Saturday, June 16, 2007
mercies
There are two sorts of mercies that are seldom eclipsed by the darkest affliction that befalls the saints in their temporal concerns, that is, sparing mercy in this world and saving mercy in that to come. [John Flavel]
Friday, June 15, 2007
Erotic Church Service
SO LET ME ASK YOU WHEN IS ENOUGH ENOUGH, WHEN WILL WE MAKE A STAND FOR TRUTH. SOME OF THE CHURCHES THAT ARE DOING WHAT THEY ARE DOING WOULD NOT GET AWAY THIS IF PAUL WERE ALIVE TODAY, SO THEN LET ME ASK THOSE OF US THAT THE TRUTH MATTERS TO TODAY.WHY ARE THEY GETTING AWAY WITH IT NOW??????
LET US STAND UP TOGETHER FOR THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST.
HERE AT TRUTH MATTERS WE ARE STANDING FOR THE TRUTH PLEASE JOIN US.
Rev. Charles J Paul
The ultimate in 'seeker sensitive' services has arrived and it is drawing crowds so large that they're having to turn people away. It is called Erotic Church and according to the news story:
'A female dancer dances in a skin coloured stocking in the middle of the church in front of the altar. She crawls about on the floor and wraps herself in a hanging down white cloth. Is this a blasphemous provocation, a scoffing at the Christian religion?
'No it is only one of the items on the agenda of the Protestant Church Assembly. The six-hundred-year-old church, the Church of the Carthusians in the south of Cologne has become the stage for an erotic church service. Nearly one thousand interested people waited outside the door of the former monastery, despite a thunderstorm- but in the end there was only room for four hundred people...
'The vicar arrived in a black cassock and barefoot. He announced that eroticism and lust are not taboo areas pushed aside by God. In fact, "lust has to be lived out", said Armin Beuscher, who tempered his speech immediately, by saying, “we are of course today in this service only able to implement this in a limited manner”...
'The faithful were then asked to take part in an anointing ritual in which they should massage the forehead and hands of the person sitting next to them. Some go further and embrace each other whilst others kiss. The atmosphere gets more relaxed. This is how most church services should be said Birgit Kruger
Click Here to Read the Original News Story
Clown Worship The Movie
You've seen the pictures of clown-led worship. But seeing it on video takes it to a whole other level.
This video is just a snippet of the abomination and mockery of Clown-Led Worship.
http://www.alittleleaven.com/2007/06/clown_worship_t.html
This video is just a snippet of the abomination and mockery of Clown-Led Worship.
http://www.alittleleaven.com/2007/06/clown_worship_t.html
Clown-Led Worship
McClure United Church in Edmonton, Canada is the latest church to join the ranks of those churches that have offered 'Clown-Led Worship'. Their service was sooooo unique and sooooo meaningful that it was covered by their local newspaper.
Whatever happened to reverence in the house of God?
Apparently that is long gone. It has been replaced with circus acts.
It makes us wonder. If Jesus were to show up to one of these services would he drive these clowns out with a whip? We think that Jesus may have to use another implement. If he used a whip people might mistake him for a lion tamer and think he was part of the act.
That old popular adage applies here, "You may feel like your pastor is a clown. But it is best if he doesn't dress up like one and confirm your fears."
Here are some more pictures documenting the 'low lights' from other churches that have gone 'clown'.
Whatever happened to reverence in the house of God?
Apparently that is long gone. It has been replaced with circus acts.
It makes us wonder. If Jesus were to show up to one of these services would he drive these clowns out with a whip? We think that Jesus may have to use another implement. If he used a whip people might mistake him for a lion tamer and think he was part of the act.
That old popular adage applies here, "You may feel like your pastor is a clown. But it is best if he doesn't dress up like one and confirm your fears."
Here are some more pictures documenting the 'low lights' from other churches that have gone 'clown'.
Sure confidence and trust
If a man would lead a happy life, let him but seek a sure object for his trust, and he shall be safe: "He shall not be afraid of evil tidings:his heart is fixed, trusting in the the Lord." He hath laid up his confidence in God, therefore his heart is kept in an equal poise. [Thomas Manton]
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Everybody Wants Reformation… but who is willing to let goods and kindred go?
A earnest plea for a day of prayer and fasting.
No fanfare; no programs; no religious leaders jockeying for media attention; no K-Street spin; no DVD’s or MP3’s to profit from; no books to promote; no CD’s to sell; no contests to judge; and no personality driven agendas to tolerate. But simply God’s people taking leave from the duties of their daily lives to humbly seek the Lord to bring revival, repentance, and reform to His church once again.
We need a new Reformation today beloved; we need another Great Awakening!
“O Christian, never be proud of things that are so transient, injurious, and uncertain as the riches of this evil world! But set your heart on the true and durable riches of grace in Christ Jesus.” -ISAAC AMBROSE
Read the entire article….
No fanfare; no programs; no religious leaders jockeying for media attention; no K-Street spin; no DVD’s or MP3’s to profit from; no books to promote; no CD’s to sell; no contests to judge; and no personality driven agendas to tolerate. But simply God’s people taking leave from the duties of their daily lives to humbly seek the Lord to bring revival, repentance, and reform to His church once again.
We need a new Reformation today beloved; we need another Great Awakening!
“O Christian, never be proud of things that are so transient, injurious, and uncertain as the riches of this evil world! But set your heart on the true and durable riches of grace in Christ Jesus.” -ISAAC AMBROSE
Read the entire article….
No Place for Truth
From Dr. J. Ligon Duncan, pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Jackson, Mississippi in their Understanding the Times series,comes this message addressing the book by David Wells, No Place for Truth. It is available in transcript and mp3 formats.
In understanding the times, we will think together critically and biblically and Christianly about important cultural and practical issues for today’s Christian. We’ll introduce you to some of the major issues in the church and the world, and family and………… [tape interruption]……and to live and think as a Christian. Tonight’s Understanding the Times is about David Wells’ well-known book, No Place for Truth.
David Wells’ No Place for Truth may have been the most important book about evangelicalism published in the 1990’s. For instance, reading it led Dr. James Montgomery Boice to draft The Cambridge Declaration and form The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. In Wells’ book, he expresses deep concern over the increasing theological void in evangelical churches. By that he means not simply that evangelical lay people and clergy are not as well-read theologically as their forebears, but that there is a growing attitude of disdain for theology, an impatience with rigorous and robust theological thinking, and a corresponding loss of the knowledge of and concern for historic biblical and confessional doctrine. These things are seen as irrelevant to life and ministry.
Wells believes that there is an audience condition in evangelicalism that almost prevents the very possibility of taking theology seriously, or doing it right. Wells says that he has watched with growing disbelief as the evangelical church has cheerfully plunged into an astounding illiteracy. This charge, he says, is evident not only in seminaries, but also in publications, churches, and pastors. It is a change so large and so encompassing that those who dissent from what is happening are easily dismissed as individuals who just can’t get along, or want to scruple over what is inconsequential, or who are not loyal, or who are in any case quite irrelevant.
Provocatively, however, Wells suggests that those who are most relevant to this world are those who are judged most irrelevant. Wells’ book is about how the audience, the evangelical audience in particular, and the condition of that audience (their mindset) affects the possibility of actually “doing” theology…thinking theologically, or speaking theologically to them.
