Heart of the Matter: Subjective Christianity

Live from Salt Lake City, Utah, this is Heart of the MatterTGNN’s original show where Shawn McCraney deconstructed religion and developed fulfilled theology., where we do all we can to try and worship God in Spirit and in Truth. I’m your host, Shawn McCraneyFounder of TGNN and developer of the fulfilled perspective—calling people to faith outside of religion..

Updates and Book Recommendations

Show 30 456 Sola Scriptura, July 28th 2015. Some of you who ordered books in our Christmas Special and were promised a first edition of our forthcoming book bear with me. I am working on what I have titled, The C.A.M.P.U.S. Series and ought to be finished with the second book of the series shortly. Those of you who were promised a copy will receive it in the next few months.

Speaking of books, I would highly recommend this one (hold up “If/Then”). I strongly recommend it to anyone who is sick to deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God. of the American Evangelical Community taking Jesus and His Good News and tying it to political issues. I wish we could get this book into the hands of every post High School believer in the nation. Go to www.hotm.tv and click on the store.

Exploring Subjective Christianity

And with that, how about a moment from The Word?

Last week I sort of ran through Romans and pulled the passages that endorsed what I’ve been calling, Subjective ChristianityA direct, personal relationship with God—free from institutional authority, guided by personal relationship, faith and agape love.. Some of my critics have tried to say that this approach to faith in Christ can also be called McCraney-ism but that is really incorrect because Subjective Christianity has absolutely NOTHING to do with my personal views of scripture or doctrine.

Definition and Acceptance

Maybe we could define Subjective Christianity as:

Subjective Christianity: “An approach to faith in Jesus Christ that refuses to divide over doctrine or dogma by accepting all professions of faith and allowing all people the right to openly pursue Him according to the leading of the Holy Spirit in their lives.”

So where I personally reject eternal punishment, and futurismThe belief that end-times prophecies are still future—TGNN teaches they were fulfilled in 70 A.D. More, and sola scriptura, and Trinity, and Calvinism, as a Subjective Christian, I fully embrace others as my brothers and sisters in Christ who claim Him in addition to being “Trinitarian Calvinists that push Sola Scriptura, the eminent Second ComingChrist’s return, fulfilled in 70 A.D., ending the old covenant—not the world. of Jesus Christ, and eternal punishment of hell fire.” Does that make sense? Do you at least understand?

Support from 1st Corinthians

So let me hit on the passages from 1st Corinthians that support Subjective Christianity:

1st Corinthians 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

1st Corinthians 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

What was the sign of Milk-drinkers in the church? Paul said

1st Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. 3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

1st Corinthians 3:11 For no one can lay any other foundation than that which has been laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1st Corinthians 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; 22 Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours.

How about 1st Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of…

Paul's Teachings on Love and Wisdom

The hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God. Paul touched on the fact that everyone tends to think they are instructors in the things of Christ, saying

1st Corinthians 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

For you doctrinalists out there Paul plainly said:

1st Corinthians 4:20 For the kingdom of GodGod’s spiritual reign—fulfilled and present, not political or future. is not in word, but in power.

1st Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

1st Corinthians 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. (Suggesting strongly that love ought to reign between us)

1st Corinthians 8:2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. 3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

Paul's Example of Servitude

LISTEN TO THIS WISDOM FROM PAUL, YOU DOCTRINALISTS…

1st Corinthians 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. 20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; 21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. 22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. 23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

The Importance of Love

Then there’s chapter 13 – how do you get around it?

1st Corinthians 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

And what about verse 7

Love… beareth all things (as Christians today we bear very little), Love believeth all things (we don’t believe anything unless it is agreed upon and vetted), hopeth all things (we hope for the destruction of our enemies – This one is really funny for me. I say in the least that I hope, at least that hell will give up its booty and people freak), endureth all things (endures ALL things folks – loss of rights, etc???).

How about…

1st Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Peace. Peace. PEACE!

What is the STRENGTH of SINMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace.?

1st Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

What we demand. The rules. The written musts. Doctrine. Dogma. The strength of SIN lies in these things.

Think on this stuff. Next week 2nd Corinthians.

The spirit giveth life folks – the letter KILLETH.

And with that, how about a word of Prayer?

