Thursday, January 31, 2008
Jehovah’s Witnesses denying both the deity of Christ and the Holy Trinity. By Rev. Charles J Paul
Below are two articles one on the Deity of Christ and the other on the Holy Trinity. Both of these articles support the interview I gave on truth matters concerning the false teachings of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who deny both the Deity and the existence of the Holy Trinity. You can listen to the the interview by clicking here...............http://www.truthmattersinc.org/index.html
Deity of Christ
The New Testament abounds with proof for the deity of Jesus Christ. In eight passages, Jesus is described by the Greek word Theos (God): John 1:1-3; 1:18; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1; 1 John 5:20. Divine attributes, such as eternality (Isa. 9:6; John 1:1,2; Rev. 1:8; 22:13), omnipresence (Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13), omniscience (John 2:24,25; 21:17; Rev. 2:23), omnipotence (Isa. 9:6; Phil. 3:21; Rev. 1:8), immutability (Heb. 1:10-12; 13:8), and in general, every attribute of the Father is ascribed to the Son (Col. 2:9).
The New Testament also depicts Jesus as exercising Divine prerogatives and works: creation (John 1:3,10; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2,10), providence (Luke 10:22; John 3:35; 17:2; Eph. 1:22; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3), the forgiveness of sins (Matt. 9:2-7; Mark 2:7-10; Col. 3:13), resurrection and judgment (Matt. 25:31,32; John 5:19-29; Acts 10:42; 17:31; Phil. 3:21; 2 Tim. 4:1), and the final dissolution and renewal of all things (Eph. 1:10; Heb. 1:10-12; Phil. 3:21; Rev. 21:5) (see: Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof, p. 94, 95).
The New Testament also affirms the deity of Jesus in calling him Yahweh. Old Testament prophecies concerning Yahweh are quoted in the New Testament as being references to Jesus (compare Mal. 3:1 and Luke 1:76; Joel 2:32 and Rom. 10:13; Isa. 45:23 and Rom. 14:10). (Buswell, p. 104, 105). These examples are adequate to demonstrate that the New Testament contains a myriad of proof for the deity of Jesus Christ.
The Bible's Teaching About The Trinity
The important point is not whether we can understand the Trinity, even with the help of illustrations, but whether we will believe what the Bible has to say about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and about their relationship to each other. What the Bible says may be summarized in the following five propositions:
1. There is but one living and true God who exists in three persons: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. We have already looked at this truth in general. We will see it more fully when I talk about the full deity of the Son and Holy Spirit in books two and three in this volume. Here we note a plurality within the Godhead that is suggested even in the pages of the Old Testament, before the Incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ or the coming of the Holy Spirit upon all God's people. The plurality may be seen, in the first instance, in those passages in which God speaks about himself in the plural. One example is Genesis 1:26. "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.' " Another is Genesis 11:7. "Come, let us go down, and there confuse their language." A third is Isaiah 6:8. "And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, 'Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?' " In other passages a heavenly being termed "the angel of the Lord" is, on the one hand identified with God and yet, on the other hand, is also distinguished from him. Thus, we read: "The angel of the LORD found her [Hagar] by a spring of water in the wilderness. . . . The angel of the LORD said to her, 'I will so greatly multiply your descendants that they cannot be numbered for multitude.' . . . So she called the name of the LORD who spoke to her, 'Thou art a God of seeing' " (Gen. 16:7, 10, 13). An even stranger case is the appearance of the three angels to Abraham and Lot. The angels are sometimes spoken of as three and sometimes as one. Moreover, when they speak, it is the Lord who, we are told, speaks to Lot and Abraham (Gen. 18).
A final, startling passage is Proverbs 30:4. The prophet Agur is speaking about the nature of Almighty God, confessing his ignorance of him. "Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in his fists? Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth?" Then comes, "What is his name, and what is his son's name? Surely you know!" In that day the prophet knew only the Father's name, the name Jehovah. Today we know that his Son's name is the Lord Jesus Christ.
2. The Lord Jesus Christ is fully divine, being the second person of the Godhead who became man. This, of course, is where the crux of debate on the Trinity is to be found; those who dislike the doctrine dislike it primarily because they are unwilling to give such an exalted position to "the man" Jesus.
Such reluctance is seen first in the teachings of Arius of Alexandria (died A.D. 336). Sabellius, mentioned earlier, tended to merge the persons of the Trinity, so that Father, Son and Holy Spirit were only temporary manifestations of the one God, assumed for the purposes of our redemption. Arius, whose main work was done just after Sabellius, went to the other extreme. He divided the persons of the Trinity so the Son and the Spirit became less than God the Father. According to Arius, the Son and Spirit were beings willed into existence by God for the purpose of acting as his agents in redemption. Thus, they were not eternal (as God is), and they were not fully divine. Arius used the word divine to describe them in some lesser sense than when applying it to the Father. In more recent centuries the same error has been espoused by Unitarians and by some modern cults.
But it is a great error. For if Christ is not fully divine, then our salvation is neither accomplished nor assured. No being less than God himself, however exalted, is able to bear the full punishment of the world's sin.
The deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is taught in many crucial passages. We read "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God" (Jn. 1:1-2). That John 1:1-2 speaks of the Lord Jesus Christ is clear from John 1:14, in which we are told that the "Word" of verse 1 "became flesh and dwelt among us." Similarly, Paul writes, "Have this mind among yourselves, which you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil. 2:5-8). The words "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself" do not mean that Jesus ceased to be fully God in the Incarnation, as some have maintained, but only that he temporarily laid aside his divine glory and dignity in order to live among us. We remember that it was during the days of his life here that Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" (Jn. 10:30), and "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (Jn. 14:9).
3. The Holy Spirit is fully divine. It is the Lord Jesus Christ who most clearly teaches the nature of the Holy Spirit. In the Gospel of John, Jesus compares the ministry of the coming Holy Spirit to his own ministry. "And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him" (Jn. 14:16-17). This understanding of the Holy Spirit is supported by the fact that distinctly divine attributes are ascribed to him: everlastingness (Heb. 9:14), omnipresence (Ps. 139:7-10), omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10-11), omnipotence (Lk. 1:35) and others.
4. While each is fully divine, the three persons of the Godhead are related to each other in a way that implies some differences. Thus, it is usually said in Scripture that the Father (not the Spirit) sent the Son into the world (Mk. 9:37; Mt. 10:40; Gal. 4:4), but that both the Father and the Son send the Spirit (Jn. 14:26; 15:26; 16:7). We don't know fully what such a description of relationships within the Trinity means. But usually it is said that the Son is subject to the Father, for the Father sent him, and that the Spirit is subject to both the Father and the Son, for he is sent into the world by both the Son and Father. However, we must remember that when we speak of subjection we do not mean inequality. Although related to each other in these ways, the members of the Godhead are nevertheless "the same in substance, equal in power and glory," as the Westminster Shorter Catechism says (Q. 6).
5. In the work of God the members of the Godhead work together. It is common among Christians to divide the work of God among the three persons, applying the work of creation to the Father, the work of redemption to the Son and the work of sanctification to the Holy Spirit. A more correct way of speaking is to say that each member of the Trinity cooperates in each work.
One example is the work of creation. It is said of God the Father, "Of old thou didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands" (Ps. 102:25); and "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen. 1:1). It is written of the Son, "For in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible" (Col. 1:16); and "All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made" (Jn. 1:3). It is written of the Holy Spirit, "The spirit of God has made me" (Job 33:4). In the same way, the Incarnation is shown to have been accomplished by the three persons of the Godhead working in unity, though only the Son became flesh (Lk. 1:35). At the baptism of the Lord all three were also present: the Son came up out of the water, the Spirit descended in the appearance of a dove and the voice of the Father was heard from heaven declaring, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased" (Mt. 3:16-17). All three persons were present in the atonement, as Hebrews 9:14 declares. "Christ... through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God." The resurrection of Christ is likewise attributed sometimes to the Father (Acts 2:32), sometimes to the Son (Jn. 10:17-18) and sometimes to the Holy Spirit (Rom. 1:4).
We are not surprised, therefore, that our salvation as a whole is also attributed to each of the three persons: chosen and destined by God the Father and sanctified by the Spirit for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood" (1 Pet. 1:2). Nor are we surprised that we are sent forth into all the world to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt. 28:19).
Threefold Redemption
Again let me note, although we can say meaningful things about the Trinity (on the basis of God's revelation of them), the Trinity is still unfathomable. We should be humble before the Trinity. Someone once asked Daniel Webster, the orator, how a man of his intellect could believe in the Trinity. "How can a man of your mental caliber believe that three equals one?" his assailant chided. Webster replied, "I do not pretend fully to understand the arithmetic of heaven now." The doctrine of the Trinity does not mean that three equals one, of course, and Webster knew that. It means rather that God is three in one sense and one in another. But Webster's reply nevertheless showed a proper degree of creature humility. We believe the doctrine of the Trinity, not because we understand it, but because the Bible teaches it and because the Spirit himself witnesses within our heart that it is so.
Satanic vandals desecrate church in LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa.
LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. - The doors of Wakefield Bible Church used to stay unlocked for anyone who wanted to stop inside and pray.But Tuesday night, vandals entered the small brick church along Route 222 in Fulton Township, desecrating several pictures of Jesus Christ and spray painting satanic and anti-religion slogans and symbols on the walls.The vandals ripped Christ's face out of one picture, church members said, and put nails through his eyes in another."God is dead" was spray painted in large silver letters in the sanctuary, and similar slogans were written in marker on the walls throughout the small church. The vandals also ripped apart and spray painted Bibles and hymn books, church members said today, knocked items off the shelves and set fire to a hymnal on the pulpit.Luckily the Rev. Phillip Towles, the church's pastor, lives next door, and his two teenage children spotted the intruders inside the church shortly after 11 p.m. and woke their parents.Towles went over to the church, frightening the intruders, who ran out a back door. He extinguished the fire before it spread and could cause further damage."God took care of it," Kim Wagner, a church trustee, said this morning. "God preserved it for some reason. We were fortunate, it could have been a pile of ash today." The damage to the walls and storage areas can be repaired with paint and the effort of cleaning crews, Wagner said, but the three desecrated pictures of Christ had special meaning to the church members. One picture, which hangs in the front of the sanctuary and depicts a praying Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane, was defaced and off-kilter this morning."I was married in that church 40 years ago, and nothing like this has ever happened," Wagner said this morning as he waited for troopers from the state police forensic unit to come and collect evidence.Towles' wife, Joanna, said she and her husband had been in the church praying around 9:30 p.m. Tuesday night and then returned home to go to sleep. Their 17-year-old daughter, Jo Beth, was still awake and had been doing homework, Mrs. Towles said, when she noticed the lights on inside the church and saw someone walking through the sanctuary.About the same time, their 14-year-old son, Jimmy, got up for a drink of water and also saw the intruders.The children woke their parents, and their father took a flashlight and went over to the church."He went over and opened the door," Mrs. Towles said. "He asked what they were doing. The lights were all on. The girl screamed and the boy ran out the side door."Mrs. Towles said the vandals took a large candle from the front of the sanctuary, piled up some Christmas decorations and ignited the hymnal on the pulpit. "It's amazing it didn't all go up," Mrs. Towles said. "The whole church could have gone down."The sanctuary smelled like smoke, but the pulpit appeared to be undamaged.State troopers arrived and searched the surrounding fields for about an hour, Mrs. Towles said, but did not locate the suspects. "It was raining and you could smell skunks in the pasture," she said.State police Sgt. Doug Burig said today the vandalism falls into the categories of hate crimes and desecration of venerated objects, increasing the seriousness of the crime.He asked that anyone with information about the incident call state police in Lancaster at 666-3742.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
The History of Praise Songs: Simple from Semple
In 1927 the three most popular American celebrities were Charles Lindbergh, Babe Ruth, and a TBN-type personality that most people today have never heard of; the female evangelist and ex-Broadway theater worker Aimee Semple McPherson. I remember seeing a PBS special about her life, which easily fit into the "you can't make this stuff up" category. You only need to learn a little about her to realize the influence she had (and still has) on American evangelicalism. This is especially the case in the church musical genre which we loosely refer to as contemporary "praise music". In this short audio excerpt, RC Sproul takes us down memory lane to examine the roots of what is often called the "7/11 song", which is now used in 70 percent of American churches. You may be surprised to find that he doesn't make an outright rejection of simple music, but has some profound observations. ... [Play/Download MP3]
Quotes On Ministry
John Chrysostom (to his congregation): To me it is nothing when I am applauded and well spoken of. There is only one thing I ask of you — to prove your approval of me through your works. That is how you can speak well of me, and that is what is going to do you good. This, to me, is the greatest honor. I prefer it to a material crown. I do not desire applause and being well spoken of. I have one request to make — for you to listen to me in quiet attentiveness and to put my advice into practice. This is not a theater. You don’t sit here in order to admire actors and to applaud them. This is a place where you must learn the things of God.
