I have written numerous articles alluding to the fact that culture has changed and continues to change theology, biblical interpretation and the way we do church. I wish I could say that historically church leaders have allowed only the Bible to transform their thinking. But the truth is that we are all products of our cultures! Even when we try to be objective, our objectivity is in the context of our cultural surroundings, thoughts, vocabulary and education.

There is perhaps no greater example of cultural influence in history than when the church began to relate the gospel through the lens of Greek culture so the kingdom would continue to expand. Thus, not all changes of this nature are bad or unnecessary; some, like the creeds and the systemization of doctrine have been very helpful.

Most Christians know that Jesus, the original Twelve Apostles and the early church were made up of Jewish believers. But most don’t understand the radical changes that took place after AD 70 when, in the aftermath of the Roman invasion of Jerusalem, the church was scattered and shifted from being a predominately Jewish sect to a Gentile religion.

The greatest transformation took place when the church began to relate more to the Greco-Roman culture than the Hebrew culture, which was done for the sake of mission and evangelism. This resulted in the early Christians, beginning in the 2nd century, expressing the gospel in Greek thought. But these early Christians also discovered, through Greek philosophical concepts in a deeper and more systematic way, what the gospel and the Bible actually taught. Moreover, it was Greek philosophical concepts rather than Greek religions that had the most impact because the Greek gods were looked at as immoral and the Greek world received its ethics primarily from their philosophers, not their religious priests and religions. Thus, prominent church bishops and apologists copied Greek philosophers rather than their religions in method and argument to make the gospel more appealing to the masses of Greek speaking peoples.

As a result, concepts related to the cult of the emperor, the military, Greek mystery religions, and Platonic philosophy gradually became common in Christian worship and doctrine. Christianity went from the Hebraic mindset of being a way and a life (John 14:6; Acts 9:2) to being defined by a set of doctrines, systematic theology, and metaphysics.

The following are some of the radical changes that took place when the church went from a Hebraic to a Greek cultural mindset:

First, starting in the 2nd century the church became a bearer of culture, reaching the intellectual elite because of the sophistication of apologists like Clement of Alexandria, Origen and others who mimicked Greek philosophers in their presentation of the gospel, which was more than a match for any anti-Christian pagan philosophical presentation and/or concept. Furthermore, after the conversion of Emperor Constantine, only Christians began to be upwardly mobile and cultured; non-Christians were looked down upon as unenlightened and uncultured.

Also, as the Roman Empire continued to disintegrate, more and more of its citizens looked to the Christian religion to fill in the gaps. This resulted in increased conversions with a subsequent Hellenization (influence of Greek culture) in the church.

Second, even as Christian apologists scorned pagan religions, they looked with favor upon Greek philosophical systems and concepts. This resulted in a growing tendency to define the faith more precisely and systematize its doctrines like Greek philosophers systematized concepts (e.g. resulting in the creeds of the church).

Thus, salvation went from the Hebraic understanding of emphasizing a historical event or narrative (e.g. the Exodus of the children of Israel; the death, burial and resurrection of Christ) to salvation through knowledge. The church went from the Hebraic emphasis on experience to the Hellenistic emphasis on enlightenment through the rational understanding of true knowledge. God’s revelation was no longer understood in the context of events, but as the communication of truth regarding the being and nature of God.

This is best exemplified by comparing Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) with the Nicene Creed. This sermon by Jesus is all about ethics and totally devoid of metaphysical speculation; the Nicene Creed is all about doctrine and says nothing about ethics. Furthermore, later in church history Hellenistic influence resulted in more of an emphasis on truth being communicated through images (plastic arts, visual arts and paintings, and even the icons of the present Eastern Orthodox Church) rather than the Hebrew emphasis on communicating truth through the spoken word (Romans 10:17).

In summary of this point, the Hebraic original gospel presents the reign or Kingdom of God as an event by which people should believe and repent; the Greek mindset presents the reign of God as rational truth to be believed. In the Hebraic mindset the Kingdom of God is in stark contrast to the present contradictions of the present pagan world and serves as a deposit of what is yet to come in its fullness. The Greek mindset presents the reign of God as a truth to be comprehended as something already fulfilled or complete.

Thus, in Paul’s understanding Christ ratified rather than fulfilled the Old Testament because the end is still to come (Romans 15:8). But in the Greek mindset all is already fulfilled in the cosmic Christ. Faith in God’s promises yet to be fulfilled was replaced by the already consummated Kingdom of Christ; Christ’s resurrection was a completed event and not viewed as the first fruits of the resurrection of all believers (1 Corinthians 15:20).

Third, as a result of the first two points, the historical continuity and hermeneutic between the Old and New Testaments was ignored. With the Greek mindset, the historical element of the Old gave way to an allegorical (spiritual, subjective or mystical) interpretation of the Old Testament as a prelude to the New Testament event of Christ.