Wells argues that theology is a knowledge that first and foremost belongs to the people of God, and the proper and primary audience for theology is therefore the church, not the learned guild. The purpose of theology, then, is not primarily to participate in high-powered academic conversation, but to nurture the people of God. So the theologian’s proper audience is the community of faith, since theologians profess to teach a knowledge received by faith and sustained by faith.
Wells argues that, rather than to professionals and methods, he looks for the recovery of the place of theology in a reformation in the way that Christian people go about their business of being Christian in the midst of the extraordinary changes that Modernity has wrought in our world. Wells states his thesis in his book this way: he says that theology happens in three places, or three worlds: the academy, the church, and middle-men—the academy (referring to schools, universities, seminaries, books, journals); the church; and then the middle-men (the academics and pastors who transfer the teachings from the academy to the church). But he says that the connection between these three worlds is now severed, and it is even breaking down within themselves. Wells says in effect that if we lose the ability to think like Christians about the world, then there ceases to be a reason to “do” theology in the pulpit or a classroom. It’s like writing books for people who cannot read.
He says that this situation in the church is a reflection of a broader theme in our culture. One effect of modernization has been to break the unity of human learning into highly segregated specializations, so rational absolutes by and large have been abandoned. The effect of secularization has been to marginalize God, making the absolute and transcendent irrelevant to daily life. The net result of this force in the church has been the triumph of diversity over unity; that is, our world, even our religious world, has become fragmented.
And the evangelical churches, too, have experienced these effects of Modernity. In this cultural context, with all the fragmentation of knowledge you might expect people in our society to believe less and less; but, surprisingly, Wells says, in fact they believe more and more. In fact, they’ll believe almost anything. And the same goes for the Christian churches.
In contrast, Wells calls himself a believer in the truth, and a disbeliever in the fabric of modern life, whereas, he says, evangelicals are believers in Modernity. They are anti-modern only across a narrow front, whereas he is anti-modern across the entire front. In other words, it is only when culture directly and obviously challenges Christianity that most evangelicals oppose it, and except in those instances evangelicals tend to view the culture as neutral, or even as a useful vehicle for conveying Christian truth.
However, culture is not neutral. It is laden with values and hidden influences. Because evangelicals believe in the innocence of modern culture they cannot believe in historic Protestant orthodoxy. But because Wells believes in historic Protestant orthodoxy, he cannot believe in Modernity. Wells suggests that evangelicalism is hampered by a pervasive worldliness, and is seeking to liberate itself from historic Christian orthodoxy, even when it does so in the name of biblical fidelity, or always reforming. Nevertheless, he says, it has not become more faithful to Scripture, but less.
Wells says there is less interest in the truth, less seriousness, less depth, less capacity to speak the word of God to our own generation in a way that offers an alternative to what our generation already thinks. Wells says his central purpose in this book is to explore why theology is disappearing. He is interested in the recovering of a theology that has a passion for truth, and which also articulates a historic Christian orthodoxy.
In understanding the times, we will think together critically and biblically and Christianly about important cultural and practical issues for today’s Christian. We’ll introduce you to some of the major issues in the church and the world, and family and………… [tape interruption]……and to live and think as a Christian. Tonight’s Understanding the Times is about David Wells’ well-known book, No Place for Truth.
David Wells’ No Place for Truth may have been the most important book about evangelicalism published in the 1990’s. For instance, reading it led Dr. James Montgomery Boice to draft The Cambridge Declaration and form The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. In Wells’ book, he expresses deep concern over the increasing theological void in evangelical churches. By that he means not simply that evangelical lay people and clergy are not as well-read theologically as their forebears, but that there is a growing attitude of disdain for theology, an impatience with rigorous and robust theological thinking, and a corresponding loss of the knowledge of and concern for historic biblical and confessional doctrine. These things are seen as irrelevant to life and ministry.
Wells believes that there is an audience condition in evangelicalism that almost prevents the very possibility of taking theology seriously, or doing it right. Wells says that he has watched with growing disbelief as the evangelical church has cheerfully plunged into an astounding illiteracy. This charge, he says, is evident not only in seminaries, but also in publications, churches, and pastors. It is a change so large and so encompassing that those who dissent from what is happening are easily dismissed as individuals who just can’t get along, or want to scruple over what is inconsequential, or who are not loyal, or who are in any case quite irrelevant.
Provocatively, however, Wells suggests that those who are most relevant to this world are those who are judged most irrelevant. Wells’ book is about how the audience, the evangelical audience in particular, and the condition of that audience (their mindset) affects the possibility of actually “doing” theology…thinking theologically, or speaking theologically to them.
Wells argues that theology is a knowledge that first and foremost belongs to the people of God, and the proper and primary audience for theology is therefore the church, not the learned guild. The purpose of theology, then, is not primarily to participate in high-powered academic conversation, but to nurture the people of God. So the theologian’s proper audience is the community of faith, since theologians profess to teach a knowledge received by faith and sustained by faith.
Wells argues that, rather than to professionals and methods, he looks for the recovery of the place of theology in a reformation in the way that Christian people go about their business of being Christian in the midst of the extraordinary changes that Modernity has wrought in our world. Wells states his thesis in his book this way: he says that theology happens in three places, or three worlds: the academy, the church, and middle-men—the academy (referring to schools, universities, seminaries, books, journals); the church; and then the middle-men (the academics and pastors who transfer the teachings from the academy to the church). But he says that the connection between these three worlds is now severed, and it is even breaking down within themselves. Wells says in effect that if we lose the ability to think like Christians about the world, then there ceases to be a reason to “do” theology in the pulpit or a classroom. It’s like writing books for people who cannot read.
He says that this situation in the church is a reflection of a broader theme in our culture. One effect of modernization has been to break the unity of human learning into highly segregated specializations, so rational absolutes by and large have been abandoned. The effect of secularization has been to marginalize God, making the absolute and transcendent irrelevant to daily life. The net result of this force in the church has been the triumph of diversity over unity; that is, our world, even our religious world, has become fragmented.
And the evangelical churches, too, have experienced these effects of Modernity. In this cultural context, with all the fragmentation of knowledge you might expect people in our society to believe less and less; but, surprisingly, Wells says, in fact they believe more and more. In fact, they’ll believe almost anything. And the same goes for the Christian churches.
In contrast, Wells calls himself a believer in the truth, and a disbeliever in the fabric of modern life, whereas, he says, evangelicals are believers in Modernity. They are anti-modern only across a narrow front, whereas he is anti-modern across the entire front. In other words, it is only when culture directly and obviously challenges Christianity that most evangelicals oppose it, and except in those instances evangelicals tend to view the culture as neutral, or even as a useful vehicle for conveying Christian truth.
However, culture is not neutral. It is laden with values and hidden influences. Because evangelicals believe in the innocence of modern culture they cannot believe in historic Protestant orthodoxy. But because Wells believes in historic Protestant orthodoxy, he cannot believe in Modernity. Wells suggests that evangelicalism is hampered by a pervasive worldliness, and is seeking to liberate itself from historic Christian orthodoxy, even when it does so in the name of biblical fidelity, or always reforming. Nevertheless, he says, it has not become more faithful to Scripture, but less.
Wells says there is less interest in the truth, less seriousness, less depth, less capacity to speak the word of God to our own generation in a way that offers an alternative to what our generation already thinks. Wells says his central purpose in this book is to explore why theology is disappearing. He is interested in the recovering of a theology that has a passion for truth, and which also articulates a historic Christian orthodoxy.
