Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 5: Brian Zahnd’s Examples of Trumping Jesus with the Bible

This is the fifth part of my review of Brian Zahnd’s teaching at The Meeting House. You can read Part 1, Part 2Part 3, and Part 4. In this series am reviewing Zahnd’s sermon and a Roundtable podcast he participated in during his visit to The Meeting House.

His sermon was called “Bad Idea: The Bible Trumps Jesus” in which he argues for what can only be described as an incoherent view of Scripture. To Zahnd, the Bible is inconsistent, contradictory, and contains erroneous “assumptions” about God. Because of this, he advocates that we interpret all of Scripture through the lens of Jesus. This results in the rejection of any Scripture which doesn’t fit his preexisting view of what he thinks Jesus should be like. We have seen so far that to prove his point, Zahnd handles the Scriptures dishonestly, argues illogically, and does so with a contemptible level of mockery.

In this post I’m going to address the examples Zahnd gives of using the Bible to trump Jesus. Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 5: Brian Zahnd’s Examples of Trumping Jesus with the Bible”

Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 4: Brian Zahnd’s Confusion Reaches it’s Apex

This is the fouth part of my review of Brian Zahnd’s teaching at The Meeting House. For some context, you can read Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. In this series I am reviewing Zahnd’s sermon and a Roundtable podcast he participated in during his visit to The Meeting House.

His sermon was called “Bad Idea: The Bible Trumps Jesus” in which he argues for an incoherent view of Scripture. To Zahnd, the Bible is inconsistent, contradictory, and contains erroneous “assumptions” about God. Because of this, he advocates that we interpret all of Scripture through the lens of Jesus.

In this post I’m going to address something Zahnd says which, frankly, frightens me.

Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 4: Brian Zahnd’s Confusion Reaches it’s Apex”

Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 3: Brian Zahnd, John 5, and the Infallible Capacity of the Fallible Scripture

This is the third part of my review of Brian Zahnd’s teaching at The Meeting House. In this series I will be reviewing Zahnd’s sermon and a Roundtable podcast he participated in during his visit to The Meeting House.

shoot-self-in-foot-850x430

He preached a sermon called “Bad Idea: The Bible Trumps Jesus” in which he argues for an incoherent view of Scripture and it’s relationship to Jesus. To Zahnd, the Bible is inconsistent, contradictory, and contains erroneous “assumptions” about God. Because of this, he advocates that we interpret all of Scripture through his particular view of Jesus. Zahnd later tells us “Jesus saves the Bible from being just another violent religious text”.

Bruxy Cavey and the leadership of BIC Canada apparently thought it would be a good idea to have Zahnd in to address their people. It’s not surprising considering most of the stuff he said I have heard in one form or another from Cavey himself. The statement addressed in this post is certainly something I have heard from Cavey. This is not just a critique of Brian Zahnd, but Bruxy Cavey as well as an indictment on the leadership of BIC Canada and The Meeting House.

I did an overview of the message and addressed a couple issues in the first two posts. This post assumes you’ve read those (Part 1, Part 2)

In this post I’m going to address a specific statement in Zahnd’s sermon. This statement refutes his own position. Furthermore, his view makes nonsense of the text he cites.

Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 3: Brian Zahnd, John 5, and the Infallible Capacity of the Fallible Scripture”

Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 2: What is Brian Zahnd’s Authority?

cafeteria

This is the second part of my review of Brian Zahnd’s teaching at The Meeting House. You can read Part 1 here. In this series I will be reviewing Zahnd’s sermon and a Roundtable podcast he participated in during his visit to The Meeting House in October of 2017.

His sermon was called “Bad Idea: The Bible Trumps Jesus” in which he argues for what can only be described as an incoherent view of Scripture and authority. To Zahnd, the Bible is inconsistent, contradictory, and contains erroneous “assumptions” about God. Because of this, he advocates that we interpret all of Scripture through the lens of Jesus.

In Part 1 I gave an overview of Zahnd’s message, and pointed out that he abuses the biblical story of Christ’s transfiguration.

In this post, I want to call attention to Zahnd’s use of a specific text, and point out that his incoherent view regarding the authority of Scripture forces him to be completely arbitrary in what he is willing to lend authority to.

Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 2: What is Brian Zahnd’s Authority?”

Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 1: Brian Zahnd at The Meeting House

ZahndBadIdeaHeader

The Meeting House, where Bruxy Cavey is Teaching Pastor, recently concluded a series called “Bad Ideas” in which Cavey and others spoke out against concepts that they say corrupt the true message of Christ. One of the guests in this series was Brian Zahnd. He was there to speak on the “bad idea” that the Bible trumps Jesus.

While I normally would stick to critiquing Bruxy Cavey, this message was delivered at The Meeting House with Bruxy Cavey’s hearty endorsement. This is the kind of teaching that Bruxy Cavey, BIC Canada, and The Meeting House are bringing in. I think it’s relevant.

