From Whence The Truth Comes

20 October 2019

2 Timothy 3:14-4:5; Luke 18:1-18

One of the most fascinating novels I’ve read is James Michener’s “The Source”.  It is set around an archaeological dig in Israel; and while the story is largely fiction, the author uses real archaeological and historical data to create the many stories that unfold with each new discovery.  That is, the deeper they dig, the further back in history they go.  What is revealed, in part, is the evolution of religion from paganism to Judaism and Christianity. 

I thought about that book as I have been experiencing my own crisis of faith in questioning the evolution of Christianity.  I’ve begun reaching back to the early Church Fathers to gain some perspective on the development of Christian doctrine and practices because, frankly, I think modern Christianity has run so far off the rails in a vain effort to appease the modern culture that I wonder whether the Fathers – or the apostles - would recognize the Church today.  It seems that the more relevant the Church tries to be to the modern culture, the more irrelevant it becomes for believers … and The Truth.

It's not always a bad thing to think of ways to reach new generations, but what are we reaching them with?  Political activism?  The integrity and the transformational power of the Gospel is at stake.  Some compromises can be reached in the means of communication but never in the core of what we are called to communicate.  Sometimes – like love – the Truth hurts.

It is not that the Truth is intended to be hurtful, but genuine transformation in growing pains often is when the Gospel calls us away from a former life and our former selves and into the Fullness of Life in Christ.  That Gospel, the fullness of which does not at all mesh with the modern pop culture, is a whole new life.  Yet, even in its newness, that New Life requires that we always – ALWAYS – first consider the Source “from whence The Truth comes”.

Consider Paul’s encouragement to Timothy (2 Timothy 3:14-4:5).  He wrote, “Continue in what you have learned and firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it, and how from childhood you have known the sacred writings”. 

Although Paul seems to put himself up as the source from whom “you have learned and firmly believed”, he nevertheless points to the ultimate source of “sound doctrine”, the likes of which will be rejected by a fickle church more amused by novelty than willing to be fed by sound doctrine.  Although Timothy and subsequent generations will face cultures moving further and further away from The Truth as it is revealed in the Scriptures, Paul is encouraging Timothy to be always mindful of his “knowledge of sacred writings” (the Scriptures; in this case, what is commonly referred to as “Old Testament”). 

The “time when people will not put up with sound doctrine” was already upon the early Church – if not only a generation or two away.  It is not only our own contemporary culture which has tried to subjectify some core components of Christian doctrine and make it a matter of personal opinion; it has been happening for centuries.  I wonder, though, if it happens not because of some intentional rebellion against The Lord more than it is just human nature to become infatuated with anything that is “new and improved”.

I often think of where we once lived, a town in which there were three well- and long-established United Methodist Churches.  Once a fourth one was built, there was a significant falling away from some of the other long-established churches in a rush to be a part of something “new”.  It wasn’t good or bad; it just was.

Some (mostly Catholic theologians) have argued Paul may have foreseen something like the 16^th-century Reformation, but that observation may be a bit shallow.  Not perhaps entirely untrue, but also not completely honest.  Because of the corruption of the Roman Church and the popes who were controlled, bought, and paid for by rival kings, anything approved by these popes – including doctrine - had to have been considered corrupted.  That is to say, one who is corrupted can only convey corruption.

However, it must be remembered one could not go to a corner bookstore and buy a Bible or download an app.  Many, especially the significantly illiterate class, depended on the Church to teach and to convey “The Truth”.  For most, the source of “sound doctrine” was the Church, the bishop, and the local priest.  Yet if a bishop or a priest were corrupted and publicly revealed, the doctrine was no longer sound; and the source “from whence The Truth comes” was undermined.

To be sure, the Church is designated as the guardian of the Gospel and the teacher of sound doctrine – as long as we are not removed from The Source “From Whence The Truth Comes”.  Yet if there was any good thing which came from the Reformation, it was the broadened idea that the “priesthood of believers” (1 Peter 2:5-9) was not restricted to Judaism or to clergy.  It was the idea that we who are baptized are endowed by the Spirit of the Living God to live into that priesthood, that we, too, may, “proclaim the praises of Him who called [us] out of darkness [and] into His marvelous light”.

None of this, however, can ever be a mere matter of personal opinion.  The reason is simple: an opinion – particularly a biblically uninformed opinion – falsely, even defiantly, elevates the opinion-holder as The Ultimate Source “from whence The Truth comes”.  The Truth becomes subjective, and we are justified not by Christ Jesus but by our own pride, our own inflated sense of worth.

One example would be the Protestant notion of the prohibition of baptizing infants.  There is no such biblical reference that expressly prohibits infant baptism.  In fact, there is no specific baptismal prescription for exactly when or how baptism must be done.  We are only taught – “From Whence The Truth Comes” – that we are to be baptized. 

This is not to say one is right and the other is wrong.  It is only to say that long-standing traditions must be measured by the full weight and context of what is written; infant or believer’s baptism, sprinkling, pouring, or full immersion cannot be defined or argued for or against with any single verse.  That Jesus was baptized in a river may imply one thing or one way; that the Philippian jailer of Acts 16 who had his entire household baptized based only on his own conversion – no river is in that narrative - would imply another.

There are many long-held traditions that make perfect sense only because we’ve been doing them for generations, but it is long past time to reconnect to The Source “From Whence The Truth Comes”.  Because in the end, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?”  Or will He find only misguided, ill-informed, but well-intended traditions, opinions, and half-truths that are more the source of our comfort and faith than The Truth Himself? 

The world has lost its mind, but what is most troublesome is that the Church has lost a strong, confident sense of self.  When we are more concerned with being right than with being righteous, we reveal we have no idea Who the Head of the Church really is.  And we are too far removed from “the sacred writings” From Whence The Truth Comes”.  And our children and our grandchildren will pay the price.

Remember Who reached out to us when we were at our lowest and most vulnerable?  Remember Who has been there from the beginning?  Remember Who will be there when time as we know it will stand still?  He is Christ Jesus, the Eternal “Word which became flesh”.  It is He “From Whence The Truth Comes” – for He Himself is the Truth.  Amen.