PRAYER PRAYERPRAYERPRAYER

PRAYER PRAYERPRAYERPRAYER

The Idea of Sola Scriptura

The idea of Sola Scriptura is in the title – scripture alone.

Our view is that scripture alone leads to division a plenty – as evidenced by the 30000 plus Christian denominations throughout the world.

As a quick review, let me put it to you this way:

• When Jesus sent the apostles out He did not tell them to write but to “preach” the Word.
• Many years later these men were led to write – gospels and letters to believers.
• These written epistles were sent to specific believers in specific areas over a wide geographical span.
• In an age where paper/velum/papyrus was costly and everything had to be hand-copied transmission was present but time consuming.
• These apostolic communications helped lead the early post-apostolic church but were by no means unified or agreed upon nor were they ubiquitously shared or copied. In other words not every believer had all the copies and what was valid was not completely established for hundreds of years.
• Additionally there were plenty of pseudo accounts that were considered apostolic by believers. To have them in the mix would have muddied doctrinal waters.

The Limits of Sola Scriptura

Blessing to believers and were shared and copied – so much so that many of them were translated into numerous languages. Unfortunately, by 400 AD all the translations were boiled down to one accepted language by the “Church” – Latin and for 1000 years this Bible was the only official translation but was also unavailable to the majority of believers due to cost and an inability to read Latin (or to read at all.) It wasn’t until Wycliffe, Erasmus, the printing press, Luther, and Tyndale that the common believer was supplied with a Bible.

My point – to claim Sola Scriptura for the Body of Christ in the mid 1500’s is like an automotive group standing up today and saying: “The ONLY viable source of travel today is the automobile” – refusing to accept that prior to Ford people rode horses and carriages and bicycles and today ride trains, plains, skateboards etc. My stance against Sola Scriptura is NOT against the scripture – ever – it’s against Man's use, interpretation, and boxed-up views of the scripture, an approach that had not led to unity but to division, dogma and death.

Erasmus and the Reformation

Last week we summarized the amazing work of Erasmus who showed how utterly messed up the Latin Vulgate was by the time he and his contemporaries got ahold of it. How could ANYONE claim Sola Scriptura was the way God worked when for a THOUSAND YEARS most of what was known as scripture was either unavailable, out of reach due to expense, or corrupted when it was read?

We also talked about how Erasmus’s views (as a preeminent scholar of his day) on things like church, traditions, and “free will” were utterly counter to Luther, the Father of the Reformation. I mean we had two great men ardently maintaining two very opposing views of Scripture! Did Sola Scriptura solve their differences?

Did Sola Scriptura solve the differences between Calvin and Michael Servetus, who too, was a great mind who differed from the great mind of Calvin! Sola Scriptura has NEVER solved any of these nascent or long-standing divisions BECAUSE IT CAN’T! This is MY over-abiding point!

Human beings have differing views! So sola Scriptura appeals to a methodology that is absolutely untenable. It “sounds” viable and like it would work because the concept presents us with what we think is written authority but even in the midst of two men – one a genius in original languages and the other a devout believer the Scripture – sola scriptura divided them!

The Role of Wycliffe and the Spread of the Bible

And though I made mention of the Man Wycliffe a number of weeks back and his translation of the Bible from the Vulgate back in the 1300’s I think his role is important in seeing how God primed the pump for the Bible to get into the hands of the masses. Remember this point – HOW GOD GOT THE BIBLE INTO THE HANDS OF THE MASSES.

The Reformation was not about KEEPING the Bible in the control of religious leaders. They HAD control of it. The reformation was about the scripture getting into the hands of the MASSES. This fact in and of itself should serve to show that pastoral input and denominational demands have a very, very limited role in Christianity. The MASSES have the Word – let them interpret it by the Spirit they have been given.

You see, this was the Catholic Churches fear – that the masses would gain access to “the manual” and they feared that the need for the Church and its “authoritai” would be lost. When it came to those who seek God in Spirit and in Truth these fears were realized – seekers find and quickly realize that institutional religion is a game.

Unfortunately, what the Catholic Church didn’t realize is that most human beings long to be led around by the nose – especially in matters relating to God – “to be told what to think, what to say, and what to pay” (is the order of their day) and so institutional religion continues to thrive – just like it was thriving in Jesus day.

But again, those who LONG to WORSHIP GOD in SPIRIT AND IN TRUTH started finding God outside the walls of religion. These are the sorts institutional religion has tried to snuff out because of their need for control, and power, and money.