Fourth, historical thinking gave way to metaphysical categories. Believers began to espouse a vertical relationship between time and eternity resulting in focusing more on heaven rather than on this age and God’s involvement in history—looking towards eternity more than on a future restored earth.

Christologically, this resulted in an emphasis on the pre-existent Jesus as the Logos (John 1:1) which spiritualized the Christ event, rather than emphasizing the historical Jesus; the emphasis became Jesus’ origin and identity rather than why He came. Speculation on the nature of the incarnation of Jesus shifted from Him identifying with the plight of humanity to metaphysical discussions on the incarnation regarding whether He had one or two natures.

Fifth, the Hellenistic (Greek) approach resulted in shifting the gospel’s impact. Instead of eventually transforming the earth realm into a future “new heaven and new earth” (Revelation 21), the Greek approach emphasized the relationship of the individual soul to God in a spiritual context. Thus, the Hebrew concept of salvation (yasha) for this world shifted to the Greek concept of being rescued from material burdens and one’s bodily existence, or salvation from this world. Thus, in the Greek mindset the Christian religion saves people from this earth instead of transforming the earth!

Hence, involvement in this world increasingly took upon itself the form of charity. Even Holy Communion was looked upon as medicine for immortality in the midst of a corrupt world. Communion became the primary way of connecting believers historically to the event of Christ.

The emphasis went from God’s involvement in history through the church to merely using earth as a place for individuals to secure rewards for the next life in heaven. The more good deeds an individual performed, the more prayers prayed, the more the individual soul would move towards spiritual perfection and be secured a place in heaven. Many believers even suffered martyrdom so they could escape hell and be rewarded with heaven!

Sixth, Gnosticism (a Greek philosophical understanding of salvation from the material world through knowledge) made inroads into the church even though, by-and-large, the church withstood the heretical elements of Gnosticism (e.g. the heretical beliefs that Jesus never had a physical body, or that the Old Testament god is an evil materialistic god and the New Testament god is a god of love and spirit). Gnosticism’s over-emphasis on ontological dualism is still alive in the church today: the difference between the temporal and the eternal, the physical and the spiritual, the earthly and the heavenly, the flesh and the spirit, etc.

Seventh, the church went from a missions movement empowered by the Holy Spirit and led by apostles, prophets and evangelists in the first century to a church in which the Holy Spirit was merely the Spirit of truth, of light, love and life meant to build up and sanctify the church so that ecclesiology (doctrine of the church) became its sole purpose rather than expanding the kingdom and transforming the world. The church became the mystical universal body of Christ that already actualized the kingdom as the spiritual elite of the universe.

The church became an institution for salvation and Greco-Roman culture. Even when it expanded it did so through church propaganda. For example, those outside the church were uncivilized pagans; evangelization became associated with the spread of civilization and culture. The monks, who practiced ascetic separation from the world, succeeded the martyrs as the heroes of the faith, and were the ones most instrumental in civilizing the barbarians who took over the Roman Empire.

Eighth, after the Edict of Milan (AD 313) granted religious equality to Christianity, the church’s focus on the heavenly Jerusalem made it possible for the Roman Emperor to have free reign when it came to temporal things. By the time the First Council of Nicaea took place in AD 325 Christ was viewed as a majestic king who granted an audience with His subjects during the liturgy of the church service, done increasingly in majestic cathedrals with Roman architectural designs. This resulted in a compromise of the church in which Christ was to rule in eternity and the emperor was to rule in time.

Whereas Jewish monotheism (belief in one God) conquered pagan polytheism (belief in a multiplicity of gods), the Roman monarchy (one king to rule the empire) conquered polyarchy (numerous leaders ruling diverse territories). The unity of the faith would depend upon the unity of the Roman Empire. Thus the objectives of the church became the objectives of the empire and vice versa.

In summary, the church had to go from a Hebraic to a Greco-Roman cultural approach so that it could evangelize the known world and not remain limited within the narrow confines of Jewishness. The Hellenistic approach was especially helpful in allowing the church to reach cultural elites and intellects. This approach also led to utilizing art to preach instead of only the spoken word, and to the ordering of biblical beliefs into systematic theology: doctrines and creeds to protect from heresy without and to bring clarity within.

As already stated, this also resulted in a Gnostic view of dualism in which spiritual and physical things were separated. Faith became focused more on metaphysical understanding of truth rather than on the historical actions of God, which resulted in abandoning the preaching and hope of an eschatological renewal of this world (Revelation 21:1) for an emphasis on the individual soul escaping the earth and going to heaven, as well as allowing earthly rulers to reign in time while Christ reigned in eternity, causing the church to be passive in regards to reforming culture, challenging political rulers and settling merely for performing acts of charity as its primary act of participation in this world.