Investigating Christian Truth-Claims

This program is being presented in an effort to investigate all Christian truth-claims by comparing them with a contextual understanding of the Bible and its original intent. We are not interested in supporting or promoting any tradition, person, practice, culture or denomination that stands contrary to this reasonable and contextual approach to scripture. Nothing is so sacred that it is exempt from scrutiny. Nothing so popular and accepted that it won’t be discarded if found wanting and unreasonable. This is Heart of the Matter… where we make every effort to worship God in Spirit and Truth.

Episode Overview

Show 8 434 The Bible Part VI
February 24th 2015
Live from Salt Lake City, Utah
This is Heart of the Matter
Where we do all we can to try and worship God in Spirit and in Truth.

I’m your host, Shawn McCraney. Got a lot to present for your consideration tonight so let’s get to it.

Engaging with Pastor Jason Wallace

I called Pastor Jason Wallace last week and asked him a simple question – Are we done? (meaning, “Are we done with all this between us?”). To my surprise he said that he was going to do a follow-up on the shows where he aired our time together (which I admitted was reasonable) and then added, “then I don’t see any reason to continue.” I couldn’t help but say, “Praise God” and felt our time together was not in vain… that just maybe I could accept Jason as a brother and he might see me as the same – even though we do not agree with one another. I was really pleased.

I was then informed that last week my brother announced on his program that he in fact going to continue to pursue me on future shows – this time with another Orthodox pastor. I hope this was incorrect but in the face of it I can say this – and I mean it: I accept Jason as a brother and think he sincerely believes he is going God’s will. And I will refrain from ever criticizing Jason or any other brother directly (or in public) but will ardently strive to see them as meaning well… and let God be their judge for the good and evil they may do. I believe in order for subjective Christianity to be seen as viable it has to be lived. And it has to start somewhere. So there it is.

Reflections from the Word

How about a moment from the Word?

1 Corinthians 12:13-25

For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. 14 For the body is not one member, but many. 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? 18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. 19 And if they were all one member, where were the body? 20 But now are they many members, yet but one body. 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: 23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. 24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honor to that part which lacked: 25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

Paul added in Colossians 1:18, speaking of Jesus: “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

Unity in the Body of Christ

The imagery is a wonderful picture of the unity and organization of the Body of Christ – with Jesus serving as the head and all believers playing their role and their part. Now we can take this message physically and apply it…

Spiritual Leadership in the Body of Christ

It to the local congregations today – that works – but I think there are factors present in the illustration that make the illustration far more applicable spiritually.

For instance, with Christ being the head – the brains of the operation as it were – and with Christ having ascended, I think it is safe to conclude that Christ leads spiritually. Right? And then with believers all over the world belonging in the body, we know that the unity we have is spiritual and not physical – because we can only integrate physically and accept with those who are within our present geography in that way – where spiritually we can belong to a body of believers scattered throughout the Universe if need be. Finally, we know that our membership in the Body as Christians is spiritual, and we see and do all things by the spirit.

Paul said in 1st Corinthians 2:15, "But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." Even the blessings we receive as members of the body are primarily spiritual, as Paul wrote:

Ephesian 1:3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ."

Peter made the principle really clear when he wrote, speaking of believers:

1st Peter 2:5 "Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."

The Essence of the Spiritual Body

Here’s the point I want you to consider. It’s conjecture but makes sense to me in the illustration. The Body is governed by Christ spiritually, thrives on the things of the SPIRIT (not carnal matters) – not in brick, not in flesh, not in money – but whatever and whomever is of the Spirit. Scripture is direct in telling us what leads and directs this body – Christ – who again, is physically absent but spiritually present. Then we all know that true believers play a role in the spirit body depending on how God has crafted and created them. All are viable, needed, and acceptable.

Considering the Life Blood of Christ's Body

But to what or whom would we liken the body's blood? Have you ever considered this? Scripture says that “the life is in the blood,” right? If Christ is the head and we are the members, what is the life blood in the Body of Christ? I think we can suggest that whatever it is, like human blood, the blood in the Body of Christ must serve to: Take oxygen, sugar (energy), and hormones (growth and development) to the spiritual members of the Body. It must serve to carry waste out and away from members and cells of the Body (our carnal minds). It must defend us from infection, regulate the temperature of the Body, and serve to engorge areas in the body due to arousal, injury, or infection (arming us spiritually and exciting us to new thought).

