“SOLA SCRIPTURA” CAN CAUSE OUR BECOMING CONDEMNED AS WELL AS OUR BECOMING COMPLIMENTED

“SOLA SCRIPTURA” CAN CAUSE OUR BECOMING CONDEMNED AS WELL AS OUR BECOMING COMPLIMENTED

This essay is not addressed to you as an individual, but to the corporate form of Christianity in which you may find yourself: “Protestant,” Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Evangelical, Anabaptist, Fundamentalist, Pentecostal, Charismatic, “non-denominational,” house-church, or other. We are the inheritors of two thousand years of evolutionary development from that original “chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people,” the “church” (“ekklesia”) that Jesus, His Pentecostal Spirit, and His holy apostles brought into being to be His Kingdom of God upon this earth (1 Peter 2:9). Even in such church groups that are corporately full of compromise and worldliness (like the one I was raised in), individual members may rise to greater loyalty and godliness than they would have done had they merely been content to follow the functional “norm” of that group. For example, no matter how much you, as a Protestant, may find to disagree with among Roman Catholicism, you cannot deny the heroic self-sacrificing love and compassion in a man like Maximilian Kolbe, a Polish Franciscan friar, priest, and martyr renowned for his heroic self-sacrifice at Auschwitz, where he volunteered to die in place of a man who had been arbitrarily selected to be exterminated. To “write him off” would be as foolish as if a Roman Catholic did the same to my personal spiritual hero, Corrie ten Boom (“The Hiding Place” / “Tramp for the Lord”).

Protestant groups – at least in their traditional orthodox versions – are rather united in believing and teaching rather vigorously that the Church must live and teach only what is authorized by His inspired apostolic writings of the New Testament. This is indeed a most wonderful principle, one which those apostolically founded earliest churches would seem to have agreed with heartily, based upon the way that they justified their theology and way of life. That “sola scriptura” (“Scripture alone”) principle is based upon the assumption that the Son of God who INVENTED words and the ability to think and speak with them was able to inspire the writing of His sacred literature in a way that a true disciple of Jesus who had personally experienced receiving God’s Spirit (as described within the Book of Acts) would be capable of understanding those words (even if sometimes needing the help of a Spiritually gifted teacher). Paul, for example, wrote his Philippian letter “To all the SAINTS in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, WITH the bishops and deacons.” So, if he was writing primarily to the “saints,” does it not seem obvious to you that He expected ALL that he wrote to them should be capable of being understood by them; they might need a teacher to explain it, but once it was explained it would be as “obviously true” as when something in your grammar exercise was explained to you by your language teacher, about which were nouns, pronouns, adjectives and adverbs! God’s inspired writings were not like the very cryptic Sibylline Oracles that men paid well to find out whether they would succeed in business or battle, oracles that do not provide a simple “yes” or “no” to the question, but were clothed in more than enough ambiguity to enable them never to be clearly wrong or to even say ANYTHING specific!

But Biblical principles, such as “sola scriptura,” are only as valuable and as valid as the details that have been attached to them by the One who created them as principles. For example, Jesus provided a principle when He said, “Love one another as I have loved you” (John 15:12). But HIS version of “love” included such painfully embarrassing and costly details as, “… love your ENEMIES, do good, and lend, hoping for NOTHING in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For He is kind to the unthankful and evil” (Luke 6:35). Well, how well are you fulfilling that “love one another” principle if you make sure to detach it from that and even more costly detailed passages? Jesus and His apostles (and the earliest post-apostolic brethren) modeled for us how that “love” command was to be fulfilled, and they were not passive push-overs!

Jesus, whose word will judge us eternally, made it very clear over and over again (e.g., Matthew 7:21f; Luke 6:46ff; John 14:15) that whether we have lived out HIS version of those lofty principles will be determined by whether we have lived out the costly details that He had attached to those principles! It is not MY definition of “love” that satisfies Him, but His DETAILED descriptions and modeling that defines what “love” means to Him! I have found this to be rarely taught in our many churches.

