May 21, 2025 • 26 mins
In this kickoff episode of The Crossheirs, I share the heart behind my journey—from questioning religion to embracing the richness of Catholic tradition. This isn’t a story of abandoning the Bible or walking away from faith. It’s a story of adding to what I already believed, not replacing it. I explore why “sola scriptura” wasn’t enough, how the early Church kept drawing me in, and why tradition doesn’t compete with Scripture—it completes it. You’ll hear how I wrestled with misconceptions, examined history, and found that the Church Christ established has been building, brick by brick, ever since. If you’ve ever felt like something was missing in your faith, or wondered whether going “deeper” means going “backwards,” this episode is for you.
🔹 This is not deconstruction.
🔹 This is rediscovery.
🔹 This is what it means to become Catholic, not by losing Christ, but by finding the fullness of Him.
🔹 This is not deconstruction.
🔹 This is rediscovery.
🔹 This is what it means to become Catholic, not by losing Christ, but by finding the fullness of Him.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Tired of wandering from church to church, hoping someone finally
got it right, watching for wolves, avoiding false teachers. So
was I. Then I asked what the earliest Christians actually believed,
and I found the church Christ build. This is the Crossairs.
(00:35):
Let's go back to the beginning. Welcome back to the Crossairs.
It's been a long time, and in that time, I've
depped deeper into my faith, asking hard and uncomfortable questions.
I realized I had my priorities all wrong. For a
(00:58):
long time, I was fascinated with the end times, prophecy
and rapture teachings, all the while neglecting how to actually
be more christ Like. Don't get me wrong, it was
definitely a change in me from my power ways, but
I still felt like I was missing something. Felt like
I was just following Jesus's teachings, not truly following him.
(01:20):
My prayer life sucked. I prayed, for sure, but not regularly.
I was simply doing my best to honor Him with
my life and my actions, but I still felt like
there was something off. I'm not trying to insult where
I came from, it's just the truth. For a long time,
I stood on sola scriptura. Believing the Bible alone was
enough and in any ways it is brought me to
(01:42):
Christ shaped my worldview. But then the question started piling up,
not just from skeptics, but from sincere believers who couldn't
agree on things like the rapture, baptism, communion, or even
what the church meant. So I started asking who gave
us his Bible? I already knew the rough history of
where it came from, kind of translations we have, etc.
(02:05):
But this led me to question, what did Christians have
before we had a printed Bible that didn't come till
much later. If some people teach, read, and know your Bible,
yet we didn't even have printed Bibles in people's hands
until the invention of the printing press, and what were
Christians doing before that? And if sol scripture really works,
(02:28):
why do we end up with so many denominations, all
claiming to be spirit filled and led, yet coming up
with wildly different views that didn't make sense to me.
I know Jesus said he wanted us to be one body,
not multiple bodies that don't agree and aren't in communion
without another. This is very evident in online circles Christians
(02:50):
disagreeing about things that should be well established and agreed on.
To me, that didn't feel like the work of the
spirit that was supposed to lead us into all truth.
I don't know about you, but to me, truth is static.
It's objective, not subjective. Sure we have different understandings of
the same truth, but the truth itself doesn't change no
(03:12):
matter how informed we are about it. It's like math,
tuplis two is always four, even if we take time
to figure that out. This journey led me to ask
what did the earliest Christians believe? That brought me to
the ancient Apostolic churches, the Catholic and the Orthodox churches.
These were major stopping points for you. I looked at
(03:34):
basic things like who started the Catholic Church? Simple research
said Jesus did. I did the same with the Orthodox Church.
It also said Jesus. Every denomination after that doesn't have
that same claim. Sure, maybe spiritually they have their origins
in Christ, but literally they don't. Let me break it
down real quick for y'all, because I did my homework.
(03:57):
Lutherans started by Martin Luther in fifteen seventeen. He challenged
the church on indulgences and taught salvation by faith alone.
This kicked off the Reformation Reformed Calvinists, led by John
Calvin and Old rich As Wingley. They emphasized predestination and
a symbolic view of communion. Out of this tradition became
Presbyterians through John Knox and Scotland. Anglicans broke off under
(04:23):
King Henry. It wasn't over theology, it was because he
wanted a divorce. The Church of England kept Catholic structure
that linked Protestant Over time, Anabaptists radical Reformers like Felix
Mann's and Meno Simons a push for adult baptism, non violence,
and separation from the world. Their descendants Mennonites and Amish
(04:46):
Methodists started by John Wesley in the seventeen hundreds, a
movement within Anglicanism that focused on holiness, discipline, and outreach.
This later fed into holiness and even Pentecostal churches. Baptists
came out of England in the early sixteen hundreds of
John Smith and Thomas Hewells or Helles. They emphasized believers,
(05:12):
baptism and local church autonomy. Huge in the US today,
Pentecostals emerged from a Zeus's Street Revival in nineteen o six,
led by William Seymour. They focused on the gifts of
the Spirit, tongues, healings, and emotional worship. Seventh day Adventists
grew out of the Millerite movement led by L. And G. White,
(05:34):
known for Sabbath observance and strong focus on end times.
Restoration movement Churches of Christ led by Alexander Campbell Barton
Stone in the early eighteen hundreds. Their goal was to
return in New Testament Christianity, no creeds, just the Bible,
non denominational evangelicals. These don't trace back to one founder.
(05:58):
Think modern megachurch as like Rick Moren Bible centered, independent,
usually low on traditions and heavy on media, worship bands
and practical preaching. Did Jesus intend for this? Don't get
me wrong. The first major split in the church was
a Great Schism of ten fifty four, which didn't come
out of nowhere. It was a long time coming due
(06:19):
to the political power struggles between the Eastern and Western
halves of the Roman Empire. We can go deeper into
that in the future episode. But with so many voices
and versions of Christianity today, we have to ask, did
Jesus intend for his church to fracture like this, or
do you establish one visible church with real authority. That's
why history matters. If you're tired of spiritual confusion and
(06:41):
doctrinal chaos, maybe the answer isn't starting another church, but
going back to the whe Christ founded. Some people leave
the church because they were never fully catechized. Others lash out,
calling different teachers deceivers. Many are reacting to shallow teaching
that didn't equip them to handle serious questions, betrayed by
the church they came out of, especially when they're showing
(07:03):
Bible passages they'd never encountered before. But many are simply
pursuing truth. And that's why I'm back, not to debate,
not to tear down. I'm not here to call your
favorite teacher a liar. But like I said before, we're
all seeking truth. We each only have proportions of it.
We need the humility to admit we may have been
(07:24):
misled at times. That's the hardest part. I want to
create a space where we rest honestly with faith, history,
and tradition. So whether you're deep in scripture, curious about
the early Church, we're just tired of feeling like something's missing. Welcome,
let's go deeper together. I came to Christ through a
(07:45):
twist of faith. I grew up in the somewhat religious home.
My father was a former addict who later led men's homes,
helping others who struggled with addiction, but he eventually lost
his own battle and passed away when I was ten.
After that, I mostly had my grandmother, the matriarchy of
our faith in our family. She was bedridden from diabetes,
(08:06):
but she would gently remind me about Jesus from time
to time. I always stayed close to her, especially in
her final years. I prayed for her while she was
cr she cried out in pain. But when she passed away,
what little moral rounding I had left with her, I spiraled,
started drinking, smoking weed, stealing, sleeping around. I lived with
(08:28):
a you only live once mindset. If life is short,
why not take whatever I could get. My older brother
tried to rain me in. He was my only close
male figure, and he hit me with things like you
can't be living with your girlfriend, that's sin. But he
wasn't living the example of a Christian eater. All I
saw was hypocrisy, so I decided to dig into this
religion and prove him wrong. I wanted to show him
(08:52):
how ridiculous it all was, that this life is all
we had. There was no afterlife, no judgment, no God.
But as I started reading the Bible, I had a
different experience. I didn't find contradictions. I found conviction. It
wasn't Christ or Christianity that I spised, it was a hypocrisy.
I asked, God, if you're real, show me the truth,
(09:15):
and he did. For years after that, I leaned hard
on sola scripture scripture alone as the foundation of truth.
I figured, if the Bible's true, then the only way
to avoid false teaching is to know the source material myself.
So I read the Bible front to back multiple times.
I joined modern churches, and I stayed far away from Catholicism.
(09:37):
Why because I had heard it was corrupted. During the
time of Constantine. I heard preachers say the Pope was
the Antichrist, that the Catholic Church was the heart of
the Babylon in revelation, and I figured, these are Bible teachers, studied, respected,
they wouldn't lie. The cracks started to show. Spirit filled
believers around me would constantly disagree. An atheist and of
(10:00):
mine challenged me logically, and it shook my confidence, not
in Jesus, but in the theologies I had learned. I
didn't have solid reasons for believing some of what I did.
I just accepted it because it sounded biblical. When those
beliefs clashed with science or logic, I didn't know how
to respond. So I started watching serious debates between atheists
(10:22):
and Christians. That opened my eyes to arugmentation, logical fallacies,
and how to defend the faith more rigorously. The way
some Christian theologians dismantled atheistic world views. It blew my mind.
It was a version of faith I had never encountered before,
more logical, more coherent. Now, don't get me wrong, there's
(10:43):
still mysteries and scripture, but I began to understand how
science operates within a naturalistic framework. It's not that science
disproves God, it's that science never considers God as an
answer to begin with. It only seeks naturalistic interpretations of data.
That realization helped me stop panicking over question and allowed
me to be more relaxed with interpreting the Bible. I
(11:03):
began to understand how the Biblical worldview could be true
without requiring hyperderalism. From there, I moved into studying debates
within Christianity itself, Calvinism versus Armenianism, believers baptism versus infant baptism,
continuationism versus Cessatianism, pre trib versus post trib congregation of
(11:24):
versus hierarchical governance. Every single side used scripture to back
up their view. They were all sincere, all prayerful, all
reading the same Bible, but their conclusions were wildly different.
It wasn't that I stopped believing the Bible. I just
started realizing we all bring assumptions into the text, and
maybe I needed more than just my own interpretation. The
(11:48):
rapture was a tipping point for me. I first learned
about it through Chuck Missler on the pre tribulation rapture view,
But as time went on, I started noticing something. I
was becoming more and more paranoid. Every few months, like
someone was predicting a new rapture date, or saying look
out for this blood moon or watch this particular celestial event.
These things came and went and nothing happened. I even
(12:09):
reached a point where I didn't want to have kids.
I thought, what's the point If the rapture's coming soon,
why bring them into a world where they'll face the Antichrist.
Then I started hearing all the other views, mid trib
post trib, all millennial, post millennial, and every teacher I
heard made it sound like their view was the clear one,
and they all used scripture to prove it. I'd respected
(12:30):
many of these teachers, but now I was confused. Why
couldn't they agree? Why did none of them explain it simply?
That quote hit me. If you can't explain it simply,
you don't understand it well enough. Then I met someone
who could. Matthew Miller, teacher who later became my friend,
explained it in a way that made sense. He didn't
(12:51):
jump all over the Bible to make his point, He
just let the text say what it said. But that
raised a few new questions for me. If his explanation
made the most sense, why was he the only one
I ever heard say it that way? Why was the
pre trib rapture teaching so widespread in America if it
didn't even come from the early Church? Was this view global?
(13:12):
Was it historical or was it a recent development? That's
when I dug into its roots. The modern rapture doctrine
can be traced back to John Nelson Darby of the
Plymouth Brethren. In the eighteen thirties. Darby introduced the idea
of a pre tribulational rapture as part of his dispensational theology.
(13:32):
His teachings were picked up and popularized through the Schofield
Reference Bible in nineteen oh nine, which included study notes
endorsing Darby's views. That Bible became incredibly influential in American
evangelical circles. Scholfield's work was later adopted by major American
seminaries like Dallas Theological Seminary and Mooney Bible Institute, which
helped embed pre trib rapture theology into the DNA of
(13:56):
evangelical preaching. Over time, shape the teach chanes of many
popular pastors and industries give the impression that this view
had always been part of Christianity. But it wasn't. This
wasn't apostolic teaching. It was a modern theological framework that
gained traction because of mass printing and institutional backing. Let
(14:18):
me be clear, I do believe in a catching up
as scripture says, but not the Hollywood version. Once I
saw how recent the Rapture teaching was, I had to ask,
what else have we added that the early Church wouldn't recognize?
After all this, I wanted to know what the Catholic
and Orthodoxic churches believed about the Rapture, especially since they're
(14:40):
among the oldest Christian traditions Still stabbing. I found out
the Catholic Church holds an all millennial view, meaning they
believe we are in a millennium now. At first I
completely turned me off, especially given my background, but I
had to look deeper and ask why they held that view.
(15:00):
What I discovered is that their focus isn't on end
time speculation or try to decode every news headline. It's
on living the Christian life, preparing for Christ's return and
abilities his kingdom here and now. They're not trying to
set dates. They're trying to live prepared, and honestly, that's biblical.
(15:21):
Think of the parable of the ten virgins, the ones
who were wise were the ones who kept oil in
their laps. They were ready. As I continue to explore,
I realized that something blew my mind. Many of the
institutions we take for granted and modern life universities, hospitals,
charitable foundations. They were started by the Catholic Church. I
(15:43):
had no clue. Then I began studying the Great Schism,
the split between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman
Catholic Church, and just so you know, both claim to
be the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I learned
that the word Catholic just means universal. Much in the
same way that evangelicals often say the Church is the people,
(16:03):
not the building, or that the Body of Christ is
without walls. The term Catholic is referring to the whole,
universal body of believers. I had no idea how been
used that way from the beginning. Then I looked at
the Reformation, and to be fair, there were a lot
of valid criticisms of the Catholic Church at the time,
things like corruption among the clergy, abuse of power, the
(16:24):
issue of indulgences. That all played a role in sparkling
a Reformation through Martin Luther, who was himself a Catholic priest.
We can talk more about the Reformation and what reforms
Luther actually wanted in another episode, but the key point
is this he was excommunicating for not recanting his views,
and from there other reformers like John Calvin or Earl
(16:46):
rich Sweetly that's a tongue twister, kicked off a chain
reaction that led to the creation of many denominations, most
of which didn't even agree with each other. That was
a huge red flag for me. The reformers didn't just
disagree with the Catholic Church. They eventually started disagreeing with
each other, and that disagreement spread like wildfire. After that,
(17:10):
I started looking into the early Church fathers. I still
reading it, by the way, but what I found so
far was has been eye opening. They referred to the
Church as Catholic. They believed in the real presence in
the Eucharist, that the bread and wine actually become the
body and blood of Christ. And honestly, I didn't have
a problem with that. Jesus said it plainly, this is
(17:30):
my body, this is my blood. Why was I the
one spiritualizing his words? Why did I believe it was
just symbolic, just a gesture of remembrance. I take Christ
at his word and everything else, So why not this
Learning that the earliest Christians believed this long before any
councils or denominations. Was a huge turning point for me.
(17:51):
I wasn't walking away from the Gospel. I view again
walking into the fullness of it. And this was the
importance of humility. Humility became the key. I realized I
had judged be Catholicism based on the weakest examples. I
had judged it through a caricature, one built on flimsy arguments, misunderstandings,
(18:15):
and surface level observations. Most of the Catholics I had
encountered were nominal Catholics, Catholic by name but not by practice.
They hadn't read their Catechism, many hadn't read the Bible
cover to cover. They had little understanding that the depth
and beauty of their ancient faith, and they were following
secondhand misinformation, just like I had been. Meanwhile, many of
(18:37):
the Bible only Christian friends were doing their best, but
they were isolated, skeptical, and constantly church hopping me because
they didn't trust anyone, and I was one of them.
I had so many questions, for example, papal infallibility. That
one really bugged me. So I looked into it, and
here's what I found. Papal infallibility does not mean the
pope is always right or that he's perfect. It doesn't
(19:00):
mean he can just say anything and it becomes doctrine.
Papal infallidability means that the pope is protected from error
only when he officially teaches ex cathedral from the chair
of Peter on matters of faith and morals, and even then,
what he teaches must align with scripture and sacred tradition.
(19:21):
He can invent new doctrines or contradict God's word. So,
for example, he couldn't declare something like homosexual marriage morally
acceptable for Christians because that would contradict church teaching and scripture.
It's not about the pope being perfect, it's about God
protecting the church from formally teaching error. That's very different
from what I had been told. And here's what really
(19:44):
drove it home. I asked my former pastor about papal infallibility.
This was someone I respected deeply. He baptized my son,
he helped our family a lot, so I trusted his perspective.
But when he told me he didn't really know much
about it. He said, the pope can teach whatever he
wants because he's infallible. And then pointed me to God
Questions dot org, a site that's known for opposing Catholic teaching.
(20:07):
He also said his wife had been Catholic but became
saved when she accepted Christ. That's when I realized even
pastors who seem well read and spiritual can be deeply
misinformed about the Church history and Catholic theology. That realization
forced me to wrestle with other Catholic teachings too, like
praying to saints, honoring Mary, other topics that made me
(20:29):
uncomfortable for years. Here's what I learned. The Church teaches
that the saints in heaven are a part of the Church, triumphant,
those who have finished the race and are now with God.
We on earth are part of the Church, militant, still
fighting the good fight. Scripture says the prayers of the
saints rise like incense before the throne of God Revelation
(20:50):
five eight. So when Catholics pray to the saints, they're
not just asking for their prayer. They're really just asking
for the prayers the way you'd ask a fallible on
earth to pray for you. That phrase pray to trip
me up until I learned that in Old English pray simply,
men ask like I pray. THEE tell me more. It's
(21:10):
not worship, it's intercession. What about Mary? That one was
tough too. I had always been taught that giving Mary
honor felt like blasphemy, felt like we were taking something
away from Jesus. The scripture says, give honor to whom
honor is due, and in Luke one eight, Mary herself says,
from now on all generations shall call me blessed. The
(21:33):
early Church called her the new Eve, just as Christ
is the new Atom. Where Eve had disobeyed, Mary obeyed.
She said, behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord.
Let it be done to me according to your word.
And yes, Catholics call her the Mother of God, which
at first sounds wild. But here's the logic. Jesus is
(21:54):
fully God and fully mad. Mary gave birth to Jesus.
Therefore she is the mother of Incarnate, not the mother
of the Trinity or the mother of God the Father.
But that's not idolatry, that's Christology. It affirms who Jesus is.
These were some of the hardest things I had to
grapple with before becoming Catholic. But as I listened to
(22:15):
Catholic apologists. I realized they weren't avoiding scripture, they were
using it, and in many cases they brought up passages
I had either overlooked, misunderstood, or had never been taught.
That's when my heart started to soften. Eventually I narrowed
it down to the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church,
the only two that seemed to preserve Apostolic succession. That
(22:36):
was another term I had never heard in all my
years in non denominational circles. Apostolic succession means that the
bishops and priests today were ordained by other priests and bishops,
going all the way back through the laying on of
hands to the original apostles. I had read that in acts,
but never heard a sermon about it. And their view
of salvation, it actually lined up with what I had
(22:58):
already concluded, just from real the Bible along Salvation is
a gift from God, it's grace, but it's not just
a one time event. The Catholic view is that we
were saved, we are being saved, and we hope to
be saved if we remain faithful. God never stops chasing us,
but he won't force us to stay we still have
free will. We participate in our salvation by cooperating with grace.
(23:21):
It's not works based salvation, it's a relationship. And here's
what ultimately broke my confidence in sol the scripture. The
early Church didn't have a full Bible. Sure, the gospels
and Paul's letters were circulating, but there was no bound,
finalized canon for centuries and most early Christians they were illiterate.
They didn't come to faith by reading. They came to
(23:43):
faith by hearing, by the oral preaching and teaching of
the church. If you take that seriously, scripture starts to
look less like doctrine and more like assumption. Yes, scripture
has authority, but it's the Church that discerned what's scripture
even is. There were gnostic Gospels, forgeries, false letters. The
(24:05):
Church decided which books were divine and inspired and which weren't.
So how could I say I only trust the Bible
when the Bible itself is defined by the Church. That's
why Bible alone doesn't work without the Holy Spirit alive
within the church that Christ built. And then there's Peter.
Why did Jesus rename Simon to Peter Rock If that
(24:25):
didn't mean anything, that kind of renaming only happens a
few times in scripture, and it's always significant. Jesus says Simon, Simon, behold,
Satan demanded to have you that he might sift you
like wheat. But I have prayed for you that your
faith may not fail, and when you have turned again,
strengthen your brothers thirty one through thirty two. Why do
(24:50):
we ignore that? Why do we say it was just
his profession of faith? Christ told Peter to feed his sheep.
He gave Peter the keys, He gave Peter a name
tied to a foundation that helped me open up to
the idea that Peter had a unique role among the apostles,
and that role didn't die with him. The Reformation had
its place. It exposed some real corruption, But now that
(25:12):
knowledge is increasing, like Daniel said it would. What we
need isn't more fragmentation. We need humility. Humility is what
opens the door to truth. Pride just slams it shut
in both directions. So that's where I'm at. If I'm
not abandoning the Word of God, I'm embracing its context.
(25:33):
I'm not rejecting the church. I'm finally understanding what it
is and I'm not the only one moving towards the
Apostolic churches. It seems to be happening more and more
among new believers and seas and Christians alike. People are
beginning to ask the deeper questions. They're realizing the surface
level stuff isn't enough. So if you're feeling that tension
that's stirring inside you, don't ignore it. Dig deeper, ask
(25:56):
the uncomfortable questions, don't settle for a faith that's payper
thin when God is offering you the riches of the
whole story. And remember, adding to your understanding of faith
doesn't mean subtracting Christ. It means honoring Him with all
your heart, soul, mind and strength. Thanks for listening to
the Crossairs. This is just the beginning. I'll see you
(26:18):
next time and we'll keep going deeper together
Tired of wandering from church to church, hoping someone finally
got it right, watching for wolves, avoiding false teachers. So
was I. Then I asked what the earliest Christians actually believed,
and I found the church Christ build. This is the Crossairs.
(00:35):
Let's go back to the beginning. Welcome back to the Crossairs.
It's been a long time, and in that time, I've
depped deeper into my faith, asking hard and uncomfortable questions.
I realized I had my priorities all wrong. For a
(00:58):
long time, I was fascinated with the end times, prophecy
and rapture teachings, all the while neglecting how to actually
be more christ Like. Don't get me wrong, it was
definitely a change in me from my power ways, but
I still felt like I was missing something. Felt like
I was just following Jesus's teachings, not truly following him.
(01:20):
My prayer life sucked. I prayed, for sure, but not regularly.
I was simply doing my best to honor Him with
my life and my actions, but I still felt like
there was something off. I'm not trying to insult where
I came from, it's just the truth. For a long time,
I stood on sola scriptura. Believing the Bible alone was
enough and in any ways it is brought me to
(01:42):
Christ shaped my worldview. But then the question started piling up,
not just from skeptics, but from sincere believers who couldn't
agree on things like the rapture, baptism, communion, or even
what the church meant. So I started asking who gave
us his Bible? I already knew the rough history of
where it came from, kind of translations we have, etc.
(02:05):
But this led me to question, what did Christians have
before we had a printed Bible that didn't come till
much later. If some people teach, read, and know your Bible,
yet we didn't even have printed Bibles in people's hands
until the invention of the printing press, and what were
Christians doing before that? And if sol scripture really works,
(02:28):
why do we end up with so many denominations, all
claiming to be spirit filled and led, yet coming up
with wildly different views that didn't make sense to me.
I know Jesus said he wanted us to be one body,
not multiple bodies that don't agree and aren't in communion
without another. This is very evident in online circles Christians
(02:50):
disagreeing about things that should be well established and agreed on.
To me, that didn't feel like the work of the
spirit that was supposed to lead us into all truth.
I don't know about you, but to me, truth is static.
It's objective, not subjective. Sure we have different understandings of
the same truth, but the truth itself doesn't change no
(03:12):
matter how informed we are about it. It's like math,
tuplis two is always four, even if we take time
to figure that out. This journey led me to ask
what did the earliest Christians believe? That brought me to
the ancient Apostolic churches, the Catholic and the Orthodox churches.
These were major stopping points for you. I looked at
(03:34):
basic things like who started the Catholic Church? Simple research
said Jesus did. I did the same with the Orthodox Church.
It also said Jesus. Every denomination after that doesn't have
that same claim. Sure, maybe spiritually they have their origins
in Christ, but literally they don't. Let me break it
down real quick for y'all, because I did my homework.
(03:57):
Lutherans started by Martin Luther in fifteen seventeen. He challenged
the church on indulgences and taught salvation by faith alone.
This kicked off the Reformation Reformed Calvinists, led by John
Calvin and Old rich As Wingley. They emphasized predestination and
a symbolic view of communion. Out of this tradition became
Presbyterians through John Knox and Scotland. Anglicans broke off under
(04:23):
King Henry. It wasn't over theology, it was because he
wanted a divorce. The Church of England kept Catholic structure
that linked Protestant Over time, Anabaptists radical Reformers like Felix
Mann's and Meno Simons a push for adult baptism, non violence,
and separation from the world. Their descendants Mennonites and Amish
(04:46):
Methodists started by John Wesley in the seventeen hundreds, a
movement within Anglicanism that focused on holiness, discipline, and outreach.
This later fed into holiness and even Pentecostal churches. Baptists
came out of England in the early sixteen hundreds of
John Smith and Thomas Hewells or Helles. They emphasized believers,
(05:12):
baptism and local church autonomy. Huge in the US today,
Pentecostals emerged from a Zeus's Street Revival in nineteen o six,
led by William Seymour. They focused on the gifts of
the Spirit, tongues, healings, and emotional worship. Seventh day Adventists
grew out of the Millerite movement led by L. And G. White,
(05:34):
known for Sabbath observance and strong focus on end times.
Restoration movement Churches of Christ led by Alexander Campbell Barton
Stone in the early eighteen hundreds. Their goal was to
return in New Testament Christianity, no creeds, just the Bible,
non denominational evangelicals. These don't trace back to one founder.
(05:58):
Think modern megachurch as like Rick Moren Bible centered, independent,
usually low on traditions and heavy on media, worship bands
and practical preaching. Did Jesus intend for this? Don't get
me wrong. The first major split in the church was
a Great Schism of ten fifty four, which didn't come
out of nowhere. It was a long time coming due
(06:19):
to the political power struggles between the Eastern and Western
halves of the Roman Empire. We can go deeper into
that in the future episode. But with so many voices
and versions of Christianity today, we have to ask, did
Jesus intend for his church to fracture like this, or
do you establish one visible church with real authority. That's
why history matters. If you're tired of spiritual confusion and
(06:41):
doctrinal chaos, maybe the answer isn't starting another church, but
going back to the whe Christ founded. Some people leave
the church because they were never fully catechized. Others lash out,
calling different teachers deceivers. Many are reacting to shallow teaching
that didn't equip them to handle serious questions, betrayed by
the church they came out of, especially when they're showing
(07:03):
Bible passages they'd never encountered before. But many are simply
pursuing truth. And that's why I'm back, not to debate,
not to tear down. I'm not here to call your
favorite teacher a liar. But like I said before, we're
all seeking truth. We each only have proportions of it.
We need the humility to admit we may have been
(07:24):
misled at times. That's the hardest part. I want to
create a space where we rest honestly with faith, history,
and tradition. So whether you're deep in scripture, curious about
the early Church, we're just tired of feeling like something's missing. Welcome,
let's go deeper together. I came to Christ through a
(07:45):
twist of faith. I grew up in the somewhat religious home.
My father was a former addict who later led men's homes,
helping others who struggled with addiction, but he eventually lost
his own battle and passed away when I was ten.
After that, I mostly had my grandmother, the matriarchy of
our faith in our family. She was bedridden from diabetes,
(08:06):
but she would gently remind me about Jesus from time
to time. I always stayed close to her, especially in
her final years. I prayed for her while she was
cr she cried out in pain. But when she passed away,
what little moral rounding I had left with her, I spiraled,
started drinking, smoking weed, stealing, sleeping around. I lived with
(08:28):
a you only live once mindset. If life is short,
why not take whatever I could get. My older brother
tried to rain me in. He was my only close
male figure, and he hit me with things like you
can't be living with your girlfriend, that's sin. But he
wasn't living the example of a Christian eater. All I
saw was hypocrisy, so I decided to dig into this
religion and prove him wrong. I wanted to show him
(08:52):
how ridiculous it all was, that this life is all
we had. There was no afterlife, no judgment, no God.
But as I started reading the Bible, I had a
different experience. I didn't find contradictions. I found conviction. It
wasn't Christ or Christianity that I spised, it was a hypocrisy.
I asked, God, if you're real, show me the truth,
(09:15):
and he did. For years after that, I leaned hard
on sola scripture scripture alone as the foundation of truth.
I figured, if the Bible's true, then the only way
to avoid false teaching is to know the source material myself.
So I read the Bible front to back multiple times.
I joined modern churches, and I stayed far away from Catholicism.
(09:37):
Why because I had heard it was corrupted. During the
time of Constantine. I heard preachers say the Pope was
the Antichrist, that the Catholic Church was the heart of
the Babylon in revelation, and I figured, these are Bible teachers, studied, respected,
they wouldn't lie. The cracks started to show. Spirit filled
believers around me would constantly disagree. An atheist and of
(10:00):
mine challenged me logically, and it shook my confidence, not
in Jesus, but in the theologies I had learned. I
didn't have solid reasons for believing some of what I did.
I just accepted it because it sounded biblical. When those
beliefs clashed with science or logic, I didn't know how
to respond. So I started watching serious debates between atheists
(10:22):
and Christians. That opened my eyes to arugmentation, logical fallacies,
and how to defend the faith more rigorously. The way
some Christian theologians dismantled atheistic world views. It blew my mind.
It was a version of faith I had never encountered before,
more logical, more coherent. Now, don't get me wrong, there's
(10:43):
still mysteries and scripture, but I began to understand how
science operates within a naturalistic framework. It's not that science
disproves God, it's that science never considers God as an
answer to begin with. It only seeks naturalistic interpretations of data.
That realization helped me stop panicking over question and allowed
me to be more relaxed with interpreting the Bible. I
(11:03):
began to understand how the Biblical worldview could be true
without requiring hyperderalism. From there, I moved into studying debates
within Christianity itself, Calvinism versus Armenianism, believers baptism versus infant baptism,
continuationism versus Cessatianism, pre trib versus post trib congregation of
(11:24):
versus hierarchical governance. Every single side used scripture to back
up their view. They were all sincere, all prayerful, all
reading the same Bible, but their conclusions were wildly different.
It wasn't that I stopped believing the Bible. I just
started realizing we all bring assumptions into the text, and
maybe I needed more than just my own interpretation. The
(11:48):
rapture was a tipping point for me. I first learned
about it through Chuck Missler on the pre tribulation rapture view,
But as time went on, I started noticing something. I
was becoming more and more paranoid. Every few months, like
someone was predicting a new rapture date, or saying look
out for this blood moon or watch this particular celestial event.
These things came and went and nothing happened. I even
(12:09):
reached a point where I didn't want to have kids.
I thought, what's the point If the rapture's coming soon,
why bring them into a world where they'll face the Antichrist.
Then I started hearing all the other views, mid trib
post trib, all millennial, post millennial, and every teacher I
heard made it sound like their view was the clear one,
and they all used scripture to prove it. I'd respected
(12:30):
many of these teachers, but now I was confused. Why
couldn't they agree? Why did none of them explain it simply?
That quote hit me. If you can't explain it simply,
you don't understand it well enough. Then I met someone
who could. Matthew Miller, teacher who later became my friend,
explained it in a way that made sense. He didn't
(12:51):
jump all over the Bible to make his point, He
just let the text say what it said. But that
raised a few new questions for me. If his explanation
made the most sense, why was he the only one
I ever heard say it that way? Why was the
pre trib rapture teaching so widespread in America if it
didn't even come from the early Church? Was this view global?
(13:12):
Was it historical or was it a recent development? That's
when I dug into its roots. The modern rapture doctrine
can be traced back to John Nelson Darby of the
Plymouth Brethren. In the eighteen thirties. Darby introduced the idea
of a pre tribulational rapture as part of his dispensational theology.
(13:32):
His teachings were picked up and popularized through the Schofield
Reference Bible in nineteen oh nine, which included study notes
endorsing Darby's views. That Bible became incredibly influential in American
evangelical circles. Scholfield's work was later adopted by major American
seminaries like Dallas Theological Seminary and Mooney Bible Institute, which
helped embed pre trib rapture theology into the DNA of
(13:56):
evangelical preaching. Over time, shape the teach chanes of many
popular pastors and industries give the impression that this view
had always been part of Christianity. But it wasn't. This
wasn't apostolic teaching. It was a modern theological framework that
gained traction because of mass printing and institutional backing. Let
(14:18):
me be clear, I do believe in a catching up
as scripture says, but not the Hollywood version. Once I
saw how recent the Rapture teaching was, I had to ask,
what else have we added that the early Church wouldn't recognize?
After all this, I wanted to know what the Catholic
and Orthodoxic churches believed about the Rapture, especially since they're
(14:40):
among the oldest Christian traditions Still stabbing. I found out
the Catholic Church holds an all millennial view, meaning they
believe we are in a millennium now. At first I
completely turned me off, especially given my background, but I
had to look deeper and ask why they held that view.
(15:00):
What I discovered is that their focus isn't on end
time speculation or try to decode every news headline. It's
on living the Christian life, preparing for Christ's return and
abilities his kingdom here and now. They're not trying to
set dates. They're trying to live prepared, and honestly, that's biblical.
(15:21):
Think of the parable of the ten virgins, the ones
who were wise were the ones who kept oil in
their laps. They were ready. As I continue to explore,
I realized that something blew my mind. Many of the
institutions we take for granted and modern life universities, hospitals,
charitable foundations. They were started by the Catholic Church. I
(15:43):
had no clue. Then I began studying the Great Schism,
the split between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman
Catholic Church, and just so you know, both claim to
be the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I learned
that the word Catholic just means universal. Much in the
same way that evangelicals often say the Church is the people,
(16:03):
not the building, or that the Body of Christ is
without walls. The term Catholic is referring to the whole,
universal body of believers. I had no idea how been
used that way from the beginning. Then I looked at
the Reformation, and to be fair, there were a lot
of valid criticisms of the Catholic Church at the time,
things like corruption among the clergy, abuse of power, the
(16:24):
issue of indulgences. That all played a role in sparkling
a Reformation through Martin Luther, who was himself a Catholic priest.
We can talk more about the Reformation and what reforms
Luther actually wanted in another episode, but the key point
is this he was excommunicating for not recanting his views,
and from there other reformers like John Calvin or Earl
(16:46):
rich Sweetly that's a tongue twister, kicked off a chain
reaction that led to the creation of many denominations, most
of which didn't even agree with each other. That was
a huge red flag for me. The reformers didn't just
disagree with the Catholic Church. They eventually started disagreeing with
each other, and that disagreement spread like wildfire. After that,
(17:10):
I started looking into the early Church fathers. I still
reading it, by the way, but what I found so
far was has been eye opening. They referred to the
Church as Catholic. They believed in the real presence in
the Eucharist, that the bread and wine actually become the
body and blood of Christ. And honestly, I didn't have
a problem with that. Jesus said it plainly, this is
(17:30):
my body, this is my blood. Why was I the
one spiritualizing his words? Why did I believe it was
just symbolic, just a gesture of remembrance. I take Christ
at his word and everything else, So why not this
Learning that the earliest Christians believed this long before any
councils or denominations. Was a huge turning point for me.
(17:51):
I wasn't walking away from the Gospel. I view again
walking into the fullness of it. And this was the
importance of humility. Humility became the key. I realized I
had judged be Catholicism based on the weakest examples. I
had judged it through a caricature, one built on flimsy arguments, misunderstandings,
(18:15):
and surface level observations. Most of the Catholics I had
encountered were nominal Catholics, Catholic by name but not by practice.
They hadn't read their Catechism, many hadn't read the Bible
cover to cover. They had little understanding that the depth
and beauty of their ancient faith, and they were following
secondhand misinformation, just like I had been. Meanwhile, many of
(18:37):
the Bible only Christian friends were doing their best, but
they were isolated, skeptical, and constantly church hopping me because
they didn't trust anyone, and I was one of them.
I had so many questions, for example, papal infallibility. That
one really bugged me. So I looked into it, and
here's what I found. Papal infallibility does not mean the
pope is always right or that he's perfect. It doesn't
(19:00):
mean he can just say anything and it becomes doctrine.
Papal infallidability means that the pope is protected from error
only when he officially teaches ex cathedral from the chair
of Peter on matters of faith and morals, and even then,
what he teaches must align with scripture and sacred tradition.
(19:21):
He can invent new doctrines or contradict God's word. So,
for example, he couldn't declare something like homosexual marriage morally
acceptable for Christians because that would contradict church teaching and scripture.
It's not about the pope being perfect, it's about God
protecting the church from formally teaching error. That's very different
from what I had been told. And here's what really
(19:44):
drove it home. I asked my former pastor about papal infallibility.
This was someone I respected deeply. He baptized my son,
he helped our family a lot, so I trusted his perspective.
But when he told me he didn't really know much
about it. He said, the pope can teach whatever he
wants because he's infallible. And then pointed me to God
Questions dot org, a site that's known for opposing Catholic teaching.
(20:07):
He also said his wife had been Catholic but became
saved when she accepted Christ. That's when I realized even
pastors who seem well read and spiritual can be deeply
misinformed about the Church history and Catholic theology. That realization
forced me to wrestle with other Catholic teachings too, like
praying to saints, honoring Mary, other topics that made me
(20:29):
uncomfortable for years. Here's what I learned. The Church teaches
that the saints in heaven are a part of the Church, triumphant,
those who have finished the race and are now with God.
We on earth are part of the Church, militant, still
fighting the good fight. Scripture says the prayers of the
saints rise like incense before the throne of God Revelation
(20:50):
five eight. So when Catholics pray to the saints, they're
not just asking for their prayer. They're really just asking
for the prayers the way you'd ask a fallible on
earth to pray for you. That phrase pray to trip
me up until I learned that in Old English pray simply,
men ask like I pray. THEE tell me more. It's
(21:10):
not worship, it's intercession. What about Mary? That one was
tough too. I had always been taught that giving Mary
honor felt like blasphemy, felt like we were taking something
away from Jesus. The scripture says, give honor to whom
honor is due, and in Luke one eight, Mary herself says,
from now on all generations shall call me blessed. The
(21:33):
early Church called her the new Eve, just as Christ
is the new Atom. Where Eve had disobeyed, Mary obeyed.
She said, behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord.
Let it be done to me according to your word.
And yes, Catholics call her the Mother of God, which
at first sounds wild. But here's the logic. Jesus is
(21:54):
fully God and fully mad. Mary gave birth to Jesus.
Therefore she is the mother of Incarnate, not the mother
of the Trinity or the mother of God the Father.
But that's not idolatry, that's Christology. It affirms who Jesus is.
These were some of the hardest things I had to
grapple with before becoming Catholic. But as I listened to
(22:15):
Catholic apologists. I realized they weren't avoiding scripture, they were
using it, and in many cases they brought up passages
I had either overlooked, misunderstood, or had never been taught.
That's when my heart started to soften. Eventually I narrowed
it down to the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church,
the only two that seemed to preserve Apostolic succession. That
(22:36):
was another term I had never heard in all my
years in non denominational circles. Apostolic succession means that the
bishops and priests today were ordained by other priests and bishops,
going all the way back through the laying on of
hands to the original apostles. I had read that in acts,
but never heard a sermon about it. And their view
of salvation, it actually lined up with what I had
(22:58):
already concluded, just from real the Bible along Salvation is
a gift from God, it's grace, but it's not just
a one time event. The Catholic view is that we
were saved, we are being saved, and we hope to
be saved if we remain faithful. God never stops chasing us,
but he won't force us to stay we still have
free will. We participate in our salvation by cooperating with grace.
(23:21):
It's not works based salvation, it's a relationship. And here's
what ultimately broke my confidence in sol the scripture. The
early Church didn't have a full Bible. Sure, the gospels
and Paul's letters were circulating, but there was no bound,
finalized canon for centuries and most early Christians they were illiterate.
They didn't come to faith by reading. They came to
(23:43):
faith by hearing, by the oral preaching and teaching of
the church. If you take that seriously, scripture starts to
look less like doctrine and more like assumption. Yes, scripture
has authority, but it's the Church that discerned what's scripture
even is. There were gnostic Gospels, forgeries, false letters. The
(24:05):
Church decided which books were divine and inspired and which weren't.
So how could I say I only trust the Bible
when the Bible itself is defined by the Church. That's
why Bible alone doesn't work without the Holy Spirit alive
within the church that Christ built. And then there's Peter.
Why did Jesus rename Simon to Peter Rock If that
(24:25):
didn't mean anything, that kind of renaming only happens a
few times in scripture, and it's always significant. Jesus says Simon, Simon, behold,
Satan demanded to have you that he might sift you
like wheat. But I have prayed for you that your
faith may not fail, and when you have turned again,
strengthen your brothers thirty one through thirty two. Why do
(24:50):
we ignore that? Why do we say it was just
his profession of faith? Christ told Peter to feed his sheep.
He gave Peter the keys, He gave Peter a name
tied to a foundation that helped me open up to
the idea that Peter had a unique role among the apostles,
and that role didn't die with him. The Reformation had
its place. It exposed some real corruption, But now that
(25:12):
knowledge is increasing, like Daniel said it would. What we
need isn't more fragmentation. We need humility. Humility is what
opens the door to truth. Pride just slams it shut
in both directions. So that's where I'm at. If I'm
not abandoning the Word of God, I'm embracing its context.
(25:33):
I'm not rejecting the church. I'm finally understanding what it
is and I'm not the only one moving towards the
Apostolic churches. It seems to be happening more and more
among new believers and seas and Christians alike. People are
beginning to ask the deeper questions. They're realizing the surface
level stuff isn't enough. So if you're feeling that tension
that's stirring inside you, don't ignore it. Dig deeper, ask
(25:56):
the uncomfortable questions, don't settle for a faith that's payper
thin when God is offering you the riches of the
whole story. And remember, adding to your understanding of faith
doesn't mean subtracting Christ. It means honoring Him with all
your heart, soul, mind and strength. Thanks for listening to
the Crossairs. This is just the beginning. I'll see you
(26:18):
next time and we'll keep going deeper together
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!