The Problem With So-Called "Bible" Churches - Apologetics for the Masses #538

Unsubscribe/Subscribe

https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter

https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter

Topic

Any Protestant who goes to a "Bible" church - basically all Protestants - is going to the wrong church.

General Comments

1) I really enjoyed speaking at the Fullness of Truth Conference in Alexandria, LA, last weekend. Met a lot of good folks there...fired up Catholics...it was awesome. If you ever have a chance to go to a Fullness of Truth Conference (they do about 5 or 6 a year - mostly in Texas, but some in Louisiana), go. These folks do conferences right. For more information about upcoming Fullness of Truth conferences, check out their website: https://www.fullnessoftruth.org/.

2) I'll be in Worcester, MA, in 3 weeks (March 21st) for the Worcester Diocesan Men's Conference. My talk is titled: Does God Want Everyone to Be Catholic? We're gonna rock and roll! For more information on the conference, the speakers, and/or to register: https://catholicmenworc.com/. If you live nearby, come on down...I'd love to see you there!

Introduction

Okay, this week...well...this week is something new...sort of. Not really new in terms of substance, but maybe new in terms of the perspective. At least, for me. Every so often, while driving around Birmingham, I'll see a sign for a church that claims to be a "Bible Church". The Fellowship Bible Church. New Covenant Bible Church. Integrity Bible Church. And, one that's about a mile or so from my house, McCalla Bible Church. You know, churches that claim to be, as the McCalla Bible Church website says: "Gospel preaching, Bible teaching" churches. The fact is, though, that pretty much every Protestant church claims to be a "Bible church" - either directly or indirectly. They say that all of their beliefs come straight from the Bible. Sola Scriptura! is their rallying cry. The Bible is their sole authority for what they believe and teach. Or, they might say it's their "ultimate" authority or their only "infallible" authority or some such thing. I've had Protestants tell me: "We believe what's in the Bible and we don't believe what's not in the Bible." Regardless of whatever particular verbiage they use, it boils down to this: Protestant churches claim to take their beliefs and teachings on doctrine and morals straight "from" the Bible.

So, I've had the thought of "Bible churches" banging around in my head the last several weeks, and it's caused me to do some cogitatin'. And what I came up with was a little bit of a different perspective on an old theme that I use quite a bit when talking to Protestants - that theme being the fact that the Catholic Church is the original Church founded by Jesus Christ 2000 years ago in Judea. The "different" perspective, is that I realized that every church that claims Sola Scriptura as its most fundamental principle, and claims to take its beliefs and teachings straight from the Bible - well, every one of those churches, by claiming to be a "Bible church" is, at the very same time, claiming not to be the church of the Bible.

I'll expand on that below, but I first want to lead into the "meat" of this newsletter by using a word that you almost never see me use when talking about the Bible, and that word is..."proves". I never say things like, "This passage [or verse] proves" this or that. I generally just say that any given verse or passage "offers evidence for" this teaching or that. But, in this instance, by using just a little simple logic, I've realized that when a church claims to be a "Bible church" - claims that it's teachings/beliefs come straight from the Bible - then that claim, in and of itself, essentially "proves" that church is not the church of the Bible. Let me 'splain...

Challenge/Response/Strategy

The Problem With So-Called "Bible" Churches
I want to start off by affirming a couple of things:

1) Jesus lived 2000 years ago.
2) Jesus started a church (e.g., Matt 16:18; Matt 18:17; Acts 5:11; Acts 8:1; Acts 9:31)

Now, to the problem with so-called "Bible" churches. As most of you know, I have written a couple of books on apologetics that were published by EWTN/Sophia Press. Imagine, if you will, that I am currently sitting in the same room with you and I am holding one of my books in my hand. And let's say you ask me the question: "John, where do you get your knowledge of apologetics from?" There are any number of things I could say in response, but let's say I answered with: "Well, I get all my knowledge of apologetics from this book I wrote." How would you respond to that?

At first, you might think: "Oh, okay, he gets his apologetics knowledge from the apologetics book he wrote." But, pretty quickly you would think: "Wait a minute...that doesn't make any sense. How can he get his knowledge of apologetics from that book, if he's the one who wrote the book?!" And you'd be right, it doesn't make any sense. I can't have gotten my apologetics knowledge from a book that I wrote, because I would have to have had that knowledge in order to write the book in the first place! I didn't get my knowledge of apologetics "from" the book, I put my knowledge of apologetics "into" the book. So, again, my answer doesn't make any sense.

