Is the Reformation Over? | Hebrews 10:10-14

The Importance of Church History for Christian Doctrine

All right, it's good to be back with you all. I know we missed last week due to sickness and Some of us are also missing today due to sickness, so We have we do ask for your prayers. For that and I uh, I was very blessed during my study of church history for the last couple of sermons that I had preached and I hope that every everyone else was edified as well.

It really it really does amaze me how much I continue to learn and and to grow and deepen my faith during sermon prep and the the thing is that I had so many notes that I still wanted to preach on and I didn't really have the time to To cover all of them.

So I'm grateful today for the opportunity That I'm gonna be able to do that today with you all and share that with you all. The main theme of today's sermon is in its title and the bulletins as you can see is a question Is the Reformation over?

Is it over? But before we answer this question We need to first identify the presuppositions surrounding this question. Because what you believe about the Protestant Reformation will determine your answer to this question Such as was the Reformation overall good or bad?

Was the Reformation necessary? Is the work of Reformation still needed or still necessary today? Does history tend to rhyme or repeat itself? So now pause for a moment and ask yourself, how would you answer these questions?

How should we answer them? Those who would answer yes, the Reformation is over often do so because they believe that the Reformation was either a lamentable mistake an Error that never should have happened because it led to undesirable consequences.

Which is like what a you know, our other fellow church historian, Justo Gonzalez thinks The not so good ecumenical church historian that I quoted last time.

And.

You know, therefore we Protestants need to repent apologize to the Pope and come back to Rome because it was a mistake. Or if not a mistake Then it was just a temporary event in history that helped to correct certain abuses in the Roman Catholic Church state.

But is no longer needed today because of all the changes that Rome underwent passively and implemented actively including ecumenical outreaches to Protestant churches and and likewise Protestant churches making ecumenical outreaches to Rome Such as the Evangelicals and Catholics together.

On the other hand those who would answer no, the Reformation is not over Often do so because they believe that the Reformation and its principles were and still are necessary. Because the work of reforming the church must continue to be done.

So keep this question in mind as I seek to answer it throughout the sermon and as we consider certain pivotal events in the history of the church and by way of recap last time I preached about the importance necessity and obligation of knowing and understanding church history and historical theology in the life of doctrine of all Christians of all believers.

We must study church history and historical theology in part because it helps us to understand the Bible itself and because God commands us to and in order to answer the question of whether the Reformation is over we obviously need to know what happened then and What it was all about.

God commands us to use the means He has given the church to build us up in the truth Which sanctifies us according to John 17 and and several others passages? God's Word Says that we must consider How to stir up one another toward love and good works.

Not neglecting to meet together as is the habit of some But encouraging one another and all the more as you see the day drawing near to obey be submissive to and receive instruction from the elders of the church and The elders themselves must teach and preach the Word of God sound doctrine and application of the Word.

That's according to Hebrews and Timothy. Because as Paul asserts We need to know how one ought to behave in the household of God Which is the church of the Living God a pillar and buttress of the truth 1st Timothy 3 15.

Because God uses the church a pillar and foundation of the truth both her ordained officers and her members that is all of us and Not just the ones that are alive today, but those who will came before us to support to maintain To ground and to preserve the truth in this evil world.

From the Old Testament remnant to her formal establishment in the New Testament in the book of Acts. So this is critical to understand as a church. Individuals turn with me to 1st Thessalonians chapter 2.

And 1st Thessalonians chapter 2 starting in verse 13. Now in 1st Thessalonians chapter 2. Verse 13 we read. We that is Paul Silvanus and Timothy also think God constantly for this. That when you receive the Word of God Which you heard from us you accepted it not as the Word of men But as what it really is the Word of God which is at work in you believers for you brothers became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea.

For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews. So here Paul Commends the Thessalonians for imitating other faithful churches of God and we likewise therefore Must strive to imitate the faithful churches of God and saints of God in our day.

The ones that model sound doctrine and godliness even in the face of trials suffering persecution and hardship. This also includes Imitating and learning from the faithful churches and saints of the past.

Who came before us? Whose testimony is is written in the annals of church history? By trustworthy historians like J. H. Merle d 'Albigny. Who asserts that the historian ought to embrace in his survey the whole field of human affairs?

