It is easy to believe that the things we want to be true are true. These are but assumptions. Unless you are genuinely after the truth, you take a huge risk. Here is some advice for telling the difference: treat the things you want to be true as if they are things you don't.
The same things that ruin a marriage ruin a Bible study: cheating, lies, jumping to conclusions, secrets, assumptions, carelessness, complacency, shortcuts, taking things for granted.
The problem is, these tools can be found in many people's bible study toolbox, especially when they want a particular outcome.
I was an Armstrongist ...until I couldn't be anymore. Why? Because I gave myself permission to ask questions and then I threw away those tools. I decided I wanted the truth - God's truth. God is truth. If I had to use devices such as those, then perhaps my "truths" weren't so true after all. If finding what really is true means sacrificing things I very much wanted to believe - things I'd built my entire life on - then that is just how it had to be.
I am going to warn you, though - following this advice to pursue truth will not make you popular.
I've been insulted over the years, let me tell ya, but usually it's because I dare to ask questions people haven't considered, and they don't like this. But I don't just do this to Armstrongism; I do it to everything. Especially my own beliefs! The whole point of this article, the whole idea I want to convey to you, is not to pick apart other people's claims but your own.
Isn't that what we all should do? I say yes. Yes it is.
Please allow me to give you an example from a recent experience of mine.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING
I met a man online who was adamant that he had figured out the book of Revelation. Yeah, one of those guys. So many people have prophecy all figured out, and no two are the same. Trying to get prophecy all figured out is pretty much what started Adventism in the first place. Trying to figure out prophecy is what started me into Armstrongism.
So, I asked this guy some simple questions (as I do), and he called me some names (as they do), then he pointed me to his "study". I figured why not read it? If he genuinely has it all figured out, then I want to know. Guess what his study was - jumping to conclusions, assumptions, carelessness, complacency, shortcuts, taking things for granted, etc.
It read like he had a goal in mind and was just filling in spots. Wild leaps of logic in places. The majority of the claims consisted of making blanket statements paired with proof-texts that didn't legitimately support his claims at all. Nothing in his study was proved. It was all confirmation bias through and through. When I came by and asked simple questions about it, he felt personally threatened. Hence the name calling. But isn't that response a dead giveaway that he isn't after the truth? Is the truth ever so fragile that it cannot withstand being verified? No. The truth can take care of itself. But he was not after the truth. He was after a predetermined conclusion that he had already declared to be the truth before he even started.
I selected one part, a negative part about Catholics (apparently Catholic-bashing is mandatory in Sabbatarian prophecy studies), and I said this was just an assumption, not proof. He protested. In his mind, the Pope is the Beast, so all he needs to do is post a verse about the Beast and that's "proof".
I disagree. I reject the predetermined conclusion in the first place. To me, it's not a valid conclusion until after it's proven out.
Experience told me he would take me on a goose chase and layer on his other assumptions, but no! Instead, he responded, "I never mentioned Catholics."
??? *sigh*
So, I pointed out the page and quoted his mention of Catholics. Guy didn't know what his own study said! Was it even his??
That's when I asked if he would mind a little constructive criticism. I told him, "Look. If you haven't tried to prove yourself wrong, then you haven't proved anything at all."
PROVE ALL THINGS, TEST THE SPIRITS
That advice is some of the best I can ever offer you.
And, no, today's article is not about prophecy. It's good advice for everything.
Stress test your own claims. I mean really think them through. Pay attention to what you are saying, and where it comes from, and what your motivation is. Investigate the start and pursue all logical conclusions to it. Pick at each little detail. If you don't do that, then you aren't proving anything.
Predetermined conclusions, misquotes, logical fallacies, confirmation bias, false history, assumptions, group think - none of these are proof. There is a world of difference between "I need it to be such and such" and "it definitely is such and such".
I GOT NOTHIN'
I will give you a second example.
I was on social media the other day. Bill posted a comment that said, "Going to synagogue on Sabbath is not a command from God but a man-made tradition." Bill is right. This led to a typical discussion.
A man responded, "Those who keep it, follow His custom." To which I responded, "So, manmade traditions are fine after all." (Going to synagogue on Sabbath is a manmade tradition, but manmade traditions are absolutely verboten in Sabbatarianism. The implications of this are broad.)
The man responded to me, "The commandments are from God and not man-made." Except there is no commandment from God to go to synagogue on Sabbath; that was Bill's point to begin with. And now, his "follow custom" statement has become "follow command". He reversed himself mid-stride.
This went on for a while. He went to "you don't need a command" (a second reversal), then to "God commanded the 4th Commandment" (third reversal), and when I posted the actual 4th Commandment, he responded, "you can't rely on one verse." Then he brought up the phrase "holy convocation," which I explained doesn't mean 'go to church'. After that, he posted one verse (I thought he wasn't going to do that). Next, he said that I am being biased. Rriiiiiighht. Then he went back to 'holy convocation' again, which I reminded him we had already covered. In the end, he would do nothing but put down laugh emojis. A grown man.
Do you see what he was doing? Saying anything in the moment, anything at all, that he felt would get what he wanted. He didn't expect anyone to pay attention and remind him of what he'd said earlier. All of that work just to dodge the inevitable: Bill's observation is true.
This person shouldn't have needed Bill or me to tell him anything. There was no need for him to be surprised or to reverse himself so often. He could have been absolutely prepared had he but followed my simple advice that I give you today. He could have put his own assumptions to the test.
But he won't. He loves his assumptions too much. He has accepted so deeply that going to church is how one 'keeps' the Sabbath day - without biblical proof - that he cannot grasp how it could be any other way. He could not prove it was this way, but he needs it to be this way. Now he feels Bill is a threat for making a true statement.
(GAL. 4:16) Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?
Be your own harshest critic or someone else will be. Worse yet, the truth will be.
Look, people will criticize you anyway. They criticize me all the time. Sometimes I even deserve it! But that's really beside the point. Be your own harshest critic so that nobody else has to.
HARD TO UNDERSTAND
I will give you a final example. Here is a favored proof-text, used in times of genuine desperation:
(2 PET. 3:15b-16) as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
In case you are unfamiliar with how this proof-text is used, I will explain.
Both Sabbatarians and Mainstream Christians accuse one another of not understanding the scriptures. (Can we ever get to the point where we understand it all?) So, after a person takes a good thrashing and needs to reassure their bruised ego, they get together with a group of like-minded people and pull out this proof-text. "The other side just doesn't understand scripture. Peter said this would happen."
First and foremost, Peter is saying Paul was right. Some Hebrew Roots groups want Paul "ripped from your Bible" (that's a quote) because he doesn't say what they want to hear. Peter calls Paul a 'beloved brother' and insinuates his writing is Scripture. Is ripping him out of your Bible truly the wise thing to do?
Second, read verses 14 & 15:
(II PET. 3:14b-15) be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation
This is what Peter is on about. Peter says Paul wrote about these same things. He didn't expound on every topic you lost a debate about on social media. Peter didn't really side with any group. He didn't mention prophecy. He didn't talk about the Sabbath day. He talked about these things and then said some people twist Paul's meaning. And that is exactly what this proof-text is frequently used for. Oh the irony! To employ Peter's warning in the exact way he warned against.
Do you understand what I am trying to say?
The person abusing Paul and Scripture, and Peter for that matter, might be you! How do you know if you have the truth or a beloved lie? You put yourself to the test! You try to disprove your own sacred cows and you accept the results.
(2 PET. 3:17-18) 17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand [that Paul is being misused], beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; 18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Heed Peter's advice to grow in Sabbath and knowledge of prophecy.
No. He doesn't tell us that.
Heed Peter's advice to double-down on something you cannot prove.
No. He doesn't tell us that, either.
Heed Peter's advice to grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus.
You want the truth? Pursue the Truth. His name is Jesus.
(JON. 18:37) 37 Pilate therefore said to Him, “Are You a king then?” Jesus answered, “You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”
JESUS DEALT WITH IT TOO
Belief and truth are not synonymous. Jesus dealt with this from everyone around Him, Pharisee and Apostle alike. No one had a clue what was really going on ...at least in part because they were too busy thinking they already knew exactly what was going on.