Matthew Henry: Those who teach by their doctrine must teach by their life, or else they pull down with one hand what they build up with the other.
A.W. Tozer: I do not preach any new truth. I do not have any new doctrine. . . . We must have a revival that will mean purity of heart as a normal standard for everybody. We must be clean people, and not only clean outside.
John Owen: A minister may fill his pews, his communion roll, the mouths of the public, but what that minister is on his knees in secret before God Almighty, that he is and no more.
John Wesley: Give me one hundred preachers who fear nothing but sin, and desire nothing but God, and I care not a straw whether they be clergymen or laymen; such alone will shake the gates of hell and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth.
Arthur W. Pink: From every pulpit in the land it needs to be thundered forth that God still lives, that God still observes, . . . [and] still reigns. Faith is now in the crucible, it is being tested by fire, and there is no fixed . . . resting place for the heart and mind but in the Throne of God. What is needed now, as never before, is a full, positive, constructive setting forth of the Godhood of God.
Robert Murray M’Cheyne: Remember you are God’s sword — His instrument — I trust a chosen vessel unto Him to bear His name. In great measure, according to the purity and perfections of the instrument will be the success. It is not great talents God blesses so much as great likeness to Jesus. A holy minister is an awful weapon in the hand of God.
Matthew Henry: Those who teach by their doctrine must teach by their life, or else they pull down with one hand what they build up with the other.
A.W. Tozer: I do not preach any new truth. I do not have any new doctrine. . . . We must have a revival that will mean purity of heart as a normal standard for everybody. We must be clean people, and not only clean outside.
John Owen: A minister may fill his pews, his communion roll, the mouths of the public, but what that minister is on his knees in secret before God Almighty, that he is and no more.
John Wesley: Give me one hundred preachers who fear nothing but sin, and desire nothing but God, and I care not a straw whether they be clergymen or laymen; such alone will shake the gates of hell and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth.
Arthur W. Pink: From every pulpit in the land it needs to be thundered forth that God still lives, that God still observes, . . . [and] still reigns. Faith is now in the crucible, it is being tested by fire, and there is no fixed . . . resting place for the heart and mind but in the Throne of God. What is needed now, as never before, is a full, positive, constructive setting forth of the Godhood of God.
Robert Murray M’Cheyne: Remember you are God’s sword — His instrument — I trust a chosen vessel unto Him to bear His name. In great measure, according to the purity and perfections of the instrument will be the success. It is not great talents God blesses so much as great likeness to Jesus. A holy minister is an awful weapon in the hand of God.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Got Backbone? By John MacArthur
No one would argue that we live in a world of compromise. In fact, compromise is often touted as a virtue; it’s diplomatic and reasonable. On the other hand, those who hold fast their integrity are viewed as difficult, hard-nosed, and unconcerned about the common good. You can understand how the world thinks that way, but shouldn’t Christians be different?
Unfortunately, too many believers worry about what people will think, say, or do if they take a stand on godly principles. So instead, they compromise their convictions or maintain them under the cover of darkness. If you’re one of those faint-hearted Christians, or if you know people who are, I’d like to encourage you to take a lesson from the life of one man, a man with a backbone.
The Test of Integrity
Following his first invasion of Judah and siege of Jerusalem in 606 B. C., King Nebuchadnezzar took hostage dozens of quality Jewish youths (who were probably in their teenage years) to help ensure the success of his long-range plans for world dominance. One of those youths was especially destined for greatness, and today his name is synonymous with integrity and an uncompromising spirit. His name is Daniel.
It wasn’t captivity that tested Daniel’s integrity, it was privilege. When the king ordered his chief official, Ashpenaz, to choose from among the Israelites, he sought youths with certain qualities. They were to be without defect, good looking, “showing intelligence in every branch of wisdom, endowed with understanding and discerning knowledge,” with the ability to serve in the king’s court (Dan. 1:4). They were to receive privileged instruction for privileged positions.
The king ordered Ashpenaz “to teach them the literature and language of the Chaldeans” including mathematics, astronomy, natural history, agriculture, and architecture (Dan. 1:4). They were to eat the king’s food and drink the king’s wine, and after three years, they were to have a guaranteed position in the king’s personal service. I doubt the other exiles were getting along as well.
Now you say, “Privilege, education, good food and drink, one of the most sought after jobs in the kingdom—who could have a problem with that?” Daniel.
Daniel didn’t argue with the education, the training program, and the future in the king’s court. He didn’t even balk when Ashpenaz named him Belteshazzar, after a Chaldean god. Daniel drew the line where the Scripture did—he wouldn’t eat the king’s food or drink the king’s drink.
“But Daniel made up his mind that he would not defile himself with the king’s choice food or with the wine which he drank” (Dan. 1:8). Those enticing morsels and vintage wines—perks of the king’s service—had been ritually dedicated to Babylon’s false gods. What’s more, eating food prepared to Babylonian standards was likely to put the young exiles in violation of God’s laws concerning unclean foods (cf. Lev. 7:23-27; Lev. 11).
Daniel wanted no participation in any pagan feast, even to the slightest degree. That would be a form of idolatry that would provoke the wrath of a jealous God (Ex. 20:4-5). His decision, though immediately dealing with food and wine, was ultimately a decision about who he worshiped.
The Results of Integrity
Daniel’s decision constitutes a basic part of genuine integrity and the uncompromising life: you must draw lines where Scripture draws them. If the truth of God’s Word opposes the world’s wisdom on a certain issue, you must align yourself with God’s Word.
The more you read about and analyze the life of Daniel, the more clearly his personal integrity comes into focus. His uncompromising lifestyle stands in sharp contrast to the way many believers live out their convictions. Many Christians tend to waver and offer ambiguous explanations for abstaining from certain secular activities. But that wasn’t how Daniel approached the opportunity to state his convictions.
Unashamed Boldness – If Daniel wanted to abstain from eating and drinking what the king provided, he could have gone about it a number of ways. He could have thrown it away when no one was looking and sneaked other food from the kitchen; he could have made arrangements with the kitchen staff; he could have started a vegetable garden out back. But Daniel, having made up his mind, chose the route of open boldness. “He sought permission from the commander of the officials that he might not defile himself” (Dan. 1:8). He was respectful, but unbending. That’s called courage.
Unearthly Protection – Daniel was in a foreign country, at the very heart of the empire that had just destroyed his homeland. And yet, “God granted Daniel favor and compassion in the sight of the commander of the officials” (Dan. 1:9). He proved the truth of Proverbs 16:7: “When a man’s ways are pleasing to the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.” Don’t compromise and forfeit God’s protection. Stand firm in obedience to God’s Word and trust Him—He’ll take care of you.
Unhindered Persistence – In his boldness, Daniel didn’t hesitate to go right to the top. But when Ashpenaz feared the forfeiture of his head for granting the special menu, Daniel was undeterred. He appealed to a lower-ranking overseer who monitored him–presumably a man who would not be as afraid of Nebuchadnezzar since he didn’t report directly to the king. Daniel showed another vital trait of integrity: persistence in doing what is right.
Unblemished Faith – When Daniel sought permission to go on a water and vegetable diet, he demonstrated unwavering faith in God. He said, “Please test your servants for ten days … then let our appearance be observed in your presence and the appearance of the youths who are eating the king’s choice food; and deal with your servants according to what you see” (Dan. 1:12-13). Daniel did what was right, and trusted God for the results, no matter what. In this case, God caused Daniel to look healthier than all the other youths (Dan. 1:15).
If it had turned out that Daniel’s appearance failed the overseer’s scrutiny, I believe he would have trusted God without wavering, maintained an uncompromising lifestyle, and humbly accepted the consequences. I also believe that all true Christians will show the same fortitude in the midst of trials.
If you’ve fallen into a pattern of compromise, confess it as sin to the Lord. Repent and look at Daniel as an example of unwavering integrity. Then seek the Lord’s help to live like he did. You must resolutely set your heart as Daniel did to fear the Lord, and the Lord alone. Borrow a little backbone from him, and you’ll live your life with integrity before God.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
The Heidelberg Catechism, This Lord's Day week 4
Q9: Does not God, then, do injustice to man by requiring of him in His law that which he cannot perform?
A9: No, for God so made man that he could perform it;[1] but man, through the instigation of the devil, by wilful disobedience deprived himself and all his descendants of this power.[2]
1. Eph. 4:242. Rom. 5:12
Q10: Will God allow such disobedience and apostasy to go unpunished?
A10: Certainly not,[1] but He is terribly displeased with our inborn as well as our actual sins, and will punish them in just judgment in time and eternity, as he has declared: Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.[2]
1. Heb. 9:272. Deut. 27:26; Gal. 3:10; Rom. 1:18; Matt. 25:41
Q11: But is not God also merciful?
A11: God is indeed merciful,[1] but He is likewise just;[2] His justice therefore requires that sin, which is committed against the most high majesty of God, be punished with extreme, that is, with everlasting punishment both of body and soul.
1. Exod. 34:6-72. Exod. 20:5; Psa. 5:5-6; II Cor. 6:14-16; Rev. 14:11
A9: No, for God so made man that he could perform it;[1] but man, through the instigation of the devil, by wilful disobedience deprived himself and all his descendants of this power.[2]
1. Eph. 4:242. Rom. 5:12
Q10: Will God allow such disobedience and apostasy to go unpunished?
A10: Certainly not,[1] but He is terribly displeased with our inborn as well as our actual sins, and will punish them in just judgment in time and eternity, as he has declared: Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.[2]
1. Heb. 9:272. Deut. 27:26; Gal. 3:10; Rom. 1:18; Matt. 25:41
Q11: But is not God also merciful?
