This is a study written by a friend of mine. Let me know what you all think.
Over the years I have noted hundreds of divisions (if not thousands) between professing Christians, many of which lead one side or the other (or both) to make accusations against the others, some going so far as to say that the others are heretics, demonic, going to hell, or even satanists... when all that is happening is that they are disagreeing on a particular interpretation of something.
The problem, as I have seen it, is that each person is building on a different cornerstone, i.e. a different criteria for determining who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.
There are hundreds of these false cornerstones around, such as whether or not a person speaks in tongues, whether or not a person has a particular take on Bible prophecy, whether or not one believes in the Trinity, whether or not one believes that the whole Bible is infallible, whether or not the King James Version of the Bible is the infallible version, whether or not one uses the right words when baptizing someone (or enough water or at what age or whether they are dipped forward or backwards, etc.) and (most commonly) whether or not one belongs to the right church.
Obviously something is wrong.
We do need some criteria for finding our way through all of this confusion, but let's not be too quick to jump into the fray with just another half-baked formula. The Bible itself talks about a Cornerstone, i.e. a measuring device which can be used to build the rest of our "house" squarely and solidly.
It says that the "builders" (whoever that may be) will toss that Cornerstone aside, assuming that it is not suitable for what they wish to build. When that happens, of course, they end up with a distortion, based around some other false cornerstone.
Most of us know that there are references to Jesus being that Cornerstone. However, the trouble even then is that some people see this as being some esoteric, invisible, purely subjective version of Jesus, as exists in their own "hearts". In other words, we end up, once again, with a cornerstone that does NOT separate the good guys from the bad guys.
It can be used by anyone to do virtually anything. We have jumped back into the same melee of everyone shouting that they have the mind of Christ, they have the Holy Spirit, they have been led to condemn everyone else who is not doing things their way.
But what about the historical Jesus, the real Jesus, the objective Jesus who appears in the Scriptures, in particular, in the first four books of the New Testament? Jesus himself used much the same illustration (i.e. the Cornerstone one) except that in his Sermon on the Mount he referred to it as the entire foundation on which we are to build our house, and that foundation, Jesus said, was his teachings.
Well, a bit more than that, because he concluded his sermon with a story about a foolish man who actually heard what he (Jesus) had taught, but then failed to obey it. That man was building on sand. But, Jesus said, the wise man is the one who, having heard the teachings of Jesus (the Rock, the Cornerstone) actually obeyed them. This man had found the foundation that would never fail.
It is exciting to think that it could be as simple as that. That we only need to make the teachings of Jesus our standard, and with his teachings, we can test all of our other doctrines, all of our other leadings, all of the various teachings and organizations, and we will arrive at the truth.
I believe that it IS as simple as that. Oh, there will be slight disagreements, but nothing like the overwhelming Babylon (which means 'confusion') that exists when we turn to any of the other myriad criteria for passing judgment that abound in the church world today.
I have, however, discovered that when I point to the teachings of Jesus, a torrent of abuse is poured out by people who have chosen other cornerstones besides the teachings of Jesus. Ironically, many of these people cannot get along with one another, but when it comes to opposing the teachings of Jesus, there is an uproar of unity amongst them all.
That, in itself, makes me think that I have hit on something which is not only extremely simple, but which is extremely significant. Why is there universal reaction against what he said?
Probably the most difficult argument to refute, which could be supported even by the Cornerstone passages in the epistles, is that people who are obeying some inner voice are, in fact, obeying Jesus, whether or not that inner voice is saying the same things that Jesus is recorded as having said. They say that they are following the living Jesus. (I think they mean the Holy Spirit, that other person of the Trinity, and something that I fully believe in.)
But that raises the same serious questions about all the others who say that they too, are following some inner voice, from the free sex of the Children of God to the suicide pact of Jonestown. All of these people thought (or at least claimed) that they were following the Holy Spirit/Jesus.
The same goes for all the other doctrines being put forward as criteria for determining who is right... each of them is being taught by someone who claims to have God's Spirit.
So what you find amongst those who argue in favour of being "led by the Spirit" is that they still need a secondary standard for discerning the good guys from the bad guys... for separating what they believe from what other "Spirit-led" people claim to believe.
The most common standard is that the Spirit must be consistent with what the Bible says. Not necessarily with what Jesus said, but just with something they have read virtually anywhere in the Bible. If the Bible says to stone homosexuals, and they feel "led" to stone homosexuals, then it's okay. If the Bible says Solomon was prosperous, and they feel "led" to become millionaires, then that's okay too.
