|
|
|
I’d like to
welcome you all back to our weekly meetings and wish you a new season
blessed with spiritual enlightenment. Every year it gets more and more
difficult to find a subject suitable for opening the new season. Looking
back at all the talks we have had over the past five years, I noticed
that some subjects were not covered fully as others. One such subject is
the teaching of Protestant Churches. We covered the differences between
the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church and we looked at the
different Bibles used by the Orthodox Church and Protestant Churches,
but we’ve never talked about the main Protestant doctrine on which all
Protestant doctrines are based. This doctrine is known as Sola Scriptura
which is Latin for “Bible only”. This idea or doctrine frees the
Protestant to believe anything he wants about the Gospel of Christ for
there is no one to stop him. Hence the 1000s and 1000s of Protestant
denominations and non-denominations that exist today.
Just before
the summer break I put together a rather long paper against the
Protestant idea of “Sola Scriptura” in the hope that it would help
Protestants searching for the truth or wishing to join the Orthodox
Church to understand that this doctrine is unbiblical and totally goes
against their concept that everything they need to teach them the truth
is only in the Bible. Most Protestants dogmatically hold to the belief
of “Sola Scriptura” which teaches that the Bible and only the Bible is
the SOLE infallible rule of Faith and that everything necessary for
salvation is contained within its pages. This is what they have been
taught since childhood, but just because one has believed something for
years on end, it doesn't mean that it's true.
It could be
said that today’s talk is essentially aimed at Protestants, but it will
also help Orthodox to answer those who hold to the belief of Sola
Scriptura that the Bible, they claim is all they need to believe, in
fact teaches just the opposite. While the salvational message is
contained in the Holy Bible, it does not contain the whole of the
Christian Faith and it says so explicitly in the New Testament: For
example what does it mean when the Bible says:
“And many other signs truly did Jesus in the
presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book”
(John 20:30)
“And there are also many other things which Jesus
did; the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even
the world itself could not contain the books that would be written”
(John 21:25).
But more than this, what does it mean when Christ says:
“And I will pray to the Father, and He shall give
you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever. Even the
Spirit of Truth” (John 14: 16) and “the Comforter, which is the Holy
Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all
things” (John 14: 26).
If the Bible
is complete and all that is needed for salvation, then why would Christ
need to send the Holy Spirit and what more could the Holy Spirit teach
us? If we accept that Christ indeed sent the Holy Spirit to teach us all
things then where is the written testimony of this teaching? It is not
in the Bible so the Bible is not complete in teaching us everything that
we need to know. The teaching we receive from the Holy Spirit is found
within the Church and in Holy Tradition which supplements the Gospels?
Protestants
reject tradition handed down through the Church because they say that
things we do are not written in the Bible, yet much of what they also do
is not biblical, but received through tradition. The Gospel of Christ is
contained in the Bible, and we can say that it is materially sufficient
insofar as it gives us the outlines concerning Christ and his teaching,
yet much of what we believe about Christ and the Holy Trinity is not
formally present or rather it is not presented to us in such a way that
everything is clear-cut without room for doubts and misinterpretations.
For example
let’s take the teaching on the Holy Trinity: It is “materially” present
in the Holy Bible: The New Testament states that after the Lord’s
Resurrection he commanded His disciples to go and teach all nations
“Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matth. 28: 19). St. Paul prays
“the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love
of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all”
(II Cor. 13: 14) and St. John the Evangelist confirms that
“There are three that bear record in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (I
John 5: 7). In spite of these clear testimonies, the true teaching on
the Holy Trinity is not “formally” present, for nowhere does the Holy
Bible define the Trinity as: One God in three persons, all existing from
eternity. Where does it state that the Holy Spirit is Divine as well as
a separate person of the Trinity? Where does it define the Trinity as
God as defined by the Church? Where, does it even mention the word
“Trinity?”