He must of course take into consideration the earthly powers that bear sway in the world ambition despotism liberty. But he ought to mark also the heavenly powers which religion reveals. The living God must not be excluded from the world which he created the world which he governs the world which he predestined to execute his will upon.

Church History as the Rise and Progress of the Kingdom of Heaven

I.

Had also previously quoted Philip Schaaf on the importance and indispensable necessity of church history for all Christians and I'm glad I have the chance to present these quotes that I had to take out of my previous sermons.

But church history according to Schaaf has in the first place a general interest for every cultivated mind as showing the moral and religious development of our race and the gradual execution of the divine plan of redemption.

If history in general be as Cicero describes it the witness of time the light of truth the life of memory the directoress or teacher of life the herald of antiquity or as Diodorus calls it the handmaiden of providence the priestess of truth or the pillar of truth to put the Christian Terms around it and the mother of wisdom Then the history of the kingdom of heaven is all of these in the highest degree.

This is what the history of the church is all about.

And.

This is also how Schaaf defines church history, which I didn't get a chance to quote last time he says. The history of the church is the rise and progress of the kingdom of heaven upon earth For the glory of God and the salvation of the world.

This is the objective conception of church history in the subjective sense. Church history is the faithful and life-like description of the origin and progress of this heavenly kingdom. It aims to reproduce in thought and to embody in language its outward and inward development down to the present time.

It is a continuous commentary on the Lord's twin parables of the mustard seed and of the leaven. It shows at once How Christianity spreads over the world and how it penetrates? Transforms and sanctifies the individual and all the institutions of social life.

It thus embraces not only the external fortunes of Christendom but more especially her inward experience her religious life her mental and moral activity her Conflicts with the ungodly world her sorrows and sufferings her joys and her triumphs over sin and error.

It records the deeds of those heroes of faith Who quote subdued kingdoms wrought righteousness obtained promises stop the mouths of lions. Quench the violence of fire escape the edge of the sword out of weakness were made strong wax valiant and flight and fight turn to Turn to fight the armies of aliens.

And this is an older translation of Hebrews 11.

Amen.

This is an excellent and cogent recap of what I preached on before. There is just and notice how he also said That That that this is a that church history is a continuous commentary on the Lord's twin parables of the mustard seed and of the leaven because in history we see that The the the parables illustrate how Christianity has true and false converts has those who are professing believers who prove to not be believers and true believers who show themselves to be faithful.

And it's like the the catechism question that I quoted in the first sermon about Church history the visible church being put all of the professing believers those who profess Christ doesn't mean that they necessarily Are true believers, but they profess Christ.

So.

There is just one disclaimer with what Schaaf said when Schaaf claims that church history focuses more especially on the inward experience of believers as Opposed to the external fortunes of Christendom.

It sounds sort of pietistic Due to his emphasis on subjective and personal experience. So I think a better way to explain what church history is is that it focuses on how? The doctrinal convictions of believers throughout the ages have become manifested in the world in the external world.

Anybody remember why and I've I've mentioned this many times before. The reason is because doctrine always Precedes practice always. Doctrine is always more fundamental than practice Always it's inescapable.

That is a very important biblical maxim. And keep this maxim in mind because it relates directly as to whether the Reformation is over or necessary. Now not surprisingly the Thanksgiving holiday that we just celebrated Just so happens to be stuffed pun intended with church history and the Reformation.

I Hope you all had a blessed day of Eucharist with friends and family. Now I know I when I mentioned this, you know, like Eucharist wouldn't wouldn't the world why would I use that word? Isn't that what the Romanist Church does the Eucharist and The answer is no.

Absolutely not.

No way.

The word Eucharist comes from the Greek word. I've got a stale Which is the usual verb? for to thank to be thankful or to give thanks in both the Septuagint which is the Greek translation of the Old Testament and the Greek New Testament.

So that's what Eucharist actually means. What it really means is Thankfulness to be thankful and to give thanks. God calls us to be a Eucharistic people a Thanksgiving people a Grateful people. The Romanist Church state on the other hand defines their Eucharist as Quote the blessed sacrament of the altar in its twofold aspect of sacrament and sacrifice of Mass and In which Jesus Christ is truly present under the transubstantiated appearances of bread and wine.

This is a complete perversion of what the word Eucharist actually means in Scripture.

Okay.

They mean it as This this the priest offering a sacrifice literal sacrifice of Christ again on the altar of the the Mass whereas Eucharist in In the Greek New Testament in the Bible means that we give thanks for what God has done for us total perversion of the meaning of the word.