My Interview with Mark Driscoll By Mike Corley
Click here to hear my INTERVIEW WITH MARK DRISCOLL, JUNE 7, 2007
I spent about 40 minutes talking with Mark Driscoll this week. My decision to interview Pastor Driscoll came about for a couple of reasons.
First, I am personally fascinated by the man and his ministry. Driscoll was very open in our discussion to say that he has totally disassociated himself from the Emergent Church and that in fact the leaders of that movement, in his words, “have nothing to do with me” theologically. My fascination stems from the fact that Mark and I are in agreement almost totally theologically, both of us upholding the reformed tradition. I will admit though, there are some areas involving methodology that still raises concerns for me.
Second, he has highly regarded by other men of God whom I respect greatly, such as John Piper, Mark Dever and C.J. Mahaney. Piper welcomed Driscoll to the most recent Desiring God conference; Mark Dever’s 9Marks website recently featured an article by Driscoll on narrative preaching, and I read recently where C.J. Mahaney visited Driscoll in Seattle and is very encouraging of their ministry there.
Thirdly, I did want to speak to the man myself and have the opportunity to ask him personally questions that I have been pondering since first learning of Driscoll and his ministry. While I am not endorsing the EC concept of “conversation” just for the sake of conversing, I did think it was a positive to establish a line of communication there.
As I said before and after the radio interview, there will be some who think I was too soft on Mark Driscoll, and there will be some who think I was to hard on him. Mark is a big boy and can obviously had either. But I personally found him to be very open and willing to admit his faults, failures and dependence on the Lord. Do I agree with everything he says or the ways he says it? No. But I am not as quick to rush to judgment in regards to the ministry of Mark Driscoll as I was before. Quite frankly I want to know and see more.
That is why I have requested the opportunity to travel to Seattle and visit Mars Hill myself and see first-hand what goes on there through the ministry of Mark Driscoll. I have also asked for such an opportunity at The Journey in St. Louis, Missouri. I want to go to these locations, see whats going on, write on what I see and hear, do some interviews and hopefully even do some live programs from there and at least try to understand some things.
I am not backing off of my concerns with the Emergent Church by no means. Yet it is my prayer that through all of this the Lord will help us, me, to better reach those in the emergent church movement, and everyone, with the Truth
I spent about 40 minutes talking with Mark Driscoll this week. My decision to interview Pastor Driscoll came about for a couple of reasons.
First, I am personally fascinated by the man and his ministry. Driscoll was very open in our discussion to say that he has totally disassociated himself from the Emergent Church and that in fact the leaders of that movement, in his words, “have nothing to do with me” theologically. My fascination stems from the fact that Mark and I are in agreement almost totally theologically, both of us upholding the reformed tradition. I will admit though, there are some areas involving methodology that still raises concerns for me.
Second, he has highly regarded by other men of God whom I respect greatly, such as John Piper, Mark Dever and C.J. Mahaney. Piper welcomed Driscoll to the most recent Desiring God conference; Mark Dever’s 9Marks website recently featured an article by Driscoll on narrative preaching, and I read recently where C.J. Mahaney visited Driscoll in Seattle and is very encouraging of their ministry there.
Thirdly, I did want to speak to the man myself and have the opportunity to ask him personally questions that I have been pondering since first learning of Driscoll and his ministry. While I am not endorsing the EC concept of “conversation” just for the sake of conversing, I did think it was a positive to establish a line of communication there.
As I said before and after the radio interview, there will be some who think I was too soft on Mark Driscoll, and there will be some who think I was to hard on him. Mark is a big boy and can obviously had either. But I personally found him to be very open and willing to admit his faults, failures and dependence on the Lord. Do I agree with everything he says or the ways he says it? No. But I am not as quick to rush to judgment in regards to the ministry of Mark Driscoll as I was before. Quite frankly I want to know and see more.
That is why I have requested the opportunity to travel to Seattle and visit Mars Hill myself and see first-hand what goes on there through the ministry of Mark Driscoll. I have also asked for such an opportunity at The Journey in St. Louis, Missouri. I want to go to these locations, see whats going on, write on what I see and hear, do some interviews and hopefully even do some live programs from there and at least try to understand some things.
I am not backing off of my concerns with the Emergent Church by no means. Yet it is my prayer that through all of this the Lord will help us, me, to better reach those in the emergent church movement, and everyone, with the Truth
Death-a State of Perfection
Death is not only no death for them, but is a kind of translation to a more glorious life, and is turned into a kind of resurrection from the dead. Death is a happy change to them, and a change that is by far more like a resurrection than a death. It is a change from a state of much sin and sorrow, and darkness, to a state of perfect light, and holiness and joy. When a saint dies, he awakes as it were, out of sleep. This life is a dull, lifeless state; there is but a little Spiritual life, and a great deal of deadness; there is but a little sight and a great deal of darkness; there is but a little sense and a great deal of stupidity and senselessness. But when a godly man dies, all this deadness and darkness, and stupidity and senselessness are gone forever, and he enters immediately into a state of perfect life, and perfect light, and activity and joyfulness. [Johnathon Edwards]
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Ashamed of Christ's Word
Here is another sad example of a church that would rather preach about movies rather than God's word.
Connection Church in Kyle, Texas has decided to abandon the teaching of God's word and instead exegete the spiritual messages in this summer's movies. (Apparently the Bible's stories are too boring and inadequate for today's discriminating 'seeker' sooooo Connection Church decided they didn't need God's Word this summer.)
It is important to note that the lead Pastor of Connection Church is Cole Phillips and he is a church planting coach for Purpose Driven Planting. (Yep, he works for Rick Warren.) His bio says that he "is guiding other church leaders to start healthy, thriving churches." It is obvious that Cole's idea of a healthy, thriving church is much different than Jesus'. God's word commands pastors to 'preach the word'. Cole thinks he is exempt from that command.
Here is their summer lesson schedule.
June 10th: Shrek the Third - Finding the KingJune 17th: Pirates of the Caribbean At World's End - Choosing SidesJune 24th: Ocean's 13 - Breaking the BankJuly 1st: Live Free or Die Hard - Living Free from AddictionsJuly 8th: Evan Almighty - Trusting GodJuly 15th: Ratatouille - Winning the Rat RaceJuly 22nd: License to Wed - Preparing for MarriageJuly 29th: The Simpsons Movie - Bouncing Back
Remember the words of our Lord in Mark 8:38:
"For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”
Based upon the fact that Connection Church has separated itself from the preaching and teaching of God's Word, they should be referred to from here on out as 'Disconnection Church'. This is exactly the type of preaching that will keep people disconnected from Christ for all eternity.
Beware of Satan's devices
Remember how much needless trouble your vain fears have bought upon you formerly: "And hast feared continually because of the oppressor, as if he were ready to devour; and where is the fury of the oppressor?" He seemed ready to devour, yet you are not devoured. I have not bought upon you the thing that you feared; you have wasted your spirit, disordered your soul, and weakened your heads to no purpose: you might have all this while you enjoyed your peace, and possessed your soul in patience. And here, I cannot but observe a very deep policy of Satan in managing a design against the soul by these vain fears. I call them vain in reference to the frustration of them by Providence; but certainly they are not as vain as the end in which Satan aims by raising them; for herein he acts as soldiers do in the siege of a garrison, who to wear out the besieged by constant watchings, and thereby unfit them to make resistance when they storm it in earnest, every night rouse them with false alarms, which though they come to nothing yet remarkably answer the ultimate design of the enemy. Oh, when will you beware of Satan's devices? [John Flavel]
Biblical Foreknowledge? (Part 2)
(By Nathan Williams)
Last week we began to look at the Biblical concept of foreknowledge and tried to gain some understanding of what the idea means. We did this by defining the term and by giving specific examples from Scripture that help us in our understanding of the term.