I have listened to lectures of scientists and mathematicians. When THEY talk, you pay close attention to their very words. If Albert Einstein wrote down on the board, “X=A+B” you would be very careful not to understand it as “X=A-B” because you know that they are exceedingly careful about what they communicate. Now, virtually all who call themselves Christian teach that Jesus is the eternally divine Son of God, and accept that it was He who invented all the “rules” that reign supreme over the stars and planets, and over all things that can live, move, and reproduce – making Him the greatest scientists of all times! And yet virtually ALL Christian traditions in existence today, force Him to be understood as if He at least half of what He said was communicating in the way that poets or diplomats talk, using “poetic hyperbole” or the veiled language of diplomats to communicate something other than what their words actually mean. Jesus did, now and then, compare his concern for His people to a hen gathering her chicks under her wings, or likening Himself to a “narrow gate.” But good communicators who use metaphors (such as, “I am the door of the sheep”) chose ones that their audience will KNOW are metaphors. Those metaphors that Jesus chose to use were understandable even by children to be metaphorical articles of speech! But our later Christian traditions have attributed all MANNER of His doctrines, commands, and promises to the scrapheap of “metaphor,” as will be demonstrated below.

But Jesus meant ALL of His commands and promises to be understood in the way you would try to understand Einstein, NOT in the way you would read Walt Whitman or Emily Dickenson! When He said what He did about mustard seeds and mountains (Matthew 17:20), He meant EXACTLY what His words clearly and grammatically meant! He wants to pull us and our understanding up to HIS version of “faith,” not allow us to pull Him and HIS “faith” down to ours! We insist upon stretching Jesus rather than ourselves! And we feel free to treat almost any thing He may have said to us as “hyperbole” that we instinctively regard as “unreal” – as will be demonstrated below in this essay.

As someone who has identified as a “born-again” disciple of Jesus since age nineteen, I have been a careful explorer and student of the Bible and the history of many of our forms of Christianity for a bit over six decades. I have concluded that no matter how different our denominations and theological traditions may be from one another, we all have one thing in common: when we examine carefully the brotherhood that is described, taught, experienced, and practiced within the New Testament we are all looking at them from the outside! That literature which described them – warts and all – does NOT accurately describe our existing groups!

The vast majority of our groups are silently regarding what we read in the apostolic writings as if we are reading some ANCIENT history of a long-gone people, being merely programed from childhood that it is “our history”! But when we look carefully at the churches in the succeeding two or so centuries after those apostolic writings, we see much the same difference between us and those earliest centuries of genuine “Kingdom of God” Christianity.

Principles like “sola scriptura” (“Scripture alone”), if taken honestly and consistently, would lead to things that THEY considered to be “normative” Christianity, but which we regard as “back then.” But it is only THEIR version of “normative Christianity” that Jesus would acknowledge as “MY church,” as we will not exemplify:

1. One of THE SIGNS THAT HIS SPIRIT IS WORKING in our midst must necessarily include the works that He Himself did while in our midst:

“And these signs WILL follow those who ‘BELIEVE’: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover” (Mark 16:17-18). Do you think that Jesus did not mean exactly what He said? If you want to challenge Jesus about what He promised there, then you will have to do it when he is searching you out in His judgment of you, but a simple carpenter or fisherman disciple who heard Him say that would know very well what He was promising, because THEIR version of “believing” Him was producing the same thing that HE had promised, as seen in this description if Irenaeus:

“… those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, DO in His name perform miracles, so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some DO certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits FREQUENTLY both believe in Christ and join themselves to the church. Others HAVE foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others STILL heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even HAVE been raised up and remained among us for many years. And what shall I more say? It is not POSSIBLE to name the number of the gifts which the church, (scattered) throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and which she exerts day by day for the benefit of the Gentiles, neither practicing deception upon any, nor taking any reward (Irenaeus, c. 180 A.D., “Against Heresies,” II.xxxii.4, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 409). Was IRENAEUS also engaged in “wishful thinking”?

2. Or think of the normal way that Christians thought of themselves in relation to the NATIONS OF THE WORLD in which they lived, when compared to most of our churches today:

Tertullian, in North Africa, at the end of the second century: “At the same time, how much more fittingly they are called and counted brothers who have been led to the knowledge of God as their common Father, who have drunk in one spirit of holiness, who from the same womb of a common ignorance have agonized into the same light of truth! But on this very account, perhaps, we are regarded as having less claim to be held true brothers, that no tragedy makes a noise about our brotherhood, or that THE FAMILY POSSESSIONS, WHICH GENERALLY DESTROY BROTHERHOOD AMONG YOU, CREATE FRATERNAL BONDS AMONG US. One in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. ALL THINGS ARE COMMON AMONG US BUT OUR WIVES.” (Tertullian, c. 197 A.D., “The Apology,” 39.10; quoted by Max Delespesse, The Church Community: Leaven and Lifestyle (Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1973), p. 64.)

And from Origen, in Egypt, around 250 A.D.: “In the next place, Celsus urges us, ‘to help the king with all our might, and to labor with him in the maintenance of justice, to fight for him; and if he requires it, to fight under him, or lead an army along with him.’ To this our answer is, that we do when occasion requires, give help to kings, and that, so to say, a divine help, putting on the whole armor of God. And this we do in obedience to the injunction of the apostle, ‘I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority;’ and the more one excels in piety, the more effective help does he render to kings, even more than is given by soldiers, who go forth to fight and slay as many of the enemy as they can And as we by our prayers vanquish all demons who stir up war, lead us to the violation of oaths, and who disturb the peace, we in this way are much more helpful to the kings than those who go into the field to fight for them … We DO NOT INDEED FIGHT UNDER HIM, ALTHOUGH HE REQUIRES IT; but we fight on his behalf, forming a special army – an army of piety – by offering our prayers to God. … Celsus also urges us to ‘take office in the government of the country, if that is required for the maintenance of the laws and the support of religions.’ But we recognize in each state the existence of another national organization, founded by the Word of God, and we exhort those who are mighty in word and of blameless life to rule over Churches And it is not for the purpose of escaping public duties that CHRISTIANS DECLINE PUBLIC OFFICES, but that they may reserve themselves for a diviner and more necessary service in the Church of God – for the salvation of men.” (Origen, c. 250 A.D., “Against Celsus,” Ch. 73, 75. The Ante Nicene Fathers, Vol. IV, p. 667-668.).

The typical reason that our “evolved” versions of Christianity justify ourselves for not being able so say the same things as Tertullian and Origen above did, is to claim that they were living under a pagan society that was hostile to them, whereas that condition changed when the friendly emperor Constantine came along. But when you examine in detail what those ancient brethren taught it becomes obvious that their teaching had nothing to do with whether or not the worldly society around them was hostile or friendly: they were just passing on what Jesus and His apostles had taught them as eternal truths! For them, there will NEVER be a version of “this world” with whom we can form some kind of covenant relationship that allows us to modify His clear teachings. There can be “less hostile” and “more hostile” versions of “this world,” but their organizing and driving force will always be under the domain of God’s enemy, Satan. That included Constantine’s empire and the later officially “Christian Europe,” and even any nation like America that claims to have been founded by “Judeo-Christian principles”! To not keep yourself FUNCTIONALLY (as well as theologically) disjoined from their systems is ultimately suicidal – as contemporary mainstream denominations are clearly fulfilling!

