, which was NOT positive is this: it split the historic church once more...and this time, once the church split, it would not stop splitting.
There are now HUNDREDS of Protestant denominations. The foundations of this are rooted in early Protestantism, when one who disagreed with Rome would simply become a member of the Protestant church that was nearest to them geographically, whether that was Luther in Germany or Wycliffe in England or Calvin in Geneva, so already Protestant thinking was off to a splintered start. From there Churches would sometimes divide over what may be considered important issues- how to understand baptism or the Lords supper (communion) or pre-destination or grace. Again, these issues are important to discuss and understand, but every time a large enough group disagreed with their original party, another faction would form. The result is what we have today; splintered, isolated groups of 'Christians', united under the Name of Christ...and little else.
We have gone astray. As imperfect as the church throughout history has been, one thing they often did realize was the importance of Unity. Jesus Christ himself asked Father God to give his disciples and those who would come after them unity, that they might be made one as He and the Father were one. I look around and do not see that kind of unity today.
So, all of that to say this: we need to understand the Order of Importance of things. Doctrinal integrity IS important but in varying degrees depending on the issue. What is said in the creeds should be our common doctrine throughout all of Christendom, and it is for those issues that I am willing to die, but there are other things that I think many need to realize are not all-important. The doctrine of free-will, so so so basic and foundational to Weslyan Armenian theological understandings, is something that actively shapes our views and image of God and should be protected. Even so, let us not forget that many of the worlds finest evangelists, preachers, and missionaries believed in predestination, and yet they were still able to perform the will of God and be used by God in mighty ways. This is an important issue that is worth fighting over to maintain in our tradition...but it is not something worth alienating a fellow believer or ostracizing someone over. Humility...we must remember humility. Only God TRULY understands how he made the world to work, or how he orders our fates.
There are many items like this; items or beliefs worth debating and understanding and taking a position on because of how they teach us about God. That is what we must not forget- they are important because and only because they tell us something about God. Should we be having church-splitting arguments about Evolution? I think not. As hot a topic as this is, and regardless of which side of the aisle you stand on, the God who made heaven and earth is not, to me, made any less powerful if we can explain in some ways how his creation came to become the way it is today. In this debate, we lose the forest for the tree, so to speak. We forget that the most important thing is to deliver the world back to God, to turn this planet into something more clearly resembling the Kingdom, to make earth as it is in heaven, NOT to be "right" or to simply defend what we were once taught because we feel emotional comfort with it. Whether you believe in a young earth or old earth, creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) or the process of evolution, the central point of importance is what the creation story tells us about God- it tells us that God CREATES, PURPOSES, and SETS APART. The how is not the force of the story, and would do well to remember that.
(Also, on a side note, some who use this argument to claim for Biblical inerrancy should realize that the Nazarene church has never argued for the inerrency of scripture. The church has always realized that the books of the Bible were written by men and therefore were God-breathed in the same way that we are God breathed. Just as man came alive in Adam (which simply means 'man' in Hebrew) when God blew his breath into us, the word comes alive through the breath of God, though it was written by human hands. We are made in God's likeness and the breath of God is in us, yet we still make mistakes. Even with our mistakes, however, the Spirit of God can lead us into truth that works for our salvation. I have never had the spirit of God lead me into the right answer on a vocab test or in a history exam, but only in those things important to my innermost being. The word of God is God-breathed as well. Humans wrote the Bible, so there are bound to be 'mistakes' in history, science, grammar (The writer of the gospel of Mark, for instance did not have as good a command of Greek as did Paul or John), but, since the spirit was leading these writers, there will not be mistakes when it comes to those issues that are of most importance, the issues of the soul.)
In summation, one must define their priorities when discussing faith and theology. At the top of my list would be the Creeds- here is listed the Nicene Creed, the most universally accepted Creed in the church today.
"I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.
Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.
And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen."
After that, everything is negotiable. If you believe those things above and live out the consequences of such beliefs, you are indeed a Christian and an inheritor of the Kingdom of God. Everything else, no matter how important, is not as important as those things above. Therefore I challenge you, when you get into a heated debate about pre-destination with your Calvinist friend, when you get into a debate on Evolution with your parents or with your children, when you get into a debate with your Sunday school teacher over the importance of communion, or the existence of purgatory...realize that all of that is secondary. Keep the perspective of what is truly important first and foremost in your mind. And on top of all of this remember to stay humble.
2. Relevance
Although this bears much in common with the concept of Order of Importance, relevance of an issue is something that perhaps plagues more the philosopher than the common lay-person of Christianity. The age-old sarcastic question, meant to mock theologians, "how many angels could dance on the head of a pin?" was at one point actually asked by a medieval thinker. being an "Ivory tower" theologian is a degrading remark, saying those whom it is aimed have lost track of reality in a way which makes their theological inquires and prose difficult to put into perspective or understand practically.
In some ways, however, normal people can also be plagued with the problem of relevance. Often people will hold a belief simply because they have never taken the time to examine that belief and seen if it holds true. Often it is something extremely relevant to their life and how they understand the world, but a lack of critical analysis (either due to laziness, ignorance, bad teaching, immature faith, or a combination of the above) leads them to never discover the inconsistencies of their belief. Although the idea of relevance warns against those who might be naturally inclined to become 'ivory tower theologians' in their thinking, it is also a call to those who live with conceptions of God and of faith that they have never yet considered critically, and yet are very relevant to their lives.
One example and then I will conclude this extremely long post. If I held the belief that God orders all things and wills for all things that happen to happen (an extremely Calvinistic, and POPULAR view among all Christians, even Wesleyans), I will no doubt find comfort in the fact that God has everything under control and that, even in the difficult phases of my life, I need not worry. Before we claim an idea as truth, though, we need to think through it critically to see where it leads us. In this case, thinking that God is indeed in control of every action and indeed wills for each event that happens to happen, we must conclude that God ordered the holocaust, that God ordains abortions, that God loves war, and that God is the perpetrator of every act of violence, treachery, and injustice that has ever occurred. If God is the ordainer of every action, then God is indeed a cruel God.
Although this is a common held belief, it is not commonly thought all the way through to its logical conclusion. If it was, perhaps more people would come to realize that a God who allows for an open future still retains the power to change it, and will still watch over the lives of those who have become part of his Kingdom (as the scripture promises us), still allowing us the peace and comfort of Biblical truth, even in difficult phases of life. What it does not do, however, is have Jesus pulling the trigger of every gun murder or dropping the ax on every martyr.
In conclusion, four phrases to remember when approaching issues where theological disagreement may lie.
WE NEED COMMONALITY- it binds us together and separates us from a disbelieving world.
HUMILITY- the most important tool for any honest seeker of Gods' truth
ORDER OF IMPORTANCE- Not everything is worth dying over, not everything is worth fighting over, figure out what is, and live for it
RELEVANCE- Live ye not in an ivory tower, nor in a valley of ignorance.
Sincerely,
The Serene Nazarene
better name for open theism would be open-futurism, because it actually isn't a view of God at all. Open theists believe, along with classical theists, that God knows all there is to know. That is, God does not know nonsense. When you ask God, "What color will the number four be eight weeks ago," God has no answer, because there is nothing to know. So open theists and classical theists both affirm God'somniscience. The unique perspective of open theism is that the future -- at least, much of the future -- is also "not there" to be known. Put simply, open theism is the belief that the future is not written yet. 
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)