Piper on Prayer

I squirmed, but I needed this.

The telos of Christmas

..."though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,  but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.  And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.  Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,  so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,  and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."


- from Phillippians 2 (emphasis mine)


____________________________


As we celebrate Christmas this year, let us rejoice in the birth of our Saviour and his coming, so many years ago, to our rescue.  Let us rest in the peace that comes when we realize that he is as present with us today, thru the Holy Spirit, as he was to the shepards on that night.


Mostly, let us look now to Easter and to the cross, because as wonderful as Christmas is...it is the Easter celebration which should remain the unclouded focus of our faith.  Jesus came into this world for a purpose.  Let us not forget that purpose as we rejoice in his coming.


Merry Christmas

Ice Cream and Free Will

I was recently asked what I thought of autonomy.  I replied...

It does not exist on the macro level. At the core, autonomy means self-determination.

The idea that we make rational, unbiased, intelligent, free choices is
untrue.  Our destinies are controled by one of two outside forces.

We are always making choices influenced by either our pre-disposed depraved nature or our
regenerated ontological being.

That is, we are either doing what we do under the lordship of Original
Sin or under the Lordship of Christ.
Its like ice cream (to paraphrase Greg Koukl)...

When you go to a creamery and choose a flavor, you ARE making a "free
will" decision. However, your will is dictated by your nature. If you
have a positive disposition towards chocolate and a massive aversion
towards vanilla - you will awlays choose chocolate.

What flavor you like wasn't a free will decision, it was an already
established fact of who you are, outside of any choice. Your choices in
the creamery included vanilla or chocolate - but you could really only
choose the one you have a taste for.
 
For your preference to change from chocolate to vanilla, that would require something outside of yourself - something you are not in control of.
 
This is the parallel of our salvation.  We are born drenched in sin according to Psalm 51 and unable to choose fellowship with God.  We do exercise our free will everyday, our free will unto sin. 
 
The good news is that God in his mercy comes and changes our desires, he changes our heart.  After that intervention, we still exercise our free will - free will in accordance with our new preferences for the things of God.
 
I know this isn't perfect as an illustration.  We could dig into it and find problems - but, I hope you get the general point.  Free will is not thrown out by the Reformed view, it is simply seen in its proper context - that is, subservient to our nature.

Jesus Storybook Bible

We got this for our little ones this Christmas.  Several people (including our pastor) recommended it.

If you have little ones, and don't have this, make buying one a priority today.

This kids bible is the best around at presenting the bible stories in a Christ-centered, faithful manner.

Cartoons

A friend helped me locate some funny Calvinist cartoons this morning.  Enjoy.

What I'm reading...

Recently I read a good book on apologetics that really influenced the way I see that discipline. Adam let me borrow:

I also have been looking back thru my favorite book in the 7th grade...

Awhile back I read a historical fiction about Cicero...

Finally I have recently re-read Chapter 11 of this:

What have you been reading?

Comment Response

Recently I posted a few thoughts entitled "Was Adam a Literal Man?" Yesterday, I received a comment on that post. Here was the comment:

Slippery slope.... The theology doesn't matter? Really??? So are you saying that it would be ok to go out and evangelize with some Mormons if you are both talking about Jesus? Who cares that they believe Jesus is the brother of Lucifer, thats not the point. You need to stop relying on your own flawed wisdom and rely fully on God and the council provided in the inspired Word of God, i.e. the Bible.

To be honest I was abit put off by the tone of the comment and I immediately responded with:

Respectfully, you should probably man (woman) up enough to fill all of us in on your identity if you want to be so critical of my post. I will post my response tomorrow.

That was probably not the most charitable way to handle my angst, but it is a good lead in as I type a few points of reply to the comment...
______________

I don't mind challenges to my beliefs - I welcome them. I may be wrong about YEC or any number of things - I have been before. However, this comment was a great example of exactly how NOT to dialogue about important issues. Here are some rules that I have drawn up after looking over the comment for future reference as "anonymous" or anyone else decides to make comments on my (or any other) blog.

Rule 1
Reveal yourself

Posting anonymously is lame and appears cowardly. If you have the answers and I am mixed up, why not tell us who you are. Why be afraid to give your identity. Walk in the light so to speak. Generally, only bellicose blog trolls who are trying to stir up trouble hide behind the curtain of Oz. It also implies a lack of confidence in your own argument IMO. Perhaps it was an accident and you meant to give your name - if so, let us have it and disregard rule 1.

Rule 2
Fallacy Follow Thru

The first words of the comment accuse me of a logical fallacy in my argument. However, the subsequent breakdown of how my argument is a slippery slope is missing. A slippery slope argument states that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact. My argument was that overemphasis on a literal 6 day creation and/ or a 100% uber-literal reading of Genesis 1-3 will, more often than not, have a more negative affect on evangelism than if we only require a person to assent to the underlying principles and then push ahead to the Gospel itself. If my argument is a slippery slope then my first premise (we should abandon uber-literal interpretations of creation as a requirement for initial faith) must lead to some major negative impact. How? I don't see that spelled out. It is implied that my thoughts might lead to an abandonment of the deity of Christ. If thats the point that anonymous is making, where the beef? That is to say, where are the connecting points that take my argument from point A to point B and how do they relate?

Rule 3
Don't misquote people

I never said that "theology doesn't matter." I said that "...making secondary issues the forefront of one's evangelical convictions can be far more harmful than helpful."

Rule 4
When you disagree with someone, that doesn't necessarily make them a heretic.

Then, in the middle of the post I get questioned (feels like an accusation) about my agreement with the Mormons. How this comes up...??? We went from my argument regarding Genesis 1-3 to talking about the nature of Christ and his relationship to God. It looks sorta like a minor ad hominem since it doesn't get flushed out with any explanation, but instead simply comes out of left field.

Rule 5
Learn abot someone before you assume their beliefs

If the question about my willingness to go knock on doors with Mormons is a serious one (as opposed to a theological insult) then anonymous didn't do their homework about me very well. A 10 minute browsing of my blog would indicate that I am fully committed to the tenets of Reformed Faith, which certainly include a far different view of Jesus than Mormons and a rigidity about holding firm to the penal substitutionary atonement of the god-man Christ as the Gospel message.

Rule 6
Don't try and be super-spiritual

The last sentence in the comment informs me that I rely too much on my own reason and that that I need to get with the program (as anonymous is, I persume) and only trust in the Word of God. Of course, I thought I did hold to revelation pretty well. I actually thought that my quest to bring both natural and special revelation in agreement so that we can get to the Gospel was God-honoring. It always seemed more God-honoring and Christ-centered to me to work with Jesus at the core of evangelism than to try and convince non-believers that all science is false and the world is 6,000 years old before I could tell them the Good News. Using the "you are not spiritual enough" argument is a last ditch effort when one realizes that they don't actually have a counter-point.

FINALLY, the comment by anonymous is truthfully a perfect example of what I said in my original post "Why I am not a YEC." Too many believers get hung up on uber-literal Genesis interpretations and they make them of equal weight with the essential aspects of the faith. When clear-thinking is abandoned for knee-jerk reactions, structured arguements are dropped and baseless critical remarks ensue.
_______________________

I hope that anonymous reads this reply and that he/ she will know that I love them as fellow members of the body as they seek to defend truth even as I think that they are deeply confused about theological priority and thoughtful debate. I also hope that they will use the suggested rules to compose another response that more accurately explains why my thoughts are unbiblical and how they contribute to a low-Christology.

I also hope that my other readers will benefit from this exchange as they seek to study Scripture, pray about truth, and trust in God's grace.

My apologies if anything in this reply has been antagonistic towards anonymous. I really don't intend to slam the individual, just to critique the comment that was made. However, I know that I struggle with my own argumenative nature and how I can best express what I believe is truth "in love." I am usually somewhat aggressive in my manner (thanks to the Marines) and I have a hard time being pastoral with my advice.  Hopefully, I have not been rude in this post.  I look forward to more (hopefully helpful) discussion.

5 Hard Questions

The following 5 questions are the ones that I have had the most difficulty with in life.  Several were questions that I had before I came to faith, some are things I still struggle with.

I didn't get near satisfactory answers to these until I came to the Reformed understanding of biblical truth.  I have attempted to provide the answers as I have now grasped them, in the case that my thoughts might help you or spark new thoughts.

1)  Who made God?

"Noone.  Its a category error.  You can't classify an eternal and timeless being in the same terms with the temporal state that he has created.  God is outside time, thus there was noone or nothing 'before' him."

2)  How did people before Jesus get saved?

"By grace thru faith in Jesus, just like us.  God elected them and they subsequently exhibited faith.  We both  have the same object as our faith - the promise of God to redeem his people. The difference is that we (of the post New-Testament era) have seen that promise in the flesh as Jesus.  Those in the B.C. world looked forward to the incarnation, but they still had faith in God's promise."

3)  What about people who never hear of Jesus?

"They will sadly perish in their sins, as we all deserve.  God doesn't save everyone - if he did so, his justice would be eclipsed by his love and both must be displayed.  If one never heard of Jesus they cannot be saved.  We should be affected by this news to take up the banner of the Great Commission and bring the good news to all people."

4)  Why does God allow horrific crimes to occur?

"Well...this one is hard.  We do know that he has subjected the world to this fallen state, but he has done so in hope.  We also know that he works the evil acts of men for ultimate good.  These things tell us that he has a plan and its the best plan to show his glory and draw his elect to himself.  Not very satisfying in the midst of great loss perhaps, but true and worth holding firm to."

5)  How can I be sure that I am saved?

"You intellectually believe biblical truths, your actions begin to look more and more like those of Jesus, the ultimate joy of your heart becomes glorifying Christ, others observing you confirm your redemption, and an inward testimony of the Holy Spirit brings you peace."

Paul was married!

A new and profound exegetical Biblical Study has now proven that the Apostle Paul was actually married.

See HERE

(I kid, I kid)

The Right-Hand Side...

I am not a great writer.  I write in far too conversational a tone, I do not proof read before I post, and I tend to ramble.

However, I see my blog as a two part entity.  Yes, I try and provide my thoughts to those of you who care - but, I also try and provide resources to you (my reader) of people far better at this than I am.

If you haven't yet, be sure and navigate to my actual blog.  On the right hand side of the page I have over 50 links to various blogs that are great reading.  The title of the most recent post is also there for each one.

I also have a small section of webpage links to some interesting sites further down on the right.

Finally, be sure and check out our other blogs:

http://everettandean.blogspot.com/
Our boys blog (I have been remiss at updating this)

http://simplyyoursphotography.blogspot.com/
Tiffany's photography
...better yet,
http://www.simplyyoursphotography.net/

http://mmaandmore.blogspot.com/
My blog on Mixed Martial Arts

http://ureact.blogspot.com/
A starter blog to introduce my new self-protection system
coming in 2010

Was Adam a literal man?

Back in October, I posted this blog "Why I am not a Young Earth Creationist."

The point of my post was to say that too many evangelicals plant a flag on YEC and then stand willing to make it of first importance (or so it seems to me.)

I wrote to say that making secondary issues the forefront of one's evangelical convictions can be far more harmful than helpful.

Ultimately, how long it took God to create the world is not an essential point of doctrine.  Maybe it was 6 days...although natural revelation seems to suggest otherwise.  However, if it took 14 billion years - so what?  The emphasis is that GOD created.  I'm even willing to concede theistic evolution if it gets me past the issue and on to the Christian nucleus.

That is, I want to clearly point out that I refuse to make creation an issue because I want to be able to stay off the rabbit trails and get right to the Gospel (which is the core of our faith).  I want to talk with people about Jesus instead of explaining my view on if men and dinosaurs lived contemporaneously.

Recently, Ben posted a comment/ question to my post:
If you have non-literal days, was Adam a literal man?

Let me say a quick word about my thoughts on that here.

YES, Adam was certainly a literal man.

How was he created...???  The Bible says that God made him from dust and breathed life into him.  Pretty vague.  Maybe it was special, independent, supernatural creation.  Maybe God used natural processes to bring forth the first homosapiens and then "breathed" a soul/ spirit into that flesh. 

I am not sure on how, but I definately believe that Adam was literal.  Even though I don't think God made all things in 6 human days, I do think that God made all of creation.  Likewise, even though I am unsure of how God made Adam, I think he did make him.

I didn't talk about this issue in my post because there is no evidence to suggest that God making Adam in a one time act of imagination or thru natural means would go aganist natural revelation, as one faces in the creation debate.  One choice is simply unproveable, the other could be fairly consistent with humanistic fossils.

T push further, I am also unclear about how exact the Eden story is.  Could parts of it be simplified or embellished for literary flare...yeah, they could.  Moses could have conveyed the creation story (which I believe he was inspired to write about) in a narrative that isn't 100% literal...does that necessarily impact the truth therein...no.

The early chapters of Genesis tell us 6 main things:

1)  God DID make man (and woman).
2)  God made them in His image
3)  God made them in fellowship with Himself
4)  Through their own volition (at the temptation of Satan), they chose to leave the fellowship of God
5)  This choice impacted all their descendents and we are therefore born into the curse of sin
6)  God promised and planned to restore that broken relationship

The whole rest of the Bible tells the story of His love and our redemption at His hands.

Those 6 things listed above MUST be literally true in their content (even if the account is overly-colorful) or else the rest of the story means nothing.

If Adam wasn't literal, or if the fall wasn't real - we wouldn't need Jesus.
We do need Jesus.
Therefore, Adam was literal and the fall was real.

Try that syllogism with other stuff:

If a 6 day creation isn't literal - we wouldn't need Jesus.
We do need Jesus.
Therefore, the 6 day creation is literal
NO

Does the thing we are debating about impact the reality or importance of Christ's death on the cross and subsequent ressurection? - Will our debate topic actually impact whether or not a person understands their own personal need for redemption? If not, I call it secondary and I ask that we not get hung up on it, lest we lose track of our ultimate joy in Jesus and our ultimate mission in spreading the Good News.

Thats my message about YEC and the literalness (is that a word) of the early Genesis accounts.

Prayer Please...

I am not very good at having a solid, intimate relationship with Christ in prayer and through deed.

I am not saying that I don't believed that I am saved. I am about 98% sure that I have been redeemed by Christ. What I am saying is that I, by nature, find myself too often studying about Christ, talking about Christ, attempting to persuade other about Christ - instead of spending time with Christ, talking to Him, and showing others his love by action.

I have friends who are very good at getting up early and devoting the wee hours of darkness to commune with the Lord. I am both encouraged and admonished by that. I know that I need to find a way to make time for my Saviour.

Since I was saved by grace in 2005, I have been thru a roller coaster on this subject of "quiet time". Usually I am not doing so well in the matter, but I do have occassional high points. I can see a difference in my attitude and my life when I am walking close to the Lord.

I have a tendency to trust people easy, then get hurt by them, then pull away from them and retreat into my head. I am afraid that I do that with God sometimes. Maybe I find excuses for finding quality time because I don't want to get close to Jesus, have something go wrong, and then be tempted to get angry at Him. If I keep an intellectual distance, the pain associated with the difficult times seems less.

I know this is a problem. I know that I need prayer.

That said, I am grateful that I have been gifted by God to use the gift of my mind to discover the biblical truths of who he is in the past 1.5 years. Through an introduction to Reformed Theology and my first ever study all the way through Scripture, I am convinced that I understand the true narrative of God's redemptive plan. I have Truth...now I need to work on Spirit with the Spirit's help.

While I won't be posting my prayers to God on my blog, I do hope that part of my life will become more steady and more transparent as well.

I absolutely stink at praying. I am almost fatalist in my view of sovereignty (and I do know thats not biblical) - which colors my attitude towards praying for myself and others. I need to follow the biblical mandates to pray and I need to do so in joy, not for duty's sake.

I want to be a model of prayer for my family and so far, I have not even come close...:(

I also need to find ways to reach out and love those around me in deed. I am good at proclaiming truth, but I am not good at coupling that with demonstrative affection for the person's needs. I hope that I will have my eyes opened to see future opportunities for that type of action.

I know people who sacrifice much of their time and resource to make a real impact in the lives of those in need. I admire their selflessness. On the flipside, I allow myself to be consumed with me and my inner circle to the point that I exclude those outside most of the time. Not good.

I am also ashamed of my track record in giving. It is hard to make life work on $35,000 a year for a family of four - but that is no excuse to be so dismal in my giving to the local church. The widow didn't have much and she gave all she had. I imagine that this issue is just another aspect of my personal distance from the Lord and my lack of actual trust in Him for daily life.

I really pray that I will have breakthru in 2010 for deep relationship with Christ in prayer, played out in deed. I have had amazing advancement in knowledge of God thru all of 2009, if I can get that same impact in my heart (rather than my head) it will be transformative for my life and for my family.

Please pray that God will begin softening my distant heart in the rest of 2009 so that he might draw me close to Himself in 2010 for the advancement of His Kingdom and the magnification of His Name.

National Satan Awareness Day

I didn't know...

From Stuff Christians Like

20 Best Theological Works

From Feeding On Christ

From 1 down to 20
_________________________

Geerhardus Vos Biblical Theology

Geerhardus Vos The Pauline Eschatology

Geerhardus Vos The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews

Geerhardus Vos The Eschatology of the Old Testament

Jonathan Edwards A History of the Work of Redemption

T. Desmond Alexander From Eden to the New Jerusalem

John Fesko Last Things First

O. Palmer Robertson The Israel of God

O. Palmer Robertson The Christ of the Covenants

O. Palmer Robertson God’s People in the Wilderness

G. K. Beale The Temple and the Churches Mission

Theophilus Herter The Abrahamic Covenant in the Gospels

William J. Dumbrell Covenant and Creation

O. Palmer Robertson Christ of the Prophets

Ray Ortland Jr. God’s Unfaithful Wife

T. Desmond Alexander From Paradise to Promised Land

Michael Horton Covenant and Eschatology

Meredith G. Kline Kingdom Prologue

Dennis Johnson Him We Proclaim

Edmund Clowney Preaching Christ in All the Scriptures
_____________________
 
I imagine that Fites is digging this list. 

I signed it...

WHAT:
The Manhattan Declaration:
A Call of Christian Conscience

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.
We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:
the sanctity of human life
the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
the rights of conscience and religious liberty.
Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
 
WHY:
To quote Ligon Duncan:
"I believe that it is important for individuals from the major quadrants of the historic Christian tradition to speak on these pressing matters in solidarity.  Furthermore, I believe that the explicit assertions and emphasis of the documents relate only to areas of principled social-ethical agreement between evangelicals and non-evangelicals."
 
HOW:
Go HERE
________________________________
 
There has been lots of controvery regarding this declaration and men I respect have come down on both sides of the issue.  I completely understand the concern that many have regarding this document and the potential for it to be seen as an agreement on the Gospel. 
 
To be clear, I do not agree with the Arminian, the Catholic, or the Orthodox views on what the Gospel is or on what Justification is.  However, I do find agreement with these "believers" regarding the 3 things expressed in the Manhattan Declaration and I think it is vital to fight for such values - even as I understand that the true mission of Christians is not to subdue the world with good morality, but to transform the world by the message of Jesus' death and ressurection as a penal substitutionary atonement.
 
I feel that I can both focus on the Great Commission as my first priority and still stand united with those whom I disagree for the sake of proclaiming the biblical truth about pressing moral issues of our day.
 
Thats why I signed it...how about you?

Krampus

At least this weird Christmas tradition hasn't caught on in America yet. 

Meet Krampus, the companion of St Nicholas.  He is responsible for scaring the "bad" kids while Santa gives gifts to the good kids.

Europe has issues...

Santa?

What do you do about about balancing Santa with the Nativity during this holiday season?

I have friends who hold different views ranging from not telling their kids about Santa at all (cause they don't want to lie to the kids) and not talking about Santa (cause they think he is a secular invention that overshadows Christ) to those who run with all things Santa (and put Jesus at a distant second place).

I grew up with the Santa myth. I don't remember thinking that my parents were horrible lying monsters when I found out the truth. I also have no reason to believe that their advocacy of the jolly old elf caused me to be less likely to trust in Christ. I didn't come to faith as a child but that was due to my parents lack of engagement with the faith in general, not because I was disillusioned by the falsehood of Santa.

Therefore, I have decided (with my wife) that we would carry on the Santa tradition in our house. We have a couple of conditions though...

- Santa is always secondary to the birth of Jesus. Thus we keep our Little People Nativity right next to the tree, this allows us to actually play out the nativity story with our boys on a regular basis, thus opening the door for conversation about who Jesus is.

- We never stress the "better be good" aspect of Santa. I think that notion is pure legalism that actually could impact a childs understanding of grace in later years. For us, Santa brings presents regardless of behavior.

I have been pretty happy with this middle ground where we engage with the culture and also keep Christ central. I wonder how others view the issue and what basis they have for their take on it.

___________________

In a related note:

- We were watching "Santa Buddies" with Everett the other night and I got pretty upset inside. The whole movie is about a talking puppy who is the dog version of Santa Claus. He decided he doesn't want that job and he tries to go live a normal dog life. In his absence the North Pole falls apart. Elves and other dogs work hard to get him back to the Pole so that Christmas can continue. The moral of the movie centers on learning that the "true meaning of Christmas" is about selfless giving and not selfish receiving.

Uh...no. The true meaning of Christmas is the birth of Christ, which could be seen as God's great gift to us I guess. Unfortunately, the movie never mentions Jesus. It struck me wrong.

However, we did watch the "Nativity Story" movie as a family the other week. Everett liked the wise men and he is funny imitating Mary as she gave birth with squinted eyes and grunts.

- Lastly, I saw this commercial for something called "Elf on a Shelf." The premise is that Santa's elf sits on your mantle and keeps track of your behavior thru December. If you're good, he'll report that to Santa and you get gifts...obviously, if you are bad - nothing.

Holy mackrel. That is freaky to me regardless of the theological issues I have with it. I can see his elf eyes following me around the room now...

Afghanistan

Usually I write on theological issue and I leave politics at the door.

Please allow me a quick digression this time...

Pres. Obama sending more troops to Afghanistan is a mistake.

This is an unwinnable war which is costing far too much in both our soldier's blood and our nation's coffers.

When you look at the lack of preexistent infrastructure, the corrupt government, the incredibly harsh terrain, the guerilla nature of the enemy, the Pakistani location of the enemy leadership, the experiences of other major powers when they fought in Afghanistan, etc...

When you add up all of those factors, you get an impossible victory.  We can't nation build in that place (and Obama did agree to that), but we can't fool ourselves into thinking that we can hang around just abit longer and prepare the Afghans to run the country on their own either.

We should pull out all combat troops immediately, minus special forces.  We should leave the special forces there with air support to continue surgical strikes.  This will prevent the country from becoming a "safe haven" for terrorists again.

We can leave trainers in country as well if we want to try and lend the Afghan army/ police a helping hand.  We CANNOT continue to put our boys in the combat arms out on the front lines to be killed and wounded for a vague mission that has unattainable goals.

Afghanistan will make Iraq look easy.  We need to get out now.

Intervention

Sometimes people will balk at the Reformed doctrines of total depravity and unconditional election. 

These teachings can be summed up as "we are so addicted and entranced by sin that we will never exercise our will to turn towards God - thus, God must sovereignly act to elect and save those whom he will aganist their natural desires"

Those offended will argue that such beliefs equate to God raping our free will.  I would offer another way to look at it.

You ever see that TV show Intervention?  Its on A&E I think.  The premise revolves around drug and alcohol addicts who are far gone on a self-destructive road.  As a last resort, the family of the person turns towards psychologists and doctors to ask for an intervention.

The crew comes in and attempts to persuade the addict that they need help.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

It seems to me that we are all addicts.  We are addicted to sin and filth.  God is our loving Father who desires to see us "clean."  Who can't understand that?

The big difference is that God doesn't have a "sometimes" success rate.  By his nature, if he will it, it occurs.  Thus - God sees our need for intervention and he comes to us and makes us clean (the the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross)

Its not volitional rape, its overwhelming love and amazing grace.  Thank God that he saw fit to make him who did not knwo sin, sin.  That means we might become righteous in God's eyes and therefore able to enter his presence with a new, pure, heart.

Thanks Lord for intervening in my life.

Pope's Post

My friend Andrew, who was my first mentor in the faith, recently wrote a blog that I wanted to link to here.  I hope he is not offended by my distibution of his material, but I had to share his story.

Andrew and I will often disagree on secondary and tertiary issues in Christianity, but he is an excellent writer and an interesting chap.  This blog of his details how 2009 went for his family and what God has shown him through the year.

Take the time to read his post HERE!
__________________________________________

Hebrews 12: 3-11

Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted.  In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood.  And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons?


“My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by him.
For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.”

It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
____________________________________________

Dominion

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Genesis 1:28


Yesterday was my first time hunting.  


