flying sola

Stamp worthy

2009-10-16T08:50:00.003-04:00

I found this comment at the end of a story about a church using the movie "Star Trek" as a sermon theme for a series addressing parenthood.

"Do you think that this lame attempt at relevance will pack unbelievers into church or convince them that Christians are pathetic in their attempts to 'be relevant'?"

Someone turn this into a rubber stamp because this same question can be applied so often to so many of the things churches are doing today that it seems a waste to have to re-type it over and over again.

Jakes on "can people of other religions go to heaven?"

2009-10-14T18:33:00.003-04:00

T.D. Jakes on whether salvation can be found in other religions. His answer is identical to Osteen's. Weasel.

By the way I just checked and you can buy his books at Lifeway- including "Hope for Every Moment: 365 Inspirational Thoughts for Everday of the Year."

Just in case you don't recognize sarcasm, I am not actually endorsing his books but only pointing out, with incredulity, Lifeway's ridiculous decision to carry his stuff.

Understanding better why we do and don't

2009-10-07T23:52:00.004-04:00

Read this, listen to the clip, and understand a little better why Ekklesia does what it does and doesn't do what it doesn't do.

And if you don't attend Ekklesia, pass this on to your pastor and ask him to think seriously about this.

Mark Dever interview of J.I. Packer on his intro. to “The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.”

2009-10-06T14:15:00.002-04:00

Mark Dever conducted an interview with J.I.Packer in which he discusses the introduction he wrote to John Owen's book "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ." You can find the full interview at www.9marks.org.

In it they discuss true preaching of the Gospel and the problem of false conversions when the full Gospel is not preached.

I had transcribed a portion of the interview for my own edification, but since the guys are going to start working through Owen's book "The Mortification of Sin" I thought this was a good opportunity to share it with you.

Enjoy!

MD- You note the change that has happened in the presentation of the Gospel- you were writing this in the late 50’s I think….”

JIP- Right

MD-You say “From this change of interest has sprung a change of content, for the new gospel has in effect reformulated the biblical message in the supposed interests of “helpfulness.” Accordingly, the themes of man’s natural inability to believe, of God’s free election being the ultimate cause of salvation, and of Christ dying specifically for His sheep, are not preached. These doctrines, it would be said, are not “helpful”; they would drive sinners to despair, by suggesting to them that it is not in their own power to be saved through Christ. (The possibility that such despair might be salutary is not considered; it is taken for granted that it cannot be, because it is so shattering to our self-esteem.) However this may be (and we shall say more about it later), the result of these omissions is that part of the biblical gospel is now preached as if it were the whole of that gospel; and a half-truth masquerading as the whole truth becomes a complete untruth. Thus, we appeal to men as if they all had the ability to receive Christ at any time; we speak of His redeeming work as if He had done no more by dying than make it possible for us to save ourselves by believing; we speak of God’s love as if it were no more than a general willingness to receive any who will turn and trust; and we depict the Father and the Son, not as sovereignly active in drawing sinners to themselves, but as waiting in quiet impotence “at the door of our hearts” for us to let them in. It is undeniable that this is how we preach; perhaps this is what we really believe. But it needs to be said with emphasis that this set of twisted half-truths is something other than the biblical gospel. The Bible is against us when we preach in this way; and the fact that such preaching has become almost standard practice among us only shows how urgent it is that we should review this matter. To recover the old, authentic, biblical gospel, and to bring our preaching and practice back into line with it, is perhaps our most pressing present need.

I trust you remember writing those lines?

JIP- Yes, I do and if you are wondering, I agree still %100 with everything I wrote here. I don’t believe anything has changed here over the last 40 years I think that still too frequent altogether that people diminish God by suggesting that he is not sovereign in the conversion of us sinners and i think it is all too frequent that we exalt the human individual and think of him or her as having much more power, including the power to respond to God’s gospel, than, in fact, any of us have. I think that the biblical gospel sends us down lower in our own extimate- humbles us lower- and raises God higher in our estimate- exalts Him more- than is usually appreciated by preachers or by writers and so the true impression is not given.

MD- Jim, if people are hearing some other gospel than this, are they being converted truly to God by some other gospel than this?

JIP- Only God knows. God blesses His truth to the conversion of souls. There is no conversion- that is to say there is no regeneration or new birth , no change of heart issuing faith’s response to the message apart from truth that God blesses to that end. And when the truth is mixed up with error or distorted with error, it is beyond us humans to say what is or what is not happening in individuals under the ministry of that muddled message. So, I’m not surprised, and I’m not bothered when I hear, as I do from time to time and I’m sure that you do as well, that this or that preacher that preaches the modern gospel rather than the authentic or biblical one has been widely used in the conversion of souls. That may well be true. But that doesn’t alter the fact that what God blessed to the conversion of those people was the truth, not the error- not the mixture as a mixture- but the truth that was there which God caused to lodge in the mind, the memory, that matter of thought and the catalyst of realization which brought people to the reality of conversion, where I think you can say conficdentaly that in every single case the person will be at the end of their own personal tether they will, in a relative sense, at the end of themselves, tey will know that there is no hope for them, save as they respond to the God through Chrsit who is coming to them , calling them telli that they are lost and hopeless and helpless, and they bleive that and, then saying ont that basis Christ does say to tour hearst, “Recieve me and the forgiveness and the new life that I bring.” That is the Holy Spriit at work. And that is the best way to preach the Gospel is the way that leads people to coming to the end of themselves and their own natural hopes in that way and focusing most directly on teh Chrsit who comes and in His Sovereign Lordship says, “LEt me bring you the new life.”

MD- Let me ask, sort of, the other half of the question. Lets say the Gospel is being fairly faithfully preached. Do you think it is common, in Evangelical churches to have false conversions- that is people who appear to be converted but who genuinely aren’t?