The ONLY relation with Jesus that He honors is one in which He is openly declared, trusted and surrendered to in an exclusive and functional relationship as being our sole Creator, Judge, and King – a relationship which yields to His many DETAILED teachings, promises, and commands in as much detail as we are expected to yield to our official U.S. Constitution, civic and traffic laws! We were created to be a unique and separated “chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people.” As He expected of His original and faithful Christian children, we can love our secular neighbors and risk our lives to put out their fires, but never exercise violence on their behalf! Jesus was embarrassingly clear about that – IF we believe that He knew how to speak clearly in a way that would apply for all ages until He returns! But later Christians – of ALL persuasions – have learned all kinds of cleaver and ingenious ways to bring Jesus “up to speed” and convince us about what He “MUST have really meant to say”!

No matter what reasons – or excuses – we may offer to justify why our versions of Christianity are so very much different from such Biblical and ancient descriptions, if we are honest with ourselves, we cannot help but recognize that we simply are not the same separated and Spiritually anointed people that were brought into being by Jesus, by His Pentecostal Spirit, and by His Spirit-anointed Apostles.

3. Another difference: these original and ancient apostolic disciples had been discipled to EXPERIENCE the risen presence of Jesus in HIS VERSION OF THE “LORD’S SUPPER.” Jesus carefully said, “this IS my body… blood,” when He COULD have said “this is LIKE my body … blood” (e.g., “The kingdom of God is LIKE a man who…”). Then, Paul had supplied even more detailed understanding when saying: “The bread that we break, is IT not the communion (“koinonia” – “sharing”) of the body of Christ…”. Paul’s using of that word “koinonia” creates an image of two realities that are “yoked” together: “the bread” and “the body of Christ.” And whatever encounter you are having with the “body” of Christ, you are having with Christ HIMSELF, in all of His resurrection glory and transformation! All of the apostolically founded churches were taught to exercise their “eyes of faith” to know that He is both invisibly and literally present among them in the way that He had promised (John 14:15-23, 6:48ff), but that they opened themselves to also receive all that He was into all that they were: His spirit for their spirit, His soul for their soul, and His risen, glorified and “spiritize” body (1 Corinthians 15:35-45) for their body. They learned to see the deeper reality hidden beneath that bread and wine in the same way that they had learned to see the deeper divinity in the very humanly embodied Jesus! They did not DARE give themselves the liberty, as so many of us do, to imply that Jesus was not communicating very well when He chose to use the word “IS my body” rather than our supposedly more “spiritual” term “symbol of” or “reminder of” His body. THEIR Jesus offered a much more intimate union with them than later “reformed” versions have created in their versions of His Lord’s Supper, in which Jesus is not expected to be invisibly yet literally present with them and to become their food, as He had boldly and steadfastly proclaimed in John 6:30-59. It is clear from the shock of His unbelieving audience there that His Jewish audience understood what He was saying more clearly than such Protestant Christians! But like too many of us “Protestants” they did not LIKE what He was saying so clearly. However, since we, unlike them, do not want to kill the One whom we call “LORD,” we deal with Him by forcing Him here and there to say things that we know He “could not have really meant.” He, whose words could say “let there be light” and bring light into being, did not know how to use His word “is” properly! That was the way I was trained to disregard His words, so I never knew the awe that I now experience in His Eucharistic Presence!

4. They looked at PERSONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL VIOLENCE very differently than we do, FUNCTIONALLY withdrawing from all forms of the violence that is of course necessary among those of this world. An honest and logical version of “sola scriptura” would cause us to know that Jesus, the Author of the ABILITY to use words, spoke very precisely and clearly when He said to the disciples and crowds, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you to NOT resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also” (Matthew 5:38-39). James reinforced His command with, “You have condemned, you have murdered the just; he does NOT resist you” (James 5:6). Because they saw the way that Jesus and His apostles actually modeled that teaching, it never occurred to them to qualify what He said with excuses like, “He only meant to do that if you live in an openly antagonistic society like ancient Rome,” or, “He only meant to apply this on a PERSONAL basis, not when your country is being invaded” (their country, Israel, HAD been brutally invaded!). We talk that way because our versions of “Christianity” are actually an adulterated version of what Jesus brought to earth, where the domain of the satanic “god of this world” has been allowed to be incorporated and mixed together with a truncated version of His “Kingdom of God!” Mainline Christianity finds Christians like the Anabaptists to be “cultlike” (at worst) or “simplistic” (at best) for merely restoring what was the required norm for being a “plain vanilla” Christian originally! But if we do not FUNCTIONALLY separate ourselves from worldly violence in the way that they did then we are “reinterpreters” of Jesus, rather than “followers” of Jesus!