The Apostles weren't catching on to the plan, even though they accepted Jesus as Messiah, and were with Him all the time, and even though they learned the Scriptures since they were kids, because what Jesus did and how He did them wasn't in line with their expectations.
Judas Iscariot betrayed the Messiah he followed because the Messiah wasn't behaving as Judas desperately wanted Him to behave.
The Pharisees murdered the giver of their beloved law because the Lawgiver wasn't behaving as they thought He absolutely must behave.
You could say the same for Simon the Zealot, the Rich Young Ruler, Nicodemus, Saul, the believing Pharisees at the Council of Jerusalem, and all the rest. No one knew what was going on, but they all thought they did. Every single one needed to rethink their core assumptions. Some of these would rather kill someone than reassess themselves.
To be fair, Jesus did need to open our eyes to it. Yet, I cannot help but wonder if He had to do that because of something outside of man's control, or if He had to do that because of stubbornness and hardness of heart. Good thing many of them eventually did eventually reassess.
I will pay the Pharisees a backhanded compliment: at least they tried to verify.
Now, that said, what they did was the equivalent of an Armstrongist saying, "I looked all through church material but there wasn't anything there to support your claim that Armstrongism is wrong."
It's a 'backhanded compliment' because it's really a criticism, you see. Of course the Pharisees didn't find anything in their own material that disproves their own material. Of course Armstrong never wrote to expose his own church. By necessity, to challenge means to think outside that box.
Here a vital key to it: Mind your sources!!
WATCHMEN
I remember something from my Armstrongist days that was actually solid advice. We were told that we had to be watchmen. We were told a good watchman doesn't stare in one direction all night. What if something comes from the other direction? If the watchman stares at the corner of the tower through the night, has he really been watching?
Think about that.
That's what confirmation bias does to Bible study. We can become so convinced that we know where the "enemy" is coming from that we never bother to look anywhere else. We examine arguments, but only the arguments we have already decided are wrong. We do not truly search for evidence, but we look in the approved places for confirmation of the approved conclusions. We think verses mean what they don't mean because we refuse to challenge those conclusions. We test everyone else's beliefs, but never turn the gaze around and ask whether our own position is the thing that needs testing.
That could be us, left with absolutely nothing but laughy emojis, if we do not challenge ourselves. In a world of Caiphases, be a Nicodemus.
DIFFICULT BUT NOT IMPOSSIBLE
Do you see what a human mind can do to justify itself and get what it wants if it tries hard enough? Stress testing your own beliefs is harder than I make it sound.
The catch here is ... everyone thinks they have the truth. No one truly believes a thing that they know to be a lie, but plenty of people believe a lie they "know" to be the truth.
Like that Mr. Laughy Emoji up there who thought he had the truth ...until he was challenged and learned he had based his life on thin air. Those laugh emojis were his way of refusing to accept reality.
How on earth do you follow my advice when you think you're already right? On ancillary things, it's simpler. But how do you do this to a core belief? How do you do this when you think you already have done this (using approved church material)? How do you criticize your proofs on the Sabbath day when the Sabbath day is at the very core of your entire church and personal identity? How do you do this when you've been told your eternal life depends on never challenging your church? How do you do this when you are afraid any answer besides the one you already have will get you the second death? How do you do this when your answer might mean your enemy was right all along and those laughy emojis are really laughing at you?
Ya just do.
Throw those faulty tools away from your toolbox, put your own beliefs to the same level of scrutiny as you do other people's beliefs, then accept the outcome. The truth will take care of itself.
CONCLUSION
To quote a successful author, "This is the frailty of religious identity. All reason and logic magically evaporate when one's religion is scrutinized even in the most tame of manners."
But scrutinize we must.
Sometimes this has real consequences.
Am I holding myself up as some great example for you to follow? No. I lived most of my life doing the very things I'm now criticizing. There's a difference between wisdom and experience. I am experienced. I'm that kid. The one who sticks something in the electrical outlet because I just have to know. I make mistakes. I miss details. I learn the hard way. But I've learned something through experience. I've learned to bust my backside to make sure I have at least tried...
to be my own harshest critic.