JIP- I think that is a commoner effect than one would like to admit. Because to the extent that the Gospel is falsified or distorted in the preaching, to that extent you are creating possibilities of misunderstanding and, experience I thikn shows that God doesn’t always overrule that and cut the errors out of what people hear. I mean by that is that what lodges in people’s minds is precisely the error- and then they act on the error and it goes something like this in many cases- the preacher says, mistakenly, “If you believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins, you will be forgiven, justified and saved. The hearere says “Oh, well then that is what I have to do.” Then teh preacher offers him the wording of the sinners prayer and he prays it and he goes out of the church believing he is a Christian and nothing has been said to him about repentance, nothing has been said to him about saying goddbye to the old life of self centered self indulgence, nothing has been said to him about the fact that, henceforth, he has a new life, given him by the Lord and he belongs to the Lord who has given him a new life by the Lord and he belongs to the Lord who has given him a new life- he’s bought with a price, he is not his own- and therefore, his whole business in life (I say he, but I mean she as well) is to glorify God in the way that they live their life day by day. Where those things are not said you have an in adequate presentation of the gospel and you are simply asking for false conversions, that is people believing that they have become Christians when, in fact, they haven’t. No one becomes a Christian who hasn’t repented. No one becomes a Chrsitain who isn’t conscienteiously saying goodbye to the old life and welcoming the new one.

MD- So what should a poastor do if he is concerned about false conversions growing up like mushrooms in his congregation?

JIP- Take great care to preach the whole of the real gospel which involves a lot of preaching calculated to…I was going to say to drive people to dispair, but that is not the way quite to put it, at least to humble them with the awareness that they cannot save themselves, and that nobody is saved that is not actually brought into a new life through a change in heart. And then, with that, the reality of regeneration itself, that is the new heart, the new life the must be preached about and taught in a way that nobody can miss the radical quality of the change. Andmcuh must be taught abou the way in which Jesus Christ, through Holy Spirit comes to people ,presents himself to people and draws out of them by his grace, the response of faith and repentance both. In the technicalities of theology, its faith that channels the power to repent, that is- it is those who have received Christ, who then find that they are able to turn from the old life to the new life, just as now they know that they are bound, they’re obliged, they’re required to turn from the old life to the new life.

MD- It is only because Abraham perceived God’s promise that his foot could go toward the promised land, that faith, that perception of the promise had to be there before the action.

JIP- I believe that is so.

The (Now Here) Evangelical Crisis Cont'd

2009-10-02T14:59:00.004-04:00

I was listening to a White Horse Inn interview between Michael Horton and Carl Trueman which they entitled "The Wages of Sin." Listen to it here.

It contained the following exchange:

We have massively downplayed the idea of the corporate worship in the church. We have emphasized the whole of life as worship, and I don’t have any problem with the whole of life as worship. But then they have relative-ized the corporate gathering of the saints which has become nothing more than to “have the Bible explained to us” rather than to understand the worship service as God speaking to us through His Word, speaking through His preacher, and the people responding in words of prayer and words of praise. I think the loss of the theology of the worship service has done a lot of harm in evangelical circles.

Do you think that is one of the reasons why there is such a reaction against preaching among some younger Christians? You know, “let’s just drop the preaching”…?

I think rubbish preaching has a lot to answer for. I also think that there is a loss of understanding of what is going on when the preacher preaches….when the preacher preaches, God is speaking in and through Him. Too many go to church thinking that what is going on is a one man Bible study – somebody standing up front explaining to me what this passage means. I don’t think preaching is ever less than that, but I do think it is more, it is much more than that. I think the Old Testament prophets are the analogy of the modern preacher. They are declaring the Word of God and when the Word of God goes out, Isaiah 55, it will not return to God empty. We don’t go to church expecting the Word of God to go forth with power any more. I think for too many people it is just a transfer of information, not a confrontation with the living covenant God.

Whether or Not You Recognize Authority, I'm it.

2009-10-02T14:00:00.003-04:00

For Ed, Kate, Patrick, Travis and all the other Trekkies out there.

Classic Lines between Capt. Kirk and the lead hippy:

Hippy Dude: "We recognize no authority save that within ourselves."

Capt. Kirk: "Whether or not you recognize authority, I'm it on this ship."

This campy episode of Star Trek contains those great lines whose application to the rule of God is obvious and if we did videos on Sunday morning, I might have been tempted to use this one.

I'm diggin' it Herbert!

Great Movies a Defense Does Not Make

2009-10-01T22:01:00.003-04:00

I know this is off the usual topics but this whole thing is just despicable. It is concerning the support that Roman Polanski is getting from Hollywood. If you don't know anything about this story, read this article and if this doesn't prove that most Hollywood elites are hypocritical, self-serving, immoral, scum-bags, then I don't know what does. And people idolize these guys? Sheesh.

The (Now Here) Evangelical Crisis

2009-10-01T12:07:00.006-04:00

During the time of my first church plant in another state, we had a statewide meeting of church planters during which a representative of the North American Mission Board provided us with some software that would help us with the administration of our churches. The software included membership tracking, time management helps, etc.

But also included in the software was a collection of sermons.

The representative explained (I'm paraphrasing): "As church planters you know you are busy doing the work of church planting and have no time to prepare sermons. So I have included sermons here for you to use."

How many of my fellow planters utilized this gift I'm not sure.

During my second church plant in the same state, I was attempting to discuss a theological question with a fellow planter and he refused to engage me in the question explaining "I don't read. I hate to read. My giftedness is more in evangelism than teaching."

These experiences and many more (i.e., I once had a pastor who was celebrated within our state convention for his many baptisms tell me about an upcoming baptism service they were conducting. With a smile on his face he told me: "We have 11 baptisms scheduled, but we'll see how many of them actually show up...you know how that is")caused me to lament the state of the church and to temper my confidence in this new found excitement centering on church growth through church planting. Church plants are great only in as far as they are actually teaching and modeling true Christianity. Let me repeat that so as not to mis-interpreted. Church plants are great. But they are great only if they are teaching the truth. Now, there are many which do teach the truth, but, let's be honest, there are many which don't. This leads me take all the church planting/church growth stats with a grain of salt.

Over at the website "Never Thirsty," they warn of this situation by reminding readers of a book written in 1996 called "The Coming Evangelical Crisis" writing:

"They (the authors of the book) warn that the teaching of the Bible is being minimized in order to please people, increase church attendance, and obtain larger followings. The goal for some is no longer the honor of God and the spiritual education of those who are in Jesus Christ. As a result, those who seek to know God and to follow Him are being taught simplistic, basic, sugar-coated spiritual truths devoid of meat and substance. As a result of weak preaching and teaching of the Bible - the book of truth - doctrinal error is rapidly increasing. The alarm rang loudly and clearly throughout the book and it still resounds today."

The alarm does indeed need to resound today for the consequences are dire.