It is a denial of the plain teaching of Scripture regarding Christ's finished sacrifice in Hebrews chapter 10. So turn with me there so we can Settle this matter once for all to use the language of Hebrews in Hebrews chapter 10 starting in verse 10.

So in Hebrews Chapter 10 in verse 10 we read and by that will We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all Once for all. And Every priest stands daily at his service Offering repeatedly the same sacrifices.

This is the Old Testament priests the Levitical priests Of which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins He sat down He sat down at the right hand of God Waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet for by a single offering He has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified all time once for the emphasis here is blatant once for all.

And You know when I protested and evangelized the local Roman Catholic Church's idolatrous veneration of the Apostle Jude The gentleman I had spoken to Repeatedly denied that the Roman Church teaches that their sacrifice that their Eucharist is a Resacrifice and reoffering of Christ's body and blood.

But Pope Leo the 13th on the other hand published a people bull in 1896 entitled on the nullity of Anglican orders meaning that they believe that the Anglican priesthood is illegitimate. Which declares and affirms the Eucharistic sacrifice of the true body and blood of Christ on the altar of the mass.

Paragraph 25 of the bull says. But the words which until recently were commonly held by Anglicans to constitute the proper form of priestly ordination Certainly do not in the least definitely express the sacred order of priesthood.

That is priesthood according to the Roman Church or its grace and power. Which is chiefly? primarily the power of Consecrating and of offering the true body and blood of the Lord. That is a direct quote from the Council of Trent in session 23.

And that sacrifice which is no mere commemoration of the sacrifice offered on the cross in other words, it is a real sacrifice a resacrifice. And If that wasn't clear enough according to the Catholic Encyclopedia numerous heretics such as Wycliffe and Luther repudiated repudiated the mass as Idolatry while retaining the sacrament of the true body and blood of Christ.

In truth the Eucharist performs at once two functions that of a sacrament and that of a sacrifice though the inseparableness of The two is most clearly seen in the fact that the consecrating sacrificial powers of the priests coincide the real difference between them is shown in That the sacrament is intended privately for the sanctification of the soul whereas the sacrifice Serves primarily to glorify God by adoration Thanksgiving prayer and expiation of.

Sin.

Expiation as a very important Bible term the removal of our sin and it being placed on Christ. Sacrifice on the cross. It is the removal of sin and of guilt so they are literally saying that the offering of the sacrificial Eucharist on during mass is a sacrifice that expiates sin.

Meaning it's not over. It's never over. You have to constantly do it and you have to constantly participate it in it because it's not Once for all completed which is a blatant contradiction to what scripture the scriptures we just read in Hebrews 10.

Notice to how the Pope's. How the Pope's still continue to quote the Council of Trent for their pronouncements. The council which condemned the Reformation in its entirety. Notice how the Roman is still denounced with Cliff and Luther as heretics.

Even though you know, they have these ecumenical gatherings and they say they're all we know we're fine. We're okay with Luther now. No, they're not. No, they're not. They're liars. They're hypocrites.

They are blatant liars and manipulators in the spirit of diatrophies because they Clearly pronounce and continue to pronounce Luther Wycliffe and all those who believe. Like they do which would include all of us heretics.

Notice how the Roman Eucharist is an enormous blasphemy to use the language of the Belgic Confession a Blatant rejection of Christ's sacrificial death and life and death on the cross where he declared it to be finished once for all.

Time.

So ask yourselves is the Reformation over. Was it really necessary? Is it necessary today? Very important to consider this in light of what is still going on now. And speaking of the need for reforming the church I Wanted to comment on another quote from William Prescott's Excellent history of the conquest of Mexico because it directly it is directly relevant To church history and to the question of whether the Reformation is over.

This quote is a continuation of the one I read last time which is about The reasoning that the Pope gave for claiming and conquering pagan lands. And he says he I quote The difficulty that meets us in the outset is to find a justification of the right of conquest at all.

But it should be remembered that religious infidelity now, which means anything that went against the papacy At this period until much later was regarded as sin to be punished with fire and faggot in this world and Eternal suffering in the next.

This doctrine Monstrous as it is was the creed of the Romish in other words the of the Christian Church and now you know Prescott Side note here Prescott is obviously referring to the Roman Catholic Church, which is not the true Christian Church.