It is important to reemphasize something I said last time but which may have gotten overlooked. One of the negative responses to the proper understanding of the term foreknowledge is that it essentially makes no difference between foreknowledge and predestination. The terms are similar but each has its own emphasis. “Foreknowledge” emphasizes God’s covenantal love for the one He has chosen, while “predestined” emphasizes His electing will. Together, these two concepts make up God’s gracious choice of believers to salvation in eternity past. They are like two sides of the same coin. I believe Wayne Grudem got it right when he said that foreknowledge means “according to God’s fatherly care for you before the world was made.”
My main goal throughout these two articles has been to explain that foreknowledge does not mean only “to know beforehand.” This week I would like to examine some further arguments that will help us to gain a proper understanding of the term “foreknowledge”. These arguments are not always drawn from any one passage in particular, but are taken from the whole of Scriptural teaching.
Theological Arguments
As one examines the passages that deal with God’s “foreknowledge” it becomes evident rather quickly that “foreknowledge” deals with individuals and not facts. The term never deals with God knowing something about someone. It always deals with the fact that God knew the person. Romans 8:29 says that God foreknew certain individuals. It is best to understand this to mean “those whom he long ago thought of in a saving relationship to himself.” (Grudem)
It is also important to recognize where the final authority for salvation rests. If God looks down the corridors of time with no intimate involvement and simply sees who will exercise faith and then chooses those who will choose Him, this leaves the ultimate authority for salvation with man. It makes God react to the decisions of men. This negates all of the Scriptural teaching that election is God’s gracious prerogative.
The Bible is saturated with the language of election, and all of it attributes the decision involved in election to God and not to man. In John 15:16 Jesus says, “You did not choose me, but I chose you. . . .” John 6:44 states that no one is able to respond to God unless the Father draws him to Himself. Scripture does not give final authority and sovereignty to man, but to God (1 Thess 1:4; John 13:18; Rom. 9:11; 15-16; Eph 2:10; Acts 13:48).
Scripture never teaches that our faith was the reason God chose us for salvation. Romans 9:11 says “for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls.” Ephesians 1:5 says that our election was “according to the kind intention of His will”. The idea that our election is based on foreseen faith is strangely absent from Scripture. This is teaching that has been read into multiple passages to make a theological system work.
Next, one cannot come to the Arminian understanding of foreknowledge with a proper concept of faith and how men exercise it. The scriptural teaching concerning the nature of man is that man has fallen into sin and has turned his back on God (Gen. 3). Now, every person is born a sinner (Ps. 51:5). Being born into sin, we have no desire for God. In fact, the natural direction of man is to hate God and oppose everything He stands for (Rom. 3:9-20). Because of this, the Bible describes humans as dead in their sins (Eph. 2:1).
A dead person does not respond, he has no life in him and is not able to move one inch. For the Arminian view of foreknowledge to be correct, the Biblical teaching on the sinfulness of man must be altered. How can man respond in faith to God if he is dead in his sins? The simple answer is that he cannot. Faith is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8-9) and one cannot exercise it unless it has first been graciously given by the Lord.
Finally, let’s assume for a moment that foreknowledge only means prescience and that God really does elect those whom He sees will exercise faith. This means that God, who has a true knowledge of the future, has already seen exactly what will happen to people. This means that what God sees of them is absolutely certain to come to pass. So the destinies of men have already been determined. If they have not been determined by God, by what have they been determined? When we wind up in this position we end up trusting the fate of our lives to something outside of God.
My hope is that these articles have been beneficial to your understanding of the Biblical concept of foreknowledge. The doctrine of election and all the teaching that goes along with it is precious truth. It is vital to understand properly and when it is understood it certainly will incite the believer to praise our sovereign God.
Romans 11:33 “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!”
Last week we began to look at the Biblical concept of foreknowledge and tried to gain some understanding of what the idea means. We did this by defining the term and by giving specific examples from Scripture that help us in our understanding of the term.
It is important to reemphasize something I said last time but which may have gotten overlooked. One of the negative responses to the proper understanding of the term foreknowledge is that it essentially makes no difference between foreknowledge and predestination. The terms are similar but each has its own emphasis. “Foreknowledge” emphasizes God’s covenantal love for the one He has chosen, while “predestined” emphasizes His electing will. Together, these two concepts make up God’s gracious choice of believers to salvation in eternity past. They are like two sides of the same coin. I believe Wayne Grudem got it right when he said that foreknowledge means “according to God’s fatherly care for you before the world was made.”
My main goal throughout these two articles has been to explain that foreknowledge does not mean only “to know beforehand.” This week I would like to examine some further arguments that will help us to gain a proper understanding of the term “foreknowledge”. These arguments are not always drawn from any one passage in particular, but are taken from the whole of Scriptural teaching.
Theological Arguments
As one examines the passages that deal with God’s “foreknowledge” it becomes evident rather quickly that “foreknowledge” deals with individuals and not facts. The term never deals with God knowing something about someone. It always deals with the fact that God knew the person. Romans 8:29 says that God foreknew certain individuals. It is best to understand this to mean “those whom he long ago thought of in a saving relationship to himself.” (Grudem)
It is also important to recognize where the final authority for salvation rests. If God looks down the corridors of time with no intimate involvement and simply sees who will exercise faith and then chooses those who will choose Him, this leaves the ultimate authority for salvation with man. It makes God react to the decisions of men. This negates all of the Scriptural teaching that election is God’s gracious prerogative.
The Bible is saturated with the language of election, and all of it attributes the decision involved in election to God and not to man. In John 15:16 Jesus says, “You did not choose me, but I chose you. . . .” John 6:44 states that no one is able to respond to God unless the Father draws him to Himself. Scripture does not give final authority and sovereignty to man, but to God (1 Thess 1:4; John 13:18; Rom. 9:11; 15-16; Eph 2:10; Acts 13:48).
Scripture never teaches that our faith was the reason God chose us for salvation. Romans 9:11 says “for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls.” Ephesians 1:5 says that our election was “according to the kind intention of His will”. The idea that our election is based on foreseen faith is strangely absent from Scripture. This is teaching that has been read into multiple passages to make a theological system work.
Next, one cannot come to the Arminian understanding of foreknowledge with a proper concept of faith and how men exercise it. The scriptural teaching concerning the nature of man is that man has fallen into sin and has turned his back on God (Gen. 3). Now, every person is born a sinner (Ps. 51:5). Being born into sin, we have no desire for God. In fact, the natural direction of man is to hate God and oppose everything He stands for (Rom. 3:9-20). Because of this, the Bible describes humans as dead in their sins (Eph. 2:1).
A dead person does not respond, he has no life in him and is not able to move one inch. For the Arminian view of foreknowledge to be correct, the Biblical teaching on the sinfulness of man must be altered. How can man respond in faith to God if he is dead in his sins? The simple answer is that he cannot. Faith is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8-9) and one cannot exercise it unless it has first been graciously given by the Lord.