Michael Horton says ". . . Apostasy begins harmlessly enough. First, we are told that we do not need creeds, confessions, and catechisms . . . The result is that the Scriptures go before long. Next, we are asked to tone down on our doctrinal distinctives and emphasize that which unites all religious people of goodwill. The result is the rejection of the gospel. Finally, we are told, “All we need is Jesus,” and we are left with a moral crusader. ( p. 260)

The "Never Thirsty" writer closes with an anecdote that I have personally experienced during several visits at Capitol Hill and which was the cause of a personal revival in my own faith in the church at a time when I was beginning to lose hope:

"The September 2006 issue of Christianity Today has a feature article titled, “Young, Restless, Reformed” by Collin Hansen. Collin indicates that a number of churches scattered across the United States are emphasizing the sound, solid teaching of the Bible. The churches have many young adults in their twenties and early thirties. One such church is Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington D.C. The pastor is Mark Dever. Collin visited the church and describes what he experienced,

I visited Capitol Hill Baptist in January. The church kicked off with Sunday school, which really should have been called Sunday seminary. Class options included a survey of the New Testament, spiritual disciplines, and a systematic theology lesson on theories of the Atonement. (Hansen, Collin. Young, Restless, Reformed. “Christianity Today.” Sept.. 2006. p. 38)

Collin explains that the pastor is serious in his study and teaching of the scriptures. The pastor’s sermons are 55 minutes long. Hymns are emphasized, and the church is packed out with the under 30 crowd. This story is being repeated in key parts around the United States. But it is the under-30 crowd that appears to be interested. The thrust of Collin’s article is that the new emerging under 30 crowd wants to know the Bible and doctrine. They are serious. They are hungry for truth - the Word of God. They are hungry for God. They want to know about God."

Amen.

I am blessed to be pastoring a church plant and have found that this same hunger is alive and well down here in Blacksburg, VA. I see it has my duty as a minister to feed that hunger to the best of my ability and I pray that other pastors will join me in that endeavor for the sake of their congregations and for the sake of Christ's church.

What are the greater implications?

2009-09-29T12:19:00.004-04:00

I was sent the following video with the question: "What are the greater implications?" I'd be curious to hear what you think. My answer below.

Some brief thoughts:

As our demographics change, my question is, have we prepared Christians well enough doctrinally that they will persevere in the face of persecution when America is no longer a "Christian nation"? It sounds like a repeat of what was happening in Rome is around the corner and Paul and the writer to the Hebrews (one in the same?) were exhorting them to stay firm in their faith and admonishing them "you ought to be teaching but you are still on milk!"

What will happen to the believers today who are attending the First Baptist Tickle Your Ears Church that is large in number but shallow in teaching?

I shudder to think.

Maybe we ought to be rethinking what our goals in discipleship are. We tend to think of them simply as "growth in Christ" and being "ready in season and out of season" when in the work place or in school, etc.

Maybe we ought to be thinking more along the lines of equipping people in the Word with the goal of helping them to hold securely to their faith even when their lives may be threatened because of it.

That is a whole different paradigm than what we are doing now but it seems like that shift may need to be made in the near future.

Worship - out of the dark into the light

2009-09-23T08:33:00.002-04:00

In the introduction to "Give Praise to God, A Vision for Reforming Worship," Philip Ryken describes how the late Dr. James Boice (who died in 2000, and in whose memory the book was written) was (rightfully) troubled by what he saw happening in the contemporary church. Ryken writes:

"Given the priority that he placed on honoring God in our worship, Dr. Boice understandably was troubled by the shift from God-centered to human-centered worship in teh contemporary church. Particularly in last years of his ministry, he believed that many (if not most) Christians had forgotten the meaning of true worship. In seeking to explain this unfortunate phenomenon, Dr. Boice observed the following connections between contemporary culture and the evangelical church: 1) Ours is a trivial age, and the church has been deeply affected by this pervasive triviality; 2)our is a self-absorbed, human-centered age, and the church has become, sadly, even treasonably self-centered; and 3) our age is oblivious to God, and the church is barely better, to judge from its so-called worship services.

In Dr. Boice's view, the result of God's dramatic disappearance from Christian worship could only be a catastrophic loss of divine transcendence, not only in our worship, but in every aspect of Christian life. The Cambride Declaration he helped to produce gave voice to his concern:

Whenever in the church biblical authority has been lost, Christ has been displaced, the gospel has been distored, or faith has been perverted, it has always been for one reason: our interests have displaced God's and we are doing his work in our way. The loss of God's centrality in the life of today's church is common and lamentable. It is this loss that allows us to transform worship into entertainment, gospel preaching into marketing, believing into technique, being good into feel good about ourselves, and faithfulness into being successful. As a result, God, Christ, and the Bible have come to mean too little to us and rest too inconsequentially upon us."

These are concerns that we share at our church and it is lamentable that, as our contemporary culture has an ever-increasing influence on the way in which we think, such concerns are often dismissed as merely the thinking of those who are trapped in the archaic forms of the past and are not sophisticated or mission-minded enough to emerge from those "dark ages" and embrace the new wave of "true" worship.

The irony is that I firmly believe that the opposite is true.

Now on my third church plant, I have experimented with various church forms and worship styles. In past works I had read all the latest church growth books and tinkered with the latest fads. During corporate worship I have (I am now embarrassed to say) done the dramas, the comedy-style routines, the videos, the puppet shows. There were Sunday mornings in which I laughed until I cried over our antics and was under the impression that this was "good," this was "real," this was community lived out to its fullest.

But while what I gained was a "fun" church experience, what I lost was a vision for God's transcendent glory.

What I gained was what I wanted, but what I lost was what I needed.

And that is the tragedy. The more you spoon feed people what their itching ears want to hear, the less they want what they should want- and the pastors are right there with them. Suggest that there should be more prayer and more Scripture in churches today and many pastors, let alone congregants, recoil at the idea. But, please tell me, Scripturally speaking, what should we then have more of? And if the Scriptures aren't speaking to us in these matters, pray tell, who is?

And when you downplay Scripture, when you downplay prayer, when you substitute songs of theological depth with ditties that sound like a teenage lovers crooning to one another, when you are more concerned with entertaining people than glorifying God, then, I contend, you have now left the light and have entered the dark.

I've been there. And while it satisfies for a moment, it does not equip for a lifetime.

More on this later.....

You Don't Have A Problem With God Do Ya?

2009-09-01T12:57:00.003-04:00

This interview is priceless. This CNN reporter doesn't know what to make of this good ol' country boy car dealer who is just talking circles around her. Good for him.

Jensen on Speaking in Tongues

2009-08-31T11:33:00.000-04:00

Ask Phillip - Speaking in tongues today from Audio Advice on Vimeo.

