Not So Famous…

When contending for the faith, I often hear the argument that the Bible ought not be believed because is has been used to justify many past atrocities.  Ultimately, there really is no real logic in this argument, and the counter-argument is simple.

If we didn’t know what the Bible taught, there would be no way to objectively determine whether or not these atrocities were justified. But this is not the situation in which we find ourselves. We can easily look at a translation of the Holy Scriptures in our own language and determine whether something like the Inquisition, or the Crusades, or the Witch Hunts, or any other mass killing is condoned by the whole of Scripture. What we find when we delve into the Bible is that such papal bulls as what started the Spanish Inquisition and indulgences such as what were granted to those who participated in the Crusades are not condoned by Scripture. No amount of professing the name of Christ can change that fact.

To begin with, I feel I must present the definitive argument in favor of translation of the Scriptures into the vulgar languages.  Jesus quoted the Old Testament exclusively; referred to it as an authority, in fact.  However, he did not refer to the original Hebrew translation. The language of the land in Israel in Jesus’ time was Greek, and the version of the Scriptures he quoted was the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament. So referring to the Scriptures in English is perfectly acceptable.  Manuscript evidence only supports this, though I do not have the time to go into it at this time.  For a great argument on manuscript evidence, refer to McDowell’s book, New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. It’s excellent.

Now, Christ’s followers only represent Christ insofar as they adhere to the teachings of Scripture.  None of us do this perfectly, of course, and we should not expect that we ever will.  We should always be up front about where we fail.  We should be up front about our inability to keep the law perfectly…to perfectly obey.  However, our sins are easily shown to be sins in light of what the Scripture teaches.

That being said, the Church does NOT represent the teachings of Christ when they condone killings, mass- or otherwise.  Whether we’re talking about the Catholic Church, or any Protestant Church.  The Church does not possess the sword, to execute evildoers.  This does not mean that capital punishment is not condoned in Scriptures.  It is, but it is not the province of the church to live by the sword. It’s important to recognize that authority is given to organizations in spheres.  It is also not the place of the Civil Government to command its citizens to sin.  It is not the place of the Civil Government to hold authority over the Word of God.  And it is not the Church’s place to execute evildoers.

In the case of the Crusades, the pope Alexander II had no right to be granting indulgences to anyone whether they died in a holy cause or not.  Christ alone can forgive sins, and it isn’t based on our actions.  Part of the problem the Protestants had with the Roman Catholic Church is that they claimed authority over the Word of God rather than the other way around.

In the case of the Inquisition, the Gospel is never to be preached using death as an impetus to conversion. The 1st Century Church never used such tactics to convert the lost, and the letters we have from the apostles never encouraged the church to do so.

Ultimately, the Church ceases to be representative of Christ when she leaves the clear teaching of the Word of God.  The Church has done many things over the course of history that she ought not be proud of.  And the Bible can easily be used to show where they went wrong, without ignoring some passages, or twisting the meanings of verses.  The reverse is not true.  The only way the Church could prove that they have Biblical support for their position is to do that very thing: twist and exclude.  However, it ought to be understood that historically, the Church has not needed to provide Scriptural support for beliefs.

While it is true that Jesus quoted a translation of the Scriptures, such translations were frowned upon by the Church after Jerome’s Vulgate. The people did not have a translation in their language until the work of Tyndale, who translated the Bible into Middle English.  (There had been translations of the Word of God, partial and complete, into Old English, but they were not readily available due to the fact that the printing press had not yet been invented. Such translations were primarily reserved for clergy whose grasp of Latin was not sufficient to be able to read the Word of God.)

What this means is that the average person in medieval times would not have been able to discern the true teaching of the Word of God.  They would have taken any word from the Church as truth.  However this should not be taken to mean that the Church always and unfailingly dispensed Truth! What it means, however, is that proof of orthodoxy was not requisite for the Church to issue decrees in medieval times.  During most of the Crusades and Spanish Inquisition (as examples), the Church did not provide Scriptural proof for its decrees and papal bulls.  This allowed for some damnable heresies to masquerade as accepted Biblical practice for many years.

What all of this shows is that the statement “the Bible has been used to justify thus and such” is really not true.  The Bible was not used to justify these types of actions.  The name of Christ was used as a seal of approval, but such claims do not hold up under Biblical scrutiny.

In closing, I would urge every one of you to read the Bible for yourselves.  Determine what the Bible teaches, and judge actions based on that alone. Remember that if someone names the name of Christ, they are not necessarily a Christian.  Christ, Himself, said that on the last day, there would be many who cried out to Christ, “Lord, Lord”, but who were workers of iniquity. The logical meaning of this phrase is that not everyone who claims to be a Christian is one in reality.  Finally, do not hold the actions of sinful man as reason to doubt the teachings of Christ.  Read for yourself and find out what is in keeping with the doctrine of Christ and what is not.