Another
example is the Christian understanding of Christ, that he is fully
divine and fully human, one person not two, but with two natures, one
divine and one human. The true teaching concerning the person of Christ
can be found in the New Testament, but not in a clear and unequivocal
way, which has over the centuries, led certain people to ask questions
concerning his divinity and humanity. For example, was he born human and
then became divine? Or was he divine and then became just human? Or did
he possess both qualities since the incarnation? These principles and
doctrines are not “Formally” presented in the Holy Bible so for one to
claim it is “the complete Truth and all that we need” ignores the fact
that not everything is contained within the Bible in a formal and
decisive manner.
Nowhere in
the Holy Bible is the teaching that the “Bible Only” is all that a
Christian needs, so the claim by many modern churches that it is
“Biblical” is self-refuting and a blatant lie.
Sola
Scriptura or Bible Only is the basic teaching of Protestantism. It is
the trunk of the Protestant doctrinal tree from which literally 1000's
of modern Christian doctrines and ideas have originated, and from which
every objection to Apostolic Tradition begins. If the trunk is false,
then so must its branches be false. If, as we shall soon see, Sola
Scriptura is found to be Unbiblical and Unhistorical and therefore not
Apostolic, in other words, not what the Apostles taught Christ's early
Church: then modern Christian theology must be rejected. For all modern
Christian theology is based on this single doctrine of Sola Scriptura
which appeared from the Renaissance era (16th Century). It follows that
if the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is false, then so must be the theology
derived from it. This is only logical.
Every
Protestant objection to the Orthodox and Catholic Faiths stems from the
Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura which has Protestants believing
that the Bible is the only infallible rule of Faith, and the Word of God
as orally taught by the Apostles and the early Church through Holy
Tradition is of no spiritual significance.
Sola
Scriptura is unbiblical, not just because there is no Biblical support,
but also because it contradicts the Bible blatantly and explicitly. Why
would Protestants believe in a rule of faith that holds the Bible as the
only infallible rule of faith when the Bible they claim holds the only
truth in fact teaches the complete opposite? It tells us that Holy Writ
and Apostolic Tradition are equally the vehicles of God’s Word. St. Paul
says on the matter: “I commend you because you
remember me in everything and maintain the Traditions even as I have
delivered them to you”. (1 Cor. 11:2)
“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the
Traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by
letter”. (2 Thess. 2:15).
“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our
Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in
idleness and not in accord with the Tradition that you received from
us”. (2 Thess. 3:6)
To make sure that the apostolic Tradition would be passed down after the
deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy: “And
the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same
commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also”
(2 Tim. 2:2)
The New
Testament is therefore very clear in telling us that the Holy Scriptures
and Apostolic Tradition form the Word of God. Unfortunately Protestants
prefer to ignore these verses possibly because they contradict the Sola
Scriptura theology of the Renaissance.
The Bible
does not contain everything, but goes hand in hand with Holy Tradition.
The Orthodox Church believes this because it has been the teaching of
the Apostles and the Church for the last 2000 years. We cannot just take
the Bible and interpret it as it suits us which is what the doctrine of
Sola Scriptura has allowed Protestants. Everyone is free to personally
interpret Scripture even though the Scriptures explicitly teach against
private interpretation of the Bible. St. Paul says:
“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the
scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in
old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were
moved by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Peter 1:20)
The only
authority that can interpret Scripture and teach it is the Church that
Christ founded 2000 years ago. That is why Christ gave us His Church.
Holy Scriptures tell us the function of the Church is “to teach” just as
Our Lord commanded: “Teach them to
observe all I have taught you and behold I am with you always until the
end of the world.” (Matt 28:20)
The early
Church Fathers, who were links in that chain of succession, recognized
the necessity of the traditions that had been handed down from the
apostles and guarded them scrupulously. One only has to read what the
early fathers have to say to be convinced that the Christian faith was
not handed down by the Bible, but by Oral Tradition within the Church.