My friend John from church asked me to join him on his family land near LaGrange and I met up with him around 3pm at their camp.  We shot a test round from by rifle (to check the zero) before we headed into the thick.


My uncle died in 2006 and I inhereited his Ruger M77 (300 WinMag) and a Glock .45 - as well as a Mossberg shotgun (don't try to break in my house :)

The rifle zeroed good and we were off.  John took me out to a big feed plot and he showed me the tree stand I was supposed to climb into.  That was the most nerve-racking part of the trip.  I am not overly fond of heights and I was definitely worried about getting us a foot wide ladder thats chained to a medium sized pine tree.  But, at the end of the harrowing climb, I was seated comfortably.


John has two way radios and we were able to quietly chat about life as we sat up in the trees on opposite ends of the plot.  Time passed quick the first hour, then the cold began to show itself and we were both quiet until just before dark.  


Right as the light began to fade into that haze of twilight, two deer came out onto the plot about 100 yards and 180 degrees of me.  I heard John say "theres deer on the field" and then he asked me if I had a shot.  I replied "yes" and he said "take it."  


As I was quietly inching my rifle into place, two more deer arrived.  Now there were 4 deer on the plot and I was in place.  John told me to "shoot the biggest one."  I lined up the crosshairs and began a slow steady trigger squeeze.  I was terribly excited and my breathing was way too sporadic to hit my target (or so I thought).  


BANG!


The gun went off, the deer jumped up in the air and ran off the field.  I observed her flight and I was for sure that I missed.  Then I heard John shoot twice.  I realized that deer were still on the field and I told John as much - he replied "Shoot them!"


I reploaded and set back up.  Unfortunately, by the time I was ready again - the field was clear.  I began to talk with John and tell him that I felt I had missed.  Just then, two deer peeked out back onto the feed plot about 80 yards away from me.  I took aim on one of them  and hastily fired.


BANG!


I was positive that I hit him even as he ran off.  The crash in the woods just ahead of me confirmed my shot.  John radioed me to carefully get down outta the stand.  We met up on the field.


Tracking consumed about an hour.  We found both of my deer via the blood trails.  We also found a lobe of liver from one of them which had fallen out.  As we looked them over we pieced together the scenario...


My first shot was dead on and it felled a 140 lbs doe.  

My second shot went in at an angle and it exited low and back (making it a gut shot - hence the organs falling out)  That kill was a young buck - which is a no-no...of course, in the low light I thought it was a female.

Not bad for my first time out John told me.


We went back to the camp and I soon realized that "the fun ends when you pull the trigger."  Skinning, gutting, and slinging around dead deer is less than stimulating.  I was bloody up to my elbow and the smell was horrible.  


We ended the night by dropping the deer off at a local deer processing establishment.  Meat should be ready middle of the week.


THE VERDICT:


I enjoyed the hunt.  I do not consider hunting a sport however.  I consider it a skill.  Its a skill that is mostly dead in the "civilized" west and I was happy to reconnect with some of that pioneer spirit.  I imagine that I will pester John to go once a year in the future.  


Two shots, two kills...the US Marines taught me well.  Semper Fi.


Thanks John!

Reformed Rap

Most of you have tomorrow off...spend 15 minutes exploring my favorite think to listen to at work...Reformed Rap.  I know it sounds cheesy given all the hokey Christian music out there - but you might be surprised.

Reach Records is the home of my favorite artists: Lecrae and the 116 Clique

http://www.reachrecords.com/

Here is an example of 116 Clique. They did an album where they rapped each of Paul's 13 epistles.

This link is to the rap on Titus:




And to the Colossians rap:



LeCrae teamed up with John Piper for the "Don't Waste your Life" campaign:

http://dontwasteyourlife.com/

This is the music video associated with that:



Here is Thabiti Anyabwile discussing Reformed Rap:

http://www.youtube.com/user/DGdwyl#p/u/11/Sp-8-C9954Q

Also, there are some really good local guys, The Plumbline Collective. A guy at Southpoint works with one of the members of that group.

Check them out:



AND

http://theplumblinecollective.com/

If you want more info or if you want me to burn you a sample CD, let me know.

T-Giving Cartoons

Thanksgiving

Thankful to Who
Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!
2 Cor 9:15

Thankful for What
But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.
2 Thess 2:13

Thankful When
...giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Eph 5:20

Ultimately Why Thankful
For it is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and more people it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God.
2 Cor 4:15

How to express Thanksgiving
...but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.
Phil 4:6
Out of them shall come songs of thanksgiving, and the voices of those who celebrate.
Jer 30:19a
___________________________________

Like so many of our American holidays, Thanksgiving has largely become a commercialized and humanistic model of familial idolatry.

Break that mold tomorrow. 

Be purposeful in centering your day around thanksgiving to God.  Eat lots of food, hang with seldom seen relatives, watch football...but don't let Jesus slip into obscurity as you do those things. 

Don't be like those of Romans 1:21
"For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened."

Make your blessing (grace) before the big meal count.  Use that 30 seconds when everyone is willing to close their eyes and listen to lavish praise and honor on our glorious king.  Without the gift of His Son, the notion of thanksgiving would be of much less importance.

Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!
2 Cor 9:15

Great Resource!

The H. Henry Meeter Center for Calvin Studies has funded a project at Calvin College that looks to be of monumental importance to theologians, students, pastors, and Christian intellectuals.

Click HERE to go to the "Post-Reformation Digital Library"

As they say on their webpage...

Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerum. Quid enim est aetas hominis, nisi ea memoria rerum veterum cum superiorum aetate contexitur? Cicero, Orator XXXIV [120].


translated:
"Not knowing what happened before you were born is to be stuck in childhood forever. What does a person's life amount to without the historical consciousness that weaves one's life into the life of earlier generations?"

Somethings not right...

I took a momentary break from scanning documents this morning to look up some gift ideas for myself.  This time of year people are always asking what I want for Christmas - much of that has already been decided for 2009...

We're getting a Nintendo Wii from my parents, a video camcorder from my wife's parents, and gift cards from my wife's siblings.  That leaves the gifts from my aunt and the gifts that my wife and I exchange to think about.

I looked over a few pages of MMA fight tee shirts.  I liked this one from Fairtex Muay Thai.

Then I thought about getting a shirt to express my faith.  I headed over to cafe press and found this nice, simple tee that captures the 5 points of biblical truth in subtle way.

As I kept looking at the webpage for Reformed apparel, I ran across something that disturbed me...

Yes, those are TULIP panties...correction, TULIP thongs!

I am all for sex.  Its an awesome gift of God in marriage to bring spouses closer together (and make babies of course!)

I am just fine with a wife wearing a thong or anything else she wants to don for her man...well most anything else...

Something seems wrong to me about putting a TULIP on a thong.  Why would one do that?

I am sort of a theological nerd, but seeing a TULIP on my wife's underwear would NOT be stimulating.

I know we are suppossed to do whatever we do to the glory of God, but some things are best left at the proverbial theological threshold.

Weird.

The New Gospel

I saw this at Kevin DeYoung's blog this morning.  Worth a look. - sorry for the weird format, can't get it straight??
_____________________

The Gospel, Old and New

Have you heard the New Gospel? It’s not been codified. It’s not owned by any one person or movement. But it is increasingly common.

The New Gospel generally has four parts to it.

It usually starts with an apology: “I’m sorry for my fellow Christians. I understand why you hate Christianity. It’s like that thing Ghandi said, ‘why can’t the Christians be more like their Christ?’ Christians are hypocritical, judgmental, and self-righteous. I know we screwed up with the Crusades, slavery, and the Witch Trials. All I can say is: I apologize. We’ve not give you a reason to believe.”

Then there is an appeal to God as love: “I know you’ve seen the preachers with the sandwich boards and bullhorns saying ‘Repent or Die.’ But I’m here to tell you God is love. Look at Jesus. He hung out with prostitutes and tax collectors. He loved unconditionally. There is so much brokenness in the world, but the good news of the Bible is that God came to live right in the middle of our brokenness. He’s a messy God and his mission is love. ‘I did not come into the world to condemn the world,’ that’s what Jesus said (John 3:17). He loved everyone, no matter who you were or what you had done. That’s what got him killed.”


The third part of the New Gospel is an invitation to join God on his mission in the world: “It’s a shame that Christians haven’t shown the world this God. But that’s what we are called to do. God’s kingdom is being established on earth. On earth! Not in some distant heaven after we die, but right here, right now. Even though we all mess up, we are God’s agents to show his love and bring this kingdom. And we don’t do that by scaring people with religious language or by forcing them into some religious mold. We do it by love. That’s the way of Jesus. That’s what it means to follow him. We love our neighbor and work for peace and justice. God wants us to become the good news for a troubled planet.”

And finally, there is a studied ambivalence about eternity: “Don’t get me wrong, I still believe in life after death. But our focus should be on what kind of life we can live right now. Will some people go to hell when they die? Who am I to say? Does God really require the right prayer or the right statement of faith to get into heaven? I don’t know, but I guess I can leave that in his hands. My job is not to judge people, but to bless. In the end, God’s amazing grace may surprise us all. That’s certainly what I hope for.”

Why So Hot?

This way of telling the good news of Christianity is very chic. It’s popular for several reasons

1. It is partially true. God is love. The kingdom has come. Christians can be stupid. The particulars of the New Gospel are often justifiable.


2. It deals with strawmen. The bad guys are apocalyptic street preachers, Crusaders, and caricatures of an evangelical view of salvation.

3. The New Gospel leads people to believe wrong things without explicitly stating those wrong things. That is, Christians who espouse the New Gospel feel safe from criticism because they never actually said belief is unimportant, or there is no hell, or that Jesus isn’t the only way, or that God has no wrath, or that there is no need for repentance. These distortions are not explicitly stated, but the New Gospel is presented in such a way that non-believers could, and by design should, come to these conclusions. In other words, the New Gospel allows the non-Christian to hear what he wants, while still providing an out against criticism from other Christians. The preacher of the New Gospel can always say when challenged, “But I never said I don’t believe those things.”

4. It is manageable. The New Gospel meets people where they are and leaves them there. It appeals to love and helping our neighbors. And it makes the appeal in a way that repudiates any hint of judgmentalism, intolerance, or religiosity. This is bound to be popular. It tells us what we want to hear and gives us something we can do.

5. The New Gospel is inspirational. This is what makes the message so appealing to young people in particular. They get the thrill and purpose of being part of a big cause, without all the baggage of the Church’s history, doctrine, and hard edges. Who wouldn’t want to join a revolution of love?

6. The New Gospel has no offense to it. This is why the message is so attractive. The bad guys are all “out there.” This can be a problem for any of us. We are all prone to soft-pedaling the gospel, only presenting the attractive parts and failing to mention where Christ does not just comfort but also confronts. And it must confront more than the sins of others. It is far too easy to use the New Gospel as a way to differentiate yourself from all the bad Christians. This makes you look good and confirms to the non-Christians that the obstacle to their commitment lies with the hypocrisy and failure of others. There is no talk of repentance or judgment. There is no hint that Jesus was killed, not so much for his inclusive love as his outrageous Godlike claims (Matt. 26:63-66; 27:39-43). The New Gospel only talks of salvation in strictly cosmic terms. In fact, the door is left wide open to imagine that hell, if it even exists, is probably not a big threat for most people.

Why So Wrong?
It shouldn’t be hard to see what is missing in the new gospel. What’s missing is the old gospel, the one preached by the Apostles, the one defined in 1 Corinthians 15, the one summarized later in The Apostles’ Creed.
“But what you call the New Gospel is not a substitute for the old gospel. We still believe all that stuff.”
Ok, but why don’t you say it? And not just privately to your friends or on a statement of faith somewhere, but in public? You don’t have to be meaner, but you do have to be clearer. You don’t have to unload the whole truck of systematic theology on someone, but to leave the impression that hell is no big deal is so un-Jesus like (Matt. 10:26-33). And when you don’t talk about the need for faith and repentance you are very un-apostolic (Acts 2:38; 16:31)

“But we are just building bridges. We are relating to the culture first, speaking in a language they can understand, presenting the parts of the gospel that make the most sense to them. Once we have their trust and attention, then we can disciple and teach them about sin, repentance, faith and all the rest. This is only pre-evangelism.”
Yes, it’s true, we don’t have to start our conversations where we want to end up. But does the New Gospel really prime the pump for evangelism or just mislead the non-Christian into a false assurance? It’s one thing to open a door for further conversation. It’s another to make Christianity so palatable that it sounds like something the non-Christian already does. And this is assuming the best about the New Gospel, that underneath there really is a desire to get the old gospel out.

Paul’s approach with non-Christians in Athens is instructive for us (Acts 17:16-34). First, Paul is provoked that the city is so full of idols (16). His preaching is not guided by his disappointment with other Christians, but by his anger over unbelief. Next, he gets permission to speak (19-20). Paul did not berate people. He spoke to those who were willing to listen. But then look at what he does. He makes some cultural connection (22-23, 28), but from there he shows the contrast between the Athenian understanding of God and the way God really is (24-29). His message is not about a way of life, but about worshiping the true God in the right way. After that, he urges repentance (30), warns of judgment (31), and talks about Jesus’ resurrection (31).


The result is that some mocked (32). Who in the world mocks the New Gospel? There is nothing not to like. There is no scandal in a message about lame Christians, a loving God, changing the world, and how most of us are most likely not going to hell. This message will never be mocked, but Paul’s Mars Hill sermon was. And keep in mind, this teaching in Athens was only an entre into the Christian message. This was just the beginning, after which some wanted to hear him again (32). Paul said more in his opening salvo than some Christians ever dare to say. We may not be able to say everything Paul said at Athens all at once, but we certainly must not give the impression in our “pre-evangelism” that repentance, judgment, the necessity of faith, the importance of right belief, the centrality of the cross and the resurrection, the sinfulness of sin and the fallenness of man–the stuff that some suggest will be our actual evangelism–are outdated relics of a mean-spirited, hurtful Christianity.

A Final Plea

Please, please, please, if you are enamored with the New Gospel or anything like it, consider if you are really being fair with your fellow Christians in always throwing them under the bus. Consider if you are preaching like Jesus did, who called people, not first of all to a way of life, but to repent and believe (Mark 1:15). And as me and my friends consider if we lack the necessary patience and humility to speak tenderly with non-Christians, consider if your God is a lopsided cartoon God who never takes offense at sin (because sin is more than just un-neighborliness) and never pours out wrath (except for the occasional judgment against the judgmental). Consider if you are giving due attention to the cross and the Lamb of God who died there to take away the sin of the world. Consider if your explanation of the Christian message sounds anything like what we hear from the Apostles in the book of Acts when they engage the world.

This is no small issue. And it is not just a matter of emphasis. The New Gospel will not sustain the church. It cannot change the heart. And it does not save. It is crucial, therefore, that our evangelical schools, camps, conferences, publishing houses, and churches can discern the new gospel from the old.

The Gospel in 3 words...

“Were I asked to focus the New Testament message in three words, my proposal would be adoption through propitiation, and I do not expect ever to meet a richer or more pregnant summary of the gospel than that.”
—J.I. Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove, IL: 1993), 214

(I grabbed this from Of First Importance)

evangelicals/ catholics NOT together

The new issue of Christianity Today arrived in the mail this week. It contains an article titled "Not all Evangelicals and Catholics Together." The article explores the renewed debate on justification between the two facets of the faith.

It brought to mind something I have long tried to comprehend. Despite my play-acting on this blog, I am no theologian and I have a difficult time grasping the nuiansces between Protestant and Catholic views of salvation. I am hoping to give a brief sketch of my thoughts here and the I will stand back and wait for some of my friends (Adam, Doc, Aaron) to weigh in on the matter and set me straight!

I think this is an important issue because I sense that the two sides see the issue more differently than the vast majority of people realize. I also think its important because we need to understand what is believed in each camp to make sound judgments regarding who is a (duh,duh,duh) heretic. Through the years each side has accussed the other of being outside the true faith. I am undecided on the issue of whether or not I think Catholicism is unbiblical. Dialogue here may help sway me one way or the other.

I have a rudimentary understanding of this...

In Protestant theology, we are saved by grace alone thru faith alone in Christ alone. That is determined to mean that by God's grace, Christ died and took our sin upon himself for punishment, then he rose from the grave after conquering death and "imputed" his righteousness to us as a holy covering. In this imputation he doesn't just forgive us for being dirty as we stand before him dirty - he actually washes us and declares that we were never dirty. This declaration is the "justification" of our soul before the Father as worthy to be in his family. Its a one time deal, many Protestants can refer to that moment of "justification" in their life when they were "saved" by God...in obedient response to Christs work they expressed their faith.

So, everything that is done in Protestant soteriology is done by Christ, we have no part to play in our "justification" other than subsequent, declaratory, affirmation of what has been done for us . Afterwards, as we still live out our mortal drama, we stand as "justified sinners" - relying upon the Holy Spirit to guide our lives into a more Christ-like model. This is explained as "santification." Finally, upon our death, we come into the presence of God and all affects of sin are removed as we become wholy clean, in body and spirit, before the Father. That is our "glorification." Thus is my understanding of the basics regarding Protestant salvation.

On the other hand, I understand the Catholic view to be that Chirst does remove our sin on the cross and then he "infuses" his righteousness to us. That is, he doesn't give us his holiness that we might be seen in Gods eyes as pure as he is, he gives us his power to cooperate with God's grace. Here is why so many Catholics are accussed of seeing salvation as being of "faith and works."

This means, at least as I get it, that justification is not a one time deal. Catholics run justification and sanctification together. I think that they would argue that we are never declared pure before God until after our death - when we have finished a life of divine cooperation and when we have been purged of the last bit of our sin.

I wonder if I understand the Catholic view correctly - they say they espouse "salvation by grace alone thru faith alone," but the teaching of cooperation with grace as a necessity for salvation appears to contradict that view. If you have to cooperate, thats an addition to grace/ faith - a "Jesus plus______" position on getting saved.

SO...

Where did I get it wrong, in either view, and how can I better understand this issue?

Selling Birthdays, Smoke Rings, and a Right Hook to some Ants.

Odd title I know.  I was trying to encapsulate my weekend with a quick phrase.

On Thursday night I was up until 1:30 am getting ready for our big Friday yard sale.  Then I was up at 4:30 on Friday to finish the prep.  It paid off pretty well thought - $400.  All of that went to Tiffany for her to buy a new lens that she has been wanting for her photography business.  

The rest of Friday night was prepping for my youngest son's 1st birthday party.  We decided to host the festivities in our backyard - that required some work.  I also got up butt-early on Saturday to finish the arrangements for the celebration.  It was worth it though, things turned out GREAT!  And we made our ritualistic Chic-Fil-A birthday meal run that night for din-din.  Check out the photos HERE.

After those exhausting 2 days you might think I would go home and crash.  Not so, the fights were on...StrikeForce MMA was being broadcast live on CBS from 9 until 11 and a friend from church invited me over to watch the action on a projector - NICE.  Two other friends from church were there, and artist and an accountant.  Also present was a blog buddy I had yet to meet in person.  Good men, one and all.  I blogged about the results at one of my other thought arenas.

As Presbyterians, we enjoyed some fine brewed beverages and some tobacco in moderation.  It is so nice to belong to a denomination that loves Jesus and the Gospel so enormously while also knowing how to enjoy all of Gods good creation in responsible liberty.

In fact, it was my first foray into smoking a pipe.  I had some difficulty keeping it lit, but thats apparently par for the course as a newbie.  I certainly felt like a hobbit and that made me very happy.

On a last note, we got invaded by ants again.  They took over my boys bedroom.  I waged war on them with the Terro gel that my friend recommended.  Great stuff.  They eat it, take it back to the hive, then hours later it hardens in their belly and they die.  Its nice having dominion.

UPDATE:  I checked on-line.  The new ants are carpenter ants.  The bait might not always wipe them put completely, they have some tricks up their sleeves - I will get them though!

Prosperity Gospel in Africa

The Prosperity Gospel from The Global Conversation on Vimeo.

An Odd Couple: Keller and Kreeft

The "Handbook of Christian Apologetics: Hundreds of Answers to Crucial Questions" is a book authored by Boston College professor Peter Kreeft (Krayfth) and co-authored by R. Tacelli.

As I looked at the webpage for Tim Keller's Redeemer Presbyterian Church today, I saw this book under the recommended resources tab for Apologetics.

This book being recommended by Keller surprised me. I have this book at home, I bought it shortly after my regeneration 5 years ago (a time when I was deeply into evidentiary apologetics). Much of the book is useful, unfortunately there is a large theological problem expounded upon in the book which is very serious.

The issue which I believe is heterodox and which is advocated in "HofCA" is Christian Inclusivism. Inclusivism is the theory that why Christ is the only way to salvation, one does not need to know of him to be saved. This translates into the idea that salvation is possible for those of different religions, if they are sincere and good devotees that seek truth (as they have access to it) and strive to live a moral life, they can make it into eternal life. This indirect and unknowing way to heaven is said to still hinge on what Jesus did, even if the one saved never hears the gospel, thus the Christian moniker.

I guess I should not be terribly surprised by the fact that Kreeft holds this view. He is a Roman Catholic and this view was offically dictated at Vatican II. He does go into much further detail on this in his book "Ecumenical Jihad," which describes his belief that he will enter heaven one day to be greeted by people like Buddha, Mohammed, and Confucius. See this LINK for a review of that book. Its a sharp and thought-provoking review, be warned.

The weird thing for me is that Tim Keller is endorsing a book with Inclusivistic claims. As a PCA pastor, I know that Keller is a conservative, Reformed, exclusivist at heart. Whay he would recommend a Kreeft book is beyond me.

Of course, lots of pastors quote another inclusivists on a regular basis and they may not even know it. C.S. Lewis was also a proponent in the idea that we can see Jesus as the underlying means for salvation, if not the understood method. Another famous inclusivist is evangelist Billy Graham. See THIS interview with R. Schuller for his take on the subject.

I can't stand behind inclusivism because the Bible does not teach it. I consider inclusivism a severe misinterpretation of John 14:6 (Jesus says he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life) in light of the rest of the redemptive narrative. If hearing the gospel is unnecessary for salvation, why does Jesus command the Great Commission? Why did so many early saints die for the sake of gospel proclamation? Whats the point of making such a big deal about Jesus if people don't need to know about him to be saved?

I feel that inclusivism is a unbiblical belief that was created to justify the Amrinian view of salvation. It stems from questions like that of the tribesman in the jungle.

"What about the guy who lives in the rainforest and who never hears about Jesus - but, who worships his god(s) sincerely and who tries to live a good life?"

The traditional reformed (that is biblical) answer is that persons who do not hear and trust in the gospel message of Christ's death and resurrection as payment for their sin have not been elected into God's family. They justly perish as a result of their own rebellion, since God is obligated to save none and his grace is his to grant thru Christ alone. See the WCF 8.8 This is why the role of missions and evangelism is so important, regeneration and new birth do not take place except thru faith in the gospel. Without knowledge of Jesus it is impossible to be saved.

Since the libertarian free-will advocates could not abide by the biblical doctrines of sovereign grace and election, they interjected themselves into the equation and made salvation a choice given to us by God that we make effectual by our own decision. This presented a problem for their "tribesmen in the jungle" scenario. If salvation is no longer the sole choice of God, but rather the ultimate decision of man - then, a God who never gives tribesmen the choice of Jesus or not Jesus is unfairly damning that individual (so they would say). Therefore, they skirt the issue by saying that all men have a choice - some have knowledge of Jesus, others only have the knowledge provided to them by general revelation - in either case they can pick the right choice and be saved.

Unfortunately, this last Arminian inclusivistic idea is nowhere in the Scriptures. Putting national Israel aside for a moment (thats a different topic), no one in the NT appears to have been saved without knowing the gospel message of Christ. In fact the Word appears to be pretty clear in the opposite direction. That means that we have no good reason to believe that inclusivism is true. It may seem "nicer" to the fallen side of our nature, but its simply not truth.

At the end of the day I know that we will all eventually reference inclusivists in our messages, blogs, and the like - I just implore us to be careful about which people we quote, the quotes we use, and how deeply we endorse those individuals.

10,000 Doors

I listen to NPR on the way to/ from work each day.  Thats my only news source.  I don't spend any other time in my life hunkered down in front of TV or internet news.  I wasted years of my life, just after 9/11, glued to the 24 hours news networks...never again.

Today I was driving home and I heard a commercial on NPR for something called "10,000 Doors."  Apparently this is a new website/ movement by the United Methodist Church to "rethink church."  You can see their site HERE.

What bothered me about this radio commercial was that the tagline went like this...

"What if church was a place where God believed in you?"

I began laughing.  I know that such massive anthropocentrism isn't really funny - but, I could not help busting a gut.  I mean, how ridiculous is this joke of a thing called American Christianity.  We have so deceived ourselves in thinking that we can use religious vocabulary, regardless of theology, and call ourselves believers.