Finally, let’s assume for a moment that foreknowledge only means prescience and that God really does elect those whom He sees will exercise faith. This means that God, who has a true knowledge of the future, has already seen exactly what will happen to people. This means that what God sees of them is absolutely certain to come to pass. So the destinies of men have already been determined. If they have not been determined by God, by what have they been determined? When we wind up in this position we end up trusting the fate of our lives to something outside of God.
My hope is that these articles have been beneficial to your understanding of the Biblical concept of foreknowledge. The doctrine of election and all the teaching that goes along with it is precious truth. It is vital to understand properly and when it is understood it certainly will incite the believer to praise our sovereign God.
Romans 11:33 “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!”
Friday, June 08, 2007
Encouragement for the Doubting Christian
Do you belong to that class of persons who really profess Christian faith and Christian obedience, and are you trying, however weakly, to follow Christ in the midst of an evil world?
I think I know something of what goes on in your heart. You sometimes feel that you will never persevere to the end, and will some day give up your profession of faith. You are sometimes tempted to write bitter things against yourself, and to believe that you have no grace at all.
I am afraid there are myriads of true Christians in this condition, who go trembling and doubting toward heaven. However, in spite of all their groans and doubts and fears, they do not turn back, but press on, though faint.
Now, my advice to all such persons is very simple. Pray every morning and evening of your life, "Lord, increase my faith." Cultivate the habit of fixing your eyes more simply on Jesus Christ, and try to know more of the fulness there is laid up in Him for every one of His believing people.
Do not be always pouring over the imperfections of your own heart, and dissecting your own sins. Look up! Look more to your risen Head in heaven, and try to realize more and more that the Lord Jesus not only died for you, but that He also rose again, and that He is ever living at God's right hand as your Priest, your advocate, and your Almighty Friend. [J.C. Ryle]
I think I know something of what goes on in your heart. You sometimes feel that you will never persevere to the end, and will some day give up your profession of faith. You are sometimes tempted to write bitter things against yourself, and to believe that you have no grace at all.
I am afraid there are myriads of true Christians in this condition, who go trembling and doubting toward heaven. However, in spite of all their groans and doubts and fears, they do not turn back, but press on, though faint.
Now, my advice to all such persons is very simple. Pray every morning and evening of your life, "Lord, increase my faith." Cultivate the habit of fixing your eyes more simply on Jesus Christ, and try to know more of the fulness there is laid up in Him for every one of His believing people.
Do not be always pouring over the imperfections of your own heart, and dissecting your own sins. Look up! Look more to your risen Head in heaven, and try to realize more and more that the Lord Jesus not only died for you, but that He also rose again, and that He is ever living at God's right hand as your Priest, your advocate, and your Almighty Friend. [J.C. Ryle]
Spin Doctor of the Month Award
Mark Kelly, who is Rick Warren’s personal spin doctor has clearly demonstrated that he has a astonishing gift for arguing both sides of an issue and playing the persecution card when called on the carpet for his inconsistencies.
In a recent post on his personal blog entitled “Assigned a place with the unbelievers” Kelly argues against the “Once Saved Always Saved” doctrine and claims that outrageous disobedience will get you thrown out of the God’s house and cause you to be dumped in hell with the unfaithful dead.
When CRN pointed out the fact that Kelly’s arguments contradicted Saddleback Church’s doctrinal statement regarding Eternal Security, Kelly went into ‘spin mode’ and posted a new piece that claims that his original post wasn’t about losing your salvation. All the while, he was claiming that he was being falsely accused of not believing in the security of the believer.
Mark Kelly’s two posts contradicted each other so badly that we have no idea what he actually believes on the matter. As best as we can figure, Kelly believes that Christians are Eternally Secure in their salvation so long as they don't committ an 'outrageous disobedience'. If they do that then they will be numbered with the unbelievers and thrown out of God's house and be sent to hell. But this doesn't mean that they've lost their salvation because the idea that a Christian can lose his/her salvation is an insult to God even though according to Kelly they were truly believers before God sent them to hell. Sound confusing? We were so puzzled by Kelly's poistion that we've named it the "Doctrine of Eternal Confusion".
Fact is, Mark's position is soooo convoluted that we felt that he deserved an award for his efforts. So we are honoring him with the ‘Spin Doctor of the Month’ award.
---
In all seriousness, the reason why Kelly's position contradicts itself so badly is because Mark is attempting to resolve the very real contradiction that exists between the Reformed doctrine of Eternal Security and the Biblical warnings regarding apostasy and its consequences.
Mark, I am not sure that the contradiction can be resolved in a way that allows you to maintain your presuppositions. However, if you allow yourself to challenge your presuppositions you will run the very real danger of truly being at odds with Saddleback's doctrinal statement. (But you are already far down that path already)
Mark, my advice to you would be to look at how the Lutheran theologians have addressed this dilema. You need more data and a different perspective.
In a recent post on his personal blog entitled “Assigned a place with the unbelievers” Kelly argues against the “Once Saved Always Saved” doctrine and claims that outrageous disobedience will get you thrown out of the God’s house and cause you to be dumped in hell with the unfaithful dead.
When CRN pointed out the fact that Kelly’s arguments contradicted Saddleback Church’s doctrinal statement regarding Eternal Security, Kelly went into ‘spin mode’ and posted a new piece that claims that his original post wasn’t about losing your salvation. All the while, he was claiming that he was being falsely accused of not believing in the security of the believer.
Mark Kelly’s two posts contradicted each other so badly that we have no idea what he actually believes on the matter. As best as we can figure, Kelly believes that Christians are Eternally Secure in their salvation so long as they don't committ an 'outrageous disobedience'. If they do that then they will be numbered with the unbelievers and thrown out of God's house and be sent to hell. But this doesn't mean that they've lost their salvation because the idea that a Christian can lose his/her salvation is an insult to God even though according to Kelly they were truly believers before God sent them to hell. Sound confusing? We were so puzzled by Kelly's poistion that we've named it the "Doctrine of Eternal Confusion".
Fact is, Mark's position is soooo convoluted that we felt that he deserved an award for his efforts. So we are honoring him with the ‘Spin Doctor of the Month’ award.
---
In all seriousness, the reason why Kelly's position contradicts itself so badly is because Mark is attempting to resolve the very real contradiction that exists between the Reformed doctrine of Eternal Security and the Biblical warnings regarding apostasy and its consequences.
Mark, I am not sure that the contradiction can be resolved in a way that allows you to maintain your presuppositions. However, if you allow yourself to challenge your presuppositions you will run the very real danger of truly being at odds with Saddleback's doctrinal statement. (But you are already far down that path already)
Mark, my advice to you would be to look at how the Lutheran theologians have addressed this dilema. You need more data and a different perspective.
Evan Help Us?
Behold the cover of the latest Christianity Today. This was the first of a four-page spread (front and back covers, inside and out) shamelessly plugging the less-than-reverent sequel to Bruce Almighty. Under the guise of a “ministry initiative” called ArkAlmighty, the film’s producers are targeting evangelical churches in a big way.
But to have this film flaunted on the cover of Christianity Today? What were the editors thinking?
Yes, we know it was just an advertisment (and that the real cover was underneath).
No, we still don’t think it was appropriate.