5. They knew that NEW COVENANT “SACRAMENTS” were invented by Jesus Himself, not by some later “Catholic” corrupted church. The Old Covenant is full of sacramental actions to which God had attached His blessings: being circumcised in order to belong to Israel; looking upon that serpent in order to be healed (Numbers 21:6-9); offering various sacrifices before being permitted to be assured of God’s forgiveness; shaving hair when taking a vow (Acts 18:18); and many more. Proponents of “sola scriptural” tend to believe that sacramental actions were done away with by Jesus once we entered into the “grace of God that is given to faith.” That is the way I was raised. I don’t know HOW many times I have heard “Bible believing” preachers proclaim things like, “the MOMENT you have placed your faith in Jesus you are saved.” One must assume that they have read what God’s apostle Peter had to say about HIS version of “baptism”: “For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, so that He might bring you to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, BAPTISM NOW SAVES YOU — NOT the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal of a good conscience to God—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:18-21). Any fisherman, carpenter, or any person who assumes that Peter knew how to convey accurately what He meant to say would clearly assume that HIS definition of that baptismal immersion (Greek “βάπτισμα” / “baptisma” / “immersion”) – is a necessary aspect of entering into God’s covenant of salvation. Why? Because that is what the grammar clearly requires! Granted, as Peter said, the most important part of that immersion in water that “saves” is the verbal and public appeal to God, BUT Peter also says that it is the appeal that occurs during that watery immersion, not during some “altar call.”

So, if you really do love God AND God’s Word, and if you really do EXPERIENTIALLY know the “fear of the Lord” then you will heartily embrace what God’s own apostle has clearly said to you, no? But what do you conclude about those who refuse to embrace what Peter said? – You will turn out to be refusing to embrace what JESUS also said: “He who believes AND is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be CONDEMNED!” (Mark 16:16 – If you “believe” then you will believe that you must also be baptized, unless you like to force Jesus to agree with YOUR theology!).

And do keep in mind that Peter did not have any infants in mind when referring to that “immersion” – the most critical part of HIS version of “baptism” was the willingness and the ABILITY to verbally make “an appeal of a good conscience to God.” If anyone were to say that an adult can make that appeal INSTEAD of their infant child, would not a non-clever person get suspicious about whether they knew either Peter or Peter’s God? No one seems to limit themself to disregard the clarity of God’s teachings at only ONE place. That famous “domino effect” also holds true in our theology as well: once the first domino falls you can be sure the one after it will do so as well!

6. OTHER EXAMPLES: Available space requires that I cannot provide adequate details for a great number of other examples where the Apostolic writings and the original apostolically founded churches depart from those who are proponents of “scripture alone,” “faith alone,” and “grace alone.” IF you are committed to obey Jesus, and IF you have “faith” in the integrity those apostolic writings and if you SAY that you believe in “Scripture alone,” then why would you ignore things like the following:

a. “For I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened; but by an EQUALITY, that now at this time your abundance may supply their lack, that their abundance also may supply your lack–THAT THERE MAY BE EQUALITY. As it is written, ‘He who gathered much had nothing left over, and he who gathered little had no lack” (2 Corinthians 8:13-15; combined with Acts 2:42-45 and Acts 4:32-35). Yes, you can argue that such behavior was never REQUIRED, and you would be correct; but they had received a Holy Spirit who caused them to WANT to do so, because THEY knew what changes take place within you WHEN His Spirit has ACTUALLY come inside of you. And you really don’t WANT to do what they DELIGHTED to do! What does that tell you about the man-made idea that anyone who “believes in Jesus” has already experientially “received” His Holy Spirit, so that there is no need for that special Pentecostal event that the “believing” and even “baptized” newly converted Samaritan true disciples needed to receive (Acts 8:4ff)!