I am going to review Zahnd’s message and a Roundtable Podcast he did with Cavey over the next few posts. I intend to demonstrate that any Christian who takes the Scripture as the authoritative word of God and desires to handle it correctly has no reason to give Brian Zahnd any credibility as a responsible Bible teacher at all.

Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey Importing American Lies 1: Brian Zahnd at The Meeting House”

Augustine Refutes BIC Canada Leadership (and other Errantists) – Part 2

maxresdefault

In my last post I demonstrated that Bruxy Cavey, Doug Sider, and Darrell Winger espoused a common lie in their podcast “Inerrancy, Authority, Tradition and the Bible” when they said that that the concept of biblical inerrancy was a relatively novel doctrine in church history. We saw that Augustine, writing near the end of the fourth century, argued for the inerrancy of the Scriptures in the same way that inerrantists do today.

I wanted to share one more example of Augustine’s belief in biblical inerrancy. This one is found in his disputation with Faustus the Manichean, Book 11.

Continue reading “Augustine Refutes BIC Canada Leadership (and other Errantists) – Part 2”

Augustine Refutes BIC Canada Leadership (and other Errantists) – Part 1

maxresdefault

It’s common for modern day theological liberals, progressive Christians, and others to claim that the doctrine of inerrancy is a fairly novel doctrine. They will often trace it back to the nineteenth century as a recent invention of fundamentalists to fight liberalism. The claim that the doctrine of inerrancy is a novel doctrine is very common among those who reject it and still wish to be considered to be consistent with what Christians have believed down through history.

Recently, in a podcast called “Inerrancy, Authority, Tradition and the Bible” (video here), Bruxy Cavey held what is called a “Meeting House Round Table” to discuss his denomination’s view of Scripture. I plan on posting a review of the whole podcast soon, but for now I want to briefly touch on one aspect of it.

Cavey’s guests were Doug Sider, Executive Director of BIC Canada, and Darrell Winger, Executive Pastor of The Meeting House. In their rejection of the inerrancy of Scripture both Sider and Winger claimed that inerrancy was new, invented to combat liberalism in the nineteenth century.

Continue reading “Augustine Refutes BIC Canada Leadership (and other Errantists) – Part 1”

Bruxy Cavey and Inclusivism: Utter Gospel Confusion – Part 2

sheep-and-goats

In my last post (it’s been a while, I know) I documented that Bruxy Cavey embraces the idea that there are people in this world who will die with no knowledge of Christ whatsoever and yet be justified in the sight of God. Bruxy appeals to Matthew 25:31-46 to justify this, claiming that the sheep Jesus ushers into eternal life are those who worshipped Jesus although they knew nothing about him. Their service to the poor and less fortunate is received by Jesus as worship. I pointed out that not only is this not what Matthew 25 is teaching, but that Bruxy’s view amounts to justification by works for these sheep.

Well, after my post, Bruxy preached this view yet again at The Meeting House, and wrote a follow-up blog post over at his blog. In Bruxy’s post he doubles-down on his unbiblical view of Matthew 25:31-46, and attempts to explain how his view is not one of works salvation. Let’s examine what he has to say. Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey and Inclusivism: Utter Gospel Confusion – Part 2”

In My Place, Condemned He Stood – Bruxy Cavey’s Denial of Penal Substitution Refuted

agnusdei_448x280Today I am sharing a sermon I heard recently.

In My Place, Condemned He Stood” is preached by Pastor Carl Muller of Trinity Baptist Church in Burlington, Ontario. In this sermon, Pastor Muller responds to those who would deny the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, such as Bruxy Cavey of The Meeting House. In fact, Bruxy’s erroneous statements that Penal Substitutionary Atonement is a novel doctrine that “goes beyond Scripture” are directly quoted as “perhaps the most disturbing example” of those rejecting the doctrine. For more direct quotes from Bruxy on Penal Substitution click here. Continue reading “In My Place, Condemned He Stood – Bruxy Cavey’s Denial of Penal Substitution Refuted”

Bruxy Cavey and Paul Hill: Detaching Christ from Scripture

Bruxy Cavey loves to make a distinction between following Jesus and following the Bible. This is a distinction without a difference. Cavey uses this tactic to justify dismissing those things in the Bible which he deems inconsistent with his own view of Christ (more about this later in this article). I have addressed this false distinction here.

When we imbue the Bible with the place and power that only Jesus should hold, Christ-followers can become idolatrous Bible-followers rather than Christ-followers – and that is a recipe for disaster.” – The Authority of the Word of God in Print and in Person – The Meeting House

To drive this point home, Cavey uses the example of a Pastor named Paul Hill (see this sermon and The Authority of the Word of God in Print and in Person). Reverend Paul Hill professed Christ and, in Cavey’s words, was “A very dedicated and passionate evangelical pastor, Paul Hill was committed to the authority of Scripture. He was passionate for God, and followed the Bible as his authority for faith and practice.” Reverend Hill shot and killed an abortion doctor and his bodyguard with a shotgun and found his justification for doing so in the Scriptures, according to Bruxy Cavey.

Continue reading “Bruxy Cavey and Paul Hill: Detaching Christ from Scripture”