The
arguments above should be enough proof to show that the “Bible Only”
idea is not taught anywhere in the Holy Scriptures. Nowhere do the Holy
Scriptures claim to be the only or "Supreme Authority" for God's Word as
many Protestant churches claim. Nowhere does the Holy Bible teach the
“Sola” or the “Only” or a rejection of the teaching authority of
Christ’s Church. Nowhere does Holy Scripture even imply that the Bible
is the only infallible Rule of Faith, and that the teachings of the
Apostles and the Church are secondary to anyone and everyone's
interpretation of the Holy Bible.
As Bible
Only Christians, they should embrace the sacred words of the Holy Bible
and not discount the verses that don’t agree with their present
theology. So much emphasis is placed on the Holy Bible as the only
infallible rule of faith that Protestants never ask where this book came
from. The Church and Holy Tradition gave as the Bible as we have it in
its present form. Something which took centuries to compile from the
great many books and letters that circulated in the Christian world
during at least the first four centuries. By simple logic, if they
reject the Church and Holy Tradition that put together the Bible, then
they should also reject the very Bible itself for how can they rely on a
Book, which was put together by the very sources they reject.
Let’s then
take a look at the Church they reject and see what the Bible has to say
about this Church. St. Paul in his First Epistle to Timothy says:
“behave thyself in the house of God, which is the
church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.”
(1 Tim 3:15) St. Paul calls the Church the foundation of the
truth. He doesn’t say this for the Old Testament or the New Testament
which hadn’t been written yet.
Christ said
to Peter: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art
Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the
kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be
bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be
loosed in heaven.” (Matt 16:18-19) Did Christ give the
“Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven with power to Bind
and Loose” to a Book or to his Church, the
“Church of the Living God, the Pillar and Foundation of Truth?”
(1 Tim 3:15) And did he say a “Book” would prevail against the
“Gates of hell” (Matt 16:18-19) or his
Church, the ONE “Bride of Christ?”
Christ said:
“Teach them to observe all I have taught you and
behold I am with you always until the end of the world” Matt
28:20.
Did Christ ever command that the teaching of his Gospel be taught
exclusively in a book? Or did he explicitly give this charge to his
Church? Did our Lord Jesus Christ ever even command that this book, the
NT Bible be written?
Does Christ
command men to “listen to” and follow a book which didn’t exit until
many years after the first Pentecost or his Church? Christ clearly said
to his disciples to “hear the Church”
(Matt. 18:17) Why would Protestants reject the Church Christ himself
started if Christ tells us to hear this very Church? And what verse in
the “soon to be written” New Testament instructs Christians to “no
longer hear” Christ's Church?
Christ calls
his Body the Church and St. Paul says that:
“Christ is the head of the body, the Church” (Colossians 1:18)
Nowhere does Christ or Paul call a Book the Body of Christ. Did Christ
say he would be with a “book” until the end of the world, or his Church?
Since the Apostles would not live forever, he was speaking of his
Church: “Teach them to observe all I have taught
you and behold I am with you always until the end of the world”.
(Matt 28:20).
Did Christ
say he would send the “the spirit of truth to
guide you into all the truth” (John 16:13) for a book or for his
Church to “Teach all nations?” (Matt 28:20)
Clearly Holy
Scripture is filled with testimonies with Christ himself giving direct
commands of Authority for his Church and he charges all Christians to
“Hear this Church.” (Matt 18:17) Either
this Apostolic Church is the “pillar and
foundation of Truth” or it isn't? Either Christ sent
“the spirit of truth to guide us into all truth”
(John 16:13) or he didn't. Do Protestants believe what the Holy Bible
says? Or are they more interested in remaining in a certain denomination
or non-denomination or belief system? Either they believe the Holy words
of Scripture or they don't. Either they “hear Christ’s Church” or they
reject it. And if they reject it they reject Christ himself for he said:
“He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you
rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Luke
10:16).