b. “… they had appointed elderS for them in every church, having prayed with fasting” (Acts 14:23).
”For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elderS in every city as I directed you” (Titus 1:5)
“Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was granted to you through prophecy with the laying on of hands by the council of elderS” (1 Timothy 4:14).
“… For A BISHOP (Greek: “ἐπίσκοπος” / “episkopos” / “overseer”) must be blameless…” (Titus 1:5…7).
“ 17 Now from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them,… Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you OVERSEERS to shepherd the church of God” (Acts 20:17-18, 28).
It does not take an IQ of 175 to see what would be obvious to any fisherman or carpenter: every brotherhood congregation is to be led by a TEAM of “elders” (Greek: “πρεσβύτερος” / “presbuteros”) who RULE FROM A COMMON MIND – NO one pastor or “bishop in apostolic succession” ruling from his supposedly Spirit-anointed ego! NO hierarchical systems creating pyramids culminating in Bishops, patriarchs or popes! Paul made it clear (in that Titus 1:5…7) that the term “bishop” or “overseer” is simply describing one of the several functions of the elders. There are passages describing bishops and deacons (e.g., Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-8), but no passages at all listing bishops AND elders, as if they were two different ministerial offices. The first church in Jerusalem had Apostles who gathered with its “elders” but not with its “bishops” (Acts 15)! So why should there be “ruling elders” or “teaching elders” versus just “plain elders,” anywhere? Why should there be “bishops AND priests/presbyters and deacons” anywhere? Submitting to the COMMON MIND of those presbyters prevents no individual ego of a “bishop” or “patriarch” or “pope” from becoming confused with “the will of God!” If that was good enough for Christ’s own holy apostles (Acts 15), by what logic or Spirit can such hierarchical replacement be justified? Ungodly logic dumbs us DOWNWARD!

c. What about all that talk about members of the church being in various forms of SUBMISSION? – wives to husbands, children to parents, citizens to rulers?

Look at the team of elders (e.g., 1 Corinthians 14:34, 18:15f; Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18 ). Hebrews 13:17 even commands us, “Obey those who rule over you, and be SUBMISSIVE, for they watch out for your SOULS, as those who must give account.” Your elders are not like a city’s mayors – merely leading the external organization and activities of the community. They have the right and responsibility to discern and disciple the “inner you”!

As a Christian I am to be in “submission” to my father and mother, and ALL who are in authority over me. If a policeman behind me starts flashing those dreaded lights, you can be sure that I SUBMIT to their request! At my Merchant Marine Academy, you can be sure that I SUBMITTED to all of those cadet officers. I wonder how many of us American “Bible Believing” but equally “democratic” Christians know HOW to actually “submit” to ANYONE!

d. How about that supposedly “petty detail” about HEAD COVERINGS: “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, DISHONORS his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors HER head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought NOT to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason, the woman ought to have authority on her head, BECAUSE OF THE ANGELS!” (1 Corinthians 11:4-10). Now we democratically free Americans may consider this sacramental discipline too petty for our supposedly majestic and omnipotent God who only seems to want “faith.” But if His apostle commanded it then HE is commanding it! Peter expected God’s female disciples to act like “Sarah who obeyed Abraham, calling him lord” (1 Peter 3:8 – do you know of a SINGLE church that dares to even mention that command?).