I guess that I should expect this from ardent Wesleyans.  It is a complete system that focuses on the free will of man to choose his own salvation, the logical outcome of which is simply being realized now - God is here to be our helper, we're the real center-point in the show.

Expect to see more of this in the future.  Christianity is being twisted into a social action network with passing reference to God, and sometimes Jesus.  Its a form of works-salvation that rarely mentions sin, the cross, grace, or judgement - those things that Jesus said and did so clearly.

I think that it is primarily a product of a low view of Scripture.  Folks have largely decided to read the Bible, the few who actually read it, as a nice story with lots of example of how we can be better people despite all that fairy tale stuff.  Once a person or a denomination begins to let their view of Scripture slide, they will soon deny all the essential doctrines of the faith and anthropocentric, feel-good, humanitarian assistance is all that they will have to stand for.

I'm probably ramblin' now - I am going to bed now.

Why I am not a Young-Earth Creationist

Here are 3 brief reasons that I am not a YEC...

1) It does not mesh with modern science (cosmology, astronomy, geology, etc...) Latest estimations put the planet at almost 14 billion years old. So that leaves one of three options on the table:

a) Science is wrong about all its current data and the earth is not that old, its actually 6000-10,000 years old. (The YEC view)
b) The planet was made to look old despite its young age when God made it. (This makes God a deceiver, thats unbiblical)
c) Both YEC and the deception views are wrong and the planet is very old just as science says it is.  (What seems the only answer in face of the natural and special revelation we have)

2) The creation account in Genesis does not force itself to be read uber-literally. The 6 days of creation are probably not literal days, a very sound way to translate the Hebrew word used (yom) refers to a long period of time. In any case, the account is certainly vague enough to be legitimately viewed as something besides 6 literal days. Furthermore, despite the opinions of some, a non-uber-literal reading of these passages does not seem to have any logical bearing on wether or not one accepts that God did the creating. More over, it doesn't affect an understanding of who Christ was, why he died, and that he rose again.

3) I believe that placing a huge emphasis on the age of the earth as young, loudly proclaiming that belief, and holding fast to it in the midst of overwhelming evidence...that does more to hinder the gospel than to help spread it. Too often, the world sees Young-Earthers as crackpots and superstitious wierdos who button their polos all the way up and think that humans rode on saddles attached to vegetarian dinosaurs. Since the age of the earth is a non-essential doctrine, I argue that we should take the worlds view on this into account and leave it alone.

The best thing we can do is to love people, serve their needs, and tell them the good news of a Saviour that died for them. If we can see unbelievers moving to accept the essentials of the faith, then we can have in-house discussions on the secondary and tertiary issues. To place emphasis on those non-essentials, like YEC, is to take the focus off Jesus and to actually put up walls between an unbeliever and Christ that impede that person from finding true joy.

Most often, I find that ardent YEC are more interested in being correct than in proclaiming the gospel. I would urge them to drop their hard-line stance, even if they turn out to be right, for the sake of the central message of our faith.

Reformation Day

While most people know October 31st as Halloween, it is actually the date of another holiday as well.

On a blustery day in Germany 492 years ago, a young man named Martin Luther nailed his famous "95 Theses" to the church door at Wittenberg. As we all know, this protest aganist unbiblical Catholic doctrines was the major incident that is considered to have begun the Reformation.

The break from Rome took many turns through the years, and through several of those twists the Presbyterian Church of America was born. This Reformation day I am going to be celebrating that I belong to a Christocentric, Gospel-driven, Bible-exalting denomination.

Beyond that, I am going to celebrate the battle cries of the Reformation:

Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
Sola fide ("by faith alone")
Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
Solus Christus ("Christ alone")
Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")

Thanks to the power of the Holy Spirit and the courage of a German monk, this October 31st is more than a day of fall festivaties or a ghostly night of costumes and candy. Above all, this 31st is a time for us to give thanks to God that he has provided his Son, Jesus, with a bride; and that we, the bride, are constantly being prepared (through events like the "95 Theses") to be ready for our glorious wedding banquet in the future!

Happy Reformation Day!

An Idolatry of Theology

As humans we are prone to make idols and subsequently, to worship those things above the Lord. This can happen even in the midst of miracles, as it did with the Hebrews who came out of Egypt when they made the golden calf. That means it certainly still happens today.

Idolatry is a serious offense to a sovereign God, notice the 10 Commandments. Often, we are quick to point out the idols worshipped by our culture - money, sex, TV, etc...Sometimes we will even admit to struggling with those idols in our own lives. What we hardly ever do is talk about the idols that sneak up on us because we tend to see them as inherently good things.

Family is a great example of this category. Many people have made an idol of thier family, putting it before God in their hearts. They do this because the have difficulty seeing typically good things as potential idols. Family is a good thing. God blesses marriage and childrearing. Unfortunately, we are so depraved that we find a way to twist the goodness of family into an idol before our God.

This general idea was hammered home for me in our weekly mens discipleship group on Tuesday. The discussion included the thought that we must be vigilant lest we make an idol of good men like Piper, Keller, or Driscoll. We can learn much from them about Jesus, but they are not Jesus.

Less obvious, if equally as dangerous is our potential idolatry of reformed theology/ Calvinism. I am fully committed to RT because I believe that it is the system that best captures the theology of the Bible. I am a strong believer that understanding TULIP is the best way to dig deep into God's truth and to grasp the beauty of God's grace. That said, I know that it is very easy for me to fall into a trap of idolizing RT.

I can spend hours on the subject, living inside my head and my thoughts, oblivious to the outside world. By being so enamoured by the "headiness" of RT, I think I often lose out on my complete surrender and worship of God. I see Scripture as telling us that correct theology is vital, else faith would be in vain, AND that we are to express that theological conviction is simplicity and love.

When my fascination with the doctrines of RT becomes such a preoccupation that it leads me into hostile confontation and arguement with fellow believers, rather than civil discussions for the glory of God, I make theology an idol.

When my love of RT reaches a level where I cloister myself away with a copy of "The Institutes" rather than venture out to engage the world in self-sacrifical love as I proclaim the good news, then my theology has become an idol.

I pray that God will keep me from making RT an idol even as he keeps me an advocate of its tenets.

Ultimately, I should be seeking 2 things:

- to see unbelievers saved by grace thru faith and adopted into God's family (even if they don't understand that and they come in as confused Arminian brothers)

- to see brothers in Christ stand together globally, agreeing on the essentials of the faith, and partenering in fellowship and evangelism.

Desiring to see all Christians become 5-pointers is a good thing for their growth and God's glory. Letting that desire eclipse the call that we have to proclaim simple gospel truth in love, thats when an idolatry of theology begins.

I am committing to be more aware of when I lead discussions into overly deep theological concepts and thereby I look to keep my usual conversations on basic truth and personal matters. Rather than pondering the Order of Decrees for 2 hours in our mens group,it may be better to engage in more prayer and more discussion of how each of us is really doing in life, in our personal walk with Christ, and in our efforts to proclaim the gospel to those lost around us, by word and deed.

I am thankful for the thought-provoking word I received at group on Tuesday and I pray that it will be useful in balancing my Christian life. Thanks guys.

Hinn: Holy or Haughty?

Is this a strong affirmation of the Trinity?

The one true God has revealed Himself as the eternally self-existent, self-revealed "I AM" and has further revealed Himself as embodying the principles of relationship and association, i.e., Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (from the Benny Hinn Ministries Statement of Faith)

Last night on Nightline, there was a feature segment about Binny Hinn. It was very interesting to see clip after clip of people falling down after being "healed" by Benny. Several things caught my attention...

1 - There has never been any evidence collected to show conclusively that Benny Hinn actually heals people. In fact, in the interview he admits that he doesn't have any evidence of healing. It seems to me that anyone really healing to the degree he "can" would want to have those miracles documented for God's glory...huh.

2 - When you watch the clips of Benny healing folks, you tend to see lots of people on stage who appear to be from an uneducated, low socioeconomic status. Yes, I stereotyped and no, I am not saying that means those individuals are worth less than any of us. However, it is a fact that low education, lack of finances, and akward social abilities often lead people in vulnerable and desperate situations where they can be easily confused and/or easily given in to the emotional exagerations that I believe we see at Hinn revivials...but maybe I am just overly profiling..?

3 - Even though Benny Hinn claims to have given all financial records from his ministry to the Senator who is investigating prosperity gospel leaders, Benny said that he was unable to provide the same info for public disclosure. He claimed that his witholding of the financial data was due to a confidentiality agreement with the Senator. The Senators office denied the existence of an agreement...interesting.

4 - Several times in the interview, when the questions got tough for Benny, his off-camera publicist would interupt the reporter and try to steer the conversation off of healing and finances. (Strange since that is the bread and butter of Hinn's work) For his part, Benny was akward in these moments, telling his publicist that he was glad to be asked hard questions and even reaching forward to oddly shake the reporters hand in thanks for the difficult interogatives...run away, run away!

5 - Mostly, when the reporter asked a very plain question to Benny that was along the lines of: "Do you take advantage of people in need by providing false healing for a fee?" Well, Benny begin to get really animated. He sat up, moved his hands, swallowed hard, and essentially changed his whole demeanor for that question. No where else in the show did he get so worked up. I am no expert (like Tim Roth on Lie to Me), but I am pretty sure that his body language indicated a lie.
Check it out HERE.

How can people be so duped? It blows my mind. I guess that such false ministires gain success because they appeal to the carnal selfishness inside us. Its so sad.

All that to get back to my original question, is the statement of faith regarding the Trinity by Hinn an adequate one or is it so vague as to be outside the faith? I am going with the latter.

God is Love

He sure is, and you need to understand exactly what that means. Most of the West is very confused. Try these two resources:

Buy an awesome, cheap, and short treatise on the subject


At first thought, understanding the doctrine of the love of God seems simple compared to trying to fathom other doctrines like that of the Trinity or predestination. Especially since the overwhelming majority of those who believe in God view Him as a loving being.That is precisely what makes this doctrine so difficult.

The only aspect of God's character the world still believes in is His love. His holiness, His sovereignty, His wrath are often rejected as being incompatible with a "loving" God. Because pop culture has so distorted and secularized God's love, many Christians have lost a biblical understanding of it and, in turn, lost a vital means to knowing who God is.

The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of Godseeks to restore what we have lost. In this treatment of many of the Bible's passages regarding divine love, noted evangelical scholar D. A. Carson not only critiques sentimental ideas such as "God hates the sin but loves the sinner," but provides a compelling perspective on the nature of God and why He loves as He does.

Carson blends his discourse with discussion of how God's sovereignty and holiness complete the biblical picture of who He is and how He loves.In doing away with trivialities and cliches, this work gets to the heart of this all-important doctrine from an unflinching evangelical perspective. Yet it does so without losing its personal emphasis: for in understanding more of the comprehensive nature of God's love as declared in His Word, you will come to understand God and His unending love for you more completely.

OR

listen to this mp3 for a summary

Both resources are from D.A. Carson. Dr. Carson is one of the most distinguished New Testament scholars in the world. He is a professor at TEDS and a member of The Gospel Coalition.

Help!

The Scripture records that just after Jesus death, an amazing thing occurred. A thing which really bothers me and I need to pick you guys brains for assistance. Whats up with this:

Matthew 27:52-53
The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Were these the Old Testament saints coming out of Abraham's bosom and into heaven?

How does that concur with the end times when the dead in Christ shall rise first?

If they appeared to many, why didn't it get recorded anywhere but the Gospels?

Help me figure this one out!

The Lord's Table

Today at our home church (Southpoint Presbyterian) we celebrated communion. It was the most moving instance of remembering the Lord that I have ever had. I think that the main reason for that was something our pastor said this morning.

He quoted the verse in 1 Corinthians 11 that tells us to examine ourselves before we come to the table. Too often I have spent my Sunday morning before communion dwelling on this verse and picking thru my recent (and distant) past to find some sin that would keep me from receiving the bread and wine (or grape juice..lol).

However, the way Matthew explained it this morning I found myself understanding that the requirement for coming before the table is not being blameless in our moral life - we never can be - the requirement for taking communion is that you truly place your faith in Christ and what he did for us by taking our punishment for sin.

When I stopped searching for a nit-picky reason that I was unworthy and I simply examined my heart to be sure that I did have real relationship with the Lord, I felt very unburdened and my joy in communion this morning was unlike any other time in my life. Awesome.

Justification

A short Piper video that I found helpful because he made this point:

God doesn't look at those who are "In Christ" as guilty but forgiven, he actually declares us not guilty. Wow.

lol

Piper in 1979

To celebrate or not to celebrate...

What do I feel about celebrating Halloween, the Easter Bunny, and Santa in light of my beliefs as a Christian?

Before I answer, let me say a few words about the various attitudes out there. On one side of the equation are believers who embrace the demonic side of Halloween, who give more "airtime" to the Easter Bunny than the ressurection, and who spend most of the Christmas season trapped in consumerism and Santa stories. On the other side are those individuals who feel convicted that these cultural festivities detract from the true meanings and beliefs of our faith, sometimes to the extreme of cloistering themselves away lest the secular icons taint them.

I believe that anyone who spends Halloween dressed up as a hooker or a demon is probably not walking very closely with Christ. They are not recognizing the reality of spiritual warfare, which probably indicates they don't take the bible too seriously. Likewise, if a family is so engrossed with bunnies and elves that they essentially deny the celebration and power of the nativity and the gospel - then I would have real difficulty in saying that was ok. I tend to think that such actions might even be denying Christ to some degree.

On the other hand, if someone is a sound believer with orthodox faith and they feel convicted that their family should not participate in the cultural activities - so be it. I don't believe that we should injure our conscience when it bears out decisions that are believed to be biblically-based (where the bible doesn't speak). I would also argue that no other believers should give that individual grief over their beliefs. If that person was trying to condemn others for participating in the holidays - then it may be appropriate to respectfully debate the issue, but we should never seek to make others (acting in accordance with their biblically based conscience) feel as if they are outsiders. Reasonable discussion may persuade, insults and mocking never does.

I personally advocate the Way of the Mean (thanks Aristotle!) - that is, we should seek to avoid deficiency (withdrawing from the world) and we should also seek to avoid excess (emersing ourselves in the world). We should strive to be "in the world, but not of the world." (I do not have a bible handy to give reference on that, sorry)

My family does participate in Halloween, we do talk about mythical bunnies, and yes we lie to our child about the existence of that jolly old soul. It is my belief that culture is so full of these things that we can't lock ourselves away from them. Yet, I also feel that culture is too enamoured with these things for its own good. Thus, I walk a middle road...

We celebrate Halloween with pumpkins, scarecrows, and hay rides - not ghosts, skulls, and zombies. We dress up as firemen, lions, and knights - not demons, monsters, or vampires.

We talk about the Easter Bunny as the bearer of an Easter morning fun basket - but we stay focused that the basket is to celebrate the ressurection of Jesus. Our Easter books aren't about Peter Cottontail, they are about the empty tomb.

We play the Christmas Eve game about St. Nick coming down our non-existent fireplace and we put up a Christmas tree - but, it is our Little People Nativity Set and our emphasis on the birth narative that hold the central place in our home.

I believe that you can do great damage to your children by allowing them to fall into the faithless vacumn of holiday celebration that our "Christian nation" has created. Don't start off your kids life by teaching them to value dark spirits and fairy tale creatures more than the risen Lord. When they grow up, their foundation will be weak and a storm may surely sweep them away.

I also think that damage (but much less damage) can be done by attempting to remove your kids from the culture around us. One day they will be exposed to these things and they will have to make independent, intelligent decisions on how to balance the mocking they will receive at school with the fundamentalism they were taught. Why put them in a position where it may be difficult for them to share the gospel because they are seen as "those weird Christian kids."

There is a better way, be in this world (just as Jesus ate with sinners) and yet, do not partake in those activities that overshadow or bring shame on the cross. I think we can play a role in Halloween, talk about the Easter Bunny, and allow our kids to believe in Santa without doing so to an extreme that blots out Christ. I encourage everyone to think about this issue and seek the middle ground.

Ultimately, we want to raise our kids with the ability to proclaim the Gospel. To do that they must venture into "enemy territory", our job is to equip them to survive and make headway in that battle. Sending them out unarmed AND keeping them back at base are both ineffective ways to raise the flag for the glory of God in Christ!

Shouting Match at GSU

It was relayed to me today that there was a recent student demonstration by some overly zealous evangelicals at Georgia State University this week…

Apparently, earlier this week, some Christians decided to stand in one of the main throughways at the college and display some large signs which read along the lines of: “Liars, Gays, Drunks, etc…are going to hell.”

This attracted the ire of some of the homosexual advocates on campus and there was a verbal confrontation that ensued. That confrontation sparked a protest by the homosexual supporters against the religious group the next day.

That group versus group dynamic is described as turning into a shouting match with the zealots screaming that the gays were going to hell and the gays screaming that they loved everyone, specifically “we love all you GD MFers!”

In the end everyone lost their cool and both groups looked stupid – or so I’m told.

These events influenced me to restate my position on homosexuality:

I wrote a position paper on this subject a few months ago that may be useful - I will reprint it here:
____________________________
A Position Paper on Homosexuality
November 1, 2008

Preface:
It is my intention in writing this paper to express my current opinion on the issue of homosexuality. This paper is a response to the onslaught of pro-homosexual media in America today and the bewildering confusion regarding this issue in the church. My views on this subject have been defined after much thought, prayer, and consultation of Scripture.[1] As always, please read this with the prayer that God will open your eyes to the truth of his will. Most importantly, keep your heart guarded against letting this (or any other immoral social issue) become the emphasis of your Christian walk or understanding of the faith writ large. Remember that it is the gospel of the grace of Jesus that is the "good news" which saves us from ourselves.

2 Corinthians 5:21
"For our sake (God) made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in (Jesus) we might become the righteousness of God."
____________________________
1. Homosexuality is an abomination before the Lord. It is an egregious sin in the eyes of a perfectly holy being.[2]

2. The immorality of homosexuality is not my personal opinion or a societal more. It is the recorded decision of the unchanging Lord of all creation.[3]

3. In no way should this truth be used as an excuse for abusing homosexuals either verbally or physically.[4]

4. Although homosexuality was a capital offense according to the Mosaic Law in the Old Covenant[5], it is understood that we are now removed from that theocratic system and are under a different relationship with God. We are in the New Covenant, instituted by Jesus Christ[6], wherein the moral principles (but not the punitive prescriptions) apply.

5. Homosexuality is too often the prevailing focus of Christians as we discuss and rightly discourage sexual sins. This sin is grouped with several other sexual immoralities in Scripture[7] and they are all equally grievous to the Lord as they all separate us from him if we are without Christ.[8] We must never push aside the battle against lust, fornication, adultery, masturbation, incest, etc as we address homosexuality.[9]

6. Our response to this issue in contemporary society should be to refrain from judgment on non-Christian homosexuals whom we know and to love and pray for them as well as to share the gospel with them.[10] Once they are regenerate, we should pray for the Spirit to speedily convict them of their sin and assist them to turn from that lifestyle. At the same time, we must be watchful of brethren who call themselves Christ-followers while continuing to habitually engage in immorality. In that case, church discipline may be necessary.[11]

7. Politically we may stand up against the tide of pro-homosexual propaganda coming from the Hollywood gay media lobby and the proponents of same-sex marriage; however we must always do so peacefully and graciously[12]. Dissemination of the truth is our best weapon. In this battle against declining moral values we must be bold with the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of our God.[13]
_____________________________
FAQ:

Q: Can a homosexual be a Christian?

A: Absolutely. Even after we have been justified by Christ’s blood and adopted into God’s children do we not all still sin? There is no sin that can separate us from Christ once we have been elected.[14] However, as the believer progresses in his sanctification we should see the casting off of the old flesh and a heart/ lifestyle which more closely resembles that of our Lord Jesus.[15]

Q: Can a homosexual be a leader in the church?

A: Absolutely not. The guidelines for elders, deacons, and overseers in the local church are detailed in Scripture and give a clear picture of a man who is the husband of only one wife amongst multiple other virtues.[16] Would we allow a man engaged in ongoing fornication or adultery function as a leader in the church? I imagine not. Neither should anyone who has not completely renounced their homosexual lifestyle.

Q: What about gay marriage?

A: Same-sex marriage (gays can already legally marry someone of the opposite sex) is obviously against God’s intention of a man and a woman as expressed in Genesis 2:18 and 2:24. Additionally, it serves no purpose for the state as a social contract. Benefits are bestowed upon married couples (i.e. tax breaks) because of the general expectation for the production of progeny to continue the citizenry. By nature and design, same-sex marriages cannot function in that way and therefore should not be legally recognized. Additionally, civil unions should not be granted. Once the homosexuals have all of the benefits of marriage but not the name, they will be correct in their cry of “discrimination.”
____________________________________
A final word against homosexuality for those who do not believe in God and/or the Bible:

If nature is the ultimate reality then it is clear that homosexuality was never its intent. Males and females are born with very different anatomical structures that when used according to their proper telos produce the specific result of continued life.

While some species of animal have been seen engaging in homosexual behaviors, it must be understood that those actions (results of confused stimuli) are never an exclusive “orientation”; as such a manufactured lifestyle would be evidently detrimental to the utmost concern of nature herself, the preservation and continuation of life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES:

[1] All my reading of God’s Word, and all quotes in this paper, are from the English Standard Version of the Holy Bible.

[2] Leviticus 18:22 – “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”

[3] 2 Timothy 3:16 –“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,” If the existence of God and/ or the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible is questioned at this point, the gospel message and a secular argument, which is made at the end of this paper, may be appropriate.

[4] Romans 12:17 –“Repay no one evil for evil,”

[5] Leviticus 20:13 – “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

[6] Luke 22:20 – “And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.”

[7] 1 Thessalonians 4:3 – “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;”

[8] Ephesians 2:13-16 – “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”

[9] Editorial – The tendency to be vocal in our discussion of homosexuality and not the other sins (like adultery and fornication) may be due to the prevailing number of individuals, even church members and leaders, who are participating in the unspoken sins. With premarital sex, cheating, and porn addiction on the rise our sin nature may be pushing us to ignore our own shortcomings by revealing others. We must be prayerful and repentant to prevent this occurrence.

[10] 1 Corinthians 5:12 – “For what have I to do with judging outsiders?”

[11] 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 – “Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you.’”

[12] 1 Peter 3:15-16 – “…but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect…”

[13] Ephesians 6:17 and Hebrews 4:12 – “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

[14] Romans 8:38-39 – “For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

[15] Ephesians 4:22-24 – “…to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

[16] 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9.

New Books and a Quote

I read this recently. It was not very good. Cheesy thriller with some Christian verbage included. No important meaning.



Thus I have taken a break from religious reading and ventured to the public library where I found this (it makes me excited - I like the author)


______________________________________________________

The Christian soldier must avoid two evils—he must not faint or yield in the time of fight, and after a victory he must not wax insolent and secure. When he has overcome, he is so to behave himself as though he were presently again to be assaulted. For Satan's temptations, like the waves of the sea, do follow one in the neck of the other.

—George Downame

Which translation to choose?

In honor of my "intense conversation" at men's discipleship group last night...
___________________________________________________

The Scripture tells us that "...the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart" in Hebrews 4:12.

Gods Word also tells us to take "...the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" Ephesians 6:17

Describing the Scriptures as a bladed offensive weapon is a popular metaphor in the Word. It seems pretty obvious why, the Word of God is by inherent definition powerful and logically useful for those to trust it as they seek to wage battle on the evil one and the internal evil of their fallen nature. Look at the example of Jesus temptation by Satan in the wilderness - he quoted Scripture to drive the devil away.

Therefore, just as no warrior would go into conflict with a rusty or dull sword because it would be inadequate for cutting and stabbing, I suggest that no Christian should hold up inadequate translation of the Bible as their offensive weapon in spiritual warfare. Unfortunately, most people are not even very aware of the different translations, how they render the original languages, or the pros and cons surrounding them.

I want to take a quick moment to sketch this issue and then offer my thoughts...
________________________

There are three general translation philosophies used to transform the Greek and Hebrew versions into English.

The first is the "Idiomatic" translations. This is a liberal paraphrase of the original texts used to make the Bible accessible in modern vernacular, usually designed for those who have not read the Bible before and who are intimidated by the perceived academic nature of Bible study. The Living Bible and The Message are examples of this method.

The second view is the "Dynamic Equivalency" translation. In these versions the original languages have been re-penned using a "thought for thought" philosophy that attempts to understand the main point behind a sentence and subsequently to render it in English. The popular New International Version is the standard bearer in dynamic translation. The New Living Translation can also be considered in this category although it has some leanings towards a paraphrase translation at times.