A11: God is indeed merciful,[1] but He is likewise just;[2] His justice therefore requires that sin, which is committed against the most high majesty of God, be punished with extreme, that is, with everlasting punishment both of body and soul.
1. Exod. 34:6-72. Exod. 20:5; Psa. 5:5-6; II Cor. 6:14-16; Rev. 14:11
Saturday, January 26, 2008
The incredible love of the Father
And I will bring the blind by a way [that] they knew not; I will lead them in paths [that] they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them.Isaiah 42:16
Reflection----The incredible love of the Father shines upon His children bringing them out of their evil darkness and into His glorious light. His light guides His people through the shadows of death. And through the grave difficulties of their lives, they are brought into places of indescribable peace and joy. As believers of Christ, we are promised this ever-present light that will lead us into the gracious sanctuary of the Lord. In this we can find hope in an everlasting rest.
Self-Worship By John Hendryx
"When we believe that we should be satisfied rather than God glorified in our worship, then we put God below ourselves as though He had been made for us rather than that we had been made for Him." -Stephen Charnock
Many times I wonder which god is being worshipped in our churches, and where this god developed his characteristics.Many (of we) modern evangelicals seem to think that the purpose of a church service is to entertain, exhilarate, and energize. Some of us go to church, not so much to worship God, to stand in awe of His grace to us in Christ, to stir up our affections for Him but rather to consume, sit back, fancy the musical experience and apply the self-help advice we gleaned during the sermon. The pastor is expected to be to be clean-cut, non-offensive and smooth, the musicians to be talented and contemporary, the congregation to be good-looking, middle-class, look and act like you (homogenous unit principle). A great majority of us appear to actually select our churches, not by the sound and dynamic preaching of the Scriptures, but by these outward considerations alone! Some newspapers have even begun to go around and rate churches on these externals as one would a local restaurant. There you have it, a worship of consumerism - In other words this new mentality we have embraced is none other than the worship of self. Then we self-righteously attack those who differ from us, who do not use the seeker sensitive model, and lose sight of the fact that the worst enemy is, more often than not, the person we see in the mirror.After you’ve narrowed it down and found a local church which preaches the word and faithfully administers the sacraments I don’t contend that there are other valid secondary considerations, but we must be faithful to God in maintaining that worship is in no way a form of diversionary entertainment. A church that is self-congratulatory has become a questionable fellowship because the function of the service has gone from the Scriptural command to worship God to the idolatrous worship of itself. God should be central to worship, not you ... that is, He should be the central focus in our song, proclamation of the word and in the administering of the sacraments. Self-focused, self-absorbed psychological sessions whose main purpose is to generate good feelings about ourselves is idolatry, a breach of the first/second commandments. This tragic lapse into consumerism is devouring the Church and making mincemeat of our local assemblies. Instead of finding the service meaningful and God-glorifying, centering in the Trinity and especially the person and work of Christ, many spend their time asking themselves what they got out of it. Rather, we need to be asking ourselves, “Was God glorified in our time of corporate worship today?”We worship a Holy God. We must always recognize that we are a hell-deserving people who have been shown mercy in Christ. There is now no condemnation for us in Christ. Real sanctification is continuing to apply this same truth through your entire life and in all your worship. The gospel must be central to Christians as well as non-Christians. We never graduate from the gospel and then go on to higher things, for the gospel is to be applied to every area of our lives. There is nothing at conversion and nothing now that we can do to maintain or contribute to the price of our salvation. From beginning to end we worship a God of grace. True worship in Spirit and Truth is worship of the Triune God - a loss of all confidence in oneself and a recognition of the gift of mercy given to us for all redemptive blessings we have in Christ. The elements of the Lord's table should be a constant visible reminder of this to us...that God fully accepts you because of Christ.God did not promise to bless methodologies, marketing techniques, sermons about psychology and self-esteem but He did promise to bless the preaching of the word. Paul, concluded at all points in his life that the only thing he would proclaim was "Christ crucified". He said that his message was a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to the Greeks, but "through us spreads everywhere the fragrance of the knowledge of him. We are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. To the one we are the smell of death; to the other, the fragrance of life." So encourage the leadership of your church to return to the biblical model, to abandon all market-driven techniques, and the unhealthy emphasis on consumerism and unbiblical models of seeker-sensitivity, which may very well be an unacceptable offering to the Lord. The preaching of the Word must continue to remain central to the worship. Marketing techniques may indeed bring people in to be entertained, but the only thing God has promised to bless is "the foolishness of preaching" the gospel. Today's self-oriented evangelicalism is quickly abandoning any semblance to historic Christian orthodoxy and unless we return to a biblical gospel that fully encompasses the work of the Trinity, the influence of the Church will continue to wane. We must once again come to Him empty-handed, naked and without hope save for His merciful intervention for the Church, whom He loves so much that He gave His Son for her.
Posted by J & J Bible Ministry, Lancaster
Friday, January 25, 2008
Christ and/or Muhammad By Rick Phillips
I want to thank John Piper for his bold rejoinder to A Common Word, an ecumenical movement to foster peace among Muslims and Christians.and especially to the Christian response from over 300 Christian leaders, including many leading Evangelicals. As Piper points out, the problem with this initiative is not the sincere desire to promote peace and mutual respect, but in what it concedes in order to do so. In short, the Christian endorsers of A Common Word laud the "common ground" that Muslims and Christians share in our convictions regarding the love of God and our calling to love our neighbor. Piper points out, however, that the Muslim ideas of God and God's love are radically opposed to the Christian beliefs of God and His love. The unavoidable effect of this joint resolution is strongly to suggest that when it comes to God and His love, Muslims and Christians believe substantially the same thing. Piper calls on Christians to seek peace and respect with greater honesty, i.e., that which refuses to downplay the fundamentally different beliefs of Islam and Christianity -- not merely in degree but in kind -- and which refuses to demure from calling all men to faith in God's only Son and our only Savior.
I suppose that a survey of the history of religion and war would show that in times of great violence there is usually an impulse to downplay important religious differences so as to soften inter-religious anger and hatred. But it is always distressing to see Christians so willing to downplay the most central and vital aspects of our faith in pursuit of some "higher" end. I am sure that the signatories of the Christian response mean well. But for Christians there must never be a higher end that the glory of God as revealed in his Word and the spread of the biblical gospel with clarity, love, and courage. At the very moment when increasing numbers of people have concluded that "all religions believe the same thing," the very worst thing Christians could do -- the least loving and ultimately the least peaceful -- is to foster the idea that one's understanding of God need not embrace Jesus Christ as the unique revelation of God and as the Savior-Son God has sent as the only hope for a sinful world. In this respect, the most distressing part of the Christian response was the willing and favorable comparison between Jesus and Muhammad as exemplars of divine love. Have we so lost our nerve? Have we so lost our sense? Have we so lost our devotion to Christ as the unique and essential revelation of God and His love? If we have, we can be sure that the result of our apologetic compromise will not be either love or peace.
I suppose that a survey of the history of religion and war would show that in times of great violence there is usually an impulse to downplay important religious differences so as to soften inter-religious anger and hatred. But it is always distressing to see Christians so willing to downplay the most central and vital aspects of our faith in pursuit of some "higher" end. I am sure that the signatories of the Christian response mean well. But for Christians there must never be a higher end that the glory of God as revealed in his Word and the spread of the biblical gospel with clarity, love, and courage. At the very moment when increasing numbers of people have concluded that "all religions believe the same thing," the very worst thing Christians could do -- the least loving and ultimately the least peaceful -- is to foster the idea that one's understanding of God need not embrace Jesus Christ as the unique revelation of God and as the Savior-Son God has sent as the only hope for a sinful world. In this respect, the most distressing part of the Christian response was the willing and favorable comparison between Jesus and Muhammad as exemplars of divine love. Have we so lost our nerve? Have we so lost our sense? Have we so lost our devotion to Christ as the unique and essential revelation of God and His love? If we have, we can be sure that the result of our apologetic compromise will not be either love or peace.
More Than Just a Preacher By John MacArthur
What is the pastor’s responsibility, besides preaching and studying?
The answer to your question lies in the title you used—pastor. That title is rich with meaning and sets out the chief responsibilities of your minister.
One of Jesus’ favorite metaphors for spiritual leadership, one He often used to describe Himself, was that of a shepherd—a person who tends God’s flock. A shepherd leads, feeds, nurtures, comforts, corrects, and protects—responsibilities that belong to every church leader. In fact, the word pastor means shepherd.
Peter wrote these words to elders who would have been familiar with sheep and shepherding:
I exhort the elders among you . . . shepherd the flock of God . . . exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. (1 Peter 5:1-4)
To give you a more complete picture of your pastor’s role, here’s a look at the nature of sheep, the task of shepherds, and how they compare to the pastor’s role among the church. Note the principles of church leadership it contains—they determine what should fill your pastor’s schedule.
Shepherds Are Rescuers
A sheep can be totally lost within a few miles of its home. With no sense of direction and no instinct for finding the fold, a lost sheep usually will walk around in a state of confusion, unrest, and even panic. It needs a shepherd to bring it home.
And so when Jesus saw the crowds, lost, spiritually disoriented, and confused, He likened them to sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36). The prophet Isaiah described lost people as those who, like sheep, have gone astray—each one turning to his own way (Isaiah 53:6).
Like lost sheep, lost people need a rescuer—a shepherd—to lead them to the safety of the fold. A pastor does that by pointing the lost toward Jesus, the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep (John 10:11).
Shepherds Are Feeders
Sheep spend most of their lives eating and drinking, but they are indiscriminate about their diet. They don’t know the difference between poisonous and non-poisonous plants. Therefore the shepherd must carefully guard their diet and provide them with pasture rich with nutrients.
In His encounter with him described in John 21, Jesus drove home to Peter the importance of feeding the sheep. Twice in His command to Peter, Jesus used the Greek term bosko, which means “I feed” (vv. 15, 17).
The pastor’s goal is not to please the sheep, but to feed them—not to tickle their ears, but to nourish their souls. He is not to offer merely light snacks of spiritual milk, but the substantial meat of biblical truth. Those who fail to feed the flock are unfit to be shepherds (cf. Jeremiah 23:1–4; Ezekiel 34:2–10).
Shepherds Are Leaders
Peter challenged his fellow elders to “shepherd the flock of God among you” by “exercising oversight” (1 Peter 5:2). God entrusted them with the authority and responsibility of leading the flock. Pastors are accountable for how they lead, and the flock for how they follow (Hebrews 13:17).
Besides teaching, the pastor exercises oversight of the flock by the example of his life. Being a pastor requires getting in among the sheep. It is not leadership from above so much as leadership from within. An effective pastor does not herd his sheep from the rear but leads them from the front. They see him and imitate his actions.
The most important asset of spiritual leadership is the power of an exemplary life. First Timothy 4:16 instructs a church leader to, “Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.”
Shepherds Are Protectors
Sheep are almost entirely defenseless—they can’t kick, scratch, bite, jump, or run. When attacked by a predator, they huddle together rather than running away. That makes them easy prey. Sheep need a protective shepherd in order to survive.