Okay, before going on, a few more affirmations:

1) The Church founded by Jesus Christ was born of the blood and water that flowed from the side of Christ on the Cross (CCC #766) or, according to some, at the latest, on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41) - 50 days after His Crucifixion.
2) The first book of the New Testament was not written for at least 10-15 years after the death of Christ; and it was some 40-60 years or so before all of the New Testament was written.
3) Therefore, the Church founded by Jesus Christ was in existence for a number of years before any of the books of the New Testament were written, and for several decades before the New Testament was completed.

Back to the problem with so-called "Bible" churches. A lot of Protestants have told me that they don't need the church, as long as they've got the Bible. In fact, if you ask Protestants, in general, the question (and I have): "Can you have the church without the Bible?" a majority of them will respond, "No, you can't have the church without the Bible." But, they'll tell you that you can have the Bible without the church. Yet, the exact opposite is true. History shows us...the Bible itself shows us...that you can indeed have the Church without the Bible. That was Christianity in its first several decades of existence. We had the Church, but we didn't have the Bible - at least, not the complete written Bible as we have it today with Old and New Testaments. Furthermore, who wrote the Bible? Let me refine that by asking: Who wrote the New Testament part of the Bible? Members of the Church. Every author of a New Testament book was a member of the Church. So, it is entirely accurate to say that the Bible came from the Church. And, since Israel is the Old Testament "church" and the Church is the New Testament "Israel", it is also fair to say that the entire Bible came from the "church". But, for purposes of this particular discussion, let's limit the word "church" as referring to the Christian Church. It is also entirely accurate to say that, without the Church, you don't have the Bible. So, can we have the Church without the Bible? Yes, we can. We have. Can we have the Bible without the Church? No, we can't. We didn't.

So how does all this relate to the problem with so-called "Bible" churches. I'm getting there...bear with me. Jesus founded a church. That church existed before the New Testament was ever written. In fact, that church wrote the New Testament and gave it to the world. Furthermore, that church vouched for the fact that the New Testament, as well as the Old, is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God. Now, think about all of that in relation to what I said about how, as the author of a book on apologetics, I cannot claim to have gotten my knowledge of apologetics "from" the book that I myself wrote on apologetics. Let's apply that logic to "Bible" churches.

When the McCalla Bible Church - or any Protestant church, for that matter - claims to have gotten their beliefs/teachings straight "from" the Bible, what does that necessarily indicate? If a church gets its beliefs/teachings "from" the Bible, then that necessarily indicates that that church is not the church that gave us the Bible in the first place. It can't be! It is not the church that wrote the New Testament half of the Bible. In order for the church to get its beliefs "from" the Bible, the Bible would have to exist before the church did. Yet, as we have seen, from the Word of God, the Church founded by Jesus Christ - the Church that Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to guide (John 16:13) - that Church existed before a single word of the New Testament was ever written!

Back to the example of my book. If someone is getting their knowledge about apologetics "from" my book, that means they did not write the book. It means that the knowledge in my book existed before they read it. Which, again, is why, when someone asks me where I got my knowledge of apologetics from, it would be utterly ridiculous to say that I got it from my own book. No! The knowledge in my book existed before I wrote the book. Just so the Bible. The knowledge, the teachings, in each book of the New Testament existed before that New Testament book was ever written. The knowledge was in the Church. The knowledge was given to the Apostles by Jesus and by the Holy Spirit. The Apostles passed along that knowledge - orally, at first, and then both orally and in writing as the years passed. That's why in Acts 2:41-42, what does it say about the first folks in the Church? It says they "devoted themselves to the Apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread [hhmmm...what could that be referring to?] and the prayers." What doesn't it say they were doing? Bible study! They weren't having individual or group Bible studies. People were not picking up the Bible and reading it for themselves to decide what was or was not authentic Christian teaching and practice. The early Christians would be shocked to see people doing that. The early Christians were being taught, by the Church, about authentic Christian teaching and practice.