Yes, we would have hoped for better from the folks at CT.
No, we’re not really surprised.
Yes, we agree the whole thing is a reflection of the current state of evangelicalism.
No, we don’t think Carl Henry would be happy about it.
Yes, we do have a good sense of humor.
No, we don’t think this is funny.
And no, we are not overreacting.
But to have this film flaunted on the cover of Christianity Today? What were the editors thinking?
Yes, we know it was just an advertisment (and that the real cover was underneath).
No, we still don’t think it was appropriate.
Yes, we would have hoped for better from the folks at CT.
No, we’re not really surprised.
Yes, we agree the whole thing is a reflection of the current state of evangelicalism.
No, we don’t think Carl Henry would be happy about it.
Yes, we do have a good sense of humor.
No, we don’t think this is funny.
And no, we are not overreacting.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
The Calvary Road Leading To Confusion
If your pastor ever holds up a book from the pulpit (other than the bible) and says "If you want to know what our church is all about, read this book", it probably ought to be setting off red flags for you. What's even worse is when that book contains subtle errors that are capable of leading an entire congregation into wrong thinking about the work of Christ and false notions of revivalism. Here's the testimony of how that very thing happened at one conservative church. It underscores how easily error can slip into a church, and how needed discernment is today.
This post was written by guest contributor Chad VanRens.Chad is a long-time commenter here on Old Truth, and is active in street evangelism and the study of systematic theology.
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you , and exhort you that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. No doubt you will recognize the verse from Jude's epistle exhorting his readers to contend earnestly for the faith. As Christians we have a divinely ordained duty to contend for the very nature of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to guard it with all jealousy. Paul anathematized those in the Galatian Church who tried to make circumcision a requirement for salvation and rebuked the rest of the believers as foolish people who had been bewitched. In Revelation 2 the church in Pergamos was counted faithful but Christ had somewhat against them because they had tolerated those that held the doctrine of Balaam and in Thyatira the church had suffered the woman Jezebel. In both cases Christ said he would come against those that held the false doctrine and fight against them. But to them that overcame Christ would bring blessing. So clearly doctrinal purity is just as important as moral purity and the scriptures warn those who hold false doctrines to repent. Even an otherwise faithful church can fall into false teaching and be lead astray. This is what I experienced at a church I used to be a member of. It was an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Church and one Sunday evening at the end of the service the Senior Pastor held a book up and from the pulpit and made the following statement:
"If you want to know what our church is all about, read this book."
The book is titled "The Calvary Road" by Roy Hession. The purpose of the announcement came prior to our annual revival meeting and the pastors had asked that everyone read the book as a congregation so that when the revival speaker came we might see God move. They even offered to give anyone who promised to read the book a copy at no charge. Well I already had a copy of the book but I hadn't read it yet. The music pastor had bought a copy for me when I first began attending that church and said that it was one of his favorite books. I had only been saved about a year at that time and it was another year before the proclamation came from the pulpit so I decided to read the book. I was rather shocked to discover that the book taught that a Christian's standing before God was based entirely on his behavior. It seemed to be teaching a strange mix of works righteousness, perfectionism and on-again off-again salvation.
The illustrations the book used were perversions of biblical imagery designed to give believers assurance and twisted to put believers into bondage and fear of loss of salvation. In chapter 5 the Holy Spirit is referred to as "she" and a timid little dove who was too afraid rest on Christ lest he be meek. Imputed righteousness and the merit of Christ's finished work being the Christian's assurance and acceptance before God are totally absent. Biblical exhortations to pursue holiness of life and sanctification are no where to be found.I have since left that church and am now part of a Reformed Baptist Church. The purpose of this post is not to call out my old church. It is to examine the teachings of this book and to illustrate how careful we must be to guard our doctrine and contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. I will provide an excerpt from one chapter and deal with it in some detail. The entire book can be read online at the following link; Calvary Road Table of Contents.There is a very reckless use of scriptural imagery in every chapter of "The Calvary Road". Roy Hession often takes a scriptural image with a well understood meaning and twists it to his own end. Here we shall see how Hession has made reference to something he calls "the Water of Life" (capitalization his). Now, the only scriptural association that one can make when seeing the words Water of Life could be that Hession is referencing "fountains of living water", a metaphor for eternal life (John 4:10-11, 7:38, Rev. 7:17).
Here is the excerpt from Chapter 2 "Cups Running Over":
The picture that has made things simple and clear to so many of us is that of the human heart as a cup, which we hold out to Jesus, longing that He might fill it with the Water of Life. Jesus is pictured as bearing the golden water pot with the Water of Life. As He passes by, He looks into our cup and if it is clean, He fills to overflowing with the Water of Life. And as Jesus is always passing by, the cup can be always running over. That is something of what David meant, when he said, "My cup runneth over." This is Revival - you and I full to overflowing with blessing ourselves and to others - with a constant peace in our hearts. People imagine that dying to self makes one miserable. But it just the opposite. It is the refusal to die to self that makes one miserable. The more we know of death with Him, the more we shall know of His life in us, and so the more of real peace and joy. His life, too, will overflow through us to lost souls in a real concern for their salvation, and to our fellow Christians in a deep desire for their blessing.Under the Blood.Only one thing prevents Jesus filling our cups as He passes by, and that is sin in one of its thousand forms. The Lord Jesus does not fill dirty cups. Anything that springs from self, however small it may be, is sin. Self-energy or self-complacency in service is sin. Self-pity in trials or difficulties, self-seeking in business or Christian work, self-indulgence in one's spare time, sensitiveness, touchiness, resentment and self-defense when we are hurt or injured by others, self-consciousness, reserve, worry, fear, all spring from self and all are sin and make our cups unclean.* But all of them were put into that other cup, which the Lord Jesus shrank from momentarily in Gethsemane, but which He drank to the dregs at Calvary - the cup of our sin. And if we will allow Him to show us what is in our cups and then give it to Him, He will cleanse them in the precious Blood that still flows for sin. That does not mean mere cleansing from the guilt of sin, nor even from the stain of sin - though thank God both of these are true - but from the sin itself, whatever it may be. And as He cleanses our cups, so He fills them to overflowing with His Holy Spirit.
Notice that Hession says that if our cup is clean then Christ will fill it with the Water of Life. Since Christ does not fill dirty cups he won't fill our cups if they are stained with sin. Now let us consider that Hebrews 10:14 says "For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified." The bible tells us that our sin has been separated from us as far as the east is from the west. Now I am not denying that Christians must confess their sins for the scriptures command us to do so. The problem here is that Hession is confusing justification and sanctification. He is threatening the withholding of the Water of Life at the first instance of anything sinful in the Christian's life. Christ has forever removed our sin and God no longer deals with us as sinners but as sinless in Christ because of the imputation of Christ's righteousness. This "Water of Life" is the free gift of God given to us on the merit of Christ's perfect obedience on our behalf. We cannot merit it even by our confession. Notice also that Hession states that Christ drank the cup of our sin, but then turns and says that our sins are not actually cleansed from the guilt, stain of sin or the sin itself until we allow Christ to show us what's in our cup and then give it to him. If we are not cleansed from the guilt or stain of sin by Christ's finished work then we are not cleansed at all. Christ's work perfectly cleanses all who believe in him. They can never be defiled in the sense that Hession is suggesting. Consider again the following scriptures. Romans 6:9-11 "Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord."In Romans 6 we are exhorted to consider what is true of Christ is also true of us, permanently. We are dead to sin, verse 2. It cannot condemn us. That is the Christian's great assurance. What Hession is suggesting is impossible. It's biblically unsound, and irresponsible to make the claim that he is making. Guard your doctrine carefully dear ones and hold fast to the truth. If sanctification is what you desire, and all Christian's must (Heb12:13), then seek it scripturally. Martyn Lloyd Jones' sermon's on Romans 6 are a great resource and J.C. Ryle has an excellent tract titled "Sanctification".