Christians need similar protection from error and those who spread it. Pastors guard their spiritual sheep from going astray and defend them against the savage wolves that would ravage them. Paul admonished the pastors at Ephesus to stay alert and to protect the churches under their care:
Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. (Acts 20:28-30)
Shepherds Are Comforters
Sheep lack a self-preservation instinct. They are so humble and meek that if you mistreat them, they are easily crushed in spirit and can simply give up and die. The shepherd must know his sheep’s individual temperaments and take care not to inflict excessive stress. Accordingly, a faithful pastor adjusts his counsel to fit the need of the person to whom he ministers. He must “admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, and be patient with all” (1 Thessalonians 5:14).
The Good Shepherd and His Undershepherds
Jesus is the perfect example of a loving shepherd. He epitomizes everything that a spiritual leader should be. Peter called Him the “Chief Shepherd” (1 Peter 5:4). He is our great Rescuer, Leader, Guardian, Protector, and Comforter.
Church leaders are undershepherds who guard the flock under the Chief Shepherd’s watchful eye (Acts 20:28). Theirs is a full-time responsibility because they minister to people who, like sheep, often are vulnerable, defenseless, undiscerning, and prone to stray.
Shepherding the flock of God is an enormous task, but to faithful pastors it brings the rich reward of the unfading crown of glory, which will be awarded by the Chief Shepherd Himself at His appearing (1 Peter 5:4).
One of Jesus’ favorite metaphors for spiritual leadership, one He often used to describe Himself, was that of a shepherd—a person who tends God’s flock. A shepherd leads, feeds, nurtures, comforts, corrects, and protects—responsibilities that belong to every church leader. In fact, the word pastor means shepherd.
Peter wrote these words to elders who would have been familiar with sheep and shepherding:
I exhort the elders among you . . . shepherd the flock of God . . . exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. (1 Peter 5:1-4)
To give you a more complete picture of your pastor’s role, here’s a look at the nature of sheep, the task of shepherds, and how they compare to the pastor’s role among the church. Note the principles of church leadership it contains—they determine what should fill your pastor’s schedule.
Shepherds Are Rescuers
A sheep can be totally lost within a few miles of its home. With no sense of direction and no instinct for finding the fold, a lost sheep usually will walk around in a state of confusion, unrest, and even panic. It needs a shepherd to bring it home.
And so when Jesus saw the crowds, lost, spiritually disoriented, and confused, He likened them to sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36). The prophet Isaiah described lost people as those who, like sheep, have gone astray—each one turning to his own way (Isaiah 53:6).
Like lost sheep, lost people need a rescuer—a shepherd—to lead them to the safety of the fold. A pastor does that by pointing the lost toward Jesus, the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep (John 10:11).
Shepherds Are Feeders
Sheep spend most of their lives eating and drinking, but they are indiscriminate about their diet. They don’t know the difference between poisonous and non-poisonous plants. Therefore the shepherd must carefully guard their diet and provide them with pasture rich with nutrients.
In His encounter with him described in John 21, Jesus drove home to Peter the importance of feeding the sheep. Twice in His command to Peter, Jesus used the Greek term bosko, which means “I feed” (vv. 15, 17).
The pastor’s goal is not to please the sheep, but to feed them—not to tickle their ears, but to nourish their souls. He is not to offer merely light snacks of spiritual milk, but the substantial meat of biblical truth. Those who fail to feed the flock are unfit to be shepherds (cf. Jeremiah 23:1–4; Ezekiel 34:2–10).
Shepherds Are Leaders
Peter challenged his fellow elders to “shepherd the flock of God among you” by “exercising oversight” (1 Peter 5:2). God entrusted them with the authority and responsibility of leading the flock. Pastors are accountable for how they lead, and the flock for how they follow (Hebrews 13:17).
Besides teaching, the pastor exercises oversight of the flock by the example of his life. Being a pastor requires getting in among the sheep. It is not leadership from above so much as leadership from within. An effective pastor does not herd his sheep from the rear but leads them from the front. They see him and imitate his actions.
The most important asset of spiritual leadership is the power of an exemplary life. First Timothy 4:16 instructs a church leader to, “Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.”
Shepherds Are Protectors
Sheep are almost entirely defenseless—they can’t kick, scratch, bite, jump, or run. When attacked by a predator, they huddle together rather than running away. That makes them easy prey. Sheep need a protective shepherd in order to survive.
Christians need similar protection from error and those who spread it. Pastors guard their spiritual sheep from going astray and defend them against the savage wolves that would ravage them. Paul admonished the pastors at Ephesus to stay alert and to protect the churches under their care:
Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. (Acts 20:28-30)
Shepherds Are Comforters
Sheep lack a self-preservation instinct. They are so humble and meek that if you mistreat them, they are easily crushed in spirit and can simply give up and die. The shepherd must know his sheep’s individual temperaments and take care not to inflict excessive stress. Accordingly, a faithful pastor adjusts his counsel to fit the need of the person to whom he ministers. He must “admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, and be patient with all” (1 Thessalonians 5:14).
The Good Shepherd and His Undershepherds
Jesus is the perfect example of a loving shepherd. He epitomizes everything that a spiritual leader should be. Peter called Him the “Chief Shepherd” (1 Peter 5:4). He is our great Rescuer, Leader, Guardian, Protector, and Comforter.
Church leaders are undershepherds who guard the flock under the Chief Shepherd’s watchful eye (Acts 20:28). Theirs is a full-time responsibility because they minister to people who, like sheep, often are vulnerable, defenseless, undiscerning, and prone to stray.
Shepherding the flock of God is an enormous task, but to faithful pastors it brings the rich reward of the unfading crown of glory, which will be awarded by the Chief Shepherd Himself at His appearing (1 Peter 5:4).
If your pastor is faithfully carrying out the duties required in his job title, remember to follow this admonition of Scripture:
Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you. (Hebrews 13:17)
Thursday, January 24, 2008
The wisdom of Charles Spurgeon for our day.
"Brethren, let me ask you, do you imagine that the gospel is a nose of wax which can be shaped to suit the face of each succeeding age? Is the revelation once given by the Spirit of God to be interpreted according to the fashion of the period? Is "advanced thought" to be the cord with which the spirit of the Lord is to be straitened? Is the old truth that saved men hundreds of years ago to be banished because something fresh has been hatched in the nests of the wise? Think ye that the witness of the Holy Ghost can be shaped and moulded at our will? Is the divine Spirit to be rather the pupil than the teacher of the ages? "Is the spirit of the Lord straitened?"My very soul boils within me when I think of the impudent arrogance of certain willful spirits from whom all reverence for revelation has departed. They would teach Jehovah wisdom; they criticize his word and amend his truth. Certain Scriptural doctrines are, forsooth, discarded as dogmas of the medieval period; others are denounced as gloomy because they cannot be called untrue. Paul is questioned and quibbled out of court, and the Lord Jesus is first belauded and then explained away. We are told that the teaching of God's ministers must be conformed to the spirit of the age. We shall have nothing to do with such treason to truth. "Is the spirit of the Lord straitened?" Shall his ministers speak as if he were?Verily, that same treasure of truth which the Lord has committed unto us we will keep inviolate so long as we live, God helping us. We are not so unmindful of the words of the apostle, "Hold fast the form of sound words", as to change a syllable of what we believe to be the word of the Lord."
A SLAVE FOR CHRIST
Once we have been drawn unto to Christ, we become a working part to further the kingdom of God. We are His field that He cultivates as we produce fruits for His glory. We are the structure of His building as He resides in our hearts. Yet, we are only His field and building by the grace of God. The triumph of Christ over death allows us to be used to His glory. After all, to be used of Christ is one of the greatest blessings in the Christian life.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
One Month Ago Today
One month ago today, on December 23, Joel Osteen appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. Many of you will remember hearing about this…. If not, here is the most shocking part of the interview.
(The full transcript can be read here. Or you can watch the YouTube version here.)
* * * *
[Begin Quote]
WALLACE: And what about Mitt Romney? And I’ve got to ask you the question, because it is a question whether it should be or not in this campaign, is a Mormon a true Christian?
(The full transcript can be read here. Or you can watch the YouTube version here.)
* * * *
[Begin Quote]
WALLACE: And what about Mitt Romney? And I’ve got to ask you the question, because it is a question whether it should be or not in this campaign, is a Mormon a true Christian?
OSTEEN: Well, in my mind they are. Mitt Romney has said that he believes in Christ as his savior, and that’s what I believe, so, you know, I’m not the one to judge the little details of it. So I believe they are.
And so, you know, Mitt Romney seems like a man of character and integrity to me, and I don’t think he would — anything would stop me from voting for him if that’s what I felt like.
And so, you know, Mitt Romney seems like a man of character and integrity to me, and I don’t think he would — anything would stop me from voting for him if that’s what I felt like.
WALLACE: So, for instance, when people start talking about Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, and the golden tablets in upstate New York, and God assumes the shape of a man, do you not get hung up in those theological issues?
OSTEEN: I probably don’t get hung up in them because I haven’t really studied them or thought about them. And you know, I just try to let God be the judge of that. I mean, I don’t know.
I certainly can’t say that I agree with everything that I’ve heard about it, but from what I’ve heard from Mitt, when he says that Christ is his savior, to me that’s a common bond.
[End Quote]
* * * *
What a sad commentary that is on the level of discernement in broader evangelical circles.
For a much more biblical (read: non-heretical) perspective on Mormonism, and its relationship to true Christianity, see here or here.
I certainly can’t say that I agree with everything that I’ve heard about it, but from what I’ve heard from Mitt, when he says that Christ is his savior, to me that’s a common bond.
[End Quote]
* * * *
What a sad commentary that is on the level of discernement in broader evangelical circles.
For a much more biblical (read: non-heretical) perspective on Mormonism, and its relationship to true Christianity, see here or here.
Daily Strength From The Word
For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock. Psalms 27:5
Reflection-------For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock.
ReflectionImpregnable is the bulwark of defence the Lord has provided in the regenerative blood of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ! Take great courage and comfort in the sure bastion of the Lord's sovereign plan. He cannot be thwarted. He cannot be dismayed. His chosen people can never be trampled or destroyed. Be strong in passion for this truth and proceed in your battle boldly! You are called to righteousness and evangelism—and God's power will be your power in these things.
Reflection-------For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock.
ReflectionImpregnable is the bulwark of defence the Lord has provided in the regenerative blood of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ! Take great courage and comfort in the sure bastion of the Lord's sovereign plan. He cannot be thwarted. He cannot be dismayed. His chosen people can never be trampled or destroyed. Be strong in passion for this truth and proceed in your battle boldly! You are called to righteousness and evangelism—and God's power will be your power in these things.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Christianity vs. Jesusanity -- The Postmodern Temptation By Al Mohler
The most hard-core forms of postmodern thought are generally limited to academic campuses, but the postmodern worldview is trickling down in various forms to the popular level. While postmodern literary theorists debate the meaning of "totalizing metanarratives," at the level of popular piety we see the widespread substitution of "spirituality" for biblical Christianity.
In this sense, spirituality is a project centered in the self and constantly negotiable -- more about "meaning" than truth. Where does Jesus Christ fit in all this? Darrell L. Bock and Daniel B. Wallace argue that popular culture is on a quest "to unseat the biblical Christ." They make their case in Dethroning Jesus [Thomas Nelson]..