Our Posture Before the Word of God

2009-06-16T22:39:00.004-04:00

This comes from the latest Banner of Truth Magazine. Very Good- print it out and keep it in your Bible! (Sorry about the spacing, I've battled with it long enough- I give up.)

OUR POSTURE BEFORE THE WORD OF GOD
Tom Lyon

1. IF I FIND SOMETHING WITH WHICH I CANNOT AGREE, I AM WRONG.
‘Subjection to God’s will is not the destruction of man’s voluntariness,
but if it were, he would be obligated to come under it.
For God’s supremacy is of more consequence than any attribute
of a creature.’
W. G.T. SHEDD

2. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH I CANNOT UNDERSTAND, I
AM WRONG TO JUDGE IT ON THAT ACCOUNT.
‘You have a very small brain and you have a very poor spirit within
you; do not be surprised that you cannot understand.’
D. M. LLOYD-JONES

3. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH WOULD CONTRADICT THE
CLEAR TEACHING OF SCRIPTURE ELSEWHERE, I CANNOT BE
RIGHT.
‘When there is an appearance of repugnancy or contradiction in any
places of Scripture . . . the truth is to be learned, stated, and fixed
from . . . those places wherein it is the design and purpose of the
holy penman to declare it for its own sake, and to guide the faith of
the church therein’ [rather than dealing with some other matter].
JOHN OWEN

4. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH WOULD SLANDER THE
REVEALED CHARACTER OF GOD, I AM CERTAINLY WRONG.
CAUTION: That which is ‘unworthy of God’ is not decided by man.
Our Posture before the Word of God 17

5. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH BRINGS UP AN APPARENT
CONTRADICTION, I AM WRONG NOT TO FACE IT SQUARELY.
‘In religion, what damned error but some sober brow will bless it and
approve it with a text, hiding the grossness with fair ornament?’
SHAKESPEARE, The Merchant of Venice

6. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH LEADS TO A SUMMARY
PRINCIPLE, I AM WRONG IF I DO NOT FOLLOW IT TO ITS CONCLUSION.

7. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH DISTURBS MY SETTLED CONVICTIONS,
I AM WRONG TO DISMISS IT ON THAT ACCOUNT.
Beware of a straitjacket confessionalism which stifles fresh thought.
‘The Bible has been imprisoned in the cells of alien dogma; it has
been bound hand and foot in the graveclothes of human tradition; it
has been entombed as in a sepulchre by the systems of theology, and
the stone of human power has been rolled up close to its door.’
F. W. FARRAR

8. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH CALLS FOR DECISIVE ACTION
AND I REMAIN INERT, I AM FATALLY WRONG.

9. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH I DARE NOT FOLLOW IN ITS
PRACTICAL DRIFT, I AM DESTRUCTIVELY WRONG.
Beware of facts imprisoned, but not improved.

10 IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH OTHERS BLUSH TO ADMIT OR
STRUGGLE TO AVOID, I AM UNWISE TO FOLLOW THEM AT THAT
POINT.
‘The delicacy of those who affect an appearance of greater prudence
than the Holy Spirit in removing or resolving difficulties, is quite
intolerable.’
JOHN CALVIN
18 The Banner of Truth

11. IF I FIND SOMETHING UPON WHICH POPULAR RELIGION
FROWNS, I MAY PRESUME I AM ON THE RIGHT TRACK.
‘Be assured, there is nothing new in theology except that which is
false.’
C. H. SPURGEON

12. IF I FIND SOMETHING WHICH WOULD TEND TO HUMBLE
MAN AND GLORIFY GOD, I AM MOST PROBABLY RIGHT.
Say, Christian, wouldst thou thrive
In knowledge of thy Lord?
Against no Scripture ever strive,
But tremble at his Word.
Revere the sacred page;
To injure any part
Betrays, with blind and feeble rage,
A hard and haughty heart.
If aught there dark appear,
Bewail thy want of sight;
No imperfection can be there,
For all God’s words are right.
The Scriptures and the Lord
Bear one tremendous name;
The written and the incarnate Word
In all things are the same.
The thoughts of men are lies;
The Word of God is true;
To bow to that is to be wise;
Then hear, and fear, and do.
JOSEPH HART

Post-Rapture Pet Care

2009-06-15T11:00:00.002-04:00

Fabulous! Sign me up!

You gotta hand it to them, these atheists are very astute marketers. My guess, however, is that these are Christians who are poking fun at their pre-millenial brothers and sisters.

Lacrea

2009-06-08T23:34:00.004-04:00

Okay, so I'm not a big rap guy (the only rap album I have ever owned was a Run DMC from '85), but I got to tell you, this guy Lacrea is knocking my socks off.

My son Nathaniel saw him with some other rappers on their "Don't Waste Your Life" tour. I wanted to hear what it was that he was going to hear and I've had it playing ever since. Check this stuff out. If you know anyone who likes rap, get them tuned into this.

His myspace: http://www.myspace.com/lecrae

on church discipline

2009-05-15T18:45:00.003-04:00

For a brief, but very good, overview of church discipline, do yourself a favor and listen to this 6 minute clip of an interview with Matt Schumaker of Capital Hill Baptist being interviewed on Moody Radio.

New sales pitch for churches...

2009-04-23T20:34:00.000-04:00

from http://betweenthetimes.com/2009/04/23/front-cover-of-a-new-gospel-tract-published-by-sebts/

The Secret of Knowing God's Will

2009-02-25T16:48:00.004-05:00

R. Scott Clark has a great article in the midst of a series on the will of God. You should read it and can find it here.

Here is my teaser to whet your appetite- he says that listening for the still small voice leads to a two-sided tyranny and comments:

The first aspect of this tyranny is the fear that “I haven’t heard the still, small voice of God.” This leads to paralysis. It also leads to doubt.

The logic is ruthless:
1. God still speaks outside of Scripture and gives direct guidance and revelation to Christians.
2. Christian X hasn’t received such guidance and revelation.
3. Christian X is either a) not really a Christian or b) doesn’t have sufficient faith or lacks the power of the Spirit etc.

Whatever the cause, the outcome of the logic is unhappy but what if the problem is not the second premise but the first? What if the first premise is flawed?

What Clark is getting into is a question that centers on the distinction between a "revelation" from God and the "illumination" of God's Spirit. We would affirm that the Spirit illumins our minds to understand Scripture better and how it applies to our situation, but would affirm that God's "revelation" was concluded with the closing of the Canon of Scripture- the Bible.