We wouldn't obviously say that the Roman Church is not part of the true Christian Church. Because they deny the gospel among many other idolatrous heresies the basis including the sacrificial offering of the Eucharistic Mass the the basis of the Inquisition and of those other species of religious persecutions which have stained the annals at some time or other of nearly every nation in Christendom.

So this doctrine of This justification is based is the basis for all of these perversions and Horrendous acts of atrocity that the Catholic Church did and the Inquisition and other similar Acts of terror and Antichrist under this code under this understanding of the Roman Church The territory of the heathen wherever found was regarded as a sort of religious waif which in default of a legal proprietor proprietor in other words a Catholic proprietor was claimed and taken by Taken possession by the Holy See which is the Pope and as such was freely given away by the head of the church To any temporal potentate whom he pleased that would assume the burden of conquest.

Thus.

Pope Alexander the sixth generously granted a large portion of the Western Hemisphere to the Spaniards and of the eastern portion to the to the Portuguese. These lofty pretensions of the successors of the humble fishermen of Galilee far from being nominal were acknowledged and appealed to as conclusive and controversies between nations.

In other words this doctrine of the Magisterium of Rome was used as to finally resolve controversies in these matters of disputes of land and territory as opposed to our final authority which is sola scriptura scripture alone.

The rallying cry of the Reformation. He continues. With the right of conquest thus conferred came also the Obligation to retrieve the nation sitting in darkness from eternal perdition. This obligation was acknowledged by the best and the bravest the gownsmen in his closet the missionary and the warrior in the crusade.

However much it may have been debased by temporal motives and mixed up with worldly consideration of ambition and Avarice or greed it was still active in the mind of the Christian conqueror. Christian conqueror.

Quote-unquote. The concession of the Pope then founded on and enforcing the imperative duty of conversion was the assumed basis and in the apprehension of that age a sound one of the duty of the right of conquest.

So this beloved is The historical context that led to the Reformation itself. We will further see the con the contrast between the Pope's megalomaniacal claims as well as the heavily armed conquistadors, which means conquerors in Spanish as Opposed to the Protestant pilgrims who were meagerly equipped to settle the land as opposed to be armed for war.

Stark contrast with that picture. With the approach that they that they took this is one of the countless reasons why Protestants historically and unanimously denounced the Popes as the Antichrist Antichrist and even codified it in several confessions.

Protestant confessions. Our Own 1689. London Baptist Confession. For example in chapter 26, which is of the church says. It says in paragraph.

For.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the head of the church in whom by the appointment of the Father all power for the calling institution order or government of the church is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner.

Neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense Be the head thereof. But is that Antichrist that man of sin and son of perdition that exalts himself in the church? Against Christ and All that is called God whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.

These are strong words. Amen. These are strong words and so many people deny this and squirm at the at the notion of what what. Hmm is it but the look at the Pope? He's such a nice old man. Look at him.

He's so he's so innocent and harmless. Baloney nonsense. The Pope is blasphemy personified. Who claims to be the sovereign supreme pontiff of Christ. It is blasphemy of the highest order. This by the way does not refer to just one Pope.

But to the office itself to the papacy and therefore to all Popes. Now I have a story to tell back when I was in college my medieval literature professor Taught us that the Apostles claimed to have a higher authority.

Because they were the more spiritual. So the more spiritual ones had a higher authority than the less spiritual ones.

Now.

This of course is false. Even a cursory reading of Scripture will show you that Jesus himself refuted this notion because he said the one who wants to be first has to serve all the rest. Right. Amen. It's the upside-down Kingdom and The Apostles were always confused by that.

So what I want to be first. It's a well now you got to serve everybody. Well, it's true that God ordains men with imputed authority to govern the church. They nevertheless are subject to the same if not higher standards.

Stricter standards. This is one of the fundamental contrast between the Roman Church's claim of papal infallibility and the biblical apostolic or ministerial authority that scripture teaches. The Apostles emphatically subjected everyone including themselves to the same doctrinal standard.

Everyone was subject to the same standard and teachers like James 3 says were subject to an even stricter standard because those who Put themselves on a platform to teach and have influence over God's people will receive a stricter judgment a stricter hearing.

So.