If they reject Christ's historical Church, if they reject this Church
which is the “Pillar and Foundation of Truth,”
what Biblical command or what Biblical basis are they using to justify
this? This rejection is unbiblical, and they are simply embracing a
“tradition of man” from the Renaissance era.
Of all the
Christian churches, only the Orthodox Church has existed since the time
of Christ. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Orthodox
Church. The Roman Catholic Church broke away from unity in 1054. The
Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began
with Martin Luther in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are
actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots, or offshoots of
offshoots.) Only the Orthodox Church existed in the tenth century, in
the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the
doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. Martin
Luther chose to reject Christ's Church to justify his new theology. That
theology being that the Bible is the sole infallible rule of faith, all
by itself. And the Authority that Christ gave his Church as illustrated
above does not exist.
By rejecting
the Church established by Christ, modern Christian churches reject the 3
ordinations of the clergy as define in the Holy Bible of the New
Testament Church? If a church does not have Bishops, Priests or Deacons,
one must ask, why not? Either they believe in the New Testament and want
to mimic the NT Church or they don't. The Holy Bible gives us the 3
offices of the clergy as taught and embraced by Christ’s Apostles. Why
do the modern Christian churches reject this Biblical guidance? The
sacrament of holy orders is conferred in three ranks of clergy: bishops,
priests, and deacons.
Bishops have
the care of multiple congregations and appoint, ordain, and discipline
priests and deacons. Examples of first-century bishops include Timothy
and Titus (1 Tim. 5:19–22; 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5). St. Ignatius, Bishop
of Antioch and direct student of St. John the Apostle wrote in 110 AD:
“Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever
Jesus Christ is, there is the Church” (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2)
Priests, in
the New Testament are also known as “presbyters” or “elders.” In fact,
the English term “priest” is simply a contraction of the Greek word
presbyteros. Priest have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and
providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas.
5:14–15).
Deacons are
the assistants of the bishops and are responsible for teaching and
administering certain Church tasks, such as the distribution of food
(Acts 6:1–6).
Modern
churches have replaced the three ranks of the Priesthood as defined by
Holy Scripture with a self ordained pastor who has no apostolic
succession and who very often is dressed in a golf shirt or a plain suit
during worship. This also is totally unbiblical and a manmade tradition
embraced by the modern Christian. It is completely unheard of in
historic Christianity including the first Protestants who at least wore
a robe because the book of Revelation tells us, that this is the garb of
those in Heaven. (See Rev 1:13; 6:11; 7:9; 7:13; 19:13)
Protestants
who hold to the Sola Scriptura doctrine believe that everything they do
or reject is verified by Holy Scripture, yet much of their theology
comes from either Apostolic Tradition which they reject or the
traditions of man from various recent centuries. The traditions of man
would be unbiblical ideas invented mostly in the last few hundred years.
Some are good and some are not, but all are Unbiblical. Let’s see some
of these Unbiblical Ideas and Doctrines.
All
Christians pray to Jesus and Protestants are no exception. Praying to
Jesus is good, healthy and wise, but it’s not Biblical. Jesus himself
tells us that we should pray to his Father (Matt 6:9-15) and gave us the
Lord’s Prayer as an example of how to pray. What Christ did say was that
we should pray in his name, but not to him directly, but to the Father.
Praying
directly to Jesus is in fact an Apostolic Tradition, it is what the
Apostles taught Christ’s early Church. This Apostolic Tradition of
praying to Jesus is not in the NT Bible. Let us not forget that the New
Testament books of the Bible did not even exist yet and would not for
decades to come. It was more that 20 years before the first epistle was
written and at least 50 years until the last Gospel was written. If it
is not in the Bible then can we say that it is a “tradition of man?” No,
it is a tradition we have received from the Apostles and handed down
through the Church.
Apostolic Tradition, along with the Holy Bible is God’s way of speaking
to us. Together they give us the Gospel of Christ or the Word of God.