But when you look more closely, virtually every evangelical Christian in the world is claiming (a) to be Christian; (b) to be born again; (c) to be Spirit-led; and finally (d) to be basing their teachings on something from the Bible. Yet they continue to come up with some of the most bizarre teachings and arguments and there is little or no agreement amongst them all.
So we end up back where we started, with everyone quoting proof texts, flashing manmade traditions and doctrines as being right, and declaring the others to be wrong. And in the midst of all the noise, the teachings of Jesus continue to collect dust.
Like I said, when I bring up the teachings of Jesus, suddenly I am accused of being unloving, out of the Spirit, legalistic, even satanic. But that, too, is covered in the teachings of Jesus, praise God! He says that if they called him Beelzebul, then how much more will they use such accusations against those of us who seek to follow him.
The anti-Jesus' teachings people say, too, that I am pushing my own "interpretation" of the teachings of Jesus... at the same time that they refuse to even look at what Jesus actually said. Why? Because what Jesus is recorded as having said is so spot on just as it's written, that there is little need for "interpretation".
While I say that Jesus literally meant for us to love our enemies, just as it's written, their "interpretation" is that it's okay to kill them if your country tells you to! And they race all over the rest of the Bible looking for excuses to do this with virtually everything that Jesus taught.
They say that Jesus left a few words out, which they can prove by something Paul said; or that Jesus was never given the authority to speak to the Gentiles... only Paul has that; or that Jesus never intended for us to obey him; or that Jesus was only making limited demands on a specific group of people, which has no relevance to us today; or that Jesus was prone to exaggeration and hyperbole, etc.
While they teach that the rest of the Bible is infallible, that it is eternal, that it is complete, the teachings of Jesus are attacked as being fallible, temporary, and incomplete without their other false cornerstones to knock Jesus into place. The end result is that, rather than being the Cornerstone as he deserves to be, Jesus is set aside, so they can continue with their false churches and false doctrines, all built on false cornerstones.
So here I am, judging them... the very same thing that I accused them of at the start of this article... with one difference... I'm defending Jesus and what he is recorded as having said, and they are not. And I think that makes all the difference in the world... in this one, and in the one to come. Hallelujah!
Over the years I have noted hundreds of divisions (if not thousands) between professing Christians, many of which lead one side or the other (or both) to make accusations against the others, some going so far as to say that the others are heretics, demonic, going to hell, or even satanists... when all that is happening is that they are disagreeing on a particular interpretation of something.
The problem, as I have seen it, is that each person is building on a different cornerstone, i.e. a different criteria for determining who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.
There are hundreds of these false cornerstones around, such as whether or not a person speaks in tongues, whether or not a person has a particular take on Bible prophecy, whether or not one believes in the Trinity, whether or not one believes that the whole Bible is infallible, whether or not the King James Version of the Bible is the infallible version, whether or not one uses the right words when baptizing someone (or enough water or at what age or whether they are dipped forward or backwards, etc.) and (most commonly) whether or not one belongs to the right church.
Obviously something is wrong.
We do need some criteria for finding our way through all of this confusion, but let's not be too quick to jump into the fray with just another half-baked formula. The Bible itself talks about a Cornerstone, i.e. a measuring device which can be used to build the rest of our "house" squarely and solidly.
It says that the "builders" (whoever that may be) will toss that Cornerstone aside, assuming that it is not suitable for what they wish to build. When that happens, of course, they end up with a distortion, based around some other false cornerstone.
Most of us know that there are references to Jesus being that Cornerstone. However, the trouble even then is that some people see this as being some esoteric, invisible, purely subjective version of Jesus, as exists in their own "hearts". In other words, we end up, once again, with a cornerstone that does NOT separate the good guys from the bad guys.
It can be used by anyone to do virtually anything. We have jumped back into the same melee of everyone shouting that they have the mind of Christ, they have the Holy Spirit, they have been led to condemn everyone else who is not doing things their way.
But what about the historical Jesus, the real Jesus, the objective Jesus who appears in the Scriptures, in particular, in the first four books of the New Testament? Jesus himself used much the same illustration (i.e. the Cornerstone one) except that in his Sermon on the Mount he referred to it as the entire foundation on which we are to build our house, and that foundation, Jesus said, was his teachings.