Check it out, read the comments below it for common questions and then, discuss it with some friends.

On Sunday Morning Worship

2009-02-24T09:07:00.002-05:00

Those of us who have paid any attention to church history and ecclesiology are familiar with the debate that existed concerning what is and what is not permitted in worship. Martin Luther's take on it was "whatever is not condemned by the Scriptures is permitted." On the other hand, John Calvin's view (none now as the "Regulative Principle") was that "whatever is not commanded by the Scripture is forbidden."

Although Calvin's view seems a bit extreme, I feel that his argument has much to commend it.

Calvin, recognizing that his view was the "tougher" of the two, wrote:

"I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honor of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course?

The words of God are clear and distinct:“Obedience is better than sacrifice.” (1 Samuel 15:22)“In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men,” (Matthew. 15:9.)

Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere “will worship” (εθελοθρησκεια) is vanity. This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate." (Humble Exhortation—The Necessity of Reforming the Church)

I suggest that you who have a charge over a flock (both planters and pastors) not dismiss this without taking the time to consider it and those who are members of a congregation come to appreciate it.

I did not appreciate what Calvin's point was until I really mulled over the fact that God did not accept whatever it was that people offered him in the name of worship. We need only consider the "strange fire" offered by the sons of Korah or the sacrifices offered by Saul which were condemned by Samuel and led to God's removing Saul from being king. Read the passages. Wasn't Saul only doing what he thought God wanted him to do?

I'm not talking here of worship that is mere action without heart- such as that condemned in the first chapter of Isaiah. I'm talking worship that the offerer thinks God will be pleased with, yet which receives rejection instead.

Doesn't that give us cause for pause?I have gained much from meditating on this and, in particular, a book called "Give Praise to God: A Vision for Reforming Worship." With contributors Baptist and Presbyterian alike, the book has been one of the most helpful to me in terms of forcing me to think through what it is that we should be about on Sunday mornings.

Some conclusions that I came to, and have posted on our church website are:

We worship according to what the Scriptures command, not according to our own innovativeness because.... (It is actually stated that we "Preach the Bible, Pray the Bible, Sing the Bible, and See the Bible)

1) Because we believe the dictums that "we become like what we worship" and "we become like Who we worship." The way we worship contributes to our grasp of the one true God and how we approach Him in all of life.

2) Because it keeps the focus on God and not on worship itself. Too often, the way in which a church worships takes precedence over the Who a church worships. And when that happenes, teh worship can actually change the message. The purpose of worship is not to draw attention to itself, but to aid the congregation in their communion with God.

3) Because it protects the congregation. God is the One who created us to worship Him as He has revealed. It is not the church's job to create new ways to approach Him. To require the congregation, during corporate worship, to do something God has not commanded them to do, could possibly force them to sin against their own conscience as they engage in acts which they do not believe the Bible requires of them.

4) Because it helps to keep us from idolatry. John Wesley, John Calvin, and Martin Luther all warned of our tendency to create God in our own image and end up worshipping ourselves rather than God. The only way to ensure that we worship the right One is to worship accordin to His wishes. As J. Ligon Duncan observes: "The whom of worship is, of course, central to true worship (John 4:22, 24). It is what the first commandment is all about. We aim to worship the God of the Bible, God as he reveals himself, for we cannot worship him as we ought unless we know him as he is- and we cannot know him as he is except insofar as he has revealed himself to us in his word. There is a god we want and the God who is, and the two are not the same. The only way to be sure that we have the whom of worship right is to worship according to God's written self-revelation."

Abortion Commercial

2009-01-31T11:04:00.001-05:00

This is a commercial rejected by NBC for play during the Super Bowl, but which is getting air time on Black Entertainment Television

Jesus Came to Save Grimace and Hamburglar

2009-01-30T15:50:00.004-05:00

Kevin DeYoung, one of the authors of "Why We're Not Emergent" responds to this McDonald's ad on his blog, taking a swat at today's hipster church culture in a way us country folk can appreciate:

"So much that passes for spirituality these days is nothing more than middle class, 20something coffee culture. If you like jazz, soul patches, earth tone furniture, and lattes, that's cool. But this culture is no holier than the McNugget, Hi-C, Value City, football culture that most people live in. Why does incarnational ministry usually mean hanging out at Starbucks instead of McDonalds?

Jesus came to save Grimace and Hamburglar too. "

I've never been into hip hop but....

2009-01-21T22:30:00.003-05:00

...my dear brother Matthew has introduced me to some of what is going on in today's Christian hip hop scene. Here is a clip worth watching. It is Shai Linne- what he raps is good- but what is better is the sermon he preaches to the crowd after he is done. This should be a great encouragement to you no matter what style of music you like.

Check it out.
Spread it around.

2009-01-21T21:57:00.001-05:00

Bush's Presidential Statement on the Sanctity of Life

2009-01-19T21:03:00.002-05:00

Unfortunately I don't believe that we will be seeing anything coming out of the Obama Whitehouse resembling this any time soon.

[Issued January 15, 2009, The White House]

National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 2009
by the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

All human life is a gift from our Creator that is sacred, unique, and worthy of protection. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our country recognizes that each person, including every person waiting to be born, has a special place and purpose in this world. We also underscore our dedication to heeding this message of conscience by speaking up for the weak and voiceless among us.

The most basic duty of government is to protect the life of the innocent. My Administration has been committed to building a culture of life by vigorously promoting adoption and parental notification laws, opposing Federal funding for abortions overseas, encouraging teen abstinence, and funding crisis pregnancy programs. In 2002, I was honored to sign into law the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which extends legal protection to children who survive an abortion attempt. I signed legislation in 2003 to ban the cruel practice of partial‑birth abortion, and that law represents our commitment to building a culture of life in America. Also, I was proud to sign the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004, which allows authorities to charge a person who causes death or injury to a child in the womb with a separate offense in addition to any charges relating to the mother.

America is a caring Nation, and our values should guide us as we harness the gifts of science. In our zeal for new treatments and cures, we must never abandon our fundamental morals. We can achieve the great breakthroughs we all seek with reverence for the gift of life.

The sanctity of life is written in the hearts of all men and women. On this day and throughout the year, we aspire to build a society in which every child is welcome in life and protected in law. We also encourage more of our fellow Americans to join our just and noble cause. History tells us that with a cause rooted in our deepest principles and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens, we will prevail.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 18, 2009, as National Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon all Americans to recognize this day with appropriate ceremonies and to underscore our commitment to respecting and protecting the life and dignity of every human being.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

GEORGE W. BUSH

Are Mormons Christians?