This is what the Apostles taught and the Holy Bible tells us this in
many places. We have already seen the written testimonies in support of
Holy Tradition.
Praying to
God the Father, the First Person of the Trinity is Biblical and our Lord
Jesus Christ tells that it is God the Father alone that should be
worshiped. Jesus said: “It is written: Worship the
Lord your God and serve him only”. (Luke 4:8) We are never
commanded to pray to or worship Jesus (the Second Person of the Trinity)
or even pray to the Holy Spirit (the Third Person of the Trinity). Both
of these ideas are unbiblical. It is good, healthy and wise to pray to
Jesus, but the origin of this idea comes from Apostolic Tradition and
Christ's early Church and not the Holy Bible.
The “Bible
Only” doctrine which allows every church to believe anything it wants
about the Gospel of Christ is responsible for the 1000s of different
denomination and non-denominations that exist today but this is in
complete contrast to the Holy Bible which commands “complete unity” and
“One Faith” for as St Paul says: “There is One
Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God.” Eph 4:4) The modern
Christian churches accept and condone a plurality of contradicting
faiths, resulting in complete disunity within these churches. This
blatantly unbiblical practice is evidenced by the very many different
“Statements of Faith” possessed by each of these churches. Where is the
unity demanded by Holy Scripture? Christ said:
“And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be
one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be
made perfect in one.” (John 17:22-23) On the subject of unity St.
Paul said: “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.” (1 Cor 1:10)
Clearly the modern churches with their various faiths and gospels have
embraced an unbiblical idea very foreign to the biblical and Christian
meaning of the word “Church” for the word stands for unity and all being
of one mind and body.
Another
unbiblical doctrine of modern churches is that they refuse to give any
honour to the Blessed Mother of our Lord as commanded in the New
Testament. This is a stumbling block for most Protestants and don’t
believe the Bible in fact honours the Mother of God until they are shown
the passages they have been blind to notice before. The Gospel according
to St. Luke clearly says that the Virgin Mary is
“the handmaid of the Lord” (Luke 1:38) and that
“from henceforth all generations shall call her
blessed,” Her cousin Elizabeth “filled with
the Holy Spirit” proclaims: “Blessed art
thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb” (Luke
1:42) In spite of these testimonies most modern Christians maintain that
the Blessed Virgin was just an ordinary Jewish girl and nothing more and
treat and ignore her as such.
Where in the
modern Christian service has the pastor ever called the Virgin Mary
“Blessed” as the Holy Bible and the Holy Spirit instructs? When has the
pastor ever referred to her as the “Mother of God” as the Holy Bible
tells us? Oh, come on now, does the Bible actually call Mary the Mother
of God? Indeed it does. Elizabeth says “And whence
is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
(Luke 1:43) which is synonymous with “Mother of God”, unless one argues
that Our Lord is not God. Why then do the modern Christian communities
feel exempt from obeying the Holy Bible of giving proper respect and
honour to the Mother of Our Saviour? Why do they refuse the honour due
to her as dictated in the Holy Bible? Either they believe every word in
the Bible or they don’t. They claim to love Jesus and call themselves
his friends yet they refuse to honour his mother whom the Holy Spirit
through Elizabeth called Blessed and the Mother of our Lord.
The
Protestant rejection to honour the Mother of God is also extended to the
communion of the Saints. We have talked of the Protestant refusal to
pray to the saints last year and would take too much time to repeat
today what was said then. In short we ask the saints to intercede on our
behalf just as we would ask our friends and family to pray for us. This
is not something offensive or blasphemous. We hope that through the
prayer of many God will speedily hear our request and come to our aid.
Praying for one another is an act of love and it is our duty as
Christians to pray for each other. The Church is a family of brothers
and sister all with the same Father in heaven. When someone passes over
to the other side he does not stop being a member of this great family.