As Bock and Wallace explain, classical biblical Christianity is being replaced by "Jesusanity." In their words:
"Jesusanity" is a coined term for the alternative story about Jesus. Here the center of the story is still Jesus, but Jesus as either a prophet or a teacher of religious wisdom. In Jesusanity, Jesus remains very much Jesus of Nazareth. He points the way to God and leads people into a journey with God. His role is primarily one of teacher, guide, and example. Jesus' special status involves his insight into the human condition and the enlightenment he brings to it. There is no enthronement of Jesus at God's side, only the power of his teaching and example. In this story, the key is that Jesus inspires others, but there is no throne for him. He is one among many – the best, perhaps, and one worthy to learn from and follow.
Biblical Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is both fully human and fully divine. Thus, Jesus does not need to be "humanized." As the Apostle Paul taught in Philippians 2:5-11, Jesus humbled Himself to take on full and authentic humanity. So, the real issue in Jesusanity is not humanizing Jesus, but denying His deity. Christianity and Jesusanity tell two different stories and represent two very different faiths. As Bock and Wallace explain:
Both of these stories afford Jesus a great deal of respect, but they are very different stories in regard to his importance. In one, Jesus is worshipped. In the other, he is simply respected. In one, he is intimately associated with God. In the other, he points to God. In one he is the Way. In the other, he shows the way. We cannot understand the public discussion about Jesus without understanding that the discussion entails these two distinct stories.
Dethroning Jesus comes in the wake of much cultural conversation and media attention devoted to the so-called gospels of Judas and Thomas and the collection generally known as the Gnostic gospels. These texts, never accepted by the Church as Scripture, do present very different understandings of Jesus than that taught by the Apostles and confessed by orthodox Christians. These different understandings are now represented by very different portraits of Jesus in the postmodern public square. As Bock and Wallace argue:
The portrait of Jesus in the public square has led to two stories about Jesus, and this despite the fact that both of these stories have often been called Christianity. One is Christianity, while the other is Jesusanity. The distinction between the two stories has surfaced for a variety of reasons, the most relevant of which we have sought to trace in this first overview. Four basic areas have contributed to the rise of these two different portraits of Jesus: (1) historical skepticism, (2) new imagination, (3) cultural factors that have changed how we assess things, and (4) the innate desire in people to seek, cope with or understand the spiritual. Within these four areas are twelve distinct factors: (1) skepticism about institutional religion of all sorts, (2) the rise of higher criticism, (3) the new finds in archaeology, (4) a larger sea change in the way we view history (written by winners/losers), (5) a selective appeal to ancient evidence, (6) the way Christianity is taught in many religious study programs, (7) increasing media attention, (8) the appeal of public-square crossover novels, (9) the intrigue of the pursuit of a spiritual journey, (10) the cultural desire to acknowledge religious diversity, (11) the growing recognition that religion motivates people, and (12) a brittle fundamentalism.
Each of these factors plays a part, but the "increasing media attention" is surely a major factor. Much of this attention is superficial and sloppy. The National Geographic Society, for example, should be embarrassed by its sensationalism in promoting exaggerated and misleading claims about the Gospel of Judas in its magazine and on television. The authors of Dethroning Jesus helpfully debunk many of the confusing claims made in recent years, answering those who assail the integrity of the New Testament and those who promote sensationalistic claims such as the discovery of the "lost tomb of Jesus."
Of course, more is at stake here than a battle over rival intellectual understandings of Jesus. As Bock and Wallace acknowledge, "Christianity is not Jesusanity for a reason. Jesus is about more than ideas." We must never depreciate the urgency of getting the doctrine right and understanding Jesus Christ as the Bible presents Him. But Jesus demands faith, not just correct knowledge.
Jesusanity fits the postmodern mind and the postmodern mood, but it cannot save. We really do not know what Christianity is if we do not also understand what it is not.
In this sense, spirituality is a project centered in the self and constantly negotiable -- more about "meaning" than truth. Where does Jesus Christ fit in all this? Darrell L. Bock and Daniel B. Wallace argue that popular culture is on a quest "to unseat the biblical Christ." They make their case in Dethroning Jesus [Thomas Nelson]..
As Bock and Wallace explain, classical biblical Christianity is being replaced by "Jesusanity." In their words:
"Jesusanity" is a coined term for the alternative story about Jesus. Here the center of the story is still Jesus, but Jesus as either a prophet or a teacher of religious wisdom. In Jesusanity, Jesus remains very much Jesus of Nazareth. He points the way to God and leads people into a journey with God. His role is primarily one of teacher, guide, and example. Jesus' special status involves his insight into the human condition and the enlightenment he brings to it. There is no enthronement of Jesus at God's side, only the power of his teaching and example. In this story, the key is that Jesus inspires others, but there is no throne for him. He is one among many – the best, perhaps, and one worthy to learn from and follow.
Biblical Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is both fully human and fully divine. Thus, Jesus does not need to be "humanized." As the Apostle Paul taught in Philippians 2:5-11, Jesus humbled Himself to take on full and authentic humanity. So, the real issue in Jesusanity is not humanizing Jesus, but denying His deity. Christianity and Jesusanity tell two different stories and represent two very different faiths. As Bock and Wallace explain:
Both of these stories afford Jesus a great deal of respect, but they are very different stories in regard to his importance. In one, Jesus is worshipped. In the other, he is simply respected. In one, he is intimately associated with God. In the other, he points to God. In one he is the Way. In the other, he shows the way. We cannot understand the public discussion about Jesus without understanding that the discussion entails these two distinct stories.
Dethroning Jesus comes in the wake of much cultural conversation and media attention devoted to the so-called gospels of Judas and Thomas and the collection generally known as the Gnostic gospels. These texts, never accepted by the Church as Scripture, do present very different understandings of Jesus than that taught by the Apostles and confessed by orthodox Christians. These different understandings are now represented by very different portraits of Jesus in the postmodern public square. As Bock and Wallace argue:
The portrait of Jesus in the public square has led to two stories about Jesus, and this despite the fact that both of these stories have often been called Christianity. One is Christianity, while the other is Jesusanity. The distinction between the two stories has surfaced for a variety of reasons, the most relevant of which we have sought to trace in this first overview. Four basic areas have contributed to the rise of these two different portraits of Jesus: (1) historical skepticism, (2) new imagination, (3) cultural factors that have changed how we assess things, and (4) the innate desire in people to seek, cope with or understand the spiritual. Within these four areas are twelve distinct factors: (1) skepticism about institutional religion of all sorts, (2) the rise of higher criticism, (3) the new finds in archaeology, (4) a larger sea change in the way we view history (written by winners/losers), (5) a selective appeal to ancient evidence, (6) the way Christianity is taught in many religious study programs, (7) increasing media attention, (8) the appeal of public-square crossover novels, (9) the intrigue of the pursuit of a spiritual journey, (10) the cultural desire to acknowledge religious diversity, (11) the growing recognition that religion motivates people, and (12) a brittle fundamentalism.
Each of these factors plays a part, but the "increasing media attention" is surely a major factor. Much of this attention is superficial and sloppy. The National Geographic Society, for example, should be embarrassed by its sensationalism in promoting exaggerated and misleading claims about the Gospel of Judas in its magazine and on television. The authors of Dethroning Jesus helpfully debunk many of the confusing claims made in recent years, answering those who assail the integrity of the New Testament and those who promote sensationalistic claims such as the discovery of the "lost tomb of Jesus."
Of course, more is at stake here than a battle over rival intellectual understandings of Jesus. As Bock and Wallace acknowledge, "Christianity is not Jesusanity for a reason. Jesus is about more than ideas." We must never depreciate the urgency of getting the doctrine right and understanding Jesus Christ as the Bible presents Him. But Jesus demands faith, not just correct knowledge.
Jesusanity fits the postmodern mind and the postmodern mood, but it cannot save. We really do not know what Christianity is if we do not also understand what it is not.
Why Preach the Word? By John MacArthur
For many reasons, faithful and full proclamation of the Word is the only right way to preach.
First of all, such preaching lets God speak rather than man, because it declares God’s own Word. And it is an incredibly thrilling privilege to give voice to God!
Second, preaching the Word is the only right way to preach because it brings the preacher into direct contact with the mind of the Holy Spirit, the author of Scripture. It is for that reason that the preacher of the Word finds the process of study and discovery to be even more rewarding than the preaching that results from it, gratifying as that can be.
It is tragic and puzzling that so many preachers who recognize Scripture to be God’s own Word spend more time investigating and interacting with the limited and imperfect minds of other men than delving into the infinite and holy mind of God. Part of the reason, of course, is that many hearers do not really want to delve into the depths of God’s righteousness and truth, because it exposes their own shallowness and sin. In his second letter to Timothy, Paul warned his son in the faith about the danger of those who hold “to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power” (2 Tim. 3:5). Later in that same epistle he would warn again that “the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;. . . and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths” (2 Tim. 4:3–4; cf. Acts 20:29–30).
Third, preaching the Word is the only right way to preach because it forces the preacher to proclaim all of God’s revelation, including those truths that even many believers find hard to learn or accept.
Fourth, preaching the Word is the only right way to preach because it promotes biblical literacy in a congregation, not only through what is learned from the sermon itself but also through the increased desire to study Scripture more carefully and consistently on their own. The faithful pastor, and all other faithful believers, love to learn God’s Word because they love the God of the Word.
Fifth, preaching the Word is the only right way to preach because it carries ultimate authority. It is the complete and perfect self-revelation of God Himself and of His divine will for mankind, which He has created in His own image.
Sixth, preaching the Word is the only right way to preach because only that kind of preaching can transform both the preacher and the congregation.
Seventh, the final and most compelling reason that preaching the Word is the only right way to preach is simply that it is His own Word, and only His own Word, that the Lord calls and commissions His preachers to proclaim.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Beware of Game Stop By Shannon G.
Recently, I visited a store called “Game Stop”..…3 of them to be exact. The reason for my visit was that my sons were given a Game Stop gift card for Christmas. Unaware of what the entire store sells, I found myself surrounded by more devilish games than I’d ever seen under one roof.
Searching for something that may be of some benefit to my two young children, I resorted to looking for batteries and educational computer games. When I couldn’t find any, I asked the gentleman if he had any educational games for the computer. To my hearts sadness, he said that the company decided to do away with games like that. This led me to other stores hoping that they may have something that would be useful that I could purchase with the gift card. Instead, all sorts of video games displaying demons, witches, violence, and witchcraft surrounded me. Disgusted, I glanced at titles such as “Saved (demonic),” “Left Behind (extremely violent),” “Dark Messiah,” “Devil’s Cry,” “War Craft,” and much more. Many game ratings included words such as extremely violent, sex, profanity, and murder.
It was a supermarket of what I’d like to call ‘the devil’s playground.’ I couldn’t help but overhear children disrespecting parents and even the employees using abbreviated swear words as they searched for games. Is it any wonder the children are acting this way I thought to myself??? How sad to see parents accompanying their children and even buying them games that will feed their soul with sin and death.
I could not wait to get out of the store. I ended up leaving with batteries and a few used DVDs (surprisingly descent and useful). I must say that I was greatly disturbed to see what intrigues the young minds of so many today. It is no surprise that we are living in a world that is increasingly evil by the minute. It is a scary thing to raise children in these perilous times. I urge anyone who has children to beware of what they are doing and stay far away from stores such as Game Stop who sells and even allows you to play demos of what I deem to be the most demonic, evil games that I have ever seen!