2009-01-03T13:19:00.004-05:00

Here are two contrasting videos- one answering "yes," the other answering "no." I post the first video not to poke fun at Joel Osteen, but because I think that he represents the view of many Christians who do not know what to make of Mormonism besides what they have heard from the Mormons themselves. Mormons present themselves as a "Christian" faith and like to be referred to as the "Church of Jesus Christ." So, here you have Osteen confronted with the question: "Are Mormons Christians?" and he fumbles around a bit but answers "yes" based simply upon their saying that Jesus is their "Savior."

The second video is a short clip by James White who explains why Mormons are, in fact, not Christians at all. I hope this is helpful- particularly for those, like us here in Blacksburg, who are in areas where the Mormon population is large. I also hope that this will serve as an introduction to James White's ministry which is very helpful indeed.

Happy Anniversary

2008-12-22T08:00:00.001-05:00

Today Michelle and I have been married for 18 years. That is so hard to believe.

Before we began dating, a buddy of mine named Tom was looking for a girlfriend. He and I had started attending a Bible study and I had gotten to know Michelle some and we had actually become prayer partners. At the time, she had her eyes on some guy named Bill. Nevertheless, I told Tom that he ought to ask Michelle out. "Why?" he asked. "Because she will make someone a good wife some day" I answered.

Little did I know that I would be the lucky guy that would have the privilege of having her as my wife.

It was not long after that conversation with Tom that it occurred to me ("duh!") to ask Michelle out myself. Within two months of our first date, I asked her to marry me. Six months after that she became my bride.

We had no idea what the future would bring. If you would have told us the journey we would embark on we would have thought you were crazy. It has not been an easy road. There have been many tears but also a lot of laughs along the way.

All I know is that there is no one that I would rather have had by my side and no one better equipped to be my "help mate." God's grace is sufficient, but I believe that, if it were not for Michelle, there is no way that I could have survived the last 11 years of ministry. No way. She has been a constant source of encouragement and support. When I decided to quit (more than once!) she told me to carry on- and reminded me that God is faithful.

God brought us together because He knew that we would be the best team to accomplish the tasks that He had planned for us before the foundation of the world. And who knows what plans He has made for our future? Who knows what the years ahead will bring? If you could travel forward in time and tell me what lies ahead, I probably wouldn't believe you.

All I know is that I there is no one that I would rather have by my side than my bride.

Michelle I love you. You are beautiful. You are my support. Thank you.
Happy Anniversary.

L.L.

Penn on proselytization

2008-12-18T14:46:00.002-05:00

I'm speechless. Watch this to the end.

ht: Matt Murphy

2008-12-10T16:58:00.000-05:00

The Economics, Psychology and Theology of Gift Giving- The Gift Says More About the Giver

In the Washington Post (Sunday, Dec. 10, 2006) article, Did the Three Kings Bear Gift Receipts?, Kevin Hassett examines gift giving from an economist’s point of view.

He discovers that an economist would say that gift giving is a completely inefficient way of celebrating Christmas. They would claim that a person knows what they want better than you do, and they would point to studies which have confirmed that people prefer their own choice as opposed to the gifts they received anywhere from 10 to 33 percent. Thus, one could say that up to 33 percent of the money spent this Christmas season is money wasted. Using figures provided by the National Retail Foundation, that could mean an annual loss of $152 billion suffered by American consumers this year. Politicians argue tooth and nail how to save Americans $152 billion through tax breaks, etc., It seems that an economist would not be out of order to suggest the banning of gift giving as a responsible law to help American’s financial situations.

What economists, however, don’t take into account, however, is the psychology of gift giving. Hassett describes a study by Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman published in 1990 explaining:

“Students at Simon Fraser University in Canada were given coffee mugs from the college bookstore and then asked whether they would sell the mugs at prices ranging from 25 cents to $9.25. A second group was asked whether they would buy a mug at the same prices. Those who received the gifts were possessive of their new treasures, and were coaxed into giving them up only at prices above $7.12. But those who did not receive the mugs as gifts found them unattractive and were willing to buy them only if they cost less than $3.12. The $4 difference is attributed to the psychological value of a gift. The recipient experienced a thrill when he or she received the mug, which became the apple of their eye. Those who were offered a chance to buy a mug experienced no such thrill.

Hassett concludes: First, you shouldn’t fret too much about the likely success of your gifts. College students are a noticeably unsentimental lot. If they become emotionally attached to mugs from the college bookstore, given to them in an experimental setting, imagine how much value a wife may attach to a gift from a beloved spouse, regardless of its exact nature.

Second…the frankincense and myrrh probably generated a textbook response in Mary and Joseph….like the mug-loving college students, Mary and Joseph must have been enormously attached to their presents. According to legend, the poor carpenter and his wife never sold the valuable gifts, despite the family’s financial needs. To this day, a case that purportedly contains the gifts of the magi is on display at a monastery in Greece. If the gifts truly were preserved for all time, it is probably because the human response to Christmas gifts has changed little since that first night.

I was listening to this article being discussed on Public Radio and found it quite intriguing, but the best part was when a caller called in to respond to the question- “what would you rather receive, a gift or money?” The caller ademately said that a gift is better because the gift says “I consider you worth spending time and effort on”- it shows that the giver cares. In fact, the caller stated, the gift says more about the giver than it does about the one who receives the gift.

What a great theological statement!

Let’s consider the gift we celebrate each Christmas- the gift of Christ. The gift of Christ, certainly does say something about those who receive Him- namely that we are sinners in need of a Savior! But it says much more about the Father who sent Him.

John Frame provides a wonderful meditation on God’s gift to us and what it teaches about Him in an article entitled The Wonder of God Over Us and With Us. Read it here.

Frame says: Christmas reveals in a wonderful way that God acts in time as well as above it. It shows us wonderfully how God relates to us, not only as a mysterious being from another realm, but as a person in our own time and place: interacting with us, hearing our prayers, guiding us step by step, chastising us with fatherly discipline, comforting us with the wonderful promises of the blessings of Christ. Truly He is Immanuel, the God who is really with us, who is nonetheless eternally the sovereign Lord of all.

Truly this bespeaks a very Merry Christmas!

Personal or Public Worship= Which is More Important?