Third, the "Formal Equivalency" method of translation is a virtual "word for word" In this version the original words are translated as closely as possible to retain as much original intent as possible. The Kings James Version was the mainstay of this philosophy for a very long time, but its clunky 17th century language has seen it being replaced by the New American Standard and the English Standard Version.

So, how did you choose your Bible version? Did someone give it to you? Did you even realize there were different versions? Does it matter which one you use?

I think that the version you choose should be a thoughtful decision based on what you intend to do with the Bible. If you intend to place it on a shelf for dust collection, then who cares? If you plan to read the Bible occasionally to get the main points correct, then a dynamic translation may be sufficient. However, I believe that if you seek to dig into God's Word and study what he is revealing and communication about Himself then a formal equivalency translation is necessary.

So what about those idiomatic paraphrases you ask...

If you want to read the Bible as a nice story without all that "theological mumbo-jumbo" then a paraphrase would suit your needs. I mean, I know that the central point is put forth the same way in each kind of translation - Jesus is crucified and he rises from the dead. However, the deep meaning behind the facts is often lost when distinctly theological language is left out. Look at the Message version of the Lord's Prayer:

"Our Father in heaven,
Reveal who you are.
Set the world right;
Do what's best -
As above, so below.
Keep us alive with three square meals.
Keep us forgiven with you
and forgiving others.
Keep us safe
from ourselves and the Devil.
You're in charge!"

Give me a break! That kind of watered down view of Holy Scripture, turning it into 5th grade, feel-good language - it makes me ill. I do not subscribe to the idea that some folks out there just can't read dynamic and formal equivalency translations because they are too hard to understand and that they need a more approachable version. That is crap. Its distinctly unReformed (that is to say unbiblical) to think that the Spirit of God needs us to lower the language a few notches so people can get it. If the Holy Spirit is working inside you, you will push into God's word and seek to overcome those difficulties thru the help of pastors and fellow believers.

Don't get me wrong...I believe that many may have read and benefitted from paraphrases in the past, but I think that the main use of paraphrase versions as a choice of text is as a cop-out for those nominal or immature Christians who don't want faith as a main course in their life, but rather as a Sunday morning side dish.

Ultimately, I hope to one day be able to pursue a MDiv. and receive formal linguistic training in Greek and Hebrew so that I may read the texts in the original languages. Until that day comes however, rest assured that I will be delving into my formal equivalency translation and I hope you will too.
____________________________________________________________
For more info (and a genuine scholarly take on this) look at The Word of God in English by Leland Ryken HERE.

How to Train Your People to Laugh at Anything

A repost of something very interesting. Thanks JT.
see original here
_______________________
A few weeks ago John Piper spoke at a conference for the American Association of Christian Counselors. You should listen to the first five minutes. Piper decided to be as transparent as possible, given the audience, and to discuss some of the prevailing sins that he has struggled with his entire life. And the audience laughed uproariously. Piper was obviously perplexed and commented on how strange their reaction was.

If you didn’t know Piper, some of it could probably come across–at least initially–as unintentionally funny. But it is quite clear soon after that Piper was not cracking jokes but was being deadly serious about sin.

Greg Gilbert, calling it “one of the most bizarre things I’ve ever heard,” sees in this an “incredibly important and massively undervalued lesson”:

Do you see, at root, what had happened at that conference? Over the course of a couple of days, those conferees had been trained to expect humor from the speakers and therefore to react to the speakers with laughter–all the way to the point that they were incapable of seeing that John Piper was being serious in his confession of sin to them. You can quibble with whether the first couple of Piper’s statements were (unintentionally, it seems) kind of funny. I happen to think they were. By the time he gets to about the 3-minute mark, though, there’s nothing funny left, and he’s moved into very serious stuff. Yet the atmosphere of humor and levity at that conference was so thick–the training so complete–that the people were incapable of seeing it. So they laughed at Piper’s confession of his sin.

Apparently the conditioning of that audience to think everything is funny took no more than a couple of days.

How deep do you think that conditioning would be for a church who sat under a funny-man pastor every Sunday for fifteen years?

Hate Crimes

Given the pending legislation regarding hate crimes, I decided to publish some good thoughts on the issue by Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason Ministries (www.str.org)
_______________________________________

The result of criminalizing hate under certain circumstances is that only certain types of people get protected. In a state with hate crime legislation, penalties levied for an assault on me would be milder by statutory requirement than for the very same assault on a homosexual. Why? Because as a straight, white male I do not belong to a class protected by this law.

Hate crime legislation, then, turns out to be not really about hate, but politics. It's not hatred for the victim that is punished. That's covered under existing statutes. Rather, it's hatred for a protected class--African-Americans, Jews, homosexuals, etc.--that's punished under hate crime laws.

Such legislation makes two crimes out of one. The assault is a crime against the victim. The hate is a crime against the victim's group. Yet how does one make sense of a crime against a group that is a different crime from the one against the victim? Groups have no rights according to the Constitution.

Hate crime laws create a whole new category of faceless, personless victims--the injured class. They identify crimes against no one in particular, but crimes nonetheless, offenses that are punishable. They don't prohibit all hate, only politically incorrect hate.
______________________________________

I cannot let the day pass without talking about the death of Matthew Shepard. When I first read the details I was sickened. My heart sank as I went over the story in the paper today. It made me want to cry.
In Laramie, Wyoming, a homosexual student from the University of Wyoming was, according to the LA Times, "brutally beaten, burned and left tied to a wooden ranch fence like a scarecrow with grave injuries, including a smashed skull, authorities said. Four people have been arrested. A passerby by found the victim, Matthew Shepard, 22, near death half a day after the attack. He was unconscious and his skull had been smashed with a handgun. He also appeared to have suffered burns on his body and cuts on his head and face. The temperature had dropped to the low 30's. On Friday he was in critical condition on a respirator at the hospital in Fort Collins, Colorado".

Apparently the police have arrested two men and two women connected with the attack. The men allegedly lured their victim from the Fireside Bar, a campus hangout, by telling him they were gay. The three of them drove off in a truck and then the two men beat Shepard to within an inch of his life. They beat him in the truck and then beat him some more after tying him to a fence about a mile outside of Laramie. Shepard's shoes and wallet were taken. Apparently two young women who had helped dump Matthew's bloody clothing eventually led the police to the suspects. Shepard was found on Wednesday evening by a man on a bicycle who first thought he was a scarecrow or a dummy tied to the fence.

I don't know how anyone can read this account without being moved. It's hard for me to imagine how such a thing can happen. I know that Christians like myself have been called evil for saying homosexuality is evil. On that point I can't recant. I think homosexuality is evil and I don't think it is evil to call evil by its real name.

However, even given that homosexuality is evil, no one has any liberty to treat a human being like Matthew Shepard--made in the image of God--that way, regardless of his sinful condition (and we all share that condition), to beat him within an inch of his life the way this young man was beaten by two other college students. This is brutal, this is criminal, this is unconscionable, and it ought to be severely punished.

However, hear me clearly: There is no direct moral or logical connection between believing homosexuality is immoral and gay-bashing. There is none. It does not follow that if you think homosexuality is wrong or evil, you are encouraging others to torment homosexuals. KABC talk show host Al Rantel--himself a homosexual--put it this way: This kind of thinking would make Alcoholics Anonymous responsible every time a drunk gets beat up in an alley.

Obviously, many people disagree, holding that moral censure of homosexuality does lead to gay-bashing. Many are publicly vocal, loudly denouncing such judgments--and those who make them--as immoral. Here's my question for those of you who think this way: Does the fact that you say I'm immoral for making such judgments encourage others to beat me up? Of course not.

If other people beat me up for the things I believe or the lifestyle I live, their sin is on their own head. I don't hold that homosexuals are inciting others to violence against me simply because they publicly judge my views as immoral. By the same token, simply taking a moral position on homosexuality does not lead to gay-bashing.

Certainly, evil people will seize on any rationalization to justify harming others. But just because they use that as a rationalization doesn't mean it's actually the cause.

As a Christian, I stand completely against those who treated Matthew Shepard this way, even though I also stand without apology with strong moral convictions against homosexuality . There is no contradiction. And every Christian person ought to be appalled by what happened to this young man and condemn it without reservation. I ask you right now to pray for his life. [Matthew Shepard died a few days later.]

I initially intended to offer you only the concerns I've just made. As a Christian, I had to speak against this. However, as I read further in the article another factor emerged that is a deep concern to me and needs to be addressed.

The article went on to explain that the attack on Matthew Shepard will probably be an animus to extend hate crime legislation in Wyoming to cover sexual preference, legislation that has failed repeatedly because critics have said it would give homosexuals special rights.

Now, I don't know about the special rights issue. I'm not concerned about that right now. But I am against hate crime legislation. I think crimes like this ought to be punished to the full extent of the law. But I do not think thoughts should be punished. I don't think motivations should be punished. I don't think immoral personal dispositions towards others should be punished. To put it simply, I don't think hate should be punished.

If somebody wants to hate me, they can hate me. As we used to say when I was a kid, this is a free country. Even as youngsters we understood that America was a place where certain things were completely off limits to the government. We have freedom of speech. We have freedom of religion. We have freedom of press. And we have freedom of thought. Minimally we can believe what we want, we can like or dislike whom we want, and we can love or hate whom we want.

I'm not approving of hate, nor do I want to encourage it. It should be discouraged, but using the law is the wrong way to do that. Lots of things people have the freedom to believe and think are immoral, but I am not in favor of punishing people for believing those things. I am not in favor of punishing cowboys in Wyoming just because they hate homosexuals. I think they should be punished for assaulting homosexuals, but further punishment should not be added for hate.

The problem with all hate crimes is that they criminalize thought, not just behavior. The behavior is criminal already. The answer to this terrible crime committed against this 22-year-old homosexual man in Wyoming is not legislation against thought, but a punishment of the offenders to the full extent of the law for violating laws already on the books that protect all human beings equally from this kind of treatment. We should legislate against the action, not the thinking. Once we start legislating against the thinking, we're in big trouble.

Frankly, I'm surprised hate crimes legislation has not suffered a serious judicial challenge. The 14th amendment would offer adequate grounds. In a state with hate crimes legislation, if someone beat me exactly like Matthew Shepard was beaten, they would receive less punishment. That means I wouldn't have the same protection as he would, a violation of the equal protection clause.

Even apart from the 14th amendment, how can we make any thought punishable by the law? Making hate illegal isn't going to prevent hateful acts. There are already sanctions against assault. Do you think adding a little more punishment for the thought associated with the crime is going to deter a crime motivated by a powerful passion like hate?

The only real result will be to take the Orwellian step of criminalizing thought. As far as I'm concerned, I want to continue to cling to my boyhood ideal that America is still a free country, though this notion is becoming increasingly fanciful.
_____________________________________________

Jesus is much better than poop!

Tonight was my first ever opportunity to give a biblical message to others in a formal setting. I had done lots of public speaking and teaching thru the military and college, but never before had I taught the truth of God to a group of people assembled for just that thing.

It was a sobering thing to prepare for. I prayed that the Spirit would move within me for God's glory and I kept in mind the admonition of James 3:1
"Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness"

I was tasked with providing a short message to our new student ministry. I decided to go forward with a message that combined something all kids can relate to...talking about poop...with the deep biblical truth of Sola Christi. Be sure to keep reading after you look at my message - there was an interesting outcome.
______________________________________________________________
LEAD IN WITH BEDPAN BABY RUTH AND MT DEW SKIT…ME v. 2 STUDENTS

Alright everybody – that was gross. And oddly enough it was a great lead-in to my short message tonight, the title of which is:

Jesus is much better than poop!

Tonight I wanna talk to you about a verse from the New Testament that centers on poop. Did anybody know there is a bible passage about poop? No, well I think you’ll like it. Before we begin – lets pray:

“Father, thank you for being here in the person of your Holy Spirit tonight, thank you for revealing yourself to us in your word, thank you for have so much love for us that you sent Jesus here to be a sacrifice for us that we might be able to stand in your presence. Be with us tonight, open our ears to your truth, and fill up our heart with a passion for you. In Jesus name, Amen.”

So…poo. Everyone loves a good talk about poo and I wanna show you guys where the Bible talks about poo. Lets open up a bible to Chapter 3 of Philippians. This is a passage where the Apostle (that means he was set apart by Jesus as a leader in the early church) Paul is writing a letter to his friends at a church in modern Greece.

Let me read verses 2-11, you can follow along on the Powerpoint if you don’t have a bible.

2 Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh.
3 For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh—
4 though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more:
5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee;
6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.
7 But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ
9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—
10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,
11 that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.

So – the first thing we see is Paul telling his friends to be on the lookout for “dogs!” What he means here is preachers trying to roll up in their church and tell the members that they need more than Jesus to be saved. These “Judiazers” would tell people that they have to be circumcised (if you don’t know what that is, trust me it would be painful and you don’t wanna know) in order to go to heaven.

Paul insults these “Judiazers” because he is so angry that they are telling his friends lies about salvation. Paul is convinced that all we need to be saved is Jesus and Jesus alone! Paul wants his friends to understand that nothing they can do, including circumcision, can get them any closer to God and everything they do to try is pointless and can be tossed out.

Next, Paul wants to prove to his friends that extra stuff is of no use for salvation (only Jesus) even if that extra stuff is really good stuff. Paul uses himself as an example here. So what is Paul saying about himself? What kind of man is he saying that he is according to the religious customs of that day?

He is basically saying “I’m the bomb” and if anyone has the ability to think that their actions are really religious and that their life can get them closer to God, its him. He talks about the family he was born into, his smarts in school, his excellence in his job, etc… He is saying that he was as “good” as it could get. He even uses the word blameless at the end of his example!

And then…

He says what he says in verses 7-8. Let me read it for you again.

Read verses 7-8

So what does he say here? Yes, he says that none of those things (family, attending church every time he was supposed to, memorizing the Old Testament)…none of those things are worth anything compared to knowing Christ.

One thing I want to point out to you tonight is that the word “rubbish” in the verse. Anyone know what rubbish is?

Good, now truth is that word actually meant poop in the original language that Paul wrote it in. In fact, it meant a slang version of the word poo that I bet no one here is allowed to say, especially not in church. To get a picture, think about the nastiest poo you have ever seen…that is what he means by “rubbish”.

Paul is saying that all our hard work to try and be good, all the cool guy status that we can get for ourselves, all the fame that so many see in celebrities and then try to get for themselves…all that is nothing but poo. Steaming, gooey, smells so bad you wanna gag POO!

Poo you say? Those things sound pretty good huh? Being rich, famous, everyone liking you…can’t get much better than that can it?

Paul says it can. He says that the thing which makes all those accomplishment nothing but poo is when you compare them to the joy of knowing Jesus as your Lord and his Savior. Because when we know Jesus and trust in him instead of our own efforts, that’s when we gain eternal life.

Jesus is the key to salvation. He says, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father except thru me.” Only Jesus can serve as the path to heaven. If we try to be “good” to get to heaven we are kidding ourselves.

Our ability to stand before God has nothing to do with us. It is totally because of what Jesus did for us. He died on that cross and took away our sin. Then he rose from the dead and gave us his righteousness (or his sinless life) so that we look as pure as Jesus in Gods eyes. The wonderful thing is that we didn’t deserve that and he still did it for us!

One more point – this doesn’t mean that being Christian has nothing to do with “being good.” It has a lot to do with that. The difference is, when we try to be good enough in our own power to get to God we always fail – we can’t really be good enough AND our focus is never on God, it’s on ourselves and trying to be better. When we trust in what Jesus did, our focus is on God and his Spirit will move inside us to bring us to do good things…not because we are trying to get to heaven – but because we begin to love doing good things. We begin to love good things instead of bad things because the Spirit of a perfectly good God is living in us. Be sure to realize that v. 10 says it may not always be easy!

When we understand all of that, we can say with Paul that anything we are or anything we do to try and get us to heaven is poop – a big stinky turd – compared to the wonderful joy that is found in trusting Jesus to be the one who died and did it for us. He will walk with us thru a fallen world and into eternal joy.

So as we finish up tonight, I hope you take 2 things away from here with you when you leave.

1) I hope that every time you look at a pile of poop from now on you will think about what Paul said and how the only way to be with God forever is thru Jesus – everything else is worth nothing except a flush.
2) Mostly, if you are already a child of God, remember that Jesus is there for you – lean on him and not the poop of this world for your happiness. If you haven’t seen Jesus for being much better than poop yet, I want you to know that Jesus had already paid the price and that you can be saved by his payment when you trust in him and make him your #1 treasure. If that is something you are interested in, you can talk with me or any leader after the meeting. (Discussion time)
_____________________________________________

After the message we had some discussion time and then we came back together and wrapped up the message. One of our students stood up and told us that she had been struggling for weeks because she felt that she wasn't doing enough for Christ. She said that hearing my message tonight assured her that there was nothing she could do for Christ. It encouraged her that despite her undeserving nature, Christ had done it all for her on the cross.

I was very touched by the impact that the Holy Spirit made in her life via my message. I pray that God will use me in other settings and places to a similar end, for the glory of his truth and his name!

Craig-Wolpert Debate

I just finished listening to a wonderful debate on "Is God a Delusion" between William Lane Craig and Lewis Wolpert. It can be found here:

http://apologetics.blogspot.com/2009/09/william-lane-craig-vs-lewis-wolpert-is.html

I highly suggest taking the 1.5 hours to listen (put it in your mp3 player) because it is a great example of several things I have come to believe about apologetics.

1) When I first got into apologetics (around 2005) I was under a strong belief that good evidence could persuade people of God's existence and of Christ's resurrection. I imagined that a logical argument would convince any rational person. I never saw any fruit of that thinking.

Numerous debates and discussions later, I decided that apologetics and debating was primarily for the strengthening of the believer, not the persuasion of the unbeliever. Believers have doubts, and that's a natural and ok thing. What we want to avoid is crippling doubt, the kind that stops you from living a life with God as your highest treasure. To combat that doubt, apologetics can be a useful tool.

The debate between these two men is good in showing that science and faith are not exclusive (despite what the Discovery and History channels say) and that our faith is confirmed to a good extent with rational evidences. That should be encouraging to us when we hit a "doubtbump."

2) The debate also gives a clear view of why the Holy Spirit must be the persuader and convincer in salvation. Dr. Wolpert is bombarded in the debate with natural and logical evidence for the reality of God and of Jesus.

Each and every time Dr. Wolpert responds to Dr. Craig, he refuses to address the issue or the evidence, he simply dismisses it out of hand. Wolpert is so presuppositionally rooted in his atheism that he can't follow the evidence. He is dead in his trespasses and no amount of talking will bring him to life.

The only thing that brings dead people back is recessitation. That comes by means of divine CPR. The Spirit of God moves to bring the dead to life (the new birth, being born again) and he uses a variety of people, things, and situations to do so.

It may be that the Spirit uses apologetics and debates to occasionally change the nature of fallen men. Praise God for that, but don't forget that it wasn't the argument or the evidence itself that instituted that persons salvation...it was the Lord.

Sola Gloria

2 thoughts

1 - American attitudes towards death, more specifically American Christian attitudes toward death and funerals are too morose. I understand that we mourn the loss of loved ones because we won't see them again in this world (and we might mourn the death of non-believers for deeper reasons) - however, we would do better to see the death of Christian brothers and sisters as celebrations.

Scripture tells us that 'to die is gain" and that "it is far better to depart and be with Christ" (Phillippians 1) - too often we don't embrace the unspeakable joy that one encounters as they pass from this mortal coil to eternal glory.

Our common denominator as believers (regardless of financial position, hardships, status, etc...) is that we all have a great future hope. When one of us passes into that reality it should be a thing of joy. Lets disgard the black clothes and the somber mood. Rather, we should take a hint from the Irish and the southern African - American playbooks.

When a beloved fellow believers dies, lets party...they are in heaven.
______________________________________

2 - The weight of condemnation is a thing which directly correlates to our soteriological status. If we are unsaved, we are under condemnation due to Adam and nothing we do can lift that death sentence (Romans 5). However, if God has mercifully elected us, our condemnation is lifted and we are in Christ (Romans 8).

Remember that if you feel the hand of God discipling you. That thing you undergo is a trial given to you in love and not in anger (Hebrews 12). Be thankful for his correction as it draws you closer to him and induces your spirit to be more like Christ.

The Doctrines of Grace

Reposted from Desiring God's blog:

Rebuilding Some Basics of Bethlehem: The Doctrines of Grace
(Otherwise Known as the 5 Points of Calvinism or TULIP)
By John PiperSeptember 25, 2009

We believe that these 5 truths are biblical and therefore true. We believe that they magnify God’s precious grace and give unspeakable joy to sinners who have despaired of saving themselves.

Total Depravity

Our sinful corruption is so deep and so strong as to make us slaves of sin and morally unable to overcome our own rebellion and blindness. This inability to save ourselves from ourselves is total. We are utterly dependent on God’s grace to overcome our rebellion, give us eyes to see, and effectively draw us to the Savior.

We were dead in our trespasses. (Ephesians 2:5)

The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:7-8)

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Unconditional Election

God’s election is an unconditional act of free grace that was given through his Son Jesus before the world began. By this act, God chose, before the foundation of the world, those who would be delivered from bondage to sin and brought to repentance and saving faith in Jesus.

He chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4).

As many as were appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48)

"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:15-16)

God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise. (1 Corinthians 1:27)

Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened. (Romans 11:7; cf. 9:11-12; John 6:37)

My servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me. (Isaiah 43:10)

Irresistible Grace

This means that the resistance that all human beings exert against God every day (Romans 3:10-12; Acts 7:51) is wonderfully overcome at the proper time by God’s saving grace for undeserving rebels whom he chooses freely to save.

Even when we were dead in our trespasses, [God] made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved. (Ephesians 2:5)

No one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father. (John 6:65)

God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth. (2 Timothy 2:25)

Limited Atonement

The atonement of Christ is sufficient for all humans and effective for those who trust him. The full, saving effectiveness of the atonement that Jesus accomplished is limited to those for whom that saving effect was prepared. The availability of the total sufficiency of the atonement is for all people. Whosoever will—whoever believes—will be covered by the blood of Christ. And there is a divine design in the death of Christ to accomplish the promises of the new covenant for the chosen bride of Christ. Thus Christ died for all, but not for all in the same way.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16; cf. Revelation 22:17).

This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. (Luke 22:20)

Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. (Ephesians 5:25)

I lay down my life for the sheep. (John 10:15)

I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. . . . And for their sake I consecrate myself [that is, prepare to die], that they also may be sanctified in truth. (John 17:9, 19)

He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? (Romans 8:32)

Perseverance of the Saints

We believe that all who are justified will win the fight of faith. They will persevere in faith and never surrender to the enemy of their souls. This perseverance is the promise of the new covenant, obtained by the blood of Christ, and worked in us by God himself, yet not so as to diminish, but only to empower and encourage, our vigilance; so that we may say in the end, I have fought the good fight, but it was not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Those whom he justified he also glorified. (Romans 8:30)

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. (John 10:27-28)

I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. (Philippians 1:6)

I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. (Philippians 3:12)

AMEN

Where did the miracles go?

Last night at mens group we had a very interesting discussion take place. After weekly updates and before our prayer time, I asked a question to the four guys who regularly attend Tuesday night discipleship.

I asked if anyone in the group had ever seen a bona fide miracle. Something distinctly supernatural and unmistakably the hand of God. It was a question that I had been dealing with for awhile. When I open the Bible I see numerous things which appear to be beyond this realm of existence. Folks being healed by an apostles shadow, the resurrection of a dead man after he falls from a window, the many exorcisms recorded in scripture, etc...And these examples are not even things that Jesus did, they are things his early apostles performed. So, I pondered...why do we see that occurring then and not now? Where are the miracles in 21st century America?

Several of the guys told stories about miracles and supernatural things they had experienced...

- Steve talked about the miracle of his sons birth and he offered a suggestion that medicine is, in itself, a miracle of sorts. He also said that when someone is presupposed to disbelieve in the supernatural, they will explain it away no matter what.

- John spoke about his experience almost drowning in the middle of a lake and his sudden, unassisted, safe arrival at the shore. He admitted it might be that he had a memory block about finding a way to swim back to shore, but I doubt he would have blocked that detail while vividly remembering the rest. Looks like angelic intervention to me.

- Jeremy gave us a interesting story about a young man he took to church one Sunday, a man dealing with lots of demonic oppression, and how the congregation was led by the Spirit to see the very particular spiritual battles the man was dealing with (despite none of them knowing of him prior). A story that concluded well, with the boy leaving free of malevolence that night.

However, even with those stories on the table, it was clear that miracles and supernatural activities were not a regular or daily part of life for us. So, I found myself back at the question of why. Why do signs and wonders show up with such frequency in the Gospels and the book of Acts - yet, we are hard pressed to find any today?

The group threw out a few ideas...