I make this point to show that none of the body is physical in the application. It is ALL spiritually relatable and applied. What is the blood? It’s what gives the body life, what serves the Body, and I would therefore liken the platelets to the Word of God and the actual plasma, and red and white cells, to the Holy Spirit. In other words, man and men don’t have ANY role in directing or keeping the body alive (in any way) other than to do what they were created to do – teach, serve, whatever. But Christ is our head and the Spirit is the life – what more do we need? Certainly NOT the dictates and disciplines of Man. With Christ as the head and The Spirit as the Blood, the spiritual essence of Christianity becomes obvious.

And the part of us that does the will of Christ and the Spirit is also spiritual. Friends – the physical “church playing” (and the roles men continue to insert themselves into) are like laws written in stone compared to laws written on our hearts by the Spirit. It is time for believers to embrace and approach this beautiful faith from this view and to liquidate and deconstruct as much of the physical as possible.

And with that let’s have a word of prayer.

(RUN INTRO HERE PLEASE)

PRAYER PRAYER PRAYER PRAYER

Alright, let’s go back to the board. Last week we left off with saying that the entire whiteboard represents the entire history of Christianity. Then we used a black dot about the size of a dime to represent the Old Testament biblical narrative, the birth

Understanding the Stances on Authority in Christianity

of Christ, his ministry, the apostles work, and everything up to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Got all that right?

So let’s start to look at some facts.

There are two stances taken in the world today on how things must be done and how things must be governed in the Christian church (or body). In the face of the two I would like to strongly and boldly suggest that there needs to be three.

Direct Line of Apostolic Authority

The first stance claims a direct line of apostolic authority: In this, we have the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the LDS Church who claims that authority to act in God’s name was restored through Joseph Smith. Got that? If any of these claims are true, the Protestant Christianity has NO right to exist. Period. Again, if either the Roman Catholics or the Eastern Greek Orthodox (or the LDS claims at the restoration are legit) the rest of the Protestant community has to shut the heck up and fall in line. Now I have personal issues with the claims of these three being legitimate and the list is LONG but this is their stance and quite frankly I think we have to admit that when it comes to proof and reason there is far more MERIT to their claims in terms of legitimacy than what the Protestants use to support their claims. We’ll get more into this in a minute.

The Protestant Stance

The second stance is the Protestant stance. Now the history is vast and multifaceted and it would take the entire year to really flesh out the players and chronology. So I’m not gonna do that – but you certainly can. But let’s sort of try and just summarize how this western rebellion, known as the Reformation, came into being. Remember, remember – today, the churches demand conformity and accountability of their congregates. Challenge the pastor and his teachings, refuse to accept something as true as they see it and you may find yourself invited to leave or even kicked out of a specific church. But remember this was the very attitude the founders of the Protestant Reformation had when they challenged the status Roman Catholic quo.

Okay, it would be really naïve to believe that Martin Luther, in the face of Christian almost 1500 years of religious history, was the first to challenge the Roman Catholic empire. There is an entire period of history (often disputed by the Catholics) that says revolutions occurred prior to Luther and it includes the rebellion of other men who proceeded Luther like Peter Waldo, Wycliffe and Jan Hus. But to simplify (once again) things really got legs with an Augustinian Monk named Martin Luther challenged the authority when he nailed what was called his 95 thesis to a church door at Wittenberg. Among other things, Luther criticized the Catholic practice of selling what were called “indulgences.” He also said that “the Pope had no authoritai over purgatory” and that the Catholic doctrine of the “merits of the saints” had no biblical foundation. In time these first criticisms widened to cover many of the doctrines and devotional practices the Catholics considered acceptable. Soon Luther was joined by the likes of guys like Zwingly and Calvin and other early Protestant Reformers and the whole “reformation” sort of lasted about 131 years (from 1517 until 1648) and included some real devistation and death (culminated in what is known as the 30 years war).