Searching for something that may be of some benefit to my two young children, I resorted to looking for batteries and educational computer games. When I couldn’t find any, I asked the gentleman if he had any educational games for the computer. To my hearts sadness, he said that the company decided to do away with games like that. This led me to other stores hoping that they may have something that would be useful that I could purchase with the gift card. Instead, all sorts of video games displaying demons, witches, violence, and witchcraft surrounded me. Disgusted, I glanced at titles such as “Saved (demonic),” “Left Behind (extremely violent),” “Dark Messiah,” “Devil’s Cry,” “War Craft,” and much more. Many game ratings included words such as extremely violent, sex, profanity, and murder.
It was a supermarket of what I’d like to call ‘the devil’s playground.’ I couldn’t help but overhear children disrespecting parents and even the employees using abbreviated swear words as they searched for games. Is it any wonder the children are acting this way I thought to myself??? How sad to see parents accompanying their children and even buying them games that will feed their soul with sin and death.
I could not wait to get out of the store. I ended up leaving with batteries and a few used DVDs (surprisingly descent and useful). I must say that I was greatly disturbed to see what intrigues the young minds of so many today. It is no surprise that we are living in a world that is increasingly evil by the minute. It is a scary thing to raise children in these perilous times. I urge anyone who has children to beware of what they are doing and stay far away from stores such as Game Stop who sells and even allows you to play demos of what I deem to be the most demonic, evil games that I have ever seen!
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Prayer Request for My Dear Friend
I received some very tragic news today. It was about a Woman whom I know, and love dearly, that is dying. She has a very odd disease: one that many doctors could not even diagnose.
The reason it is such an odd disease is that it begins by affecting certain parts of the body, and then, almost in sequence, attacks other parts in order. The progression of how this virus attacks the body is important, because it renders the victim helpless first, and then once the victim is paralyzed, slowly eats away at the person’s internal organs.
First the disease attacks the brain. It reprograms the brain so that it no longer functions properly. Thinking about painful things causes pain for the victim, but thinking about pleasant things causes pleasure. Naturally, the victim begins thinking about the things that cause pleasure, and soon they cannot think about anything else.
Next, oddly enough, the disease goes after the taste buds, and food begins to lose its flavor. After a while the victim cannot even tell what they are eating or drinking, and the only thing that seems to satisfy them is a milkish beverage that is a blend of all kinds of foods mixed together. By the time the disease digresses to this point, don’t even mention meat or fish or anything solid to the victim, because, remember, the victim’s brain begins processing this milkish blend as pleasant. As a result, the victim falls ill to severe weakness and malnutrition.
Then, the disease attacks, of all things, the legs and the arms simultaneously. This renders the victim fairly helpless, as they can no longer move about freely, and must rely on others to take them from place to place, to help them dress, and even to feed them.
Then, the disease gets really nasty. One by one, the internal organs are attacked. The liver, the pancreas, the lungs, the heart. Somehow this disease is able to slowly begin digesting each organ, eventually leaving nothing but empty space. The ultimate effect is that the body, which is already paralyzed, becomes little more than an empty, rotting shell. It’s not long before enough organs are eaten away that the victim dies a horrible death.
The worst problem of all, however, is that the victim doesn’t know any of this is happening. Because the brain is attacked first, it reprograms the victim’s thinking to feel that everything that is going on is normal, healthy, and right. As the victim slowly dies, she has the sensation that all is well. As she begins wasting away, she feels –in her own mind – that she is young and vibrant, and that she will live forever. Then she suddenly dies.
There is one Doctor whom I’m told has a cure for this disease. However, it can only be introduced at a prescribed time during the life-cycle of the disease. The Doctor –probably because the procedure is so invasive- has chosen not to tell us when he will provide the cure. However, my friend the victim is so far gone, we’re confident it can’t be much longer.
The friend that I love so dearly has a name. She is called Evangelical Church. The Great Physician, who is the only One that has properly diagnosed the disease, has named this insipid, nasty, virus Satan.
Won’t you please pray for my friend, who also happens to be the lovely Bride of the Great Physician? Pray that the Cure will come, and that it will arrive before the Bride is no longer recognizable.
This is my prayer, and I believe that there’s no greater prayer that we can pray.
Amen.
The Heidelberg Catechism, This Lord's Day week 3
Q6: Did God create man thus, wicked and perverse?
A7: No,[1] but God created man good and after His own image,[2] that is, in righteousness and true holiness; that he might rightly know God his Creator, heartily love Him, and live with Him in eternal blessedness, to praise and glorify Him.[3]
1. Gen. 1:312. Gen. 1:26-273. II Cor. 3:18; Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24
Q7: From where, then, does this depraved nature of man come?
A7: From the fall and disobedience of our first parents, Adam and Eve, in Paradise,[1] whereby our nature became so corrupt that we are all conceived and born in sin.[2]
1. Gen. ch. 3; Rom. 5:12, 18-192. Psa. 14:2-3; 51:5
Q8: But are we so depraved that we are completely incapable of any good and prone to all evil?
A8: Yes,[1] unless we are born again by the Spirit of God.[2]
1. John 3:6; Gen. 6:5; Job 14:4; Isa. 53:62. John 3:5; Gen. 8:21; II Cor. 3:5; Rom. 7:18; Jer. 17:9
A7: No,[1] but God created man good and after His own image,[2] that is, in righteousness and true holiness; that he might rightly know God his Creator, heartily love Him, and live with Him in eternal blessedness, to praise and glorify Him.[3]
1. Gen. 1:312. Gen. 1:26-273. II Cor. 3:18; Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24
Q7: From where, then, does this depraved nature of man come?
A7: From the fall and disobedience of our first parents, Adam and Eve, in Paradise,[1] whereby our nature became so corrupt that we are all conceived and born in sin.[2]
1. Gen. ch. 3; Rom. 5:12, 18-192. Psa. 14:2-3; 51:5
Q8: But are we so depraved that we are completely incapable of any good and prone to all evil?
A8: Yes,[1] unless we are born again by the Spirit of God.[2]
1. John 3:6; Gen. 6:5; Job 14:4; Isa. 53:62. John 3:5; Gen. 8:21; II Cor. 3:5; Rom. 7:18; Jer. 17:9
Friday, January 18, 2008
The Weight of Glory The Significance of C.S. Lewis by Dr R.C. Sproul
C.S. Lewis emerged as a twentieth-century icon in the world of Christian literature. His prodigious work combining acute intellectual reasoning with unparalleled creative imagination made him a popular figure not only in the Christian world but in the secular world as well. The Chronicles of Narnia and The Space Trilogy, though rife with dramatic Christian symbolism, were devoured by those who had no interest in Christianity at all, but were enjoyed for the sheer force of the drama of the stories themselves. An expert in English literature, C.S. Lewis functioned also as a Christian intellectual. He had a passion to reach out to the intellectual world of his day in behalf of Christianity. Through his own personal struggles with doubt and pain, he was able to hammer out a solid intellectual foundation for his own faith. C.S. Lewis had no interest in a mystical leap of faith devoid of rational scrutiny. He abhorred those who would leave their minds in the parking lot when they went into church. He was convinced that Christianity was at heart rational and defensible with sound argumentation. His work showed a marriage of art and science, a marriage of reason and creative imagination that was unparalleled. His gift of creative writing was matched by few of his twentieth-century contemporaries. His was indeed a literary genius in which he was able to express profound Christian truth through art, in a manner similar to that conveyed by Bach in his music and Rembrandt in his painting. Even today his introductory book on the Christian faith — Mere Christianity — remains a perennial best seller. We have to note that although a literary expert, C.S. Lewis remained a layman theologically speaking. Indeed, he was a well-read and studied layman, but he did not benefit from the skills of technical training in theology. Some of his theological musings will indicate a certain lack of technical understanding, for which he may certainly be excused. His book Mere Christianity has been the single most important volume of popular apologetics that the Christian world witnessed in the twentieth century. Again, in his incomparable style, Lewis was able to get to the nitty-gritty of the core essentials of the Christian faith without distorting them into simplistic categories. His reasoning, though strong, was not always technically sound. For example, in his defense of the resurrection, he used an argument that has impressed many despite its invalidity. He follows an age-old argument that the truth claims of the writers of the New Testament concerning the resurrection of Jesus are verified by their willingness to die for the truths that they espoused. And the question is asked: Which is easier to believe — that these men created a false myth and then died for that falsehood or that Jesus really returned from the grave? On the surface, the answer to that question is easy. It is far easier to believe that men would be deluded into a falsehood, in which they really believed, and be willing to give their lives for it, than to believe that somebody actually came back from the dead. There has to be other reasons to support the truth claim of the resurrection other than that people were willing to die for it. One might look at the violence in the Middle East and see 50,000 people so persuaded of the truths of Islam that they are willing to sacrifice themselves as human suicide bombs. History is replete with the examples of deluded people who have died for their delusions. History is not filled with examples of resurrections. However, despite the weakness of that particular argument, Lewis nevertheless made a great impact on people who were involved in their initial explorations of the truth claims of Christianity. To this day, people who won’t read a Bible or won’t read other Christian literature will pick up Mere Christianity and find themselves engaged by the acute mental processes of C.S. Lewis. The church owes an enormous debt to this man for his unwillingness to capitulate to the irrationalism that marked so much of Christian thought in the twentieth century — an irrationalism that produced what many describe as a “mindless Christianity.” The Christianity of C.S. Lewis is a mindful Christianity where there is a marvelous union between head and heart. Lewis was a man of profound sensitivity to the pain of human beings. He himself experienced the crucible of sanctification through personal pain and anguish. It was from such experiences that his sensitivity developed and his ability to communicate it sharply honed. To be creative is the mark of profundity. To be creative without distortion is rare indeed, and yet in the stories that C.S. Lewis spun, the powers of creativity reached levels that were rarely reached before or since. Aslan, the lion in The Chronicles of Narnia, so captures the character and personality of Jesus; it is nothing short of amazing. Every generation, I believe, will continue to benefit from the insights put on paper by this amazing personality.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Televangelist Defends Spending
FG Theology and Matthew 7:21-23 (Part 2) By Matt Waymeyer
Today’s post is continued from yesterday’s discussion on “Free Grace” Theology and its interpretation of Matthew 7:21-23.
A Misguided Hermeneutical Approach
The second problem is that the FG view apparently sees John 6:40 as the interpretative key which unlocks the hidden meaning of Matthew 7:21. There is nothing in the immediate context which leads the interpreter to understand “the will of the Father” as faith in Christ, and only when this meaning is imported from John 6:40 does this interpretation emerge. But where does that leave the original hearers’ of the Sermon on the Mount? Without a copy of the Gospel of John in their hip pockets, they would be left completely in the dark, with the true meaning of Matthew 7:21 hidden from their eyes.
On top of that, even if the original hearers had possessed the Gospel of John, what would compel them to look to John 6:40 to discover the meaning of Matthew 7:21? FG teachers confidently state that the meaning of “the will of the Father” in Matthew 7:21 can be found in John 6:40, but how do they know that? The whole approach seems to betray a desire to preserve FG theology. Unfortunately, it does so at the expense of the clear meaning of Matthew 7:21-23.