- God can't do miracles. He never could or he can't anymore. (obviously, we didn't go with this one)

- God isn't in the miracles business anymore. The church and the canon are established, that's all we need. (aka the cessasionst view, none of us seemed to completely subscribe to this one either)

- God simply decides not to perform many miracles anymore. He could do them, he has just ordained to cut back on them. (as Calvinists, we all acknowledged this view of God's sovereign will, yet it still leaves one wondering why he would cut back on miracles between 200 years ago and today)

- We play some role in "blocking" our own supernatural experiences. Certainly salvation is all God and he is in complete control of all things, knowing the outcome before it occurs - but perhaps...could it be that he gives us some measure of responsibility thru faith and belief to cultivate these supernatural healings and occurrences for ourselves? That might explain the high number of miracles in countries that trust in such things as a reality.

My friend Andrew talked about this years ago...what if the reason Americans don't experience the supernatural is because we are so rational and explanatory. Could that "hinder" the wonders from happening in our midst. Couldn't that theory apply even within Christendom...charismatics have supernatural experiences all the time (or so they claim) and Calvinists rarely talk about the experience of the supernatural. Do reformed people hold a theology that is somewhat closed to the idea of regular miracles thereby blocking their occurrence?

What do you think? I am particularly interested in the opinions of Andrew (the most charismatic of my readers), Adam (the reformed intelligentsia of my readers), and Doc (my Catholic friend).

Why don't we experience miracles and supernatural events in the same way today as they did in the early church?

Discuss!

God is the main character!

Your life story isn't about you with a cameo by God.

Your life is a small paragraph in God's great story of love and redemption.

He is the star of the show and you are the supporting cast member.

That sounds demeaning to our natural flesh, but to a regenerated spirit it is a cause for tears of joy.

He deserves the glory and the letters on the marquee, not us.

800 million Christians...

Yesterday at work I was doing a manual labor project sorting about 700 boxes. I was working with an atheist and we were talking mostly about MMA. It was around lunch when another fellow employee, a known atheist who likes to start strange conversations that challenge others faith, came along.

When my project buddy (Mike) saw the rabble rouser (Will) coming close, even he said "oh hell." We were about to be surprised.

Will walked up with another co-worker in tow. This other gentleman is a fundamentalist Baptist named Ricky. Ricky and I share a commitment to the essential biblical truths and we both value Christ. Ricky is probably the closest person to me at my job in terms of faith.

Will has rubbed Ricky and me the wrong way many times in the past. We used to engage him pretty often in his questions. When it became apparent that Will is more interested in causing dissension than getting truthful and honest answers, that's when Ricky and I began to slow down on getting caught up in fruitless conversation with Will.

Will walked up and said that he heard there were 800 million Christians on the earth, but Ricky told him that was an inaccurate number and the only true Christians were born again Christians. Will proceeded to ask me if the only real Christians were born again and if so, did that mean that non-pentecostal/ charismatic denominations were going to hell.

First, I tackled the definition and history of born again. I explained the origin of the phrase in John 3 and I cleared up the misunderstanding that only certain denominations were born again (Will thought it was only the emotionally driven groups). I talked about the relatively new use of that term to describe the classical beliefs about regeneration and the inability of any group, especially relatively young groups like the charismatic movement, to lay claim to the term born again.

I told Will that being born again is an individual thing between a person and the God who gives them new spiritual life. Ultimately, that means that I can't judge if a person in the Orthodox church or the Catholic church or the Anglican communion is born again. I told Will that I could critique denominational doctrines against the plain truth of scripture - but I couldn't lump all catholics or all anglicans into "non-born again status."

I was glad that Mike was listening since I know him to be an atheist as well. And I was glad that Ricky has since told me that he was praying the whole time I was talking.

I went on to answer Wills next question..."how then do you get saved and go to heaven." That one was easy - believe on the Lord Jesus, confess with your mouth and believe with your heart, accept the free gift of grace that comes to you..." I elaborated with passages from James and Matthew to show that mental assent to facts isn't enough - the act of regeneration occurs when one is so moved to trust their life to Christ in whole.

I talked about our inability to do anything truly "good" on our own and I worked to clear up some legalistic thoughts that Will had been taught. I used my own testimony as a drunk, disrespectful, male whore coming to an unexpected and relatively quick 180 in my life to show that it is God who sovereignly changes us (the born again principle) and that no one is too bad for him to make new, just as no one is good enough to earn salvation.

I think we had an overall fruitful conversation. I told him that the 800 million statistic was certainly wrong due to the high numbers of nominal Christians, moral legalists, liberal religionists, etc... However, there was no real way to attain a number of "real" Christians (those who have been regenerated, made alive, born again) since these surveys are usually done too generally, too vaguely, and with an assumption that the participant is truthful.

Finally, Will asked me if that meant that the behavior of Christians wasn't important. I told him it was quite the opposite. Once a person is touched by the Spirit and adopted by God, they will begin to exhibit Christ-like love in their actions - not to earn their way to heaven or to feel better about themselves, but because the Spirit of a perfect God lives in them. They won't be perfect, but they will show steady remarkable improvement in their moral life on the whole over time. Again, I used my own life to give illustration.

I parted ways by encouraging Will to earnestly look for answers like he had that day and to steer clear of his usual attempts to cause controversy and doubt.

As Will and Ricky left, I was asked a question by Mike. Mike wanted to know what a charismatic was. He had heard the term in our conversation and he didn't know it. I went thru a brief sketch of the history of the church from the Apostles to Constantine to the Crusades and the Orthodox Schism to the Reformation to the Puritans to the Great Awakening to Finney then to the Pentecostal Movement to charismatic preachers to modern heresies like the prosperity gospel.

I tried to give Mike a large picture of the development of the faith and I used parts of that sketch to highlight the woes of politicizing the church, the return to Sola Scriptura, the American distortion of biblical truth into libertarian free will faith and the most recent ear tickling done by televangelist. I concluded by noting the newest phenomenon (of which I belong), the return to Protestant principles in the Young, Restless, and Reformed New Calvinists.

Despite attempting to make the short lesson fun and engaging, my audience was flat. It is really clear to me that Mike is simply uninterested in faith of any kind. It is a stark difference from Will, who wants to talk about nothing else.

I pray that God will use our conversation yesterday in the lives of both of these men, in different ways, to (in some small way) bring forth the new birth of their souls.

Quote, Context, and a Video

Quote

"There is no teaching in Christian theology that offends our contemporaries (especially our Christian friends and family), any more then the teaching of sola gratia. Americans hate to be told "no," that they are helpless. Surprisingly, the greatest opposition to the biblical teaching on this point comes not from a secular culture, but from household-name leaders in the American Church. From contemporary figures such as Chuck Smith at Calvary Chapel to Bill Bright and Campus Crusade, to virtually all forms of revivalism and Pentecostalism which spring from the loins of one Charles Grandison Finney ... to Alexander Campbell and the Restorationist movement, to Joseph Smith and what later on became the cult known as Mormonism, to William Miller and the Adventist movement, and we can go on and on; all of these movements are based, at least in part, upon a denial of sola gratia, in direct opposition to Reformation theology, and the biblical teaching on this point. Americans hate to be told that God does not depend upon them and a decision that they make. And it is here, then, that we as Reformation Christians and historic Protestants run smack dab into our culture and to much of American Christianity. This is why our friends and families look at us like we have three heads when we speak of these doctrines. But this is the historic Protestant position, and the wholesale rejection of sola gratia demonstrates how far the "evangelical movement" has departed from the historic and biblical Evangelical faith."
- Dr. Kim Riddlebarger
_________________________________

I was driving near Emory University today and I saw a rally of gay students carrying signs. One sign read "Judge Not - Jesus"

It struck me how people of all kinds (me included) like to take scripture out of both immediate and total context in order to suit their agenda.

They shouldn't do that, neither should we. A firm understanding of the entire redemptive story which is laid out for us in the Bible is key to seeing the whole picture and drawing close to God for who he is - not for who we want him to be.
________________________________

Must-see video (warning, UFC related - nothing to do with faith)


Meet The Heavyweights

Protecting Abortion

I don't normally write on political things here. I find that there are very few people who can talk about politics and keep a level-enough head in their demeanor to be sure that Christ is seen in the discussion. Most Christians who get excited talking about, or participating in, politics are either nominal in the faith or tend to be overzealous and quarrelsome. I would fall into the latter category, so I refrain most of the time.

However, something struck me yesterday as I read an Esquire magazine article at lunch about one particular abortion doctor and the US Marshalls that are protecting him. Yes, that is correct - a private abortionist has a federal law enforcement protection detail. I was struck enough to do some research.

Apparently, in the wake of the George Tiller murder at the beginning of the summer, Attorney General Eric Holder decided that US Marshalls should be sent "to offer protection to other appropriate people and facilities around the nation."

Let me be clear...

George Tiller was a mass-murderer.

George Tiller should not have been killed by any fellow human being.

Like it or not, he was practicing a legal procedure in his state.

We should respect the law and peacefully try to change it.

God is sovereign and He will take vengence as He deems.

In the wake of the Tiller murder, other abortionists may be likely targets for other fanatics.

That said, I cannot understand why the US Government would be providing security. If these physicians are private industry, shouldn't they hire a private security?

Around the same time as the Tiller murder, 2 soldiers were gunned down by a terrorist sympathizer outside a military recruiting station in Arkansas. To the best of my knowledge, US Marshalls have not been directed to protect the recruiting stations around the country and they ARE government entities.

Sending US Marshalls to protect the most prolific abortionists in America after Tillers murder is nothing more than a political move by the most abortion-friendly White House in history and an unethical use of US taxpayer dollars.

It seems to me that there are plenty of crimes occuring everyday that could use the attention of these highly-qualified LE officers - playing bodyguard to abortionists might offer abit of safety to those abortionists - but doesn't it ultimately leave the rest of us more vulnerable?

Quick Hits

A new format I plan to try out on occasion...

A few quick paragraphs on topics that don't require extensive treatment, yet which I want to get out of my head and "on paper."
___________________

RIGHTEOUS POO

My oldest boy is pretty much potty trained these days. We have a kiddy potty in our house (and one in our car for MBMs - mobile bowel movements). Sometimes the duty (insert pun here) of cleaning a kiddy potty is dumped (is it too much yet) on me. As I was cleaning one out the other day, something struck me...

Everything we do in our own righteousness looks like poo to God in his sight. No matter how much we shine up our turdish works, they are all still smelling offensive to a holy God. Only by the Lord's gracious hand (by way of the cross) can our status before God be ontologically changed from feces to family. By the application of Christ's righteousness we may enter into the presence of a perfect Father without burning his nostrils and him subsequently burning us.

Note: To all of those offended by the tone of this post, I offer no apologies. Sometimes the use of otherwise crass language is completely appropriate to state a necessary point. Paul thought so in Phillippians 3:8 and Isaiah seemed to agree in 64:6 of his own book. In order to understand our own depravity and inability to please God, I felt that a visceral metaphor was appropriate.
___________________

JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE CHURCH

My wife recently attended a friend's church to support the young lady being baptized. I didn't go with her, I went to our home church for the morning. As I was heading home, I got a call from my wife. She was expressing how thankful she was for our church. Apparently, the sermon at the church she visited was devoid of any gospel message, any mention of Christ, or any serious contextual look at scripture. Instead, the pastor gave a nice self-help sermon sprinkled with some random bible verses to try and support his "Dr Phil-ish" points. My understanding is that it was so generic a message that a rabbi, an iman, or a Mormon could have delivered the talk.

When my wife got home I looked at the bulletin that she had received. It was a joke. The main paragraph on the handout was entitled "What to expect at________" and it listed these qualities..."a message relevant to your life, fun and exciting worship, and the best day of your kids life." Nowhere on the paper did I see mention of anything that even resembled the name of Jesus. Additionally, the church service included a solo secular song performance (baby you're all that I need, when I'm lying here in your arms,...we're in heaven) and my wife was told that she could not keep our boy in the service with her because the pastor had ADD and children distracted him.

I know that different people do church differently and I am not suggesting that all believers follow a specific method of doing things. However, when a church works so hard to become relevant to the "cool culture" around them that they turn man-centered instead of Christ-centered - thats a real problem! I believe that American Christianity can largely be summed up in Paul's words to Timothy:

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths." (2 Tim 4:3-4)
___________________

FALL HAPPENINGS AT SOUTHPOINT

As the weather cools and the leaves fall, our home church begins a new season of ministry. This fall I am very excited about a number of things:
- I am back in my mens discipleship group, we are probably gonna do a Tim Keller study of James.
- Tiffany is now in a women's discipleship group with some awesome ladies.
- Tiff and I will be teaching Children's Church several times this fall.
- I have committed to work with the new Student Ministry at every other meeting they hold!
- We will be attending a membership class and subsequently, we shall become official members of Southpoint and the PCA.
- Both our boys will be getting baptized as a sign of the covenant promise that God has given them as the children of believers!

Thanks to God for leading us to a wonderful family of believers who embrace sound doctrine, who love and care for each other, and who labor to spread the message of the Gospel daily thru incarnational ministry.
____________________

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

"forcing tactics can only do damage, perhaps incalculable damage, to men's souls . . . Evangelism must rather be conceived as a long-term enterprise of patient teaching and instruction, in which God's servants seek simply to be faithful in delivering the gospel message and applying it to human lives, and leave it to God's Spirit to draw men to faith through this message in his own way and at his own speed"
(Packer, A Quest For Godliness , 164).
___________________

CANCER UPDATE

Someone close to me was diagnosed with cancer earlier this year. They didn't tell many people and they still don't want it to be a fuss. Shortly after they found out, I asked them to come to my house for dinner and prayer. We had a group prayer meeting where we acknowledged the sovereignty and wisdom of God while crying out for his healing hand. Apparently, God has seen fit to grant his healing powers. I received an e-mail today that gave me an update. It seems that the main tumor has shrunk by 50% and all the other spots are gone! The doctor said that it was more than he ever hoped for...

“With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
Matthew 19:26
____________________

PASTOR PRAYS FOR OBAMA'S DEATH

This kind of stuff is horrific. Whats wrong with this guy - he needs some prayer. We also need to pray that God would steer some media coverage to all of the intelligent, loving Christians out there who are demonstrating and proclaiming the gospel.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/31/phoenix-pastor-draws-protests-telling-church-prays-obamas-death/
______________________

DEEPER

Just around the corner is the Deeper Conference. Its here in ATL. I wanted to go this year but medical bills from earlier this year surfaced and cut into our budget. It is put on by the Way of the Master folks and it will feature Ravi Z. and Greg Koukl as well. It looks like a good way to spend a weekend if you are free with extra cash. Just wanted to mention it.

http://www.deeperconference.com/
______________________

SPELUNKING

I am doing a caving trip to PettyJohns in NW Georgia all day on Sept 26th. Its a cheap, challenging, and fun way to explore part of creation that most folks don't see. Come join me! Contact for details.
______________________

Thats it gang. I think I caught caught up on my thoughts as quick as possible. Hope you enjoyed - hit me up with questions or comments.

My work...

Where I work - if you care. Its a 10 minute short film, but it is nicely done.

Become a Better You!

Mike Horton says:
_________________

Under the Library of Congress identification system, Joel Osteen's book, Becoming a Better You: 7 Keys to Improving Your Life Every Day is classified as:

"1. Self-actualization (Psychology)-Religious Aspects-Christianity."

Even the Library of Congress seems to know what sort of message this represents.
_________________

Read the whole Article HERE.

The Importance of Hell

An article recently recommended to me by someone who read the "Wrath of God" blog post from last week.

You can access the original and many other resources by Tim Keller at Redeemer.
_____________________

The Importance of Hell
There are plenty of people today who don't believe in the Bible's teaching on everlasting punishment, even those who do find it an unreal and a remote concept.
by Tim Keller

In 2003 a research group discovered 64% of Americans expect to go to heaven when they die, but less than 1% think they might go to hell. Not only are there plenty of people today who don't believe in the Bible's teaching on everlasting punishment, even those who do find it an unreal and a remote concept. Nevertheless, it is a very important part of the Christian faith, for several reasons.

1. It is important because Jesus taught about it more than all other Biblical authors put together. Jesus speaks of "eternal fire and punishment" as the final abode of the angels and human beings who have rejected God (Matthew 25:41,46) He says that those who give into sin will be in danger of the "fire of hell" (Matthew 5:22; 18:8-9.) The word Jesus uses for 'hell' is Gehenna, a valley in which piles of garbage were daily burned as well as the corpses of those without families who could bury them. In Mark 9:43 Jesus speaks of a person going to "hell [gehenna], where 'their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.' " Jesus is referring to the maggots that live in the corpses on the garbage heap. When all the flesh is consumed, the maggots die. Jesus is saying, however, that the spiritual decomposition of hell never ends, and that is why 'their worm does not die.'

In Matthew 10:28 Jesus says, "Do not fear those who can kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell." He is speaking to disciples, some of whom will eventually be tortured, sawn in half, flayed and burned alive. Yet, he says, that is a picnic compared to hell. Clearly, for Jesus hell was a real place, since he said that after judgment day people would experience it in their bodies. Hell is a place not only of physical but also of spiritual misery.

Jesus constantly depicted hell as painful fire and "outer darkness" (Matt 25:30; cf. Jude 6,7,13,) a place of unimaginably terrible misery and unhappiness. If Jesus, the Lord of Love and Author of Grace spoke about hell more often, and in a more vivid, blood-curdling manner than anyone else, it must be a crucial truth. But why was it so important to Jesus?

2. It is important because it shows how infinitely dependent we are on God for everything. Virtually all commentators and theologians believe that the Biblical images of fire and outer darkness are metaphorical. (Since souls are in hell right now, without bodies, how could the fire be literal, physical fire?) Even Jonathan Edwards pointed out that the Biblical language for hell was symbolic, but, he added, 'when metaphors are used in Scripture about spiritual things . . . they fall short of the literal truth." (from "The Torments of Hell are Exceeding Great" in volume 14 of the Yale edition of Edwards works.) To say that the Scriptural image of hell-fire is not wholly literal is of no comfort whatsoever. The reality will be far worse than the image. What, then, are the 'fire' and 'darkness' symbols for? They are vivid ways to describe what happens when we lose the presence of God. Darkness refers to the isolation, and fire to the disintegration of being separated from God. Away from the favor and face of God, we literally, horrifically, and endlessly fall apart.

In the teaching of Jesus the ultimate condemnation from the mouth of God is 'depart from me.' That is remarkable--to simply be away from God is the worst thing that can happen to us! Why? We were originally created to walk in God's immediate presence (Genesis 2.) In one sense, of course, God is everywhere and upholds everything. Only in him do we all speak and move and have our being (Acts 17:28.) In that sense, then, it is impossible to depart from the Lord; even hell cannot exist unless God upholds it. But the Bible says sin excludes us from God's 'face' (Isaiah 59:2.) All the life, joy, love, strength, and meaning we have looked for and longed for is found in his face (Psalm 16:11)-that is, in his favor, presence, fellowship, and pleasure.

Sin removes us from that aspect of his power that sustains and supports us. It is to us as water is to a fish-away from it our life slowly ebbs away. That is what has been happening to us throughout history. That is why, for Paul, the everlasting fire and destruction of hell is 'exclusion from the presence of the Lord." (2 Thessalonians 1:9.) Separation from God and his blessings forever is the reality to which all the symbols point. For example, when Jesus speaks being 'destroyed' in hell, the word used is apollumi, meaning not to be annihilated out of existence but to be 'totaled' and ruined so as to be useless for its intended purpose.

The image of 'gehenna' and 'maggots' means decomposition. Once a body is dead it loses its beauty and strength and coherence, it begins to break into its constituent parts, to stink and to disintegrate. So what is a 'totaled' human soul? It does not cease to exist, but rather becomes completely incapable of all the things a human soul is for--reasoning, feeling, choosing, giving or receiving love or joy. Why? Because the human soul was built for worshipping and enjoying the true God, and all truly human life flows from that. In this world, all of humanity, even those who have turned away from God, still are supported by 'kindly providences' or 'common grace' (Acts 14:16-17; Psalm 104:10-30; James 1:17) keeping us still capable of wisdom, love, joy, and goodness. But when we lose God's supportive presence all together, the result is hell.

3. It is important because it unveils the seriousness and danger of living life for yourself. In Romans 1-2 Paul explains that God, in his wrath against those who reject him, 'gives them up' to the sinful passions of their hearts. Commentators (cf. Douglas Moo) point out that this cannot mean God impels people to sin, since in Ephesians 4:19 it is said that sinners give themselves up to their sinful desires. It means that the worst (and fairest) punishment God can give a person is to allow them their sinful hearts' deepest desire.

What is that? The desire of the sinful human heart is for independence. We want to choose and go our own way (Isaiah 53:6.) This is no idle 'wandering from the path.' As Jeremiah puts it, 'No one repents . . . each pursues his own course like a horse charging into battle. (8:6)' (We want to get away from God-but, as we have seen, this is the very thing that is most destructive to us. Cain is warned not to sin because sin is slavery. (Genesis 4:7; John 8:34.) It destroys your ability to choose, love, enjoy. Sin also brings blindness-the more you reject the truth about God the more incapable you are of perceiving any truth about yourself or the world (Isaiah 29:9-10; Romans 1:21.)

What is hell, then? It is God actively giving us up to what we have freely chosen-to go our own way, be our own "the master of our fate, the captain of our soul," to get away from him and his control. It is God banishing us to regions we have desperately tried to get into all our lives. J.I.Packer writes: "Scripture sees hell as self-chosen . . . [H]ell appears as God's gesture of respect for human choice. All receive what they actually chose, either to be with God forever, worshipping him, or without God forever, worshipping themselves." (J.I.Packer, Concise Theology p.262-263.) If the thing you most want is to worship God in the beauty of his holiness, then that is what you will get (Ps 96:9-13.) If the thing you most want is to be your own master, then the holiness of God will become an agony, and the presence of God a terror you will flee forever (Rev 6:16; cf. Is 6:1-6.)

Why is this so extremely important to stress in our preaching and teaching today? The idea of hell is implausible to people because they see it as unfair that infinite punishment would be meted out for comparably minor, finite false steps (like not embracing Christianity.) Also, almost no one knows anyone (including themselves) that seem to be bad enough to merit hell. But the Biblical teaching on hell answers both of these objections. First, it tells us that people only get in the afterlife what they have most wanted-either to have God as Savior and Master or to be their own Saviors and Masters. Secondly, it tells us that hell is a natural consequence. Even in this world it is clear that self-centeredness rather than God-centeredness makes you miserable and blind. The more self-centered, self-absorbed, self-pitying, and self-justifying people are, the more breakdowns occur, relationally, psychologically, and even physically. They also go deeper into denial about the source of their problems.

On the other hand, a soul that has decided to center its life on God and his glory moves toward increasing joy and wholeness. We can see both of these 'trajectories' even in this life. But if, as the Bible teaches, our souls will go on forever, then just imagine where these two kinds of souls will be in a billion years. Hell is simply one's freely chosen path going on forever. We wanted to get away from God, and God, in his infinite justice, sends us where we wanted to go.

In the parable of Luke 16:19ff, Jesus tells us of a rich man who goes to hell and who is now in torment and horrible thirst because of the fire (v.24) But there are interesting insights into what is going on in his soul. He urges Abraham to send a messenger to go and warn his still-living brothers about the reality of hell. Commentators have pointed out that this is not a gesture of compassion, but rather an effort at blame-shifting. He is saying that he did not have a chance, he did not have adequate information to avoid hell. That is clearly his point, because Abraham says forcefully that people in this life have been well-informed through the Scriptures. It is intriguing to find exactly what we would expect-even knowing he is in hell and knowing God has sent him there, he is deeply in denial, angry at God, unable to admit that it was a just decision, wishing he could be less miserable (v.24) but in no way willing to repent or seek the presence of God.

I believe one of the reasons the Bible tells us about hell is so it can act like 'smelling salts' about the true danger and seriousness of even minor sins. However, I've found that only stressing the symbols of hell (fire and darkness) in preaching rather than going into what the symbols refer to (eternal, spiritual decomposition) actually prevents modern people from finding hell a deterrent. Some years ago I remember a man who said that talk about the fires of hell simply didn't scare him, it seemed too far-fetched, even silly. So I read him lines from C.S. Lewis:

Hell begins with a grumbling mood, always complaining, always blaming others . . . but you are still distinct from it. You may even criticize it in yourself and wish you could stop it. But there may come a day when you can no longer. Then there will be no you left to criticize the mood or even to enjoy it, but just the grumble itself, going on forever like a machine. It is not a question of God 'sending us' to hell. In each of us there is something growing, which will BE Hell unless it is nipped in the bud.

To my surprise he got very quiet and said, "Now that scares me to death." He almost immediately began to see that hell was a) perfectly fair and just, and b) something that he realized he might be headed for if he didn't change. If we really want skeptics and non-believers to be properly frightened by hell, we cannot simply repeat over and over that 'hell is a place of fire.' We must go deeper into the realities that the Biblical images represent. When we do so, we will find that even secular people can be affected.