Well, a bit more than that, because he concluded his sermon with a story about a foolish man who actually heard what he (Jesus) had taught, but then failed to obey it. That man was building on sand. But, Jesus said, the wise man is the one who, having heard the teachings of Jesus (the Rock, the Cornerstone) actually obeyed them. This man had found the foundation that would never fail.
It is exciting to think that it could be as simple as that. That we only need to make the teachings of Jesus our standard, and with his teachings, we can test all of our other doctrines, all of our other leadings, all of the various teachings and organizations, and we will arrive at the truth.
I believe that it IS as simple as that. Oh, there will be slight disagreements, but nothing like the overwhelming Babylon (which means 'confusion') that exists when we turn to any of the other myriad criteria for passing judgment that abound in the church world today.
I have, however, discovered that when I point to the teachings of Jesus, a torrent of abuse is poured out by people who have chosen other cornerstones besides the teachings of Jesus. Ironically, many of these people cannot get along with one another, but when it comes to opposing the teachings of Jesus, there is an uproar of unity amongst them all.
That, in itself, makes me think that I have hit on something which is not only extremely simple, but which is extremely significant. Why is there universal reaction against what he said?
Probably the most difficult argument to refute, which could be supported even by the Cornerstone passages in the epistles, is that people who are obeying some inner voice are, in fact, obeying Jesus, whether or not that inner voice is saying the same things that Jesus is recorded as having said. They say that they are following the living Jesus. (I think they mean the Holy Spirit, that other person of the Trinity, and something that I fully believe in.)
But that raises the same serious questions about all the others who say that they too, are following some inner voice, from the free sex of the Children of God to the suicide pact of Jonestown. All of these people thought (or at least claimed) that they were following the Holy Spirit/Jesus.
The same goes for all the other doctrines being put forward as criteria for determining who is right... each of them is being taught by someone who claims to have God's Spirit.
So what you find amongst those who argue in favour of being "led by the Spirit" is that they still need a secondary standard for discerning the good guys from the bad guys... for separating what they believe from what other "Spirit-led" people claim to believe.
The most common standard is that the Spirit must be consistent with what the Bible says. Not necessarily with what Jesus said, but just with something they have read virtually anywhere in the Bible. If the Bible says to stone homosexuals, and they feel "led" to stone homosexuals, then it's okay. If the Bible says Solomon was prosperous, and they feel "led" to become millionaires, then that's okay too.
But when you look more closely, virtually every evangelical Christian in the world is claiming (a) to be Christian; (b) to be born again; (c) to be Spirit-led; and finally (d) to be basing their teachings on something from the Bible. Yet they continue to come up with some of the most bizarre teachings and arguments and there is little or no agreement amongst them all.
So we end up back where we started, with everyone quoting proof texts, flashing manmade traditions and doctrines as being right, and declaring the others to be wrong. And in the midst of all the noise, the teachings of Jesus continue to collect dust.
Like I said, when I bring up the teachings of Jesus, suddenly I am accused of being unloving, out of the Spirit, legalistic, even satanic. But that, too, is covered in the teachings of Jesus, praise God! He says that if they called him Beelzebul, then how much more will they use such accusations against those of us who seek to follow him.
The anti-Jesus' teachings people say, too, that I am pushing my own "interpretation" of the teachings of Jesus... at the same time that they refuse to even look at what Jesus actually said. Why? Because what Jesus is recorded as having said is so spot on just as it's written, that there is little need for "interpretation".
While I say that Jesus literally meant for us to love our enemies, just as it's written, their "interpretation" is that it's okay to kill them if your country tells you to! And they race all over the rest of the Bible looking for excuses to do this with virtually everything that Jesus taught.
They say that Jesus left a few words out, which they can prove by something Paul said; or that Jesus was never given the authority to speak to the Gentiles... only Paul has that; or that Jesus never intended for us to obey him; or that Jesus was only making limited demands on a specific group of people, which has no relevance to us today; or that Jesus was prone to exaggeration and hyperbole, etc.
While they teach that the rest of the Bible is infallible, that it is eternal, that it is complete, the teachings of Jesus are attacked as being fallible, temporary, and incomplete without their other false cornerstones to knock Jesus into place. The end result is that, rather than being the Cornerstone as he deserves to be, Jesus is set aside, so they can continue with their false churches and false doctrines, all built on false cornerstones.
So here I am, judging them... the very same thing that I accused them of at the start of this article... with one difference... I'm defending Jesus and what he is recorded as having said, and they are not. And I think that makes all the difference in the world... in this one, and in the one to come. Hallelujah!