2008-12-10T16:34:00.000-05:00

What happens when someone argues that their own private times with God are more important than corporate gatherings of the church as a whole?

Each of us, I'm sure, have heard those who have questioned the necessity of corporate worship, thinking that it is less "spiritual" than their own private times of reading and meditation.

Well, R. Scott Clark, professor of Church History and Historical Theology at Westminster Seminary in California, has recently written saying that a strong case can be made from Scripture that public worship is more important than private.

He writes:

"We know precious little about God's clearly revealed requirements for private piety. What we have are clearly revealed requirements, in the typological revelation about attending to the divinely appointed feasts and other corporate gatherings...In the 18th and 19th centuries, however, the relation between the public and the private became reversed under the influence of pietism."

Clark argues that private practice of devotion and worship should be secondary to the public: "It is through the public reading and preaching of the Gospel that God has promised to bring his people to faith (Rom. 10). " He adds that communion and baptism are administered in public services. People are disciplined (or ought to be) for failing to attend to these public gatherings.

He continued:

"Remember, universal literacy is relatively new. Universal bible ownership is relatively new. That doesn’t mean that people couldn’t have recited passages or even whole books from memory but it means that, for much of world history, God’s people could not have had “devotions” in the way that we think of them.

Private piety and devotion is important. If we neglect private prayer and meditation on Scripture we deprive ourselves on important benefits and blessings. There is probably a correlation between private devotions and maturity but they are not the public means of grace. When it comes to piety, the private flows from the public. The latter is not the joint expression of a hundreds of private religious experiences. Whatever private religious experience we may (or may not) have our Christian life is grounded in the preaching of the Word, especially the gospel, the administration of the sacraments, and public prayers in the context of public worship services."

His full article can be found here.

For more help in this area, 9 Marks (a ministry out of Capital Hill Baptist) has wonderful resources on the importance of church membership and worship.

The Biblical Case for Homosexual Marriage...Not

2008-12-08T16:58:00.003-05:00

Al Mohler does a critique of Newsweek's latest issue which makes a "religious case for homosexual marriage." Read his response here.

You might live in Radford if....

2008-12-08T13:10:00.001-05:00

with apologies to Neal and Aleah.

Review of Pagan Christianity

2008-12-08T12:34:00.004-05:00

There is no lack of junk out there being passed off as Christian scholarship. When a popular name is put behind it, it makes the stuff downright dangerous. George Barna is a name many Christians recognize and, so, assume that what he writes is trustworthy. Well, it appears that Barna has gone off the deep end and has been the subject of much criticism lately for his last work: "Pagan Christianity." Knowing that many have found this book to be "revolutionary" in their thinking of church, I figured I'd guide you to a helpful review/critique of it which points out its fundamental flaws. The review has several parts and I'm sorry that the author hasn't made it easier to go from one to the other- but they are worth your time and effort if you have heard of this book.

The first of the series of reviews is here.

Where have you been?

2008-12-08T11:42:00.001-05:00

Well, glad you asked.

I've been setting up a new blog for the church planters in the Midwest area of our State Convention. If you are curious and want to see a few posts I've done there to the neglect of this blog, pay us a visit: Midwest CPN Blog

John Owen Communion With God- Part 10

2008-12-08T11:39:00.004-05:00

John Owen, Communion with God Part 2, Chapter 3, Digression II

(Sunday mornings before our worship service, our church is studying our way through Owen's book. This series consists of the notes handed out for the class).

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

The sum of all true wisdom and knowledge may be reduced to these three heads:- 1) The knowledge of God, his nature and his properties. 2) The knowledge of ourselves in reference to the will of God concerning us. 3) Skill to walk in communion with God….In these three is summed up all true wisdom and knowledge; and not any of them is to any purpose to be obtained, or is manifested, but only in and by the Lord Christ.

1) God, by the work of creation, by the creation itself, did reveal himself in many of his properties unto his creatures capable of his knowledge;- his power, his goodness, his wisdom, his all-sufficiency, are thereby known (see Romans 1:19-21). But yet there are some properties of God which all the works of creation cannot in any measure reveal or make known;- such as his patience, long-suffering, and forbearance. For all things being made good (Gen. 1:31), there could be no place for the exercise of any of these properties, or manifestation of them. The whole fabric of heaven and earth considered in itself, as at first created, will not discover any such thing as patience and forbearance in God; which yet are eminent properties of his nature, as himself proclaims and declares (Exodus 34:6,7).

Wherefore the Lord goes further; and by the works of his providence, in preserving and ruling the world which he made, discovers and reveals these properties also. For whereas by cursing the earth, and filling all the elements oftentimes with signs of his anger and indignation, he hath, as the apostle tells us, Rom. 1:18, “revealed from heaven his wrath against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men;” yet not proceeding immediately to destroy all things, he hath manifested his patience and forbearance to all. See Acts 14:16,17.

There are some of the most eminent and glorious properties of God that there is not the least glimpse to be attained of out of the Lord Christ, but only by and in him; and some that comparatively we have no light of but in him; and of all the rest no true light but by him:

A) Of the first sort, whereof not the least guess and imagination can enter into the heart of man but only by Christ, are love and pardoning mercy:-
a. Love; I mean love unto sinners. Without this, man is of all creatures most miserable; and there is not the least glimpse of it that can possibly be discovered but in Christ. The Holy Spirit tells us in 1 John 4:8 that “God is love.”

But how do we know this?

He tells us, verse 9- “In this was manifested the love of God, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.”

Where now is the wise, where is the scribe, where is the disputer of this world, with all their wisdom? ….That wisdom which cannot teach me that God is love, shall ever pass for folly.

b. Pardoning mercy or grace. Without this, even love would be fruitless. Pardoning mercy is God’s free, gracious acceptance of a sinner upon satisfaction made to his justice in the blood of Jesus; nor is any discovery of it, but as relating to the satisfaction of justice, consistent with the glory of God. Romans 3:25, Ephesians 1:6,7

Had not God set forth the Lord Christ, all the angels in heaven and men on earth could not have apprehended that there had been any such thing in the nature of God as this grace of pardoning mercy.

And these are the properties of God whereby he will be known, whereof there is not the least glimpse to be obtained but by and in Christ; and whoever knows him not by these, knows him not at all. They know an idol, and not the only true God. He that hath not the Son, the same hath not the Father 1 John 2:23; and not to have God as a Father, is not to have him at all; and he is known as a Father only as he is love, and full of pardoning mercy in Christ.