Remember We're Galatians 1. Let's turn there now to Galatians 1. To clear some of this up in Galatians chapter 1 We see one of the clearest Of passages that highlights the primary importance of the gospel of the necessity of having a pure pristine biblical gospel.

In Galatians chapter 1 Starting in verse 7.

We read.

There are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ but even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary To the one we preach to you. Let him be anathema accursed condemned to hell excluded from salvation as We have said before.

So now I say again if Anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you receive. Let him be anathema. He is so emphatic about this. He says this twice in the same sentence. In the same verse same passage this again.

Is the difference between biblical authority? Which is always subject to checks and balances. The church has checks and balances that it has to answer to. Everyone in the church has to answer to it Including the Apostles themselves.

They don't have some special higher authority. That's like the Pope has of megalomaniacal tyrannical claims of land and and and and a spiritual authority over everybody else.

Mm-hmm.

So it is a difference between biblical authority and spiritual abuse of authority. Between the Pope and true apostolic authority. Between the Apostles and the reviling domineering diatrophies. Who was the real first Pope?

It wasn't Peter. Peter wasn't the first Pope. If you want to look at who the first Pope was read the letter of 3rd John where you see who diatrophies was and the domineering reviling things that he did.

We should therefore ask ourselves again. Is the Reformation really over? Do we still have Pope's to deal with? Do we still have abusive domineering men who take over and usurp churches. Who abuse and twist the truth by reviling and manipulating the flock?

Who pervert church discipline and wrongly excommunicate believers from fellowship? Who deserve the same judgment they are illegitimately applying to those who do not deserve it? Ring any bells. Sound familiar.

Most of us came from abusive churches like this. Like the old past Christian Church, this is still happening today. It's a very common problem sadly. But it needs to be judged biblically according to Scripture.

They had these men have to be judged and exposed.

Thanksgiving, the Pilgrims, and the Reformation in America

So I.

Want to circle back now to Thanksgiving because something interesting also came up during our family's Thanksgiving celebration which highlights the importance of knowing the past and the history of the church.

It is providentially appropriate to preach about the history of Thanksgiving and how it relates to the question of whether the Reformation is over in fact. Because Thanksgiving is all about church history.

It's a it's fascinating stuff. But it has become popular in Academia and in our culture to denounce this day because the pilgrims who came here are accused of Barbarity and of invading the noble savages the natives.

This is symptomatic of a major problem affecting many today Including church attending Christians. This problem is Having a view of history that is shallow simplistic and ignorant. It is a failure to do what the renowned historian William Prescott whom I quoted on earlier Says we must do in order to properly understand Learn from and judge history.

And which scripture also likewise admonishes us to do that is To judge the action fairly and make proper sense of it. We must transport ourselves to the age to when it happened. We must do that in order to judge fairly and to understand and learn.

Even secular academics understand this. That just as the pilgrims don't represent all English colonists the Wampanoags Who feasted with them on Thanksgiving don't represent all Native Americans? They are not all the same.

You cannot just Ignorantly and and Foolishly say well, they all did this they all did that they were all bad. They were all they were all you know, just a bunch of invaders that took advantage of the natives.

When the or the the natives were all just innocent harmless noble savages who were peacefully leaving, you know living in their societies until you know the The wasps came right the white Anglo-Saxon Protestants came and they destroyed everything.

That's a very common, you know narrative being pushed by post-colonial Relativistic Perspectives in our woke culture. So There were native conflicts and wars not only with the pilgrim settlers, but also amongst themselves amongst the natives themselves.

For example in 1677 Reverend William Hubbard recounts that quote things had been very Prosperously and successfully carried on in all the force said colonies and jurisdictions from the year 1620 to the year 1636.

At which time the Pequod Indians the most warlike and fierce of all the Indians in that part of the country. Who had made all the rest of the Indians to stand in awe? Meaning in fear. Having committed many barbarous outrages upon their neighboring Indians.

Both the Narragansetts on the east side and the Mohicans on the west side of them and Also upon the English and Dutch as they came occasionally to traffic with them and in the year 1634 having barbarously murdered Captain Stone and Captain Norton as they were trading with them.

Okay, so much for the idea of the noble savage, right? These these natives were not noble savages. Okay, that doesn't exist. Men are depraved apart from Christ. They are evil wicked and depraved. It is men who deny the scripture which says all men are Sinners all men are evil and there is none who does good apart from Christ apart from the gospel.

