Who Are the Theological “Fathers” of the Born Again Assembly (Edited by ChatGPT)

  

Imagine a theoretical physicist who claims that the core facts of physics are wrong, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Would you take him seriously? It would be absurd to do so — unless you were studying the history of scientific thought.

 

Jesus is God, the entire Bible is about Jesus, salvation is only through Jesus, and we are commanded not to bow to idols, “angels,” “saints,” or even our good mother. These are the core and undeniable facts of Scripture. So should we take seriously anyone who rejects these basic truths of the faith?

 

If a Muslim wrote a biblical commentary or a book explaining why Jesus is not God, would you take him as having any value for biblical knowledge? If a Jew who does not see Jesus in the Bible wrote a book about the Bible, would you take him seriously — let alone as a top biblical scholar? Unless that Jew is born again, his ideas are nothing but worthless nonsense. A person who cannot see the camel in the Bible cannot see the insect, let alone be my biblical guide.

 

Now, any lost soul who does not accept the Bible as the sole authority of truth, who does not believe that salvation is only through Jesus, and who teaches the worship of idols, “angels,” “saints,” or “our good mother,” is not fit to be called a biblical scholar — let alone a theological “father.” How can the dead be the “theological fathers” of the living? Why are we consulting witch doctors of theology when the living God dwells in our hearts?

 

The first truth is this: if we speak the truth about the Bible, it is not ours — it belongs to God. So if God teaches truth through us, our Teacher is the Lord Jesus Christ. Our Father is the Heavenly Father. Therefore, we have no “theological fathers” or “church fathers” at all.

If God is our Teacher and the Bible is before us, why are we consulting the dead to understand the living? The living cannot consult the dead heretics — much less call them “Fathers,” a title reserved for God alone.

 

Calvin made mistakes. Luther made mistakes. Even those labeled as cult leaders, like Ellen White, made mistakes. Many brothers and sisters in the faith stumble here and there while following Jesus toward the light. But they are not our theological fathers, mothers, or teachers, because we have one Father — the Heavenly Father — and one Teacher — the Lord Jesus Christ. When they speak truth, it is Jesus who speaks through them. When they stumble, it is Peter trying to lead Jesus — a failure of a born-again faithful.

 

These were giant servants of the Lord, and we can stand tall today because of the great work God did through them. When we see their errors, it is because they worked hard to bring bright light into the midst of darkness. Standing in that light, we can now see their blind spots.

 

Just as it is wrong to raise Luther, Calvin, Ellen White, or even Paul to the standard of Jesus, it is equally disrespectful and foolish to ignore the light and life that God brought to us through them. They were wrong on critical points, but they were right on many others. In fact, when you balance Luther with Calvin and Calvin with others, you see the growth of our theology. That is why, even as we correct their shortcomings, we must recognize that these torches were the ones who led us out of the darkness of the devil — out of the dead religions of both the West and the East.

 

We are their certificate of commendation — the evidence that they were messengers of God. We are the living proof of God’s work through them. As for Ellen White, despite her major theological blunders, I have seen enough of the fruit to know who she is.

 

We also have theological contributions from those of the true faith before the rise of darkness in Rome. Many of their writings are nothing but hocus-pocus and chewing-gum theology — but a few are wine, improving in taste over time. Many of them borrowed the nonsense of their age — the dominant philosophy of the time — and tried to make their apology for God. They had love, which is more important than knowledge, but we are now speaking of knowledge — and they had none.

 

When you force Jesus through Plato or Aristotle, nothing good comes out — only chewing gum. People may enjoy it for a while, but its end is the trash bin. But when your theology is biblical and drawn from the Bible alone, the fools of the age may call you ignorant — yet you are wine. Human ideas come and go, but the Word of God is the only stable ground under the sun. That is why, theologically speaking, men like Irenaeus — and Paul himself — those peasants of the Bible, represent the wisdom of God.

 

So should we now add men from dead religions — those who cannot grasp even the rudimentary truths of our faith — as “Church Fathers”? Were they living and born again? If not, why is the living consulting the dead? It is because our theology has become upside-down — built from the bottom instead of from above. We categorize, we count, we analyze — and since we work like the dead, we consult the dead.

 

That is why we must read the Bible as the living, not as the dead. We must pray that God opens our eyes — far more than we need to perfect our methods. Let the slaves work hard on their methods; as a child of God, work smart. If those slaves did their work right, you will be their limit. So study the Bible as a child of God, and if you must consult the works of others, focus on the living — like Luther and Calvin — rather than the chewing gums of dead religion. If you are holy unto God, separate yourself from the dead, for there is no unity between the living and the dead.