We run from the presence of God and therefore God actively gives us up to our desire (Romans 1:24, 26.) Hell is therefore a prison in which the doors are first locked from the inside by us and therefore are locked from the outside by God (Luke 16:26.) Every indication is that those doors continue to stay forever barred from the inside. Though every knee and tongue in hell knows that Jesus is Lord (Philippians 2:10-11,) no one can seek or want that Lordship without the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3.This is why we can say that no one goes to hell who does not choose both to go and to stay there. What could be more fair than that?

4. The doctrine of hell is important because it is the only way to know how much Jesus loved us and how much he did for us. In Matthew 10:28 Jesus says that no physical destruction can be compared with the spiritual destruction of hell, of losing the presence of God. But this is exactly what happened to Jesus on the cross-he was forsaken by the Father (Matthew 27:46.) In Luke 16:24 the rich man in hell is desperately thirsty (v.24) and on the cross Jesus said "I thirst" (John 19:28.) The water of life, the presence of God, was taken from him. The point is this. Unless we come to grips with this "terrible" doctrine, we will never even begin to understand the depths of what Jesus did for us on the cross. His body was being destroyed in the worst possible way, but that was a flea bite compared to what was happening to his soul. When he cried out that his God had forsaken him he was experiencing hell itself. But consider--if our debt for sin is so great that it is never paid off there, but our hell stretches on for eternity, then what are we to conclude from the fact that Jesus said the payment was "finished" (John 19:30) after only three hours? We learn that what he felt on the cross was far worse and deeper than all of our deserved hells put together.

And this makes emotional sense when we consider the relationship he lost. If a mild acquaintance denounces you and rejects you--that hurts. If a good friend does the same--that hurts far worse. However, if your spouse walks out on you saying, "I never want to see you again," that is far more devastating still. The longer, deeper, and more intimate the relationship, the more tortuous is any separation. But the Son's relationship with the Father was beginningless and infinitely greater than the most intimate and passionate human relationship. When Jesus was cut off from God he went into the deepest pit and most powerful furnace, beyond all imagining. He experienced the full wrath of the Father. And he did it voluntarily, for us.

Fairly often I meet people who say, "I have a personal relationship with a loving God, and yet I don't believe in Jesus Christ at all." Why, I ask? "My God is too loving to pour out infinite suffering on anyone for sin." But this shows a deep misunderstanding of both God and the cross. On the cross, God HIMSELF, incarnated as Jesus, took the punishment. He didn't visit it on a third party, however willing.

So the question becomes: what did it cost your kind of god to love us and embrace us? What did he endure in order to receive us? Where did this god agonize, cry out, and where were his nails and thorns? The only answer is: "I don't think that was necessary." But then ironically, in our effort to make God more loving, we have made him less loving. His love, in the end, needed to take no action. It was sentimentality, not love at all. The worship of a god like this will be at most impersonal, cognitive, and ethical. There will be no joyful self-abandonment, no humble boldness, no constant sense of wonder. We could not sing to him "love so amazing, so divine, demands my soul, my life, my all." Only through the cross could our separation from God be removed, and we will spend all eternity loving and praising God for what he has done (Rev 5:9-14.)

And if Jesus did not experience hell itself for us, then we ourselves are devalued. In Isaiah, we are told, "The results of his suffering he shall see, and shall be satisfied" (Isaiah 53:11). This is a stupendous thought. Jesus suffered infinitely more than any human soul in eternal hell, yet he looks at us and says, "It was worth it." What could make us feel more loved and valued than that? The Savior presented in the gospel waded through hell itself rather than lose us, and no other savior ever depicted has loved us at such a cost.

Conclusion The doctrine of hell is crucial-without it we can't understand our complete dependence on God, the character and danger of even the smallest sins, and the true scope of the costly love of Jesus. Nevertheless, it is possible to stress the doctrine of hell in unwise ways. Many, for fear of doctrinal compromise, want to put all the emphasis on God's active judgment, and none on the self-chosen character of hell. Ironically, as we have seen, this unBiblical imbalance often makes it less of a deterrent to non-believers rather than more of one. And some can preach hell in such a way that people reform their lives only out of a self-interested fear of avoiding consequences, not out of love and loyalty to the one who embraced and experienced hell in our place. The distinction between those two motives is all-important. The first creates a moralist, the second a born-again believer.

We must come to grips with the fact that Jesus said more about hell than Daniel, Isaiah, Paul, John, Peter put together. Before we dismiss this, we have to realize we are saying to Jesus, the pre-eminent teacher of love and grace in history, "I am less barbaric than you, Jesus--I am more compassionate and wiser than you." Surely that should give us pause! Indeed, upon reflection, it is because of the doctrine of judgment and hell that Jesus' proclamations of grace and love are so astounding.

The Wrath of God

Today at work yielded an interesting conversation. I was speaking with a Catholic friend and we were discussing the Tornado and the Lutherans (see this post).

My Catholic friend, "John", said that he thought the tornado was probably a message of some type - but maybe not. Then he said that he figured God could judge a church seeking to ordain openly homosexual clergy, but he would just love and respect all people.

I asked him what he meant by that, was he saying that he would unjudgementally love and care for lost homosexuals. He said that he would. I agreed that was a good thing. Then I asked if he also meant that he would love and accept practicing homosexuals who were fellow Christians and members of a local church, even clergy. He said he would love and respect them as well. He misquoted the "Do not judge" passage here (Matthew 7).

I brought up the idea behind the last paragraph in 1 Corinthians 5, which is Paul telling the people of Corinth to disassociate (really excommunicate) unrepentant habitual sinners who call themselves a brother (sister) in Christ. My Catholic friend said that I must be taking the passage out of context. I grabbed a Bible (we keep one around) and showed John the passage. I asked him to explain to me what Paul meant if he didn't mean that we ARE to judge those within the church, not those outside the faith, but expressly those inside the church.

John didn't have an answer for me, other than pointing me to 1 Samuel 16:7


"But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”

That confused me. I asked him to clarify how that passage related to my interpretation of 1 Corinthians. He told me that God was the one who judged the heart - not us. I agreed with him that only God ultimately knows what a man thinks and does at all times, however - Paul seems to be saying that we are bound to pass disciplinary judgement on fellow church members if they are found to be engaged in persistent, wanton sin. Therefore (I argued) the Samuel passage did not conflict with the Corinthians passage, it was simply saying a different thing - "Don't judge others by apperance alone." The old book by its cover thing...(also see John 7:24)

John went on to tell me that he felt sorry for me because I was so pessimistic and I only saw the negative things of the faith. He said that I should look around and see the good in people.

I told him that I didn't see people as inherently good (and neither does the Bible). He argued that all people have something of Gods light in them and if I could just see that, I would stop from talking about wrath and condemnation so much.

I again grabbed the Bible and went to Ephesians 2 and Psalm 51 to make a case for original sin and our depraved, rebellious nature. I told him that we are dead children of wrath from birth and that none of us has the Spirit of God in us - until God sovereignly decides to make it so.

John told me that he didn't think we worshiped the same God. He said that he didn't see how his God, a God of love and mercy could square with my God, a God of wrath and judgement. I told him that we did worship the same God - only we each decided to emphasize diffrent attributes of him, but it was certainly the same God.

I went on to explain that I probably emphasize the holiness of God and the righteous indignation of God more, because I think we have abandoned that attribute in large part as American Christians. We are moving closer and closer to universalism and heresy instead of biblical theology and orthodox doctrine (many have already crossed the line). I told John that I felt we needed more voices in the wilderness crying out to tell people about their desperate need for repentance. I also told him "Thanks" for pointing out my focus on wrath - I have to be careful to always follow that message up with a clear picture of the gospel.

John told me that God was not a God of wrath anymore. He said that while the Old Testament was full of Gods wrath, the New Testament was full of Gods love. I told him that he was flat mistaken and that he needed to get into a good bible study where the entire scripture was opened and examined. In fact, I explained - the New Testament is really a continuation of and a more vivid portrayal of both Gods love and his wrath. Jesus is the apex of Gods love (the cross) and Jesus is the apex of Gods wrath (the pending Second Coming).

At this point, John was obviously over talking with me. I am sad for him. He is obviously entrenched in the mainline American believer mentality of a politically correct, lovey-dovey, God who would never be angry at anyone. What starts with a simple denial of the plain text on church discipline leads to a disregard for the inerrancy and inspiration of the Bible. Ultimately, it can slide one into the path of a tornado.

I hope that God will use me in such a way as to speak truth to John in love about what scripture tell us. I pray that I might see John realize the full panoramic of God, his terrifying wrath along with his generous mercy. I also pray that God will keep me from ever delivering a message of Gods fury without including the path that takes us away from that anger - the path of Jesus Christ.

John 14:6
"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.."

True Blood

I am here to confess my obsession with the HBO miniseries "True Blood"

Its basically a vampire soap-opera currently in the second season. The show revolves around an alternate reality where the development of synthetic blood has allowed the undead to "come out of the coffin" and dwell openly amongst humans. The main character is a telepath named Sookie Stackhouse. She falls in love with a civil war-era vampire named Bill and they have lots of adventures.

USA Today said "Sexy, witty and unabashedly peculiar, True Blood is a blood-drenched Southern Gothic romantic parable set in a world where vampires are out and about and campaigning for equal rights. Part mystery, part fantasy, part comedy, and all wildly imaginative exaggeration, True Blood proves that there's still vibrant life — or death — left in the "star-crossed cute lovers" paradigm."

I must admit that the show is overtly violent, sexually charged, profanity ridden, and generally negative towards Christians (at least the televangelists - which they use as the general stereotype)...

Nevertheless, I really enjoy the show. The topics that it deals with are often very human topics and you can find a lot of thought-provoking social commentary amidst the less wholesome moments.

I have examined my life carefully since I began watching it to see if it was being of any influence in my life. I know that everything we do, see, and interact with has some influence on us - however, I don't see any place in my life where True Blood is corrupting me beyond the struggles I always deal with.

Yet, I decided that I should look to others for advice on how they would view watching a show like True Blood while walking a Christian life. For fun, I came up with a few imaginary responses from famous pastors and theologians...

Calvin: What's a TV?

John Piper: You should just turn the TV off in general.

Mark Driscoll: You ought to watch it to maintain relevance with the culture.

Paul Washer: How do you expect to watch that filth and have the Spirit fill you up?

Jerry Falwell: If they show kids holding hands in that program - turn it off!

Joel Osteen: (smiling) You deserve to watch whatever makes you be the best person you can be.

TD Jakes: (sweating and yelling) Devil come out of that TV show right now, in the name of Jesus!

NOW...What about you? Even if you have never seen/ heard of the show, what do you think about me watching it after reading this post?

I appreciate your replies.

DG: The Tornado, the Lutherans, and Homosexuality

From the Desiring God blog today (controversial I am sure, but spot on)

John Piper says:

I saw the fast-moving, misshapen, unusually-wide funnel over downtown Minneapolis from Seven Corners. I said to Kevin Dau, “That looks serious.”

It was. Serious in more ways than one. A friend who drove down to see the damage wrote,

On a day when no severe weather was predicted or expected...a tornado forms, baffling the weather experts—most saying they’ve never seen anything like it. It happens right in the city. The city: Minneapolis.

The tornado happens on a Wednesday...during the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America's national convention in the Minneapolis Convention Center. The convention is using Central Lutheran across the street as its church. The church has set up tents around it’s building for this purpose.

According to the ELCA’s printed convention schedule, at 2 PM on Wednesday, August 19, the 5th session of the convention was to begin. The main item of the session: “Consideration: Proposed Social Statement on Human Sexuality.” The issue is whether practicing homosexuality is a behavior that should disqualify a person from the pastoral ministry.

The eyewitness of the damage continues:

This curious tornado touches down just south of downtown and follows 35W straight towards the city center. It crosses I94. It is now downtown.

The time: 2PM.

The first buildings on the downtown side of I94 are the Minneapolis Convention Center and Central Lutheran. The tornado severely damages the convention center roof, shreds the tents, breaks off the steeple of Central Lutheran, splits what’s left of the steeple in two...and then lifts.

Let me venture an interpretation of this Providence with some biblical warrant.
1. The unrepentant practice of homosexual behavior (like other sins) will exclude a person from the kingdom of God.

The unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

2. The church has always embraced those who forsake sexual sin but who still struggle with homosexual desires, rejoicing with them that all our fallen, sinful, disordered lives (all of us, no exceptions) are forgiven if we turn to Christ in faith.

Such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:11)

3. Therefore, official church pronouncements that condone the very sins that keep people out of the kingdom of God, are evil. They dishonor God, contradict Scripture, and implicitly promote damnation where salvation is freely offered.

4. Jesus Christ controls the wind, including all tornados.

Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him? (Mark 4:41)

5. When asked about a seemingly random calamity near Jerusalem where 18 people were killed, Jesus answered in general terms—an answer that would cover calamities in Minneapolis, Taiwan, or Baghdad. God’s message is repent, because none of us will otherwise escape God’s judgment.

Jesus: “Those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:4-5)

6. Conclusion: The tornado in Minneapolis was a gentle but firm warning to the ELCA and all of us: Turn from the approval of sin. Turn from the promotion of behaviors that lead to destruction. Reaffirm the great Lutheran heritage of allegiance to the truth and authority of Scripture. Turn back from distorting the grace of God into sensuality. Rejoice in the pardon of the cross of Christ and its power to transform left and right wing sinners

Prayer 8/16/09

This week a prayer instead of a quote...

The Valley of Vision

Lord, high and holy, meek and lowly, Thou hast brought me to the valley of vision, where I live in the depths but see Thee in the heights; hemmed in by mountains of sin I behold Thy glory. Let me learn by paradox that the way down is the way up, that to be low is to be high, that the broken heart is the healed heart, that the contrite spirit is the rejoicing spirit, that the repenting soul is the victorious soul, that to have nothing is to possess all, that to bear the cross is to wear the crown, that to give is to receive, that the valley is the place of vision. Lord, in the daytime stars can be seen from deepest wells, and the deeper the wells the brighter Thy stars shine; let me find Thy light in my darkness, Thy life in my death, Thy joy in my sorrow, Thy grace in my sin, Thy riches in my poverty, Thy glory in my valley.

Buy the book here:
http://www.monergismbooks.com/The-Valley-of-Vision-A-Collection-of-Puritan-Prayers-Paperback-p-17135.html

A Shocking Message

This guy is abit loud and aggressive with his preaching, but maybe we all need some of that...

Prosperity theology is a False Gospel

It may seem like overkill since I have been writing on similar topics recently - but Al Mohler puts it more eloquently than I do. Check out his message from today:

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=4248

Death is Not Dying

Yesterday, a friend from church posted a link on facebook. I followed it and I was so happy that I did.

"Death is Not Dying" is a webpage devoted to the life of Rachel Barkey. Rachel recently passed away after years of fighting breast cancer, being a cancer survivor, finding out that the cancer returned, and receiving a terminal prognosis. On top of those things, Rachel was young and she had a husband and two small children. For many people, being put in that situation would lead to an abandonment of the faith or a deep anger at God. But, for Rachel - her walk with Christ only deepened.

The webpage has some great resources, including:

A 55 minute video of her speaking to 600 women shortly before her death. (A magnificent presentation of the hope we have in the gospel)
A stellar book list that was her personal reconmendations for further study and edification
A section with reprints of the numerous letters that Rachel wrote during her trial
A links section to several good sites

The story of Rachel Barkey is a moving tale of one women who faced certain death with untouchable hope - not in herself or her own skills and ability - but with a saving faith in the hope that Christ gave us thru his finished work on the cross and his ressurection. Its worth a look.

A Gospel Centered Church

Today in his blog, Tullian Tchividjian, quoted his seminary friend Bob Thune (pastor of Coram Deo Church in Omaha, Nebraska) who had written something to describe his church. He explained that every church has a “DNA” – a set of deeply rooted values or characteristics that define it. So what does that mean, exactly?

Bob says, “Churches often obscure the glory of the gospel by reducing it to something less than it is. Some understand the gospel only as doctrinal content to be believed. Others diminish it to a personal, subjective experience of God’s presence. Still others see it as a social cause to be championed. The gospel is none of these, and yet it is all of these. A truly gospel-centered church understands and embraces the fullness of the gospel as content, community, and cause.”

GOSPEL CONTENT
The Gospel is a message that is to be preached or proclaimed (Mark 1:14; Acts 14:21; Rom 1:15; 1 Peter 1:12). It is the story of God’s redemption of his fallen creation. It is the good news that God has acted in history to conquer evil and reconcile sinners to himself through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor 15:1-12). A gospel-centered church is one where the gospel is proclaimed clearly, consistently, and compellingly (1 Cor 9:16-23).

GOSPEL COMMUNITY
The gospel is not just a message to be believed, but a power to be experienced (Rom 1:16). The gospel shapes a new community as those who were formerly God’s enemies are reconciled to Him (Rom 5:10) and adopted into his family (Gal 4:4-7). The church is not a place, but a people – a community that is continually being reformed and renewed by the transforming power of the gospel (Col. 1:6).

GOSPEL CAUSE
The gospel is a call to action – a declaration that “the kingdom of God is at hand” (Mark 1:15). God is not just interested in the salvation of humans, but in the restoration of all of creation to its original “good” (Gen 1:31; Rom 8:19-22). A gospel-centered church will be active in the work of mercy, justice, and cultural renewal, praying and working against the effects of sin so that God’s will might be done “on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt 6:10).
_______________________

I am so very glad that I go to a local church that is gospel-centered in all three aspects. If you are not familiar with our family church, please check it out at:
http://www.southpointpca.com/

A new season

After my faith, my family, and my friends - my next greatest passion is fighting. A new season of TUF is coming...

Ultimate Fighter Cast Preview | UFC | SPIKE.com

Response to comment on "Healing"

An Anonymous Friend said...

Honestly, I don't know how I feel about healing. I questioned my girlfriend about Isaiah 53, and she pointed me to Matthew 8:16-17. Matthew clearly interprets the "griefs" and "sorrows" in Isaiah 53:4 as "sicknesses."

"When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses."

I will check back in a couple of days to see if you have replied. Take care!
_________________________

The passages in question (ESV):
__________________________
Matthew 8:14-17

14 And when Jesus entered Peter's house, he saw his mother-in-law lying sick with a fever. 15 He touched her hand, and the fever left her, and she rose and began to serve him. 16 That evening they brought to him many who were oppressed by demons, and he cast out the spirits with a word and healed all who were sick. 17 This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah: “He took our illnesses and bore our diseases.”
__________________________
Ish 53:4-5

4 Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.

5 But he was wounded for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his stripes we are healed.
___________________________

I appreciate folks stopping by with comments!

I looked back at my original post and it should be clear via the 2nd and 3rd point I made in my blog entry that I believe Christ's penal substitutionary atonement on the cross did vanquish both our sin debt and the effects of the fall/ death on our world. That includes sickness. However, my point is that those benefits are not provided to us in full until our death and glorification in the world to come with our ressurected body. We can all see that our acceptance of Christ's work in place of our own has secured our eternal life, yet we still have to endure in this mortal shell for a generation before sin is no longer our enemy for practical purposes. In that same way, we can bank that the cross did secure our physical perfection, but only after a season on this planet where we struggle with deep afflictions, shall we realize it in sum.

The whole broad narrative of Scripture is blatantly obvious about the multitude of painful trials that believers will encounter. We are encouraged to rest in our hope (that is Christ) and stand strong thru them - we are NOT called to take select verses out of context and create entire man-centered theologies around a false idea that true believers will never experience hardship.Seeing the entire redemptive plan means that Isaiah 53 could have lots to say about healing and it wouldn't affect my view. Jesus is sufficient for all things, physical healing included, but that does not mean that we inccur all the benefits immediately - just the opposite, we are to be patient as we wait for the ressurection of the saints and the ultimate realization of the victory that Christ already purchased.

As for the correspondence between Isaiah 53 and Matthew 8...I can see that Matthew makes reference to the Isaiah passage and he is obviously talking about physical sickness. However, in my blog I did not deal with 53:4, I dealt with 53:5. I think that the two are completely different sentences and separate thoughts/ prophecies about the coming Messiah (the suffering servant).

Verse 4 (together with the Matthew version) seems to be telling of a man who would heal the sick, cast out demons, and perform other miracles while his own people ignored his power and made plans to make him suffer. This is exactly what happened to Christ, he came and proved that he was who he claimed he was via his miracles - yet the Jews despised him and plotted to have him killed.

Verse 5 on the other hand is the one that actually refers to healing and is usually taken out of context to speak of physical healing. The language here (transgression and iniquities) is obviously related to our sin nature and not our sickness. When that verse mentions "peace" it is clear that the meaning is primarily "spiritual peace with God" not "physical peace from suffering" - why is it so clear? I think that a plain reading is pretty forthright, but another way to see the clarity is to once again look at all of the Bible and open one's eyes to the suffering that the apostles endured in the early church...

When Paul tells Timothy to have some wine (1 Tim 5:23), its good for the stomach, that implies that Timothy's probably had stomach aches. Thats a simple example of the fact that even the earliest saints were dealing with sickness and mortal fragility while they remained alive.

It is so easy to get captured by the word-faith movement and the teaching on healing - it appeals to our dark and self-centered heart..."oh, you mean that I don't have to be sick or poor if I truly believe, wow that Jesus guy is pretty sweet" Instead we should see the biblical portrait, which is..."Christ is worthy no matter my physical or financial condition, he alone is God and he is a good and merciful God who only does what is right and just and loving - even if I don't understand."

If you build your faith on prosperity theology, your foundation will be swept away when great calamity hits your life. If you build your house on the sovereignty of our Lord, you will endure all storms - it may still be scary when they strike, but you will pull through intact!"

Interview Outcome

Lots of people are probably interested in how my interview went yesterday - so I figured that it would be easiest to give the rundown on here and then simply direct folks to this link.

I think that I did very well in the interview itself. I met with 3 of the top folks at the Court of Appeals Chief Executives Office. I wasn't flabbergasted by any questions and I felt they were overall impressed. At the end of the interview they asked me if I had any questions and thats when things when south.

I asked them about the daily routine, the hours, the chance for upward mobility, etc...

They were very honest and they gave me a lot to think about. Here is the situation as it looks now.

PRO to this job - $375.00 a month net income increase (thats a minivan)

CONS to this job:
- take away $100.00 of that increase immediately for my bus pass to get there
- add 1 to 1 ½ hours away from my family each day due to a longer commute
- no upward mobility (they were very honest about the fact that the court rarely has new vacancies and that they rarely hire from internal candidates even when they do have openings)
- suspension of civil service protections (I would work at the pleasure of the Chief Judge, so all the benefits of government job security are out the window)
- need to go buy dress pants, shirts, and shoes (no more shorts and tees)
- travel on Mother's Day to judicial conference every other year
- no cost of living increases ( Court is cutting budget they explained and they are about to stop giving both "step" increases and annual cost of living increases)
- working as a "gopher" for 12 appellate judges who see themselves as demi-gods (obviously fun)

So, as you can see I am not too excited about this job prospect. I have decided to continue with the application process if they call me in for the second interview. If they do eventually offer me the job, I will accept on the condition that they reimburse me the cost of my bus pass each month (hey, its going green isn't it?!?)

Thanks to everyone who was praying for me. God doesn't always answer in the affirmative and it might be that the uneasy feeling I got yesterday about this job is His way of saying "I have something better around the bend." I am not sure yet of the choice I'll make in this situation - but I pray that He will continue to be with me for my joy and His glory.

'Stillborn' 1.1.-Pound Baby Wakes Up Just Before Funeral

He is still in the miracle business...

ASUNCION, Paraguay — A baby boy born 16 weeks prematurely was declared dead by doctors at a hospital in Paraguay only to wake up in time for his funeral wake hours later.

Dr. Ernesto Weber, head of pediatric care at the state-run hospital in the capital of Asuncion, said the baby weighed just 1,1 pounds when he was born.

"Initially, the baby didn't move, he practically didn't have any respiratory reflexes, nor did we hear a heartbeat and, as a result, we declared a premature fetus of 24 weeks dead," Weber told Reuters Television.

The family was given a death certificate and a cardboard box with the baby's name scribbled on the outside which served as a makeshift coffin.

But when the family took him from the hospital to prepare him for his funeral, the unbelievable happened.

"I opened the box and took the baby out and he cried. I got scared and I said "the baby's crying" ... and then he started moving his arms, his legs and I got scared, we got very scared," said one member of the family, Liliana Alvarenga.

Hours after the baby's death had been declared he was found to be alive. The hospital has begun an investigation and the baby is now in a stable condition in an incubator.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,538721,00.html?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a16:g2:r2:c0.192287:b27050028:z0

GIVE HIM PRAISE!