A Complete Misunderstanding of John 6:40
Thirdly, the FG explanation completely misinterprets John 6:40. In other words, this interpretation not only ignores key details in the immediate context of passage under consideration, but it also uses John 6:40 to import into Matthew 7:21-23 meaning which is not even found in John 6:40! Put simply, the will of the Father in John 6:40 is not God’s will for mankind, but rather God’s will for His Son Jesus.
Consider the verse in its context. In John 6:38-40, Jesus says:
(38) For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. (39) This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. (40) For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.
Verse 38 is simple enough: Jesus says He has come to do with the will of the Father. He follows this up in verse 39 by explaining what this will is: that He (that is Jesus) would lose none of those whom the Father has given to Him, but rather that He would raise up all of these believers on the last day. In verse 40, Jesus elaborates further on what He has said in verse 39 (indicated by the explanatory gar [“for”] at the beginning of v. 40) by again explaining the will of the Father for Jesus. The will of the Father, He says, is that all believers will have eternal life (the emphasis being not on the present possession of eternal life but on the future culmination of it). And who is going to make sure they have eternal life? Who is going to accomplish the Father’s will and guarantee this eternal life by raising believers up on the last day? Jesus! As He says at the end of verse 40: “I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” Jesus will indeed accomplish the will of Him who sent Him, and therein is the hope of the believer.
To summarize, the will of the Father in John 6:38-40 is not that people would believe—it is that those who do believe would have eternal life and that Jesus would guarantee this by raising them up on the last day. None whom the Father has given to the Son shall perish, because Jesus shall do the will of the Father. Therefore, to use John 6:40 to interpret Matthew 7:21 may seem to get FG off the hook, but it amounts to a careless handling of the Word of God. If FG teachers are determined to relieve the tension that exists between Matthew 7:21-23 and their theology, they will need to seek some other way to do it. My vote is that they jettison their theological system altogether.
“Free Grace” and Matt. 7:21-23 (Part 1) By Matt Waymeyer
Matt is the Senior Pastor of Community Bible Church in Vista, California.
In case you haven’t heard of it, “Free Grace” is the name given to a theological system founded by Zane Hodges and currently promoted by Bob Wilkin and The Grace Evangelical Society. According to “Free-Grace” theology (hereafter FG), genuine conversion does not necessarily result in a spiritually transformed life. In other words, FG advocates affirm that an individual can believe in Christ and yet show forth absolutely no fruit whatsoever in terms of obedience to God or love for Christ. Put another way, they believe in a regeneration which may or may not result in progressive sanctification. Most times, they say, it does not.
FG teachers would go so far as to say that if an individual were to believe in Christ for a brief moment—even as brief as 10 seconds—and then recant of that belief and live out the rest of his life as a Christ-rejecting atheist who never obeys God, that individual is a true child of God and will some day be in heaven. In other words, rather than recognizing that such an individual did not truly believe in Christ to begin with (1 John 2:19), Free-Gracers would affirm that person’s faith and conversion as genuine, for regeneration is no guarantee that one will persevere in the faith.
Among the many passages of Scripture which contradict FG on this point is Matthew 7:21-23. In this passage, Jesus says:
(21) “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. (22) Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ (23) And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’”
The obvious problem that this presents for the FG position is Jesus’ assertion that only those who “do the will of my Father” will enter the kingdom. This runs contrary to the FG gospel which says that most of those who end up in heaven will not have lived a life of obedience to God during their lives on earth.
One of the primary ways that FG teachers try to solve this dilemma is by using John 6:40 to interpret “the will of My Father” in Matthew 7:21 (e.g., see Joseph Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings, 199; Bob Wilkin, Confident in Christ, 216). According to this approach, doing the will of the Father in John 6:40 (and therefore in Matthew 7:21) refers to believing in Christ. Therefore, Matthew 7:21 simply says that only those who do the Father’s will (which is to believe in Christ) will enter the kingdom of heaven. And with that, the tension between Matthew 7:21-23 and FG theology suddenly vanishes. Or does it?
To get right to the point, I believe that this approach to Matthew 7:21-23 suffers from at least three significant difficulties: (1) a neglect of the original context; (2) a misguided hermeneutical approach; and (3) a complete misunderstanding of John 6:40. (Today we will consider the first of these three. We will look at the other two in tomorrow’s post.)
A Neglect of the Original Context
The first problem is that this explanation of Matthew 7:21-23 ignores key details in the text itself. The most obvious one is the clear contrast that Jesus establishes between those “who [do] the will of the Father” in verse 21 and those “who practice lawlessness” in verse 23 (both present participles in the Greek). Those who do the will of the Father (i.e., live lives of obedience) will enter the kingdom (v. 21), but those who practice lawlessness (i.e., live lives of disobedience) will not enter the kingdom (v. 23). “Doing the will of the Father” most naturally refers to obeying God, and the way it is set in contrast to living a life of disobedience only confirms this interpretation.
In addition, there is an irony in Jesus’ description in which those who call Jesus “Lord” do not obey Him as Lord. In other words, they profess to be followers of Christ who live in submission to God’s authority, and yet they do not live in obedience to the will of the Father. Their lives of disobedience betray the hypocrisy of their confession. As it is often said, they profess, but they do not possess.
FG theologians respond to this interpretation with two objections. First, they insist that it amounts to a person trusting in his own obedience as the basis for his salvation. In response to this objection, Jesus is not saying that obedience to the Father is the basis of the believer’s salvation, but rather the inevitable result of it. Only those who obey the will of the Father will enter the kingdom because everyone who truly believes in Christ will demonstrate their faith in the way that they live. Genuine conversion will not fail to result in works of obedience.
This truth is taught throughout the New Testament, but one example will suffice. 1 John 2:3 says: “And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.” We don’t come to know Christ by obeying His commandments—rather, the evidence that we have already come to know Christ (through faith) is that we obey His commandments. In this way, obedience to God is not a prerequisite for conversion—it is an inevitable result of conversion. FG people seem to have a difficult time understanding the difference between the two (and therefore often reject the latter because they mistake it for the former).
The second objection involves the passage itself. FG teachers point out that the very individuals who are rejected by Christ in verse 23 are described in verse 22 as those who trust in their obedience as the basis for their salvation. (Verse 22: “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’”) Therefore, the objection goes, whatever Jesus means by “the will of the Father” in verse 21, it couldn’t refer to a life of obedience to God.
In response to this objection, the works that Jesus describes in Matthew 7:22 are not acts of obedience to the will of the Father. Nowhere does God command the common man to prophesy, cast out demons, and perform miracles. The individuals rejected by Christ claimed to be engaged in these activities in the name of Jesus—and they may have been—and yet, at the same time, they had not lived lives of obedience to the Father. In fact, just the opposite—they had lived lives of lawlessness. In contrast, only those who do the will of the Father will enter the kingdom.
(To Be Concluded Tomorrow)
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
SCIENTOLOGY By Rev. Paul Seiler
Click Here to read full Document....... http://www.christianlibrary.org.au/cel/documents/cults/11.html
Belly Dance Classes at Church?
Please take a moment and click the linkhttp://www.northwoodchristian.com/index.html and share your comments about this with this church. Take a stand with Truth Matters Today. Also notice on there calender page the use of Yoga in the church.
Learn how to Belly Dance at North Wood Christian Church in Indianapolis? Sure, why not? Nothing is sacred anymore and if they incorporate Belly Dancing into their worship services we're sure that it will be a 'relevant' way to get some of the men of indianapolis into church.
We All Error In Bible Interpretation, But . . By. William Plumer
The knowledge of God possessed by angels and by the spirits of just men made perfect in heaven, is very different in degree from that possessed by even good and able men on earth. Here all men are liable to err, and all men do err. No man on this earth is without some wrong view, or some ignorance, which mars his knowledge. This is no reason for sloth or discouragement; but is a good reason why we should be humble and careful and teachable, and pray for divine light and guidance. It is far different in heaven. There they do always hold the face of God. Matthew 18:10. They do not hope for anything, for they already possess all good. Romans 8:24. "Now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known." 1 Corinthians 13:12. Knowledge without any mixture of error belongs only to the heavenly state. And yet a great part of the knowledge which the inhabitants of heaven have - concerns the very things which good men are learning in this world. Those above know perfectly what we know in parcels only.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Comments Concerning Lititz Grace By Rev. Charles J. Paul
The following three comments were made to J&J Bible Ministries. Concerning the last posting to Lititz Grace entitled Lititz Grace Chose To Ignore Meeting Over Doctrine...
Mark said...
"If you had received an email from Rick Warren or Bill Hybels, you and your staff would have responded with open arms immediately."This statement speaks volumes!
January 12, 2008 2:58:00 PM EST
"If you had received an email from Rick Warren or Bill Hybels, you and your staff would have responded with open arms immediately."This statement speaks volumes!
January 12, 2008 2:58:00 PM EST
Anonymous said...
I applaud every church that wants to win seekers, connect postmoderns with Jesus, and impact baby boomers or generation X or millennials or whatever. God loves people and they all need Christ regardless of their culture or their background or whatever. The problem I have had through the years is with the notion that if you are really serious about reaching these secular generations you have to somehow get beyond the Bible. Churches pride themselves on their cultural relevancy as they play Beatles songs in the Sunday service, and jettison the Bible to the back seat in favor of felt-need talks on subjects of supposed interest to the secular mind. This philosophy has divided countless churches across our country as Christians and God's Spirit within them are starving to be fed biblical depth and challenge. Jesus' commands to "feed my sheep" are skirted in favor of the priority of preaching to lost secular people without the Word of God. All of this is defended from the Mars Hill sermon of Acts 17????
January 12, 2008 6:57:00 PM EST
I applaud every church that wants to win seekers, connect postmoderns with Jesus, and impact baby boomers or generation X or millennials or whatever. God loves people and they all need Christ regardless of their culture or their background or whatever. The problem I have had through the years is with the notion that if you are really serious about reaching these secular generations you have to somehow get beyond the Bible. Churches pride themselves on their cultural relevancy as they play Beatles songs in the Sunday service, and jettison the Bible to the back seat in favor of felt-need talks on subjects of supposed interest to the secular mind. This philosophy has divided countless churches across our country as Christians and God's Spirit within them are starving to be fed biblical depth and challenge. Jesus' commands to "feed my sheep" are skirted in favor of the priority of preaching to lost secular people without the Word of God. All of this is defended from the Mars Hill sermon of Acts 17????
January 12, 2008 6:57:00 PM EST
Anonymous said...
"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly." - Proverbs 26:11 In consideration of all the scriptural neglect Hybels and his colleagues have facilitated over the years trying to "transform the planet," (sounds like an alien invasion) is Hybels' oopsy-daisy admission that "We made a mistake" his idea of repentance? Seeing as we're talking about the founder of the world's largest and most influential seeker-sensitive church, it would certainly seem so. But, if this pragmatic preacher doesn't expect real repentance from his "converts," I suppose we shouldn't expect it from him either
"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly." - Proverbs 26:11 In consideration of all the scriptural neglect Hybels and his colleagues have facilitated over the years trying to "transform the planet," (sounds like an alien invasion) is Hybels' oopsy-daisy admission that "We made a mistake" his idea of repentance? Seeing as we're talking about the founder of the world's largest and most influential seeker-sensitive church, it would certainly seem so. But, if this pragmatic preacher doesn't expect real repentance from his "converts," I suppose we shouldn't expect it from him either
Good, Bad, or In Between: A short survey of the doctrine of man By Pastor Bryan Wolfmueller
Name that CreedWhat is man? All theologies answer this question. Some say man is good; others that man is bad, but most say that there is a mix of good and bad. So we'll play a theological game (you're favorite kind, I know). Below are four statements on the teaching of man and the depth of sin, your job is to guess who said it.