How then more natural can it be for us to seek the prayers of our fellow
brothers and sisters who not only have passed over to the spirit world
but have through their way of life found favour with God and find
themselves bathed in his glory. Is it not more natural and logical to
put our trust in their prayers than our fellow Christians who are still
living in this world? Asking for their intercessions does not mean that
we worship them. Yes, we give them honour and respect because of their
oneness with God and because they have made themselves God’s friends.
When we pray to a saint, we do not ask him to save us directly as though
he was God, but we beseech him as our fellow man and as our brother and
fellow member of Christ’s Church to intercede to God on our behalf. Of
course our prayer to the saints is always accompanied by a great
reverence because they have been shown by God as great men who have
overcome the passions of this world and for this he has rewarded them
with glorification. By honouring the saints we are recognizing that we
see in them the light of Christ and rejoice because we are reassured of
the resurrection.
Is Praying
to Saints Biblical? Where does the Bible teach this? St Paul says:
“that, ...supplications, prayers, intercessions,
and giving of thanks, be made for all men... For this is good and
acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour.” (1 Tim 2:1-3) All
men means ALL Christians in the Body of Christ whether in this life or
in the life beyond. Again Paul says “Praying
always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching
thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; And for
me.” (Eph. 6:18-19). Any objection to asking fellow Christians to
pray for us whether they be in Heaven or on earth is unbiblical, for no
verse can be found or valid Biblical objection to this instruction given
by the Apostle Paul. Any and all objections to asking fellow Christians
to pray for us stem from years of conditioning as a non-Orthodox and
have no Biblical foundation.
Do the
saints actually pray for us?
In the book of Revelation, John sees that “the
twenty-four elders [the leaders of the people of God in heaven]
fell down before the Lamb, having every one of
them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of
saints.” (Rev. 5:8). Thus the saints in heaven offer to God the
prayers of the saints on earth. Angels also do the same: it says:
“An angel came and stood at the altar, having a
golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should
offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was
before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, which came with the
prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.”
(Rev. 8:3–4).
Let’s now
move on to some other unbiblical practices. When Protestants pray they
bow their heads, close their eyes and place their hands together. This
is not a bad tradition, but it is again unbiblical. It is quite similar
to how Orthodox make the “Sign of the Cross” to profess their Baptism
when they pray to and worship the Blessed Trinity. Both are good
practices, yet both are clearly unbiblical traditions of men. Not all
“traditions of man” are bad. But all are unbiblical. And it is difficult
to call oneself a “Bible Only” Christian in the strictest sense when one
adheres to and practices so many unbiblical behaviours and beliefs.
Another
unbiblical behaviour is the refusal to kneel before our Lord as the Holy
Bible commands. We read in Philippians 2:10-11
“That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven,
and things in earth, and things under the earth.” Our Lord
himself prayed on his knees on the night He was betrayed. (Mark 14:35)
Where in the Holy Bible do we read that modern Christians are exempt
from these Biblical commands? When has the Modern Christian pastor
instructed the congregation to kneel in church to worship our Saviour?
Why do these verses not apply to the modern Christian churches?
The Bible
commands that we must fast, yet Modern Christian churches do not fast
and do not consider it essential or as part of the salvation process. In
fact, even the Roman Catholic Church has done away with the Biblical
meaning of Fasting. Yet Christ himself commands us to fast. The Old
Testament is full of people fasting as an act of repentance and Nineveh
was saved when they repented with fasting. In the New Testament Christ
begins his ministry by fasting for 40 days. Christ had no need to repent
and therefore had no need to fast. Modern churches teach their members
that they are saved, but does that mean that they are exempt from
fasting when Christ himself wasn’t. If they hold to the belief of “Bible
only” then shouldn’t they follow Christ as he commands us to do?