This post was written by guest contributor Chad VanRens.Chad is a long-time commenter here on Old Truth, and is active in street evangelism and the study of systematic theology.
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you , and exhort you that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. No doubt you will recognize the verse from Jude's epistle exhorting his readers to contend earnestly for the faith. As Christians we have a divinely ordained duty to contend for the very nature of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to guard it with all jealousy. Paul anathematized those in the Galatian Church who tried to make circumcision a requirement for salvation and rebuked the rest of the believers as foolish people who had been bewitched. In Revelation 2 the church in Pergamos was counted faithful but Christ had somewhat against them because they had tolerated those that held the doctrine of Balaam and in Thyatira the church had suffered the woman Jezebel. In both cases Christ said he would come against those that held the false doctrine and fight against them. But to them that overcame Christ would bring blessing. So clearly doctrinal purity is just as important as moral purity and the scriptures warn those who hold false doctrines to repent. Even an otherwise faithful church can fall into false teaching and be lead astray. This is what I experienced at a church I used to be a member of. It was an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Church and one Sunday evening at the end of the service the Senior Pastor held a book up and from the pulpit and made the following statement:
"If you want to know what our church is all about, read this book."
The book is titled "The Calvary Road" by Roy Hession. The purpose of the announcement came prior to our annual revival meeting and the pastors had asked that everyone read the book as a congregation so that when the revival speaker came we might see God move. They even offered to give anyone who promised to read the book a copy at no charge. Well I already had a copy of the book but I hadn't read it yet. The music pastor had bought a copy for me when I first began attending that church and said that it was one of his favorite books. I had only been saved about a year at that time and it was another year before the proclamation came from the pulpit so I decided to read the book. I was rather shocked to discover that the book taught that a Christian's standing before God was based entirely on his behavior. It seemed to be teaching a strange mix of works righteousness, perfectionism and on-again off-again salvation.
The illustrations the book used were perversions of biblical imagery designed to give believers assurance and twisted to put believers into bondage and fear of loss of salvation. In chapter 5 the Holy Spirit is referred to as "she" and a timid little dove who was too afraid rest on Christ lest he be meek. Imputed righteousness and the merit of Christ's finished work being the Christian's assurance and acceptance before God are totally absent. Biblical exhortations to pursue holiness of life and sanctification are no where to be found.I have since left that church and am now part of a Reformed Baptist Church. The purpose of this post is not to call out my old church. It is to examine the teachings of this book and to illustrate how careful we must be to guard our doctrine and contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. I will provide an excerpt from one chapter and deal with it in some detail. The entire book can be read online at the following link; Calvary Road Table of Contents.There is a very reckless use of scriptural imagery in every chapter of "The Calvary Road". Roy Hession often takes a scriptural image with a well understood meaning and twists it to his own end. Here we shall see how Hession has made reference to something he calls "the Water of Life" (capitalization his). Now, the only scriptural association that one can make when seeing the words Water of Life could be that Hession is referencing "fountains of living water", a metaphor for eternal life (John 4:10-11, 7:38, Rev. 7:17).
Here is the excerpt from Chapter 2 "Cups Running Over":
The picture that has made things simple and clear to so many of us is that of the human heart as a cup, which we hold out to Jesus, longing that He might fill it with the Water of Life. Jesus is pictured as bearing the golden water pot with the Water of Life. As He passes by, He looks into our cup and if it is clean, He fills to overflowing with the Water of Life. And as Jesus is always passing by, the cup can be always running over. That is something of what David meant, when he said, "My cup runneth over." This is Revival - you and I full to overflowing with blessing ourselves and to others - with a constant peace in our hearts. People imagine that dying to self makes one miserable. But it just the opposite. It is the refusal to die to self that makes one miserable. The more we know of death with Him, the more we shall know of His life in us, and so the more of real peace and joy. His life, too, will overflow through us to lost souls in a real concern for their salvation, and to our fellow Christians in a deep desire for their blessing.Under the Blood.Only one thing prevents Jesus filling our cups as He passes by, and that is sin in one of its thousand forms. The Lord Jesus does not fill dirty cups. Anything that springs from self, however small it may be, is sin. Self-energy or self-complacency in service is sin. Self-pity in trials or difficulties, self-seeking in business or Christian work, self-indulgence in one's spare time, sensitiveness, touchiness, resentment and self-defense when we are hurt or injured by others, self-consciousness, reserve, worry, fear, all spring from self and all are sin and make our cups unclean.* But all of them were put into that other cup, which the Lord Jesus shrank from momentarily in Gethsemane, but which He drank to the dregs at Calvary - the cup of our sin. And if we will allow Him to show us what is in our cups and then give it to Him, He will cleanse them in the precious Blood that still flows for sin. That does not mean mere cleansing from the guilt of sin, nor even from the stain of sin - though thank God both of these are true - but from the sin itself, whatever it may be. And as He cleanses our cups, so He fills them to overflowing with His Holy Spirit.
Notice that Hession says that if our cup is clean then Christ will fill it with the Water of Life. Since Christ does not fill dirty cups he won't fill our cups if they are stained with sin. Now let us consider that Hebrews 10:14 says "For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified." The bible tells us that our sin has been separated from us as far as the east is from the west. Now I am not denying that Christians must confess their sins for the scriptures command us to do so. The problem here is that Hession is confusing justification and sanctification. He is threatening the withholding of the Water of Life at the first instance of anything sinful in the Christian's life. Christ has forever removed our sin and God no longer deals with us as sinners but as sinless in Christ because of the imputation of Christ's righteousness. This "Water of Life" is the free gift of God given to us on the merit of Christ's perfect obedience on our behalf. We cannot merit it even by our confession. Notice also that Hession states that Christ drank the cup of our sin, but then turns and says that our sins are not actually cleansed from the guilt, stain of sin or the sin itself until we allow Christ to show us what's in our cup and then give it to him. If we are not cleansed from the guilt or stain of sin by Christ's finished work then we are not cleansed at all. Christ's work perfectly cleanses all who believe in him. They can never be defiled in the sense that Hession is suggesting. Consider again the following scriptures. Romans 6:9-11 "Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord."In Romans 6 we are exhorted to consider what is true of Christ is also true of us, permanently. We are dead to sin, verse 2. It cannot condemn us. That is the Christian's great assurance. What Hession is suggesting is impossible. It's biblically unsound, and irresponsible to make the claim that he is making. Guard your doctrine carefully dear ones and hold fast to the truth. If sanctification is what you desire, and all Christian's must (Heb12:13), then seek it scripturally. Martyn Lloyd Jones' sermon's on Romans 6 are a great resource and J.C. Ryle has an excellent tract titled "Sanctification".
The Blood of Martyrs Was The Seed of The Church
Quoting Jeremiah Burroughs . . .