Man is responsible for sin because he is endowed with free will; yet he is by nature frail, and the tendency of the mind is to evil: "For the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen. viii. 21)
“By his free choice man sinned against God and brought sin into the human race. Through the temptation of Satan man transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original innocence whereby his posterity inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin. Therefore, as soon as they are capable of moral action, they become transgressors and are under condemnation. Only the grace of God can bring man into His holy fellowship and enable man to fulfill the creative purpose of God.”
“[Original sin] is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it; subject to ignorance, suffering, and the dominion of death; and inclined to sin-an inclination to evil that is called 'concupiscence.'”
"Nor do I absolve my own self of blame: the human soul is certainly prone to evil, unless my Lord do bestow His Mercy: but surely my Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."
Before we get to the answers, let's point out the difficulty of the game: all the answers are the same! The key word in each answer is 'inclination'. In the first answer: “the tendency of the mind is to evil.” In the second and third: “a nature and an environment inclined toward sin” and “inclined to sin.” And in the last answer: “The human soul is certainly prone to evil.” There is a common theme in all of these teachings, and that is that man is not good, and yet not necessarily evil, but inclined and prone to do evil.
Now for the source of each statement:
The Jewish Encyclopedia
Baptist Faith and Message (2000)
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 405
The Quran 12.53
Stunned? It is an amazing thing that modern Judaism, the Southern Baptist Church, the Roman Catholic Church and the Muslim religion have the same doctrine of man. All of these teach that man is wounded, sick, troubled, but that there is still some degree of freedom and life in the will of man.
I, A Poor, Miserable SinnerMost people think of themselves as a “pretty good person.” The Scriptures beg to differ. The denial of original sin means that most people live in the delusion of their own freedom, but the Bible teaches that all men are dead in trespasses and sin. How many good people are there?
St Paul answers:
It is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips." "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes." Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.” [Romans 3:10-19, see also Ephesians 2:1ff]
The Scriptures teach with clarity that man is wicked and unholy, and yet (as we have seen above) this teaching that no one is righteous or holy is almost universally denied. But this makes sense. Our sinfulness is so complete that we are blind to our sinful condition.
Imagine a man who falls off a ladder and breaks his ankle. He is broken and he knows it, he cries out for help from someone else. But imagine again that this man breaks his ankle and his back. Now he doesn't feel the pain of his injury, and in fact might not even know that he is hurt. “Give me a hand up, I'll be okay.” So is our fall, we are so badly hurt that we do not even feel the injury; we do not know the depth of our sin.
Martin Luther talked of this trouble, that our sin is so deep that we don't even feel it: “This hereditary sin is so deep and horrible a corruption of nature that no reason can understand it, but it must be learned and believed from the revelation of Scriptures, Psalm 51:5; Romans 6:12ff; Exodus 33:3; Genesis 3:7ff.” [Smalcald Articles III.I.3]
What Does it Matter?Most churches teach that our sin is a tendency, not a death.
Does this matter? Yes, in fact the Gospel is at stake.
If the article of Justification is the article upon which the church stands or falls, then the article of original sin is the article upon which justification stands or falls. When we know the depth of our sin then we know the height of God's love for us. The law shows us the depths to which we have fallen, our complete inability to love, serve and fear God, our complete lack of freedom, and so our utter dependence on Jesus for freedom, life and salvation.
Our Lutheran Confessions comment on this: But the knowledge of original sin is necessary. For the magnitude of the grace of Christ cannot be understood and no one can heartily long and have a desire for Christ, for the inexpressibly great treasure of divine favor and grace which the Gospel offers, unless our diseases be recognized. As Christ says Matt. 9, 12; Mark 2, 17: They that are whole need not a physician. The entire righteousness of man is mere hypocrisy and abomination before God, unless we acknowledge that our heart is naturally destitute of love, fear, and confidence in God that we are miserable sinners who are in disgrace with God. [Apology to the Augsburg Confession, II.33-34]
The depth of our sin puts the “alone” in front of grace, in front of faith, in front of Christ. When we know the depth of our sin then we cry out with full voice to God, “Help!” “Lord, have mercy!” And the Biblical doctrine of our original sin gives us the comfort that Jesus has done all to win our salvation. This is the only comfort for sinners. May God grant us this comfort in life and in death.
Man is responsible for sin because he is endowed with free will; yet he is by nature frail, and the tendency of the mind is to evil: "For the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen. viii. 21)
“By his free choice man sinned against God and brought sin into the human race. Through the temptation of Satan man transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original innocence whereby his posterity inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin. Therefore, as soon as they are capable of moral action, they become transgressors and are under condemnation. Only the grace of God can bring man into His holy fellowship and enable man to fulfill the creative purpose of God.”
“[Original sin] is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it; subject to ignorance, suffering, and the dominion of death; and inclined to sin-an inclination to evil that is called 'concupiscence.'”
"Nor do I absolve my own self of blame: the human soul is certainly prone to evil, unless my Lord do bestow His Mercy: but surely my Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."
Before we get to the answers, let's point out the difficulty of the game: all the answers are the same! The key word in each answer is 'inclination'. In the first answer: “the tendency of the mind is to evil.” In the second and third: “a nature and an environment inclined toward sin” and “inclined to sin.” And in the last answer: “The human soul is certainly prone to evil.” There is a common theme in all of these teachings, and that is that man is not good, and yet not necessarily evil, but inclined and prone to do evil.
Now for the source of each statement:
The Jewish Encyclopedia
Baptist Faith and Message (2000)
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 405
The Quran 12.53
Stunned? It is an amazing thing that modern Judaism, the Southern Baptist Church, the Roman Catholic Church and the Muslim religion have the same doctrine of man. All of these teach that man is wounded, sick, troubled, but that there is still some degree of freedom and life in the will of man.
I, A Poor, Miserable SinnerMost people think of themselves as a “pretty good person.” The Scriptures beg to differ. The denial of original sin means that most people live in the delusion of their own freedom, but the Bible teaches that all men are dead in trespasses and sin. How many good people are there?
St Paul answers:
It is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips." "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes." Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.” [Romans 3:10-19, see also Ephesians 2:1ff]
The Scriptures teach with clarity that man is wicked and unholy, and yet (as we have seen above) this teaching that no one is righteous or holy is almost universally denied. But this makes sense. Our sinfulness is so complete that we are blind to our sinful condition.
Imagine a man who falls off a ladder and breaks his ankle. He is broken and he knows it, he cries out for help from someone else. But imagine again that this man breaks his ankle and his back. Now he doesn't feel the pain of his injury, and in fact might not even know that he is hurt. “Give me a hand up, I'll be okay.” So is our fall, we are so badly hurt that we do not even feel the injury; we do not know the depth of our sin.
Martin Luther talked of this trouble, that our sin is so deep that we don't even feel it: “This hereditary sin is so deep and horrible a corruption of nature that no reason can understand it, but it must be learned and believed from the revelation of Scriptures, Psalm 51:5; Romans 6:12ff; Exodus 33:3; Genesis 3:7ff.” [Smalcald Articles III.I.3]
What Does it Matter?Most churches teach that our sin is a tendency, not a death.
Does this matter? Yes, in fact the Gospel is at stake.
If the article of Justification is the article upon which the church stands or falls, then the article of original sin is the article upon which justification stands or falls. When we know the depth of our sin then we know the height of God's love for us. The law shows us the depths to which we have fallen, our complete inability to love, serve and fear God, our complete lack of freedom, and so our utter dependence on Jesus for freedom, life and salvation.
Our Lutheran Confessions comment on this: But the knowledge of original sin is necessary. For the magnitude of the grace of Christ cannot be understood and no one can heartily long and have a desire for Christ, for the inexpressibly great treasure of divine favor and grace which the Gospel offers, unless our diseases be recognized. As Christ says Matt. 9, 12; Mark 2, 17: They that are whole need not a physician. The entire righteousness of man is mere hypocrisy and abomination before God, unless we acknowledge that our heart is naturally destitute of love, fear, and confidence in God that we are miserable sinners who are in disgrace with God. [Apology to the Augsburg Confession, II.33-34]
The depth of our sin puts the “alone” in front of grace, in front of faith, in front of Christ. When we know the depth of our sin then we cry out with full voice to God, “Help!” “Lord, have mercy!” And the Biblical doctrine of our original sin gives us the comfort that Jesus has done all to win our salvation. This is the only comfort for sinners. May God grant us this comfort in life and in death.
The Church’s Mission Statement? By Jesse Johnson
A mission statement is a brief statement of the purpose of a company or religious or other organization. Companies sometimes use their mission statement as an advertising slogan, but the intention of a genuine mission statement is to keep members and users aware of the organization’s purpose.
The mission statement should be a clear and succinct representation of the enterprise’s purpose for existence. The intent of the Mission Statement should be the first consideration for any employee who is evaluating a strategic decision.
1. ”A computer on every desktop and in every home, running our software”
2. Establishing ourselves as the premier purveyor of the finest coffee in the world while maintaining our uncompromising principles while we grow.
3. ”We seek to be the world’s most customer-centric company, where customers can find and discover anything they may want to buy online at a great price.”
4. “To bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world.”
5. ”Organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
6. ”To give ordinary folk the chance to buy the same thing as rich people.”
7. “To make people happy.”
2. Establishing ourselves as the premier purveyor of the finest coffee in the world while maintaining our uncompromising principles while we grow.
3. ”We seek to be the world’s most customer-centric company, where customers can find and discover anything they may want to buy online at a great price.”
4. “To bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world.”
5. ”Organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
6. ”To give ordinary folk the chance to buy the same thing as rich people.”
7. “To make people happy.”
The answers, of course are: Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon, Nike, Google, Wal-Mart, and Disneyland. When an employee at one of those companies makes a decision, they do so in light of their mission statement. This ensures that the whole company is working toward the same end.
If you had a mission statement for your life, what would it be? I propose to you that our mission statement is clearly laid out in Scripture. Many churches, in fact, have a mission statement.
But the true mission statement of the church, and the true mission statement for every Christian was not invented at an elder’s meeting or designed by committee. The church’s mission statement was given to us by Jesus himself.
Matthew 28:19-20: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.
Mark 16:15-16: And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”
Luke 24:45-48: Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things.”
John 20:21: Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.”
Acts 1:8-9: “You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight.
Matthew 28:19-20: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.
Mark 16:15-16: And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”
Luke 24:45-48: Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things.”
John 20:21: Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.”
Acts 1:8-9: “You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight.
So at the end of all four Gospels, as well as at the beginning of Acts, the church is given it’s mission. To reach the lost with the saving power of the Gospel. And with this commission, Jesus makes evangelism an issue of obedience to our mission statement.
Christians are then called to live, think and act in light of our mission statement. We make decisions and choices based on how they will affect our purpose, the reaching and saving of the lost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)