That supposedly “petty” command was not a mere “culturally conditioned” command, not if God commands it “because of the ANGELS.” The only place where the ideas of angels, women and submission are mentioned in the Word are in Genesis, chapters 3 and 6; so I assume that is what was in Paul’s mind. But WHATEVER it was, it was not a “tradition” that can be set aside, and we will all be getting challenged by a holy God if we decide that it CAN be set aside. Jesus warned us, “He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much, and he who is DISHONEST in a very little is dishonest ALSO in much!” (Luke 16:10). I personally have never met a person who has only disregarded only ONE of God’s teachings, promises, or commands!

e. Then, there are equally “petty” commands regarding jewelry (1 Peter 3:5); or Dress (3:3); or NO consumption of blood (Acts 15);

f. Or what about that clear encouragement to vowed celibacy, about which Jesus Himself said, “The one who is able to accept this SHOULD accept it” (Matthew 19:12; 1 Corinthians 7:32ff; 1 Timothy 5:9)

g. What about “Scripture alone” Bible believers converting a command to not be “drunk” into a command “do not drink,” thus very implicitly insulting your Savior who was willing to turn water into alcoholic wine and adding to the joy and festivities of a wedding? Remember, they did not simply look at the miracle; they DRANK it! (Ephesians 5:16, John 2)

h. And what about our ignoring a command that would certainly provide much PLEASURE to all who obeyed it: “A husband should fulfill his marital responsibility to his wife, and likewise a wife to her husband. It is not the wife who has the rights to her own body, but the husband. In the same way, it is not the husband who has the rights to his own body, but the wife. Do not deprive each other, except by mutual agreement for a specified time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer” (1 Corinthians 7:3-5). Obedience to this command would revolutionize both the frequency and the sexual pleasure in most marriages between TRULY “Bible believing” Christians! Once can very validly theologize on this biological fact: the female clitoris is the only organ whose SOLE function is to enable her to experience sexual orgasm. The fact that it was our CREATOR who designed and created it tells you much about HIS attitude toward sexual pleasure, no?

There are SO many more “petty details” that are being ignored by “Bible Believing Christians” who are champions of “sola scriptura,” but you get the message! Those of us who have “accepted Christ” and may be so optimistic about it that we know that “once saved always saved” may be setting ourselves up the greatest and most chronologically-enduring shock we will ever receive: we thought we were eternally married to a God that we actually and functionally NEVER KNEW!

As individuals, you and I may not be in a position to create any changes in attitude and practice within our churches, but we can change OUR attitudes about what I have been describing above. He who knows what is buried within the deepest heart of every human being would then know what you are genuinely WANTING to see fulfilled. You would be declaring to Him your actual and FUNCTIONAL relationship to Him and to His holy Word! And it would remove you from the masses of “Christians” who believe that they can “love God” and call Him “Master” without loving ALL that belongs to Him. They are like people who, when marrying, had seen and married the “person of their dreams” rather than the person who actually WAS.

To those from a CATHOLIC/ORTHODOX PERSPECTIVE: You are academically correct in claiming that the phrase “sola scriptura” is not contained within the Bible. But, no matter WHAT you may think of “sola scriptura” as a principle, you are nevertheless under GOD’s obligation to fulfill the grammatically natural and literal sense of each of those SPECIFIC apostolic teachings, promises, and commands that are found IN those Spirit-inspired apostolic writings, and do it in the same way that your own predecessors in the earliest several centuries did – those who were closest in time, and to the piety and the Spirit-created experience created by Jesus and His holy apostles! And you who judge Protestants as deviants will be judged harshly if your magisterium is judged by Him to have justified any departures from those Spirit-inspired apostolic writings: NO violence, FUNCTIONAL separation from all secular societies (no such thing as a Catholic Italy or Spain, or an Orthodox Greece or Russia! No such thing as “CHRISTIAN combatants,” even the Orthodox kind who are sent off to war after war, and then “repent” in supposed sorrow only AFTER they come back: but the kind of Catholics and Orthodox who are bound by clear and literal sense of CANON 12 of the Council of Nicaea (as opposed to the clever reinterpretations of it that adulterate its sufficiently clear meaning)!

*****************************

ReedMerino.com
“Blueprint for a Revolution: Building Upon ALL of the New Testament”