The power of God is glorious, not only in preserving His church, in raising the spirits of His servants in their greatest affliction, but in increasing His church by them. If it is a wonder to be upheld in them, it is much more a wonder to be increased by them. "The more we are cut down, the more we persist", says Tertullian. The church never grew so fast as when it was under the most affliction. Sulpitius says of the Christians in primative times, that they were greedy of martyrdom, as in his time men were greedy of bishopric. The blood of martyrs was the seed of the church. Pliny reports of the lily, that it is increased by it's own juice that drops from it, and so is the church, which is the lily that grows among the thorns; the very blood that drops from it, multiplies it; the sufferings of one beget many to the love of the truth.
John Knox reports of a gentlemen, one John Lindsay, familiar to Bishop James Bettoune, that he said to the Bishop upon the occasion of Patrick Hamilton's burning: "My Lord, if you burn any more, you will destroy yourselves; if you will burn them, let them be burnt in hollow cellars, for the smoke of Mr. Patrick Hamilton has infected as many as it blew upon."
It is reported of one Cecelia ... that her constancy and exhortations, before and after her martyrdom, were the means to convert four hundred people. "By blood and prayer the church converts the whole world", says Luther.
From:
Discovering The Healthy Condition of a Self-Denying Heart (from Day By Day w/Puritans)
The power of God is glorious, not only in preserving His church, in raising the spirits of His servants in their greatest affliction, but in increasing His church by them. If it is a wonder to be upheld in them, it is much more a wonder to be increased by them. "The more we are cut down, the more we persist", says Tertullian. The church never grew so fast as when it was under the most affliction. Sulpitius says of the Christians in primative times, that they were greedy of martyrdom, as in his time men were greedy of bishopric. The blood of martyrs was the seed of the church. Pliny reports of the lily, that it is increased by it's own juice that drops from it, and so is the church, which is the lily that grows among the thorns; the very blood that drops from it, multiplies it; the sufferings of one beget many to the love of the truth.
John Knox reports of a gentlemen, one John Lindsay, familiar to Bishop James Bettoune, that he said to the Bishop upon the occasion of Patrick Hamilton's burning: "My Lord, if you burn any more, you will destroy yourselves; if you will burn them, let them be burnt in hollow cellars, for the smoke of Mr. Patrick Hamilton has infected as many as it blew upon."
It is reported of one Cecelia ... that her constancy and exhortations, before and after her martyrdom, were the means to convert four hundred people. "By blood and prayer the church converts the whole world", says Luther.
From:
Discovering The Healthy Condition of a Self-Denying Heart (from Day By Day w/Puritans)
Scripture and Plain Reason
Scripture isn’t antithetical to sound, rational wisdom, though many today imagine otherwise. Reason is no substitute for Scripture, of course, but when good reason and sound logic are kept subject to the authority of Scripture, they are in no way a threat to the truth. On the contrary, the application of sound, logical thinking to the truth of Scripture is a key aspect of the formula for discernment.
The Christian's Way and end
Here is the Christian's way and his end…His way is holiness, his end happiness.[John Whitlock]
Does Doctrine Really Matter? By John MacArthur
Is it enough to “believe in Jesus” in some amorphous sense that divorces “faith” from any particular doctrine about Him, or is doctrine—and the content of our faith—really important after all?
Scripture plainly teaches that we must be sound in the faith—which is to say that doctrine does matter (1 Tim. 4:6; 2 Tim. 4:2-3; Tit. 1:9; 2:1). It matters a lot.
“If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing” (1 Tim. 6:3-4, emphasis added).
Sound, biblical doctrine is a necessary aspect of true wisdom and authentic faith. The attitude that scorns doctrine while elevating feelings or blind trust cannot legitimately be called faith at all, even if it masquerades as Christianity. It is actually an irrational form of unbelief.
God holds us accountable for what we believe as well as how we think about the truth He has revealed. All Scripture testifies to the fact that God wants us to know and understand the truth. He wants us to be wise. His will is that we use our minds. We are supposed to think, meditate, and above all, to be discerning.
The content of our faith is crucial. Sincerity is not sufficient.
Consider, for example, these well-known verses. Note the repeated use of words like truth, knowledge, discernment, wisdom, and understanding:
“Thou dost desire truth in the innermost being, and in the hidden part Thou wilt make me know wisdom” (Psa. 51:6).
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who do His commandments” (Psa. 111:10).
“Teach me good discernment and knowledge, For I believe in Thy commandments” (Psa. 119:66).
“Make your ear attentive to wisdom, incline your heart to understanding; for if you cry for discernment, lift your voice for understanding; if you seek her as silver, and search for her as for hidden treasures; then you will discern the fear of the Lord, and discover the knowledge of God. For the Lord gives wisdom; from His mouth come knowledge and understanding” (Prov. 2:2-6).
“The beginning of wisdom is: acquire wisdom; and with all your acquiring, get understanding” (Prov. 4:7).
“We have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding” (Col. 1:9).
“In [Christ] are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3).
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16).
God’s Word makes it abundantly clear that He wants us to use our minds. And one of the most vital duties facing every Christian—especially in an era (such as ours) when the church is overrun with contradictory ideas and spiritual confusion—is the duty of discernment. As those who would be faithful Bereans of the Word (Acts 17:11), we must be careful to watch our lives and our doctrine closely (1 Tim. 4:16).
Scripture plainly teaches that we must be sound in the faith—which is to say that doctrine does matter (1 Tim. 4:6; 2 Tim. 4:2-3; Tit. 1:9; 2:1). It matters a lot.
“If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing” (1 Tim. 6:3-4, emphasis added).
Sound, biblical doctrine is a necessary aspect of true wisdom and authentic faith. The attitude that scorns doctrine while elevating feelings or blind trust cannot legitimately be called faith at all, even if it masquerades as Christianity. It is actually an irrational form of unbelief.
God holds us accountable for what we believe as well as how we think about the truth He has revealed. All Scripture testifies to the fact that God wants us to know and understand the truth. He wants us to be wise. His will is that we use our minds. We are supposed to think, meditate, and above all, to be discerning.
The content of our faith is crucial. Sincerity is not sufficient.
Consider, for example, these well-known verses. Note the repeated use of words like truth, knowledge, discernment, wisdom, and understanding:
“Thou dost desire truth in the innermost being, and in the hidden part Thou wilt make me know wisdom” (Psa. 51:6).
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who do His commandments” (Psa. 111:10).
“Teach me good discernment and knowledge, For I believe in Thy commandments” (Psa. 119:66).
“Make your ear attentive to wisdom, incline your heart to understanding; for if you cry for discernment, lift your voice for understanding; if you seek her as silver, and search for her as for hidden treasures; then you will discern the fear of the Lord, and discover the knowledge of God. For the Lord gives wisdom; from His mouth come knowledge and understanding” (Prov. 2:2-6).
“The beginning of wisdom is: acquire wisdom; and with all your acquiring, get understanding” (Prov. 4:7).
“We have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding” (Col. 1:9).
“In [Christ] are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3).
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16).
God’s Word makes it abundantly clear that He wants us to use our minds. And one of the most vital duties facing every Christian—especially in an era (such as ours) when the church is overrun with contradictory ideas and spiritual confusion—is the duty of discernment. As those who would be faithful Bereans of the Word (Acts 17:11), we must be careful to watch our lives and our doctrine closely (1 Tim. 4:16).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)