Potential Solutions and Reflections

I would suggest none of this ought to have ever happened (either from the Catholic side or the Protestant) and all of it could have been entirely avoided if the third approach to Christianity had been embraced post 70 AD. But more on this later.

Remember – remember, that the Protestant Reformation was the result of regular men and women who said: “What the church is presently doing in the name of God and Christ needs to be challenged;” that Those who did the challenging were believers – that they were not bad believers nor were their intentions evil – including Calvin. It seems all of them had intentions that were aimed at honoring God and making things better not worse. Also remember that almost one thousand five years of tacit acceptance passed before such a reformation took hold of the hearts of people and during much of that time some very unattractive acts and teachings about God were generally accepted by the masses. From the reformation it has only been 360 years until today. Are we to believe that the reformers had EVERYTHING right and nothing ought to be challenged that they set in motion?

Protestant Beliefs and Practices

Revisiting and challenging things today any worse than their challenging things then? I don’t think so.

Isn’t it strange that religious men and women today hail Luther and Calvin and others are heroes of the faith but the church in their day railed on them as enemies of God, anti-law, and needing to be accountable?

Core Tenets from the Protestant Reformation

Let me lay out what Protestantism stands for (particularly in opposition to those who take this first stance).

First, most Protestant churches emphasize “The universal priesthood of all believers.” Which implies the duty, even the right of the Christian laity not only to read the Bible on their own but to also take part in the government and all the public affairs of the Church. This position is supposed to be opposed to the hierarchical system which puts the essence and authority of the Church in an exclusive priesthood, and makes ordained priests the necessary mediators between God and the people. For me, and in most cases of Protestant churches today, I find this claim pretty comical.

First of all, to claim the priesthood is held by all believers but to exclude women in any way is plainly offensive. Secondly, there still remains within the ranks of Protestant faiths the idea that the Pastor or Reverend or Preacher has some sort of authority to do certain things that others don’t. The degree that this is thought depends on the denomination but a large number of protestant denominations – while claiming to reject the Catholic claims to a priestly authority and to embrace “a priesthood of all believers” still think certain men are more qualified than others to prepare communion, pray, collect offerings and the like. If there is a priesthood of all believers let there be a priesthood of all believers – which means among believers there is absolutely NO hierarchy or order or special privileges. Especially between males and females.

The Five Solas

A few other distinctive stances the Protestant Reformers took against the Catholic church included what were later named the “Solae” and there were five of them (eventually). I say eventually because there were first three and then I think they grew to five. Sola means alone in Latin. Before I get back to the board let me quickly detail four of the Solae (known as the Solae today) and then begin to rip one of them apart – and it is the main one upon which the other four originate.

The first Sola is “Scripture alone.” It is from this idea that Protestants establish four other positions on the Bible and these include that “its teaching” is needed for salvation (what they call necessity); that all the doctrine necessary for salvation comes from the Bible alone (what they call sufficiency); that everything taught in the Bible is correct (what they call inerrancy); and that, by the Holy Spirit overcoming sin, believers may read and understand truth from the Bible itself, though understanding is difficult, so the means used to guide individual believers to the true teaching is often mutual discussion within the church (this they call clarity).

Sola Scriptura, in my opinion, is the altogether convenient belief that the Bible has always been the supreme source of authority for what is also thought to be a physical church. The early churches of the Reformation believed in a critical, yet serious, reading of scripture and holding the Bible as a source of authority higher than that of “church tradition.” The Protestant Reformers rejected some of the traditions of the Western Church because they did not find justification for them in the Bible.

Criticism of Sola Scriptura

This is the one Sola I want to explore – actually criticize – not because I want to in any way devalue the import and value of the Bible in an individual believer’s life. Not at all. But because I want to try and further strip it from the hands of men and women who think they have the right to interpret it on behalf of the individual.