“if any man will come after me, let him deny
himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” (Matth. 16:24)
After
telling us how to pray and to forgive men their trespasses, Christ said:
“Moreover when ye “fast”, be not, as the
hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that
they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their
reward. But thou, when thou “fastest,” anoint thine head, and wash thy
face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which
is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee
openly.” (Matt. 6:16-18)
If fasting
was not important for spiritual growth then Christ would not have
referred to it, but here Christ is telling us that fasting is part of
our Christian duty and if he fasted then it goes without saying that we
must fast also. The Old law of the Jews demanded fasting and the
Pharisees asked Jesus why his disciples didn’t fast. Jesus replied:
“Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as
long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the
bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.”
(Matt. 9:15)
Christ the
Bridegroom was taken from them and the disciples indeed fasted. We are
told that at Antioch “As they ministered to the
Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for
the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and
prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.” (Acts
13:2-3) “And when they had ordained them elders in
every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the
Lord, on whom they believed.” (Acts 14:23) Paul commends us to
fast saying: “Defraud ye not one the other, except
it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting
and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your
incontinency.” (1 Cor. 7:5)
Why then,
with so many biblical testimonies do modern churches disobey the very
teaching of Christ and the Apostles? Where in the bible does it say that
they are exempt from this holy practice? Are Christians free to choose
what teachings they prefer and to reject the teachings that place
restrictions on their free will? Either one is a “Bible only” Christian
or one isn’t. One cannot reject a certain Apostolic Tradition because as
they claim it is not in the Bible, but on the other hand to reject and
blatantly disobey a teaching given by Christ himself which is very
clearly in the Bible. But Protestants don’t have to do anything to be
saved other that “Believe in Jesus”. At least this is what their modern
bible tells them.
Most modern
bibles have mistranslated or distorted a verse from the Gospel of St.
John which tells them that all they must do for guaranteed salvation is
to “Believe in Jesus.” The verse in question is John 3: 16.
Modern translations read: “For God so loved the
world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have eternal life.” John 3:16 (New
International Version)
“God loved the people of this world so much that
he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have
eternal life and never really die.” John 3:16 (Contemporary
English Version)
These translations give the uninformed reader the impression that Christ
taught that all one has to do for eternal life is to “believe in Him.”
In contrast to these, the original Greek and the early translations such
as the KJV read:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but
have everlasting life.” John 3:16 (King James Version)
Notice that
it does not say like the modern translations that the person who
believes will have eternal life, but that believing in Christ is part of
the salvation process, and “may or should” bring eternal life. Salvation
is not just believing, but a process which involves hard work and
sacrifice from the believer. It means to follow Christ in his footsteps
for as he said “anyone who does not take his cross
and follow me is not worthy of me.” (Matt 10:38). and:
“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord,
shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my
Father which is in heaven.” (Matt 7:21) Just “believing in
Christ,” as the Holy Bible says, is no more of an accomplishment than
the demons achieve. “Thou believest that there is
one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt
thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” James
2:19-20
Why then was
John 3:16 changed in the Bible of the modern Christian? Because it
conforms to the new theology that salvation is a one time event, and all
one needs to do is just “believe in Christ.” One has to admit, this is a
quick sell and is very appealing to prospective members. If only
Christianity was just that easy. If only salvation was just that easy.
But unfortunately it is not what Christ said or taught.
There are
still a great many things we can say about Protestant ideas and
doctrines but we don’t have time to see all these today. Protestants
believe that the “Bible Only” doctrine protects them from the errors and
traditions of men. History has shown that the Roman Catholic Church did
indeed abuse the faith of the early church with doctrines that forced
the Reformation of the Church in the west. But the grievous error of the
Reformation and the Bible Only doctrine deprived the Protestant west of
the teachings of the Holy Ghost found in Holy Tradition which
supplements the Holy Scriptures. If they read the Bible carefully and
impartially then they should agree totally with what have been said
today. Only then can they relate to Christ’s words when he said:
“If ye continue in my word, then are ye my
disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make
you free.” (John 8: 31-32)
|
|
|