Apart from the redeeming regenerating power of the spirit all men are evil and depraved to varying degrees. So we cannot therefore Shallowly paint all the pilgrims into the most uncharitable Slanderous picture we can find just as we cannot likewise paint all the natives into the most noble innocent victims to satisfy our woke relativistic culture of victimhood.

This is not reality. The Puritans and Other Protestant separatists were in fact dissatisfied with the state of the Church of England with the limited extent of the English Reformation and With the reluctance of King James the first of England to enforce enforce further reform that is Protestant reform and This is King the King James whom the King James Bible takes the name after.

In other words the pilgrims who essentially founded our country Settled here because they believed that the Reformation was not over and still needed to continue. That's the main reason why they came here it's pretty amazing when you think about it this way.

The founding of our country is based on this conviction. The reason then for Thanksgiving is actually to celebrate the very opposite of what is often claimed of by these these liberals and woke people because the pilgrims thanked God for his providence and The natives for teaching them how to cultivate the land and they were able to survive the harsh winters and the harsh weather.

The pilgrims Started the Thanksgiving feast to celebrate God's providence together with the Wampanoag Indians that was the whole point of it was to celebrate and peace and Thankfulness to God and to them Total.

White.

Rewriting of history to deny that that fact and That's not also to deny that there weren't other atrocities committed by By certain people not everybody who had this noble intentions that certain Pilgrims had there were obviously bad actors the Trail of Tears and a lot of other atrocities committed on the natives but you have to think about it in a biblical way as well because there's a lot of There's a lot of natives today who still have a grudge about what happened and Refused to accept the reality of the situation that they're in and as believers.

We're called to forgive. We have to forgive and move on. What's done is done. It's it's done. Was it sin? Yes, it may very well have been sin, but It's done. We can't keep holding grudges to the past and and and And and And and hold a grudge and bitterness against those things.

So.

Now let's start wrapping up with some practical application recommended resources and approaches to studying church history. This is where it's going to get kind of fun and a little interactive.

So.

Well and before I do that You know there is very controversial with issues like slavery and the natives and how they were just sort of Pushed out of their land and you know all of these things Sin happens in the world.

That's not to excuse everything that the pilgrims did or the colonists did but at the same time We have to remember even even our country has made efforts to Make reparations or Restorations to the Native Americans, that's why there's affirmative action and things like that and obviously there's a lot of dispute or controversy Debate about that as well, but you know We have to at some point we have to leave it in God's hands.

Because it is for God to judge ultimately right and wrong.

So.

And of course we don't celebrate that in Thanksgiving we celebrate the Thanksgiving part of it. So. Now back to church history. Remember. Not all churches not all church history books and perspectives are equally valid or useful.

And some are downright deceptive and misleading. All histories have a bias. The question is whether the bias is good or bad. Is it biblically consistent or biblically contrary. As I said before the best church histories make mature balanced competent interpretations and judgments about people events churches and doctrines from an Explicitly Protestant bias that is informed by Scripture.

And because they define the church according to Scripture as opposed to the mushy ecumenical bias. That many historians historians like who's to go and Gonzalez suffer from. We want to avoid those guys.

I Also mentioned that the best way to study church history individually and as a church is through a five-fold approach of first of number one overviews of surveys of church history. Number two is biographies.

Three is visiting historical sites. Four is doctrinal treatises and creeds confessions and catechisms written by God's historic servants of the church. And Men like Luther and Calvin and men like that theologians and five audio and video resources.

Also brought some copies some of my own personal copies for show-and-tell. So I'm gonna have some fun with this. But but there's also a public service announcement that I need to make. Be sure to practice.

Identifying the biases and perspectives of whatever it is that you read whatever it is always identify. Look for the bias and perspective that the author is pushing. They may try to hide it. They may try to suppress it.

They may try to claim. They don't have one. It's a lie. Everybody has a bias and.

A.

Good. In order to properly understand the agenda behind the book that you're reading it is important to understand and Identify those biases and perspectives. That is how you will get the most out of reading church history because everybody's gonna have a bias of Perspective of church history and of the event or person or doctrine or conflict that they're discussing.

So I.

Recommend. So so the the first one which is the church history surveys those are for starters to get your feet wet These are shorter books That Give you a big picture of of the history of the church. I recommend This book called church history a crash course for the curious by Christopher Catherwood Because it's a very short.