Anyway, getting back to Wycliffe. He is known as the Morning star of the Reformation – a precursor to Erasmus and Luther and Tyndale and the rest. He was born in 1331 and rose to the heights of being a University Professor at Oxford.

John Wycliffe's Influence and Legacy

As such he was a man of influence – tremendous influence. And prior to the Catholic Church putting him to death he was a brave dissident of the Roman Catholic Church and its ways.

I’m cutting through a lot of information about the man but a biographer on Wycliffe said that he was dead set on three main points in reaction to Roman Catholicism –

1. Wycliffe said that an INDIVIDUAL’S interpretation of the Bible was the best guide to a moral life rather than the Church providing things like their Sacraments to give salvation. This is all that I am suggesting relative to the Bible – that we, as individuals, can, will and have interpreted the Bible differently from each other and from our pastors – and that this is okay. God is working with all of us. So we abide in love and let ALL the doctrinal divisions die.

2. Secondly, Wycliffe insisted that an individual’s life in God was of more value than official office – in other words, a devout individual was morally superior to a wicked ordained cleric. In this we can see that Wycliffe challenged the privileged status of the clergy, which was central to their power in England and the world. Again, I am promoting the same thing – the church – it’s leaders and popes and priests and Reverends and pastors – have absolutely no better insight on the Word and how to think about it than the woman in her tenement apartment down on Third and Main. Pastors are called to teach the word – so let them teach. But all the rest? It’s just them playing church (in my estimation). Cut out the institutions, the money, the burdens, the buildings, the demands and put the responsibility back in the hands of the individual to be Christian – and we will see genuine Christianity flower.

Translation of the Bible

3. The third area Wycliffe – all the way back in the 1300’s for goodness sakes – attacked was he thought that the Bible ought to have been translated into the common language of the people. Committed to this the man completed his own translation of the Bible (taken directly from the corrupted Vulgate) in 1382 and into what is called “vernacular English.” Not easy to read and not perfect due to its source – the Vulgate – but it was an utterly rebellious act. And it helped pave the way of the Reformation a hundred plus years later.

Additionally Wycliffe believed that the church had NO business getting into the temporal affairs of people. Naturally those who attacked him for his opinions were the religious leaders – but he kept on. Theologically, Wycliffe pressed for the "invisible church of the elect" rather than in the "visible" Catholic Church. Amen, right? Needless to say the heat was turned up on Wycliffe – especially by “his brethren” in the church. The sharper the strife became, the more Wycliffe had recourse to his translation of Scripture as the basis of all Christian doctrinal opinion, and expressly tried to prove this to become the norm. It would take too long to articulate Wycliffe’s stance against monasticism and the church's involvement with Government and indulgences but he was against it all.

Wycliffe's Legacy

In the end his aim was to do away with the existing hierarchy and replace it with the "poor priests" who lived in poverty, were bound by no vows, had received no formal consecration, and who preached the Gospel to the people. Did you hear that? All the way back in the 1300’s the precursor to the Reformation was preaching and pleading for a deconstruction, a Subjective Christianity, and the end to institutional church playing. His popularity grew to the point where it culminated in what is known as the Peasants' Revolt of 1381 which Wycliffe stood against but was blamed for none the less. While he was saying Mass in the parish church on Holy Innocents' Day, 28 December 1384, he suffered a stroke, and died by year's end. An Anti-Wycliffe Statute of 1401 extended great persecution against Wycliffe's remaining followers. A paper called “the Constitutions of Oxford" in 1408 reclaimed all authority in all ecclesiastical matters, and specifically named John Wycliffe as the enemy. It banned some of his writings and made the translation of Scripture into any other language by “unlicensed laity” as a crime punishable by “charges of heresy.” The Council of Constance declared Wycliffe a heretic on 4 May 1415, and banned all of his writings entirely. The Council decreed Wycliffe's works should be burned and his remains exhumed, burned and tossed into the river.

The Foundation of Sola Scriptura

Of all the reformers who preceded Martin Luther, Wycliffe put most emphasis on Scripture IN THE HANDS OF THE INDIVUAL: "Even though there were a hundred popes and though every mendicant monk were a cardinal, they would be entitled to confidence only insofar as they accorded with the Bible."