My iPod

Sometimes people ask me about the music I am listening to on my iPod. I have lots of different stuff on there. Much of my life inside the headphones does not revolve around music at all. I listen to lots of podcasts (free talk radio from Apple). You can get a podcast for just about any subject, I listen to lots of preaching.

Currently, my iPod hosts sermons from John Piper, John MacArthur, Mark Driscoll, and Allistar Begg. Additionally, I have several teaching programs downloaded, including stuff from Greg Koukl, RC Sproul, and William Lane Craig. All of these resources have been one part of growing my faith – namely, they grew my theological understanding and critical thinking skills. I am very grateful for the use I have gotten out of my iPod. I paid $200 for it back in 2006 – great investment!

Of course, I do have some music stored away as well. It may seem cheesy, but I have lots of Christian music. I am not one of those people who thinks that a believer can’t listen to secular music, it is my own personal conviction to distance myself from most music that isn’t overtly Christian. Music tends to bring back memories for me and I don’t need to spend my day thinking about drunk fighting (rock music) or promiscuity (hip hop). To keep my head uncluttered, I listen to lots of explicitly religious stuff.

I would say that my two favorite “artists” are Indelible Grace and LeCrae. IG is actually a group of folks that sprung out of Belmont University. They have an amazing knack for setting old hymms to modern arrangement. It is really laid back, yet deep music. Best of all, they are very sound in their lyrics, one can learn a lot about what Scripture says by the songs they sing. It’s a great way to reinforce daily time in the Word and prayer. The other artist is a Christian rapper named LeCrae. He is able to put catchy beats in the background of some insanely profound rhymes. His work is so Christo-centric and right-on, John Piper has teamed up with him for several projects.

Before I post the webpages of these 2 artists, let me invite you (my awesome reader) to send me a comment with your favorite Christian artist/ song. I appreciate it!

http://www.igracemusic.com/

http://www.lecrae.net/

Interview

All-

Please include me in your prayers tonight or tomorrow morning (if you remember). I am heading to a job interview at 1:15pm tomorrow. I will be trying to get a new job at the Court of Appeals downtown. It isn't extremely well-paying - but it should provide us the minivan that we need.

Ultimately, I want to be where God wants me to be. I think he left me at the Archives for these past few years (despite the pay and atmosphere) because it is a place that allows me to listen to lots of podcasts (whereby I gained alot of knowledge and faith) and because it is a workplace where religion is regularly discussed (providing a door for the gospel to be proclaimed).

I feel in my heart that he is ready for me to move on - I hope that isn't just me being ready to move on! So, please pray that I will do well in the interview and that I am able to trust in His grace whatever the outcome of His perfect will for my life turns out to be.

Thanks.

Quote 08/09/2009

"Man is nothing: he hath a free will to go to hell, but none to go to heaven, till God worketh in him to will and to do his good pleasure"

George Whitefield to John Wesley

Challies Controversy

There has been lots of controversy about a recent post by well-known reformed blogger Tim Challies in the past couple of days. I encourage you to read his post here:
http://www.challies.com/archives/christian-living/the-religious-hell-hole-1.php

Tim is attempting to address the very difficult question of "do babies that die go directly to heaven?" I was actualy asked that question myself less than a week ago by a 12 year old boy. In my opinion, it has no easy answer. The best we can say is that Scripture does not appear to be clear on the issue.

On one hand we have the issue of original sin and the sentence that it brings to our eternal soul w/o Jesus intervention to elect us. Taken with logical reformed consistency, it seems that elect babies who die go to heaven while non-elect babies that die do not. On the other hand, many pastors (including Piper and MacArthur) make arguments of inference from select scripture to say that God mysteriously saves all babies since they lack a natural ability to understand their sin.

I am unsure of my position. I don't see concrete evidence in the Bible of the "all babies go to heaven" stance - yet, I see enough potential evidence to keep my mind unmade on the matter. Personally, if I ever had to speak with someone who experienced such a loss regarding this, I would side with Pipers argument. I think that it would bring comfort without harming any of the essential doctrines of grace.

However, a recent comment by someone about this at "22 Words" struck me...they said:

"The real question is would you still love Jesus even if He did send some or all babies to hell?”

How true. If you find yourself answering in the negative to that question then you have a serious problem with understanding sovereignty, authority, Lordship, and submission. We must remember that God is the creator and we are the created. He has ultimate power in deciding to do what he will with us. And by definition, all of his decisions are good. They may not always seem good to our limited, finite, temporal, and fallen minds - but, we must trust that they are.

God is a God of grace and I hope that he makes a special provision, although not explicit in Scripture, for babies/ children/ and mentally handicapped who don't have the mental faculty to see his natural or special revelation to go straight to heaven. However, if he does not make such allowance and he treats those persons the same as us all (elect and non-elect without any basis from ourselves) then I will still worship and adore him. It is a painful idea, until I remember that we all deserve hell and that it is only the grace of God which saves any from eternal torment. As we see our own condition clearly (baby or not) we get a much bigger appreciation for the love that God displays in saving any rebel against him. Take comfort in that amidst the difficult questions like this one.

You might be a Presbyterian if...

1. You can spell supralapsarian.

2. When asked to name the twelve apostles you say Matthew, John, James, Andrew, Peter, Nathaniel, Phillip, Simon, Thomas, Augustine, Luther and Calvin.

3. You used to be a Baptist.

4. You started drinking ("in moderation" of course) after you left the Baptist church and became a Presbyterian.

5. When the spirit comes upon you in power, you don't raise your hands and shout Hallelujuah, rather you scratch your chin, turn to your neighbor and whisper "hmmm, . . . that was a good point."

6. You think fencing has something to do with the Lord's Supper instead of swords.

7. You've considered church discipline for people who watch the NFL on Sunday afternoon.

8. They aren't "catholics," or even "Roman Catholics." They're "Papists."

9. Instead of going to prophecy conferences where they talk about Star-Trek eschatology and the mark of the Beast, you attend conferences on "life and culture", art, social justice and other high- brow things like that. Afterwards, you go to the local pub and talk about enlightenment philosophy and soteriology over a pint of dark beer.

10. You attend a church which has a name closer to "Grace Covenant Fellowship" rather than a church that calls itself something like "The Washed In The Blood, Berean, Bible-Believing, Charismatic Tabernacle and Worship Center".

Healing - part 2

I had a few extra thoughts on the subject...

- We should ALWAYS pray for the healing of those who are sick. It is explicitly commanded in James 5:14. Yet, we must not take the next verse (15) to mean that everyone who gets sick WILL be healed. Verses 10 and 11, just above, make it plain that many will suffer and endure affliction. They also make it clear that we are to endure that hardship with steadfast praise.

- Instead of praying for healing (or anything else) as if we have authority over God to affect him into action, we should pray in the way that the Lord Jesus taught us. In Luke 22:42, we read that Jesus makes his request AND he trusts that God will ordain the outcome in whichever way is best. I hear alot of people say that praying "in His will" is weak prayer, but thats how Christ prayed and he certainly wasn't a man of weak prayer.

- And lastly, I want to post this great article which I recently read by Dr. Sam Storms. It is a far better resource than I could ever write, please take a look at it. This question will hit all of us at some point. If you can get your mind biblically prepared now - the turmoil might be less when life forces you to ponder the issue.
_______________________

Why God Doesn't Always Heal

God loved the apostle Paul. Yet God sovereignly orchestrated his painful thorn in the flesh and then declined to remove it, notwithstanding Paul's passionate prayer that he be healed.

We are not apostles. Yet, as his children, no less so than Paul, God loves us too. We don't know the nature of Paul's thorn, but each of us has undoubtedly suffered in a similar way, and some considerably worse. We, like Paul, have prayed incessantly to be healed. Or perhaps knowing of a loved one's "thorn" we have prayed for them. And again, like Paul, God declined to remove it. Why?


It's hard to imagine a more difficult, confusing, and controversial topic than why God chooses not to heal in response to the intercessory pleas of his people. I don't profess to have all the answers, but I think I've got a few. I'm sure that this meditation will provoke many to anger and frustration, while others, I pray, will find a measure of comfort.

In the final analysis, virtually everything about healing remains a mystery. I don't mind saying that I'm weary of those who claim to reduce healing to a formula or a manageable cause and effect phenomenon in which we can know with certainty why some are healed and why others are not. I've labored in this meditation to avoid falling into that trap. That said, I would like to suggest that the reason why many are not healed may possibly be answered in any one of seven ways.

(1) Although we must be careful in giving more weight to the role of faith than does the NT itself, we also must be willing to acknowledge that occasionally healing does not occur because of the absence of that sort of faith that God delights to honor.

This does not mean that every time a person isn't healed it is because of a defective faith or that if only a more robust and doubt-free faith were in exercise that healing would inevitably follow. But it does mean that faith is very important. How can we conclude otherwise in view of the many texts in which healing is closely linked to someone's faith? I hope you'll take the time to pause and read these passages: Matthew 9:22, 28-29; 15:28; Mark 2:5,11; 5:34; 9:17-24; Mark 10:52; Luke 17:19; Acts 3:16; 14:8-10; James 5:14-16.

In my book on spiritual gifts I asked the question: "Why did Jesus emphasize faith?" Neither he nor his Father need it. They could have orchestrated life such that something other than faith would be the condition on which they would heal. They are not hampered or hindered by the faithlessness or prayerlessness of the sick person or those who pray for his/her healing. The reason is this: faith glorifies God. Faith points us away from ourselves to him. Faith turns us away from our own power and resources to his. Faith says, "Lord, I am nothing and you are everything. I entrust myself to your care. I cling to you alone. My confidence is in your word and character no matter what happens."

Faith is not a weapon by which we demand things from God or put him in subjection to us. Faith is an act of self-denial. Faith is a renunciation of one's ability to do anything and a confession that God can do everything. Faith derives its power not from the spiritual energy of the person who believes, but from the supernatural efficacy of the person who is believed: God! It is not faith's act but its object that accounts for the miraculous.

(2) Sometimes healing does not occur because of the presence of sin for which there has been no confession or repentance. James 5:15-16 clearly instructs us to confess our sins to one another and pray for one another that we may be healed. Again, please do not conclude from this that each time a person isn't healed it is because he/she has committed some specific sin of which they have refused to repent. But in some cases this is undoubtedly true.

(3) Although it sounds odd to many at first hearing, healing may not happen because the sick don't want it to happen. Jesus asked the paralyzed man in John 5:6, "Do you want to be healed?" What on the surface may appear to be a ridiculous question is, on further examination, found to be profoundly insightful.

Some people who suffer from a chronic affliction become accustomed to their illness and to the pattern of life it requires. Their identity is to a large extent wrapped up in their physical disability. They enjoy their dependency on others and the special attention it brings them. In some instances they don't want the responsibilities that would come with being healthy. This is not a common phenomenon, but it does happen in a few cases.

(4) We must also consider the principle articulated in James 4:2, where we are told that "you do not have, because you do not ask." The simple fact is that some are not healed because they do not pray. Perhaps they pray once or twice, and then allow discouragement to paralyze their petitions. Prayer for healing often must be prolonged, sustained, persevering, and combined with fasting.

(5) Some are not healed because the demonic cause of the affliction has not been addressed. Please do not jump to unwarranted conclusions. I am not suggesting that all physical disease is demonically induced. Of course, it is interesting, is it not, that in Paul's case God used "a messenger of Satan" to inflict the thorn. There is also the case of the woman in Luke 13 "who had a disabling spirit [or, a spirit of infirmity] for eighteen years. She was bent over and could not fully straighten herself" (Luke 13:11). According to Jesus, "Satan" had "bound" her (Luke 13:16; see also Acts 10:38).

It takes considerable discernment, time, and patience to determine if an illness has a demonic cause, together with even greater commitment to praying for that individual and leading them to address the reasons for their spiritual oppression. When these factors are ignored, healing may not be forthcoming.

(6) We must also consider the mystery of divine providence. There are undoubtedly times and seasons in the purposes of God during which his healing power is withdrawn or at least largely diminished. God may have any number of reasons for this to which we are not privy, whether to discipline a wayward and rebellious church or to create a greater desperation for his power or to wean us off excessive dependence on physical comfort and convenience or any number of other possibilities. If this leaves you confused, that's why it's called a mystery!

But what must we say when the problem isn't the absence of faith or the presence of a demon or the refusal to repent or the failure to pray or a lack of desire? How then do we account for on-going physical affliction, as in Paul's case? I strongly urge you to carefully read the next point.

(7) Often times there are dimensions of spiritual growth and moral development and increase in the knowledge of God in us that he desires MORE than our physical health, experiences that in his wisdom God has determined can only be attained by means or in the midst of or in response to less than perfect physical health. In other words, healing the sick is a good thing (and we should never cease to pray for it), but often there is a better thing that can only be attained by means of physical weakness.

More important to God than our physical health is our spiritual holiness. This isn't to say the body isn't important. God isn't a Gnostic! He values and has redeemed our bodies and now dwells within them as his eternal temple. But while we live in this corrupt and decaying world, inner and spiritual conformity to the image of Christ often comes only at the expense of or at least simultaneous with physical deterioration and suffering (see 2 Cor. 4:16-18).

Let me personalize this principle. If I believe Romans 8:28, that God sovereignly orchestrates all events in my life for my ultimate spiritual good (and preeminently for his ultimate glory), I can only conclude that, all things being equal, if I'm not healed it is because God values something in me greater than my physical comfort and health that he, in his infinite wisdom and kindness, knows can only be attained by means of my physical affliction and the lessons of submission, dependency, and trust in God that I learn from it.

In the final analysis, we may never know why a person isn't healed. What, then, ought to be our response? In the first place, don't stop praying! Some people find this difficult to swallow. Many times I've been asked: "Why should Paul bother to pray for release from something that God wills to inflict?" The answer is because Paul didn't know what God's will was in this particular case until such time as God chose to make it known. And neither do you or I with regard to any particular illness that we may suffer.

If the Lord had never said in response to Paul's prayer, "No, it isn't my will that you be relieved of this thorn," Paul would have been justified, indeed required, to continue to pray for his healing. I once heard Jack Taylor put it this way: "Never cease praying for healing until you are shown otherwise either by divine revelation or death!" If you are able to discern, as did Paul, through some prophetic disclosure or other legitimate biblical means that it is not God's will now or ever to heal you, you may cease asking him to do so. Otherwise, short of death itself, you must persevere in prayer. You never know but that God's ultimate and long-term will for you is complete healing after he has for a season accomplished his short-term sanctifying purpose.

In Paul's case, the only reason he ceased asking for deliverance was because God, in effect, told him to shut up! "No, Paul. I'm not going to heal you. It isn't my will in this instance that you be set free from this affliction. Rather, I have a higher purpose in view: your humility and my Son's glory manifest in the context of your on-going weakness."

To which Paul, in effect, replied: "O.K., Lord, I'll shut up and submit to your merciful purpose in my life. I know you love me and desire what is ultimately of greatest good for my spiritual growth. Therefore, my prayer now is that you maximize in me the beneficial effects of this pain. Don't let me miss out on any spiritual good that might come my way from this malady. Teach me everything I need to know and sustain me that I might be a platform for the glory of Christ and a source of comfort to other suffering saints."

I'm sure there are other ways to account for why God chooses not to heal, but I trust that these have proven helpful. There is much I do not know about this matter, but of this I'm quite certain: God's grace is sufficient in all circumstances so that we, "for the sake of Christ" (2 Cor. 12:10a), might learn that in our weakness his power is made perfect!

A bigger cross...

"We all need a bigger cross...a cross that not only forgives us, but also draws us to obedience and gives us the assurance that God’s ways are always the best ways - even when we don't understand."

Thanks to Tim and his controversial post for the inspiration of this quote.

http://www.challies.com/archives/christian-living/the-religious-hell-hole-1.php

Healing

I have some friends (folks who get my blog delivered to their e-mail each time I hit "post") who sometimes discuss their beliefs on healing. I disagree with their take on what the Bible has to say about healing and I feel compelled to air my opinion in response to their interpretation. I want to start by saying that they are fine people and strong Christians. They were used in a mighty way by God to bring me to saving faith in Christ and I do not write this "rebuttal" out of any animosity towards them. They are sincere believers with whom I simply don't agree. Because I think that dialogue about important issues is essential - I give you their view and my response. Comments welcome, especially from the friends of whom I write.
__________________________

My friends said:

"The second part of our belief in Healing is a little harder to explain.

And like I said, I don't claim to understand it 100%, but hey isn't that what faith is about?

Boiled down, we believe that Isaiah 53:5 is proof that Christ took our sickness on the Cross.
Christians believe that Christ died on the Cross for our sins, but if you read the rest of that verse you find that Jesus also died for our diseases. He was reversing the Fall of Man, and that would include sickness.

In our family, the husband is our Bible Scholar.
I personally have a hard time interpreting and focusing on the text. So most of what I know about Healing I have learned from sermons from Pastors like Andrew Wommack.
When we pray a sickness off us, it isn't much different then when people talk about praying for the sick. We just have a different mindset.

We claim Healing once and only once. The same way we ask to be forgiven once and only once.
From there, we begin to thank God for the Healing that is taking place.

And sometimes believing it is hard.
I think that Healing is even harder in America because we are bombarded by negative information about health all the time. There is always an epidemic on the news and WebMD makes us all sure we are dying from something.

It's a rule in our house that when one of us isn't feeling well, we cannot go online or watch TV. We try not to talk to people about it who don't believe in Healing.
It just helps keep the negative disbelief out of our minds.

We also are big on not speaking death over our house.

The Bible says that there is power in the tongue and that you are either speaking Life or you are speaking Death at all times.

For example, when someone says, "Little Billy has the flu. I hope Susie doesn't get it since we were over there last night. I think they shared a cup!", we simply say, "She won't get sick, she's covered by the blood of Jesus."

Some people are sensitive so we don't say it to them. We just claim it.

We believe that God took All the disease and sickness with him and that we are healed of any problem. That's where we lose people.

We acknowledge that people of extreme faith die of illness. That sometimes, it seems their claiming didn't work. And as I said, I don't have all the answers. I do believe that it has to do with having unbelief.

You know the verse that talks about moving mountains with faith as small as a mustard seed? I believe that you only need a teeny tiny bit of faith, but just a teeny tiny bit of unbelief mixed in there will block that belief. That's why we think its so important not to let our fast technology scare us out of claiming.

See, sounds kinda crazy huh?

We have lost friends over this and a lot of people write us off when we tell them that we don't get sick.

But that's OK with me.

The proof is in the fact that we don't get sick."
_________________________

My reply:

1) Healing is mysterious, I agree. No one can understand the will or actions of God perfectly - but we can come pretty close by looking at the whole of his redemptive plan in Scripture.

2) I do not deny that Christ's sacrifice on the cross conquered sickness once and forever. But, I don't see evidence that this is immediately applicable anymore than our spiritual perfection is immediate. The effects of a fallen world plaque us until we die and pass on to be glorified and ushered into the presence of God. It is in that moment, when we leave this realm behind that the victory of Christ over sickness is realized for us. Check these passages:
1 Corinthians 15:52-53
1 Corinthians 13:12
2 Corinthians 5:2-4

3) The use of Isaiah 53:5 by charismatics to give "proof" that Jesus death on the cross was as much for physical healing as it was for spiritual rebirth falls flat when one looks at the context and the original language. The first part of the verse tells us what things that Christ healed us from. The context does not denote physical illness. Instead it clearly refers to our transgressions and iniquities. Physical illness is not a transgression nor an iniquity. It is obvious that the reference here is to sin. The word "healed" can only be properly interpreted when it is studied in light of its surroundings. In this case, it does not mean "healed from physical sickness" - instead, it appears to be used as a metaphor. Sin is our disease, Jesus heals us.

4) I suggest that one should stay away from preachers like Andrew Wommack. People like him, Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, even Joel Osteen are not Christ-centered ministers. The gospel that they preach is a false one that elevates man to an absurd degree. They seem to preach Jesus as a means to an end, a slot-machine for our gain, instead of the all-powerful and sovereign God of creation who deserves our praise regardless of what he does for us or not. Jesus is our greatest treasure, he is our end - not health, wealth, or success...only Jesus. Those things may come, they may not - if he is our chief pleasure and our ultimate aim in this life, we have not wasted our existence. If, however, we see Christ as the way to get rich, healthy, and powerful we will miss out on the true joy of loving Him for Him and we will have wasted this life. Scripture is clear that greedy false prophets will come and deny the all-sufficiency of Jesus (2 Peter 2:1-3), but they will not escape final doom.

I suggest trying to listen to a few sermons from John Piper or John MacArthur. Most importantly - become a bible scholar for yourself. We ALL should (that means me and my family too).

5) I agree that the media and the world are very negative and that they can influence us to jump to conclusions and to overreact. Self-diagnosis via the web is a horrible thing.

6) The neo-pentecostal idea of "name-it, claim-it" or "speaking life and death" over oneself is a serious theological misunderstanding and honestly appears to border on turning biblical faith into some hocus-pocus mystical new age stuff. Proverbs 18:21 is the "proof-text" for this idea. However, as we again look at the context it seems clear that the writer is not being literal in verse 21 anymore than he is talking about actual fruit growing in ones mouth satisfying ones hunger (see verse 20).

The principle here is that our tongue can be used for edifying people or for breaking them down. Compare with Proverbs 12:18. This is certainly true. Our human nature stands in defiance to that old schoolyard poem...words can really hurt us.

7) Claiming things does not seem to make them happen. St. Paul, who authored most of the New Testament, was afflicted with an illness in 2 Corinthians 12 and he didn't seem to be able to pray it away. In fact God told him that this messenger of Satan should stay with him. Why would God do that? Why would he allow a man of amazing faith, a man begging to be relieved of his pain, to be tortured through physical sickness?...

Because God is not most ultimately concerned with us being in good health, financially well-off, or secularly successful. God is most concerned with his Name, he is most concerned with getting glory for Himself. That isn't conceited for a being who deserves it, its natural and good. He is the potter and we are the clay (Romans 9), he will mold us in whatever way he sees fit that he should receive the utmost glory and honor. This is borne out by Paul and the story of Job. Horrible, horrible things occur to Job and God patently allows Satan to do them. By that allowance, God ordains, even wills the action in some sense.

God is in control, despite what Andrew Wommack would say, and he will be gracious to whom he will be gracious (Exodus 33). The wind blows where it wills (John 3), not where we claim it should blow.

8) No one has all the answers, some unregenerate people receive miraculous healing and other people with great faith die. Even if claiming was true, it often does not seem to work. And why not? According to this theological mentality, it is due to a lack of faith and an abundance of unbelief in the one who needs the healing or the ones praying for that person . Malarkey!

Great saints of God are struck down by the fallenness of this world every day. Cancer kills grandmothers, lung disease racks godly women who never smoked a day in their life, children get leukemia and die even when their parents have raw and rug-burnt knees.

These things don't happen because the person didn't have enough faith to force Jesus into performing his magic healing trick. They happen because God sovereignly ordains them. He made all things and he has authority over creation, not us. Sure, he sometimes delegates specific authority to specific persons - but we are not all little-Gods. He alone is God. He is all-wise and all-good. He is working all things (even the horrible ones) together for the good of his people. The ultimate good, that is eternal life and a inner man that resembles Christ more and more each day.

God will work differently in each of us all to achieve that goal. Some will be rich, some poor. Some will be healthy, some terminally ill. Some will be CEOs, some will be pizza boys. God works in all things that his people will be taken care of (Romans 8:28) and he works in all our lives to bring us to a place where he will be most glorified in us and we will be most satisfied in him.

9) Everyone gets sick, and ear infection is a sickness. There may be many reasons that someone does not usually get sick. They might eat well, exercise regularly, have good genetics, decide that a common cold isn't worth a trip to the doctor, etc...To say that the "proof is in the pudding" again brings the center of attention to ones own abilities (we are good claimers with lots of faith) and not Gods ruling hand/ deserved glory. We must learn to take our eyes off this world and our own work and say with Job:
"The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Blessed be the name of the Lord" (1:21)

10) In conclusion...Christianity is not a religion of magic words, its a relationship of trust even when the relief doesn't come. Faith is not best explained as "what Jesus can do for me" if I have enough of it, but as resting in what Jesus did for me that I might enjoy eternity with him and obey him forever. Sickness is not a consequence of ones lack of belief, its a consequence of this natural order and it is always a thing allowed by God for ultimate good. Gods number one priority is not us, it is himself and thats the way it should be. The "full gospel" isn't - its actually a false gospel.
_____________________________

Thats all I felt that I needed to get off my chest. I realize that my friends posted their views with the request that:

"... if you don't agree or believe the same way, please keep your negative comments away."