I’ll explain the multiplicity of problems with the Protestant use and interpretation of this particular Sola over the next few weeks. But let me wrap up the other Solas before we go to the phones:

After Sola Scriptura there’s (Justification by) Faith Alone or Sola Fide. It states that faith in Christ is sufficient alone for eternal salvation. Though argued from scripture (and is therefore a consequence of sola scriptura) sola fide this probably the guiding principle of the work of Luther and the later reformers. Because sola scriptura placed the Bible as the only source of teaching (and not

The Protestant Reformation and the Solas

The traditions of men) sola fide epitomized the main thrust of the teaching the reformers felt was lost in Roman Catholicism. It was this stance – sola fide – that I believe needs to be taken up a notch – and to remove the brick and mortar and men from the mix.

Solus Christus: Christ alone. Again, while I wholeheartedly agree with this sola I have to laugh at it in the face of today’s Evangelical approaches. See, early Protestant Reformers had some hearty disdain for the Catholic Pope as the representative head of the Church on earth which certainly flies in the face of the biblical teaching that Christ is the only mediator between God and man. Yet somehow men have crept back in and put themselves and their insights on doctrine and authority back in the mix allowing themselves to loom over the lives of individual believers.

Grace and Glory to God Alone

Sola Gratia: Grace alone. Remember it was the Protestant revold AGAINST the Roman Catholic way of doing things and it was at least perceived that Catholics were making works AND God’s grace the recipe for salvation. The reformers posited that salvation is a gift of God (i.e., God's act of free grace), dispensed by the Holy Spirit and possible by the redemptive work of Jesus Christ alone.

The final Sola is known as Soli Deo Gloria: Glory to God alone. This stance says that all glory is due to God alone since salvation is accomplished solely through his will and action — not our own – and certainly not the church, its authority, its rituals, or its demands.

Current State of the Solas

Ironically, in the face of the way many churches operate today, all of these Sola’s have effectively been marginalized to some extent or another, and men (with their theologies and standards and Bible bludgeoning) have moved more toward the stance of the Catholics or Mormons or Greek Orthodox than away from them OR (OR OR OR) have become utterly licentious and worldly so as to toss all the goodness of the Solas to the wind and replace them with elements of the world, not Christ.

So I want to take the first Sola – Sola Scripture – and using the white board, explain why this foundational Protestant claim does NOT hold water. And we’ll do this next week.

Let’s open up the phone lines

(801)

And while the operators are clearing your calls, take a look at this:

SPOT

(draw BLACK DOT)

ON BOARD:

Roman Catholic / Eastern Orthodox / LDS

We get a lot of great emails from you guys. And I mean they come in from all over the world. Thank you. One was so touching to me personally because from the writer I could hear the voice of a fellow truth seeker.

It comes from Brisbane, Australia.

FROM FUTI

Hi Shawn,

GOD BLESS YOU BROTHER!

My name is Futi from Brisbane. I've spent countless hours listening to your teachings and they make sense. I like that you are real and aren't like many televangelists out there in TV land. I appreciate that your show is raw and it gets directly to the heart of a matter!

I attend a baptist church, in this church I was released from religious chains that I was indoctrinated in from a young age attending a Samoan congregational Presbyterian church. My wife & I enjoy the fellowship we share with members from our church. However, I'm really struggling to listen to the sermons & teachings that are spoken & taught every week. They sound exactly like what you said once .. 'Keeping the messages hip and trendy to fill seats because it generates money'. I no longer pay tithing which was a big decision for me. The pastor has just started a series on God and I disagree with almost all of it (I'm currently studying your series on God which has opened my eyes). Things like the trinity & eternal sonship just don't make sense to me like it used to. I believe in 1 God.. Not a trinity. There have been times when the tithing message was longer than the sermon lol.

My question is, do you think I should continue to attend my baptist church and just ignore the things that are taught, just so my wife and I can continue to have our fellowship connections? I've looked around my area for non-denomination churches and found 1. It teaches tithing 🙁 I don't want to attend any church that teaches 'saved by Grace .. but'

Sorry for the long email. Keep up the great work. Continue to investigate and study the 'greater

Shining the Light on All Topics

God Bless you. From your friend and fellow truth seeker from Brisbane, Australia.

Eternal Punishment Discussion

Challenge for all who have questions about end times/eternal punishment.

Viewing Recommendation

WATCH DE SHOWS!