From this and his mindset I see the “idea” behind Sola Scriptura. But nearly 150 years later Luther would pick up on it but unfortunately, like Erasmus pointed out, Luther believed that His interpretations of the Bible were what needed to be embraced – and once AGAIN – AGAIN – men and the churches that assumed their names allowed themselves to slip into playing a role of authority – whether it be the authority to govern others, make demands of others, or interpret scripture for others, it was ALL the same – more religion.

Now, let me wrap our topic of Sola Scriptura with an addendum – a historical addendum of which I have some knowledge – not much mind you, but some. In 1522 Luther produced, from Erasmus’s work, the German New Testament. In response Erasmus, in 1524 wrote, “Freedom of the Will” to suggest an affront to Luther’s interpretation of scripture. In response Luther, a year later, wrote, “On the Bondage of the Will.” Do you see in retrospect where we are headed?

What If a Different Path Was Taken?

WHAT IF . . . WHAT IF Luther and Erasmus and Calvin and all the rest – all the rest, stepped back and said – “Hey, let’s let our utter faith in Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit do the managing of people and let’s let LOVE truly abide between us?”

I mean what IF these leaders of the Reformation had taken up His cross, humbly preached Jesus as the author and finisher of the faith, and let every believer see things as they were led – insisting on love abiding over all, all, all, all divisions. Isn’t the Holy Spirit capable of managing people? The pastors preach to the best of their abilities but admit that many things are not completely known or understood and patiently accept people views letting God work out the wrinkles?

The Reality of Sola Scriptura

Let’s look instead at some highlights of what happened in the face of what these men labeled Sola Scriptura:

In . . .

Next week we will examine the beginnings of what is called the Restorationist Movement which in the end, includes one family that thought the whole church system of infighting had to be restored to its originally established state. That family was named Smith.

Let’s open up the phone lines: (801)

SPOT HERE PLEASE

EMAILS

From: Sandra Estrella

Subject: Just a few words…

Message Body: Hi Shawn, Just watched your "Sola Scriptura part 2". Great lesson and you continue to bring it together in ways that make the most sence to me. I always want to study everything I can find, but I always come back to you and when I hear what you have to say, it just becomes so clear. I always pray for discernment and ask for the Spirit to guide me, so I guess you are doing something right. Thanks so much for your efforts. Also, around the holidays last year, I purchased a bundle of books from you and was told another book would be coming out and I would get a copy of that. Don't remember what the title was exactly and have not heard you talk about it again, but could someone check on it and let me know if I will be getting one. By the way, I loved the books I got and they have helped me and my husband a great deal. We even were able to get some friends to order your book, "Born Again Mormon", which they are reading as we speak. Wish I lived closer so we could attend your meetings, but we watch you all the time. Keep up the wonderful way you teach, and thank you for helping me to see that the Gospel really is about love and being open to what the Spirit wants us to know. Best wishes for continued success! Sandie

From: Austin Glover

Subject: "Trinity"

Message Body: Hey Shawn, I want to thank you for all you do, I first discovered your show on YouTube when I was 15 after praying for truth, and your show in turn led me out of Mormonism. You've always been a great friend and mentor to me in Christ.

My question is about your view of the Trinity. I had a lot a

Understanding the Trinity

problems with it. Like Which ones my father? When Isaiah 9:6 clearly says the Jesus is the everlasting Father. I also wondered Who do I pray too? and I often wondered which one was my favorite or which one I would focus on, so I agree with your view. But I'm confused by it also, about things like Matt. 3:16-17 or one argument for the trinity I hear tossed around is that in the Old Testament is that The Father was known as YHWH and the Son was called "The Angel of the Lord" and the Spirit was called "The spirit of the Lord." So I just wondered if you could explain some of these things in the Bible that make it seem as if God is indeed three in one.

Seeking Clarification

Here are some videos I saw that originally made me believe in the Trinity. If you can't take the time to look at these that's fine, this is just where I'm getting my information from:

Sorry if this is a bit drawn out, I don't mean to take up to much of your time, but I was just wondering if you could explain some of this and show me some places, both in the Word and outside of it where I can further search for the truth. Every website and article I've seen always points to the Trinity and I see now that you have a different perspective and like I said, all I want is to best know who I'm bending my knee too.

In Conclusion

Thanks for your time my brother,

Austin.