...thus, I have not responded on their blog nor have I named them and few people who read this blog could figure out who they are even with some effort. Ultimately, I don't feel that I was negative in my post, unless you think that disagreeing is inherently negative. My hope is that I have provided some food for thought and some lively discussion fodder.

Please hit me up with some feedback. I don't claim to know it all, I just claim to try and have good biblical reasoning behind my views - what do you think?

Protect Thyself

This past Monday was my first "Protect Thyself" seminar. A few months ago, a friend who serves as a houseparent at Eagle Ranch asked me to come teach his (5) middle-school boys self-defense. I talked it out with him over a few weeks and the result was a class called "Protect Thyself."

The essence of this one-day period of instruction is to give the student a introduction to practical ways they can defend themselves both physically (against assaults and abductions) and spiritually (against the temptations which spring from our nature, the world, and the devil).

I spent the physical portion talking about how to stay safe and out of harms way before transitioning into some drills that showed them ways to defend themselves if it came to that. They loved the hands on interaction and the sense of accomplishment. Then I spent the spiritual section focusing on the gospel (always central) and the biblical portrait of spiritual combat as we discussed the weapons we have in that battle (prayer, the word, social action...)

I can't post many pictures because I need the kids parent's premission to put them on-line. Here are a few of me and John (my houseparent friend) demonstrating a choke defense.

Now that I have one of these under my belt, I am looking to open this up to interested youth groups and ministries. It is also great for women AND men (if they can push past that male pride we all have). If you know of anyone interested, shoot me a message.

glover4088@bellsouth.net

I have a blog up that touches on this right now, I may get a full webpage in the future - if it takes off. Thanks!

http://protectthyselfsd.blogspot.com/

Quote of the Week - 8/2/09

"Ignorance of God and of ourselves is the great principle and cause of all our disquietments; and, this ariseth mostly not from want of light and instruction, but for want of consideration and application."
John Owen

This Present Darkness

Ephesians 6:12
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

Recently, a friend at work asked me if I read much Christian fiction. I admitted that I didn't read much fiction at all. I have a hard time losing myself in stories that don't reflect reality (or at least the deep themes of reality), plus all fiction pretty much fails to meet the bar set by Tolkien in LotR.

My friend went on to suggest that I read a novel called "This Present Darkness" by Frank Peretti. I politely said "ok, thanks" and put the issue out of my mind. The next day I found a $25.00 gift card to Books-A-Million in my dresser drawer. Apparently, I received it for Christmas, stuffed it away, and absolutely forgot it existed. Imagine my surprise at finding it - it truly was Christmas in July!

So today, after work, I stopped in to spend the gift card before I forgot about it again. I moved back to the Christian section and picked up "Death by Love" by Driscoll. It looked really good, but something in me put it back down. Then I grabbed a small booklet by J.I. Packer called "Affirming the Apostles Creed." Then, as I headed for the checkout, my mind flashed to the recent talk with my co-worker about the Peretti book. I went back to the Christian Fiction section (new territory for me) and looked around. I quickly found the book and next thing I knew I was buying it.

I came home tonight, spent time with the family, and then laid down at 11pm to read. I had no idea what this novel was about. However, my first indication of it being good was that it was published by Crossway. I am always pleased with the publishing decisions of the folks at Crossway. In shortly over an hour I had devoured the first 60 pages of this book. 60 pages which have been so powerful for me that I am sitting at the computer at 1am writing this blog.

"This Present Darkness" has started out in the fashion of C.S.Lewis' "The Screwtape Letters." An intense and gripping portrait of the world that lies under our visible arena. A place where angels and demons readily engage each us, entice us, and protect us. Yet, the supernatural characters in the book don't take front stage. The main player is a small town pastor who is unfailing in his proclamation of the gospel and unwavering in his prayer for the community - in the face of much hardship.

Granted I have a long way to go in this book, so my review is incomplete, but the first impression is a great one. I don't see any theological heterodoxes or heresies in the writing, I do see a strong stance by the pastor character for Christ, and the writing is fun and engaging. I would highly recommend this book to friends, even off of the little bit I have read. Has anyone else out there read the book? If so, what are your opinions - please no spoliers!



Reading this also reminds me to give a "shout-out" to my friend William "Doc" Woods. Doc is the author of a book which has similar structure. His "The Warfare of Doubting Thomas" is a great blend of his Catholicism and his years in the Navy. It is a worthy read as well. Plus any book with my name in the acknowledgements must be good right?!?

- OH, I forgot to mention the providence of this find. I am scheduled to teach a seminar to middle school boys at Eagle Ranch on Monday. It is a 6 hour class on physical and spiritual self defense. I am very able to do the physical part off the top of my head, but I have been praying for assistance on correctly discussing the world of spiritual combat. This book will certainly not be my textbook, but it was a good resource for visualization as I prepare. You can check out more about this grassroots venture at:
http://protectthyselfsd.blogspot.com/
I hope to evaluate the endeavour after my first seminar and potentially pitch the idea to local churchs. We'll see what God has in store.
Soli Deo Gloria

Missing Discipleship Group

Proverbs 27:17
Iron sharpens iron,
and one man sharpens another.

Last night I had to miss my weekly mens discipleship group. Something came up last minute at home with our photography business that kept me from going. As I reflected on missing, I found myself rather sad.

I have come to cherish the 2.5 hours of solid fellowship and study with 3 awesome guys from my church each week. It has been a "pit stop" in my life where I can refuel and retool. We have been studying "Gospel Christianity" by Tim Keller and I have learned alot about making the faith practical from that workbook.

More importantly, I have deeply benefited by sharing with and hearing from other men about our Christian walk in this life. It is nice to be able to bounce ideas off of other men and be better for it. This is my first regular mens group that actually delves into the Word for the glory of Christ. I am humbled to be a part of it.

I am ultimately very thankful for the iron in my life and I am looking forward to our next meeting so we can continue making each other better men through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Infant Baptism

I jut read a great post on infant baptism by Kevin DeYoung. I adopted reformed theology a couple of years ago, but it wasn't until the last few months that I began to attend a PCA church that teached padeobaptism. I thought this article was very good to summarize the position. I expect to have my 8 month old baptised pretty soon.

http://www.revkevindeyoung.com/2009/07/why-i-baptize-babies.html

One of the best things I get to do as a pastor is to administer the sacrament of infant baptism to the covenant children in my congregation. Before each baptism, I take a few minutes to explain why we practice infant baptism in our church. My explanation usually goes something like this:

It our great privilege this morning to administer that sacrament of baptism to one of our little infants. We do not believe that there is anything magical about the water we apply to the child. The water does not wash away original sin or save the child. We do not presume that this child is regenerate (though he may be), nor do we believe that every child who gets baptized will automatically go to heaven. We baptize infants not out of superstition or tradition or because we like cute babies. We baptize infants because they are covenant children and should receive the sign of the covenant.

In Genesis 15 God made a covenant with Abraham. This covenant was sealed with the sign of circumcision in Genesis 17. God promised to bless Abraham. For Abraham this meant two things in particular, offspring and land. But at the heart of the covenant was God’s promise that he would be a God to Abraham and his children (Gen. 17:7, 8).

Circumcision was not just a physical thing, marking out ethnic Jews. Circumcision was full of spiritual meaning. The circumcision of the flesh was always meant to correspond with circumcision of the heart (Rom. 2:25-29). It pointed to humility, new birth, and a new way of life (Lev. 26:40-42; Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; 6:10; 9:25). In short, circumcision was a sign of justification. Paul says in Romans 4:11 that Abraham “received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised.” God’s own interpretation of circumcision is that it was much more than just a physical sign for national Israel.

Remarkably, though, this deeply spiritual sign was given to Ishmael as well as Isaac, even though only Isaac was the continuation of the promised line. The spiritual sign was not just for those who already embraced the spiritual reality. It was to be administered to Abraham and his sons. Circumcision was not a simple equation. It didn’t automatically mean the recipient of the sign was in possession of the thing signified. Circumcision, like baptism, also pointed to belonging, discipleship, covenant obligations, and allowed for future faith that would take hold of the realities symbolized. Just as there were some in Paul’s day who were circumcised but not really circumcised (Rom. 2:25-29), some children of Abraham who were not truly children of Abraham (Rom. 9:6-8), so in our day there are some who are baptized who are not truly baptized. Children should be marked as belonging to the covenant, but unless they exercise saving faith, they will not grab hold of the covenant blessings.

Children today are baptized based on this same covenant with Abraham. Paul makes clear in Galatians 3 what Peter strongly suggests in Acts 2, namely that the Abrahamic covenant has not been annulled. It is still operational. In fact, we see the basic promise of the Abrahamic covenant running throughout the whole Bible, right up to the new heaven and new earth in Revelation 21.

Because sons were part of the Abrahamic covenant in the Old Testament and were circumcised, we see no reason why children should be excluded in the New Testament sign of baptism. Admittedly, there is no text that says “Hear ye, hear ye, circumcision replaces baptism.” But we know from Colossians 2:11-12 that baptism and circumcision carried the same spiritual import. The transition from one to the other was probably organic. As the Jews practiced proselyte baptism, that sign came to be seen as marking inclusion in the covenant people. For awhile circumcision existed along baptism, but as the early church became more Gentile, many of Jewish rites were rendered unnecessary, and sometimes even detrimental to the faith. Thus, baptism eclipsed circumcision as the sign renewal, rebirth, and covenant membership.

Although not conclusive all by themselves, there are several other arguments that corroborate a paedobaptist reading of the New Testament.

One, the burden of proof rests on those who would deny children a sign they had received for thousands of years. If children were suddenly outside the covenant, and were disallowed from receiving any “sacramental” sign, surely such a massive change, and the controversy that would have ensued, would been recorded in the New Testament. Moreover, it would be strange for children to be excluded from the covenant, when everything else moves in the direction of more inclusion from the Old Covenant to the New.

Two, the existence of household baptisms is evidence that God still deals with households as a unit and welcomes whole families into the church to come under the Lordship of Christ together (Acts 16:13-15; 32-34; 1 Cor. 1:16; cf. Joshua 24:15).

Three, children are told to obey their parents in the Lord (Eph. 6:1). Children in the church are not treated as little pagans to be evangelized, but members of the covenant who owe their allegiance to Christ.

Four, within two centuries of the Apostles we have clear evidence that the church was practicing infant baptism. If this had been a change to long-standing tradition, we would have some record of the church arguing over this new practice. It wasn't until the 16th century that Christians began to question the legitimacy of infant baptism.

So we come to administer the sacrament of baptism to this child today with the weight of church history to encourage us and the example of redemptive history to confirm our practice. We baptize in obedience to Christ’s command. The sacrament we are about to administer is a sign of inclusion in the covenant community as circumcision was, and the water we are about to sprinkle is a sign of cleansing from sin as the sprinkled blood of bulls and goats in the Old Testament was. We pray that this little one will take advantage of all his covenant privileges, acknowledge his Lord all the days of his life, and by faith make these promises his own.

Calvin on the Gospel

On his blog yesterday, Tullian Tchividjian wrote:

A friend sent this nugget of gospel gold to me the other day. It comes from a stunning preface John Calvin wrote for Pierre Robert Olivétan’s French translation of the New Testament in 1534. Calvin wrote:

Without the gospel everything is useless and vain; without the gospel we are not Christians; without the gospel all riches is poverty, all wisdom folly before God; strength is weakness, and all the justice of man is under the condemnation of God. But by the knowledge of the gospel we are made children of God, brothers of Jesus Christ, fellow townsmen with the saints, citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven, heirs of God with Jesus Christ, by whom the poor are made rich, the weak strong, the fools wise, the sinner justified, the desolate comforted, the doubting sure, and slaves free. It is the power of God for the salvation of all those who believe.

It follows that every good thing we could think or desire is to be found in this same Jesus Christ alone. For, he was sold, to buy us back; captive, to deliver us; condemned, to absolve us; he was made a curse for our blessing, sin offering for our righteousness; marred that we may be made fair; he died for our life; so that by him fury is made gentle, wrath appeased, darkness turned into light, fear reassured, despisal despised, debt canceled, labor lightened, sadness made merry, misfortune made fortunate, difficulty easy, disorder ordered, division united, ignominy ennobled, rebellion subjected, intimidation intimidated, ambush uncovered, assaults assailed, force forced back, combat combated, war warred against, vengeance avenged, torment tormented, damnation damned, the abyss sunk into the abyss, hell transfixed, death dead, mortality made immortal. In short, mercy has swallowed up all misery, and goodness all misfortune. For all these things which were to be the weapons of the devil in his battle against us, and the sting of death to pierce us, are turned for us into exercises which we can turn to our profit. If we are able to boast with the apostle, saying, O hell, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? it is because by the Spirit of Christ promised to the elect, we live no longer, but Christ lives in us; and we are by the same Spirit seated among those who are in heaven, so that for us the world is no more, even while our conversation [life] is in it; but we are content in all things, whether country, place, condition, clothing, meat, and all such things. And we are comforted in tribulation, joyful in sorrow, glorying under vituperation [verbal abuse], abounding in poverty, warmed in our nakedness, patient amongst evils, living in death. This is what we should in short seek in the whole of Scripture: truly to know Jesus Christ, and the infinite riches that are comprised in him and are offered to us by him from God the Father.

FROM:
http://www.crpc.org/blog/?p=712

Bill Cosby speaks...

Seems like a fair guy to me. And I like Jello!
http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/072309_Bill_Cosby_reacts_to_Gates_incident

Mortification

Romans 8:13
For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

A lion prowling around the exterior walls of my house may be barred in the immediate from eating me, yet he is only biding his time and waiting for my guard to drop or my gate to fail so that he might come in and have a meal. To be freed from the worry and the danger of that lion, I must do more than place barricades between us - I must see him slain.

I often feel that my battle to overcome the sins that plague me is a desperate one which usually ends poorly for me. I know that we shall not be perfected as long as we wait in this mortal shell groaning for our future hope, yet I am also aware that there is power in the Holy Spirit to overcome the desires of the flesh and the snares of the evil one.

I like the title of John Owens book, The Mortification of the Flesh. That reflects my desire to utterly vanquish the temptation and sin that creeps up in my heart. I am looking to add that title to my collection in the future, I imagine it will be a good read. Until then I am reexamining how I can best allow the Spirit to work in my life and how I can subsequently be set more free from the envy, pride, and lust that attack my walk with God.

I am thankful to be back in church with godly people who have Christ-centered hearts and biblically sound theology. I am also excited for the new friends I have made and the Tuesday night bible study that I have with some other men. I have been edified by reading the Bible thru this year and I have been working at my prayer life. All that said, I still feel that my natural man wins the skirmish on a regular basis.

Does anyone have any practical suggestions or resources that have helped you in killing your sinful self and living more fully and joyously for the glory of Christ? (No flagellation, cilice, or mock crucifixions will be taken in account)

The Sea

We went to the beach this weekend. It was my first time back to the beach since I left my apartment in Wilmington, NC back around 2004. I found myself once again in awe of the vastness and the power of the ocean. As I get older in the Lord I am becoming more prone to reflect on the beauty of God's creation. The ocean is a masterpiece.

Several reflection about the sea, the Scriptures, and my spiritual life came to mind as I looked out on the waves...

1) The promise of God to Abraham in Genesis 22.
“By myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. "
It reminds me that I am one of those grains of sand. Not because of anything I did, but due to the mercy and the covenant love of God. Am I taking utmost pleasure in that adoption or am I letting other idols rule my heart?

2) The divinity of Christ shown in his absolute authority over nature. (Mark 4)
"On that day, when evening had come, he said to them, “Let us go across to the other side.” And leaving the crowd, they took him with them in the boat, just as he was. And other boats were with him. And a great windstorm arose, and the waves were breaking into the boat, so that the boat was already filling. But he was in the stern, asleep on the cushion. And they woke him and said to him, “Teacher, do you not care that we are perishing?” And he awoke and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, “Peace! Be still!” And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. He said to them, “Why are you so afraid? Have you still no faith?” And they were filled with great fear and said to one another, “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?”
A question answered by Peter in Matthew 16: "“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Do I bow before him in the same manner as the waves fell prostrate or do I rebel aganist his Lordship?

3) The glimpse John had into Heaven in Revelation 5.
"And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, 'To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!'"
Do I weep with longing to join the worshippers before the throne or do I desire to sing my own songs for my own purposes?

I do not think that a born-again believer (John 3) can ever lose his salvation. It is clearly a gift from God and it is he, not us, who sustains that gift. However, I am always concerned, not paralyzingly worried - just concerned, that I might be one of those individuals who is not radically changed by the Spirit. The snares of this world are many and are alluring - I often wonder how I can be sure of my election.

Ultimately, I can't be 100% sure and thats ok. In fact, it is probably better to be like a Puritan, constantly self-examining ones evidences of fruit, than to get so assured that you become complacent. That said, there are some things that can give you an indication of your new birth. I just finished John Piper's book Finally Alive. It deals with the truths of regeneration and it has a helpful section on page 125 where Piper details 11 biblical evidences to help me (and you) test ourselves to ensure that we are walking into eternal joy with Christ and not gnashing of teeth.

I highly suggest the Piper book AND a trip to the beach, summer will be over soon and the ability to read and vacate will be greatly lessened with the coming of school, holidays, and football season :)

Quote 7/19/09 - from the Pacman

"Doctrinal preaching certainly bores the hypocrites; but it is only doctrinal preaching that will save Christ's sheep. The preacher's job is to proclaim the faith, not to provide entertainment for unbelievers--in other words, to feed the sheep rather than amuse the goats"- J.I. Packer, A Quest For Godliness , 285

Shameless plug...

My wifes webpage went "live" today. She has only been in photography for 4 months, I am so proud of her!

Check it out at:
www.simplyyoursphotography.net

photo caption: a family portrait of The Browns at Heritage Park

100 Christian Apologists

I used to be really big into apologetics. Not so much these days. However, I ran across this blog post that lists 100 great apologists and provides links to their pages/ works. It is worth a look and a bookmark/ favorite, for future reference.

http://apologetics315.blogspot.com/2009/06/100-christian-apologists.html

Quote of the Week 7/12/09

"Grace" is more than mercy and love, it superadds to them. it denotes, not simply love, but the love of a sovereign, transcendly superior, one that may do what he will, that may wholly choose whether he will love or no. There may be love between equals, and an inferior may love a superior; but love in a superior, and so superior as he may do what he will, in such a one love is called grace: and therefore grace is attributed to princes; they are said to be gracious to their subjects, whereas subjects cannot be gracious to princes. Now God, who is an infinite Sovereign, who might have chosen whether ever He would love us or no, for Him to love us, this is grace.

—Thomas Goodwin

Word-Farce Theology

A friend who usually blogs about daily life recently wrote this:

"My husband and I are firm believers in Healing. I can count on one hand the times we have gotten any kind of sickness in the past five years. We don't push this belief on anyone, we just simply do not allow sickness into our lives. While I attribute the majority of our health to the fact that we broke that stronghold off awhile back, I also give credit to the foods we eat."

I want to address these comments with a piece from Marco Gonzalez at ReformationTheology.com
________________________________

When I first became a Christian, I was influenced heavily. Much of my doctrinal and theological stances were formed and shaped by the gospel of prosperity (or as many have labeled it “The prosperity Gospel.”) The prominent speakers: T.D Jakes, Jesse Duplantis, Kenneth Copeland, and Kenneth Hagin all participated in creating my understanding of the gospel. The success of these individuals is well-known Even without the major influence of their broadcasts on TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Network), many of the dominant speakers have gross revenues reaching a billion dollars a year. TBN is primarily the telecommunication used to project these individuals toward Christians. I’ve personally listened to well-over a thousand hours of broadcasting.

This is including when I was cultivated by the network and after I broke free from it. Whether we wish to admit it or not, TBN has influenced billions of Christians. From my own personal experience and close friends, I have witnessed the devastating effects of the prosperity gospel.Living in Southern California, I am aware of two individuals who have fought seriously against the prosperity gospel: John MacArthur, Hank Hannagraph. Whenever TBN or individuals from TBN have been criticized, the founder of TBN, Paul Crouch, has replied back to the criticism. When Hanagraph and MacArthur were exposing much of the deception of TBN, Crouch responded. Paul Crouch said both Hanagraph and MacArthur were “heresy hunters” and looking to pick fights. Crouch went as far as to say (and this is a direct quote), “If God doesn’t shoot them, I will.” I mention this because TBN is built upon billions and billions of dollars. Crouch realizes whenever his speakers are criticized, it results in a net-loss and is a liability to his corporation.

In fact, both Hannagraph and Macarthur immediately received death threats following their sermons and discussions about TBN. This does not mean that TBN sent them death threats directly, but what it does mean is that TBN posses many loyal followers who are willing to defend their leaders. It is note-worthy to mention that I have personally never heard Macarthur or Hannagraph say their death threats were directly from TBN.

Before we can address the prosperity gospel, we need to understand the enormous impact it has and continues to have on Christians. While to many Christians what TBN and their speakers say may appear to be rank heresy, Christians need to understand the innumerable amounts of people who believe in the prosperity gospel. With over six-teen satellites world-wide, TBN reaches trillions of people groups from every, tongue, tribe, and nation. Just walk inside your favorite Christian bookstore and look at the new releases and you will find the top-selling authors of Christian publishing to be prosperity preachers. Or start talking with normal everyday Christians and you will find their theology embedded with the prosperity gospel.

I will not deny that I once was held in bondage to this. Breaking out of this mentality can only come from the spirit awaking and humbling our souls to the word of God. The belief that financial restoration is the primacy of the gospel makes it so it is not hard to attract numerous followers. Followers who are so deeply entrenched in this ideology will fight every logical and coherent biblical argument that those who proclaim the gospel’s preeminence is faith and repentance can give.

I have seen the heartbreak and witnessed the unanswered prayers and uncertain hope in God because of a lack of healing or prosperity. There are countless people who are poor or are currently afflicted by a medical condition; the prosperity gospel provides false hope for these people as a mandated guarantee God will provide provision. Take a moment and understand a mother whose child is terminally-ill and all her options have been exhausted. Or a couple who is bankrupt and lives on the street and has no other choice. It changes our perspective when we realize these are not just ignorant people, but people who are in extreme hardship and the prosperity gospel gives false hope to them.

I need to make this clear because many are under the assumption that the followers of TBN are obtuse. I am not making excuses for the lack of discernment these individuals have, but we need to understand the roots of their fellowship with the prosperity gospel. The first part of this essay was never intended to examine the prosperity gospel’s theology, rather it was planned to give a perspective of TBN as a network and their followers as a whole.

Obviously, prosperity is attractive; there is no human being who objects to God as a giver of healing and financial restoration. These people provide a false fabrication of God and then subject millions to it. The prosperity gospel is by far the worst manufactured gospel of our generation. It differs from Roman Catholism, because Catholism twists the essence of the gospel in a way which looks, from a distance, like truth. On the other hand, the prosperity gospel is blatantly false with the ideology that God’s provision toward your wealth and health is available if you tap into the spiritual realm correctly.

The prosperity gospel will continue to do damage to Christians and evangelicalism. It is imperative we equip ourselves with the understanding of its doctrinal and biblical stances toward interpreting scripture. Most of all though, we need to pray; we need to pray that our motives are gentle and pure. Let’s keep our eyes fixed on the eternality of God’s judgment and remember this is not merely an aim to correct doctrine. Before I address the theological issues, we need to look at our hearts and make sure they are pure. Don’t let correcting someone’s doctrine become the primacy of this endeavor but become distressed that God’s grace will be concluded with the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and that now is the time of salvation.

Let the word of God dwell deeply in you to create an overwhelming passion for people to be set free; people who are in bondage to the roaring doctrines of false teachers and preachers. Do not let your heart grow cold toward those who refuse to walk in the truth, but fervently pray to God to awaken their soul. If we want to be truly effective in our apologetics and defense of the gospel, we need examine our hearts. Most of all we need to depend on the Holy Spirit to break down the anarchy of people’s hearts and minds.

Since the birth of 1st Century Christianity, the church, collectively, has been beleaguered with false preachers. Many of the written epistles to churches were written with the intention of warning believers of the impending crisis surrounding the gospel. Paul, who possessed an abundance of fellow ministers that preached along with him, was ultimately left alone in his endeavor as some of his closet companions fell away for the “pleasures of the world.” It comes as no surprise then, that in the 21st century, false preachers and teachers are widespread; TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Network) has proven to us the prevalence of this.

It is a difficult thing to look at the prosperity gospel’s theology and create a systematic overview of it. This is mainly because there is no doctrinal statement or systematic theology. For example, Benny Hinn and T.D Jake’s theology is plagued with prosperity. However, Hinn is clearly more extreme on particular issues then Jakes. That being said, the main premises of prosperity theology are identical (That is, how they view the gospel in terms of prosperity.)

Typically, Prosperity theology is set up in a formula. If you correctly follow these steps, then the reward is God’s provision. You don’t hav