All of that is to say, once again, that any church that professes to get its beliefs "from" the Bible, is essentially saying that it is not the church "of" the Bible. Now, don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that the Bible is not important to Catholics or is not relevant to doctrine and morals and so on. It absolutely is! The Bible, as the inspired, inerrant, Word of God is the highest authority in Christianity. Everything in the Deposit of Faith can be found, directly or indirectly, in the Bible.  But, here's the thing. The Catholic Church is not a "Bible" church in the sense that we take our beliefs/teachings "from" the Bible; it is, however, a "Bible" church in the sense that we put our beliefs/teachings "into" the Bible. So, we are not a "Bible" church; rather, we are the Bible Church...we are the Church "of" the Bible.

Protestant churches..."Bible" churches...by claiming to go by the Bible alone (Sola Scriptura) and by claiming to get their teachings/beliefs straight "from" the Bible, are admitting - although they don't realize they are doing so - that they are not the Church founded by Jesus Christ. That they are not the Church Jesus Christ sent the Holy Spirit to guide. That they are not the Church that came before the Bible. That they are not the Church that wrote the New Testament. That they are not the Church that put its teachings "into" the Bible. That they are not the Church that serves as the authoritative witness that the books of the Bible are indeed the inspired, inerrant, Word of God. That they are not the Church "of" the Bible.

A few final affirmations:

1) No person or institution within Protestantism claims to be infallible.
2) Since no person or institution within Protestantism is infallible, then that means that every interpretation of Scripture made by a Protestant could - potentially - contain error.
3) Given that Protestant doctrine is taken "from" Scripture, and that every Protestant doctrine necessarily involves man's interpretation of Scripture; and also given that no person or institution within Protestantism is infallible, then there is necessarily the potential for error in every single Protestant doctrine.
4) Given that there is necessarily the potential for error in every single Protestant doctrine, then it is necessarily the case that Protestant doctrine is based, primarily, on the Word of Man and only secondarily on the Word of God. Protestant doctrine could indeed be characterized as being based solely on the Word of God as fallibly interpreted by the Word of Man. Or, in a phrase: Sola - Man's Fallible Interpretations of - Scriptura.

So, the next time a Protestant says they are in a "Bible" church...and/or that they get all of their beliefs straight from the Bible...or they affirm Sola Scriptura!...you might want to ask them if they prefer being in a church that was started by men and came after the Bible, or if they would rather be in the Church that is "in" the Bible and was started by Jesus Christ Himself.

Summary
And there you have the problem with so-called "Bible" churches. Hopefully that made some sense. I don't know if that was as "clean" a presentation of my thoughts as it could be, so I'm sure I'll be tossing these ideas around inside of my skull for a while to come trying to tighten them up a bit. In fact, I'm thinking about organizing all of this into a tract that I could mail out to pastors of non-Catholic parishes...try to light some fires. We'll see...

---------------------------------------------------

Below are a few affirmations that will give you a "sneek peek" for the next newsletter.

1) Given the Principle of Non-Contradiction, any particular statement of belief is either true or it is not true. It cannot be both. True or false. Truth or error.
2) If you believe in something that is not true, you are believing in a lie.
3) The Bible tells us that Satan is the "father of lies," (John 8:44).
4) Therefore, if you believe in a lie, you are believing in something that is of Satan.
5) If you believe in a false doctrine, you are believing in a lie.
6) Therefore, false doctrine is of Satan.
7) The Bible tells us that "in later times" some will depart from the faith by giving heed to "doctrines of demons," (1 Tim 4:1).
8) Therefore, if you believe in a false doctrine...give heed to the doctrines of demons...you can "depart from the faith".

Closing Comments

I hope all of you have a great week. I pray for you and your families daily. Please keep the Bible Christian Society (and the Martignoni family) in your prayers. Thanks!

Donations

The Bible Christian Society is a non-profit organization that relies solely on your support to bring the truths of the Catholic Faith to tens of thousands of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world each year. If you would like to help us do what we do, you can donate online at:

https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/donations

or send a check to:

Bible Christian Society

PO Box 424

Pleasant Grove, AL 35127.

Anything you can do is greatly appreciated!

Unsubscribe/Subscribe

https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter

https://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter