Moving on to some deeper analysis and aspects, which needs more development:
The way it works is that you begin with rapping Roy, following his mesmerizing meditation, and gain esoteric understanding, and while you may see things in the Bible that you “awaken” you to that hidden knowledge, and see things as confirming it, this is not by normal exegesis in which you pay attention to context, grammar, genre, etc, but is a revelation knowledge, in which you are the supreme authority on truth, and after you have really arrived you can throw the Bible away.
Masters denies that remembering and treasuring the words of the Bible in the heart means they have the word of God in their heart, as while Masters says that the Bible can awaken you to esoteric understanding under his meditation, yet it is the revelation knowledge that he gets, the understanding that is awakened in my mind, and the bond with that spirit of awakening is what is holy with me,” not the physical Bible, and “the Scriptures are just words on a page,” and “I can take that Bible to the toilet with me and use it in the same way as anything else.” (ibid, Walter Martin takes on Roy Masters min. 12:30-34)
In this Masters makes a critical error, as he reasons that since the pages which conveys truth is material, and and language is not then it is not holy, sanctified, set apart, and to be treated with reverence, but only the truth is contains and awakens one to is holy. However, as i pointed out before, even the presence of one believer in a marriage sanctifies a family. (1Cor. 7:14)
And consistent with Masters understanding, one can say that since the human body is simply made protoplasm, it need not be treated with special respect, but only the things it contains.
Giving him more rope, Masters states that “you cannot analyze language and find understanding in it,” which, along with consideration of genre and context, is part of understanding what people say in everyday life as well as what the Bible is doctrinally saying. And while by so doing we get a deeper understanding of God and the fulness of meaning, yet under Masters this is denigrated for the actual words are only a sound, or noise, and instead the Bible only “awakens” you to an understanding through his mind-numbing meditation, heretofore described by him.
Scan the Scriptures for understanding. BUT NEVER STUDY OR BE ABSORBED IN MERE WORDS..” (The Satan Principle, p. 100).
What comes from thinking builds pride, but what comes out of neutral realizing awareness [the state of innocence or holiness] is holy.” ( How to Control Your Emotions, p. 84)
His words, in response to the charge that he is his own standard, is that, “the standard is not the Bible, the standard is what the Bible awakens to me in my own heart.” (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/waltermartindotcom/2011/06/05/walter-martin-takes-on-roy-masters.mp3, min. 36:53-57) in which he detaches his conscious mind from his “imagination,” including daily thinking and living.
“Not the words on a page, not the sounds of a language,” but when you understand what the words are saying, when you understand what the knowledge is saying, you leave the knowledge behind, you leave the printed word behind and you have life.” as this understanding is a “wordless word” and when that happens, “there is the beginning of salvation.” “The Bible you read says ‘the letter kills,’ the words on a page, they kill you; if you involve yourself in words you move away from understanding.” ibid. min. 12:40-13:35)
Here Masters makes a false dichotomy between consideration of the actual words of Scripture in prayerful consideration of their meaning, and understanding of them.
Certainly there are secondary meanings to Scripture, and God can apply any text to any situation, but the doctrinal meaning is critical and is not realized apart from exegetical consideration, including of the very words themselves, such as seen by the Lords question in Mtt. 22:
“While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. “ (Matthew 22:41-46)
And which focus upon the meaning of words SR also pointed out in other texts.
And which is seen in this description of an ongoing dialog between a Christian and a so-called Jehovah’s Witness:http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2012/09/my-time-with-jws.html
However, Masters, as them, denies the Deity of Christ, and as they, supposes that “One’ must refer to an absolute unity of one person, versus Being, and rejects analysis of words which play a part of this doctrine.
Masters often has justified his rejection of textual analysis of language in determining the meaning of words - versus the revelation understanding which Scripture can “awaken” one to as attained thru his meditation - by reasoning that you do not know for sure such things as whether the events in the Bible took place, etc, and thus you are the supreme judge of truth. Provided of course that you esoterically realize it thru his meditation.
However, in reality, while every man must judge for himself what truth is, this is not through Masters occultist meditation with its looking thru your forehead as it were, and finding you hand rising, and cold shivers and becoming one with the universe, etc., but primarily by prayerful study of Scripture (once one finds trust in it warranted due to evidence), which entails consideration of context, genre, etc. to understand its doctrinal meaning, and while how it applies to your situation does not determine doctrine, or what is truth.
Nor is the reader of Scripture the supreme authority on truth, as though he were infallible, even though he must at some point judge for himself what is right, but the words God are, (Mt. 4:4; Jn. 17:17) with the Scriptures being the assured word of God (2Tim. 3:16) by which truth claims are both tested and established. (Is. 8:20; Acts 17:11; 18:28; 28:23)
This does mean different interpretations can and do result, yet this is limited, and amidst the core salvific gospel essentials, which are critical to conversion and realizing the unity of the Spirit, (Acts 10:34-43; Eph. 4:3-6; 1Cor. 12:13; 15:1-4), the denial of which divides Christianity from most cults.
And God has also given the church administration, that of pastors to oversee the flock, (Acts 20:28; Rm. 12:8; Eph. 4:11; Heb. 13:17; 1Pt. 5:1,2) and teachers with the gift of teaching, (Rm. 12:7) which works to foster unity, and limit the degree in which believers can disagree beyond core truths.
But which Masters denigrates:
“If you need the church you’re not well.” ((tape “The Mystery of Golgotha”)
The Church is supposed to teach you to go within yourself and to be a whole person and not need the Church. (Tape No. 20, “The Sayings of Jesus—Right Tradition”)
Through true belief you acquire a new nature from within that does not require any external reinforcement by church attendance, study or ritual—ever. (How to Conquer Suffering Without Doctors, p. 191)
But in reality he has effectively set himself up as a type of pope. For many men and churches have sought to deal with the problem of disunity and different interpretations by asserting they are assuredly infallible, or uniquely enlightened to teach with authority equal or above Scripture, but who are not reliant upon or manifest Scriptural warrant.
And while Masters effectively but erroneously teaches that souls are the supreme authorities on truth under his meditation, in reality he is the supreme authority on how to realize this truth, and on more, and if one disagrees with him, at least in principal matters and even as a result of meditation, it must be disallowed.
And while leaders claiming assured veracity does work unity, it is inferior in quality to that which depends upon the Spirit doing so as a result of personal seeking of God and faith in the gospel, resulting in a unity founded upon a shared, Scripture based conversion and relationship with the risen Lord Jesus.
Moreover, in reality, looking to one teacher or church office as assuredly faithful interpreters does not solve the problem of different interpretations, as it moves the problem of interpretation to that of interpreting the interpreter, and even as to when they have given an infallible type interpretation. And as seen in churches which hold to the sola ecclesia (the church is the supreme authority on truth) model, this does not prevent divisions both formal or informal.
But as said, while the interpretive office has its Scriptural place, and while each individual at some point must judge for himself what truth is and what warrants trust (including if it be his church), Scripture is the only transcendent material source that we as evangelicals Christians see as being Divinely established as being of God, due to their manifest enduring Heavenly qualities and power, and by faith in it the church as the born again body of Christ has endured (being founded upon the O.T. Scriptures: Lk. 24:44; Rm. 1:2; 16:25,26).
And the fruits of which is not that of cultic bondage to defend a Masters-type teacher to the point where even valid documented material is dismissed as fabrications.
And like true men of God, these writings are wholly inspired of God even if men do not recognize it as such, though like as with true men of God, they are supposed to be affirmed to be so by men based upon their continuing qualities.
And thus the Scriptures which Masters sometimes invokes have continued to be established from generation to generation because their enduring qualities, but which are realized by faith in and obedience to its words and what they doctrinally and personally teach. But which does not sanction the means of Masters, with the occultic, looking, as it were, thru your forehead type of meditation which the monologue of Masters mesmerizes men and women with.