Our Discussion this morning centered on:

The concept that this world, with all its tragedies, is the "best of all possible worlds.”

And the question: “Is the God of Islam the God of Christianity?”

John Owen Communion With God- Part 9

2008-12-08T11:36:00.001-05:00

John Owen, Communion with God Part 2, Chapter 3 Contd. (part 2)

The fact that Jesus is both God and man makes him able to be a source of grace to us.

1) He was fit to suffer the punishment that was due to us.

Had he not been man, he could not have suffered;- had he not been God, his suffering could not have availed either himself or us, - he had not satisfied; the suffering of a mere man could not bear any proportion to that which in any respect was infinite. Had the great and righteous God gathered together all the sins that had been committed by his elect from the foundation of the world, and searched the bosoms of all that were to come to the end of the world, and taken them all, from the sin of their nature to the least deviation from the rectitude of his most holy law, and the highest provocation of their regenerate and unregenerate condition, and laid them on a mere holy, innocent, creature; O how they would have overwhelmed him and buried him forever out of the presence of God’s love!

That is why the writer of Hebrews describes Jesus before He speaks of the purging of our sins. He is the Son and heir of all things, by whom the world, the brightness of the Father’s glory- He did it, He alone could do it.

2) Thus he is an endless, bottomless fountain of grace to all who believe. The Father committed the fullness of grace to Christ and all grace becomes to be his.

The real communication of grace is by Christ sending the Holy Spirit to regenerate us, and to create in us all the daily supplies of grace that we partake of.

This, then, is that which I intend by this fullness of grace that is in Christ, from when we have both our beginning and all our supplies; which makes him, as he is the Alpha and Omega of His church, the beginner and finisher of our faith, excellent and desirable to our souls:- Upon the payment of the great price of his blood, and full acquitment on the satisfaction he made; all grace whatever becomes, in a moral sense, his, at his disposal; and he bestows it on, or works it in the hearts o his by the Holy Spirit, according as, in His infinite wisdom, he sees it needful. How glorious is He to the soul on this consideration! That is most excellent to us which suits us in a wanting condition, - that which give bread to the hungry, water to the thirsty, mercy to the perishing. All our reliefs are thus in our Beloved. Here is the life of our souls, the joy of our hearts, our relief against sin and deliverance from the wrath to come.

3) Thus, He is able to be the mediator between us and God- being one with God and one with us, and one in Himself in this oneness.

Herein shines out the infinitely glorious wisdom of God; which we may better admire than express.

What poor, low, perishing things do we spend our contemplations on! Were we to have no advantage by this astonishing dispensation, yet its excellency, glory, beauty, depths, deserve the flower of our iniquities, the vigor of our spirits, the substance of our time; but when, withal our life, our peace, our joy, our inheritance, our eternity, our all, lies herein, shall not the thoughts of it always dwell in our hearts, always refresh and delight our souls?

4) He is excellent and glorious in that He is exalted and invested with all authority.

Acts 2:36

Psalm 2:6

Heb. 2:7-9

Matthew 28:18

John 17:2

Micah 5:4

Psalm 45:5

Oh, how glorious is he in his authority over his enemies! In the world he terrifies, frightens, awes, convinces, bruises their hearts and consciences,- fills them with fear, terror, disquietment, until they yield him feigned obedience and sometimes with outward judgments bruises, breaks, turns the wheel upon them,- stains all his vesture with their blood,- fills the earth with their carcasses: and at last will gather them all together, beast, false prophet, nations, etc. and cast them into that lake that burns with fire and brimstone. Psalm 110:6; Rev. 19:20

Eph. 1:20-22

Phil. 2:9

And what a little portion of his glory is it that we have pointed to! This is the Beloved of the church, - its head, its husband; this is he with whom we have communion.

His head is his government, authority and kingdom. Hence it is said, “A crown of pure gold was on his head,” Psalm 21:3

1) It is a glorious kingdom; he is full of glory and majesty, and in his majesty he rides “prosperously,” Psalm 45:3,4. “His glory is great in the salvation of God: honor and majesty are laid upon him: he is made blessed forever and ever,” Psalm 21:5,6. It is a heavenly, a spiritual, a universal, an unshaken kingdom; all which render it glorious.

2) It is a durable kingdom. “His throne is forever and ever” Psalm 24:6. “Of the increase of his government there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever,” Isaiah 9:7 “His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom” Dan. 7:27

Cheetos Pet

2008-12-05T15:40:00.001-05:00

Just for fun:

Dinesh D'Souza interview

2008-12-05T14:55:00.002-05:00

Check out this interview Dinesh D'Souza and then go get his book. He is a Christian apologist answering atheist critics. Below is an excerpt:

You write that "sex is the primary reason most contemporary atheists have chosen to break with Christianity." What do you mean?

Atheists spend a lot of time thinking about the motives for belief. Why do religious people believe these ridiculous things? When you turn the tables on atheists and ask them why they don't believe, they will answer, "Because we don't have enough evidence. We don't believe because there's no proof." But if you think about it, this is an inadequate explanation, because if you truly believe that there is no proof for God, then you're not going to bother with the matter. You're just going to live your life as if God isn't there.

I don't believe in unicorns, so I just go about my life as if there are no unicorns. You'll notice that I haven't written any books called The End of the Unicorn, Unicorns Are Not Great, or The Unicorn Delusion, and I don't spend my time obsessing about unicorns. What I'm getting at is that you have these people out there who don't believe that God exists, but who are actively attempting to eliminate religion from society, setting up atheist video shows, and having atheist conferences. There has to be more going on here than mere unbelief.

If you really look at the motivations of contemporary atheists, you'll find that they don't even really reject Christian theology. It's not as if the atheist objects to the resurrection or the parting of the sea; rather, it is Christian morality to which atheists object, particularly Christian moral prohibitions in the area of sex. The atheist looks at all of Christianity's "thou shalt nots"—homosexuality is bad; divorce is bad; adultery is bad; premarital sex is bad—and then looks at his own life and says, "If these things are really bad, then I'm a bad guy. But I'm not a bad guy; I'm a great guy. I must thus reinterpret or (preferably) abolish all of these accusatory teachings that are putting me in a bad light."

How does one do that? One way is liberal Christianity—you simply reinterpret Christian teachings as if they don't really mean what they say. The better way, of course, is to ask where morality comes from. Well, it comes from one of two places. It either comes from ourselves—these are the rules that we make up as we go along—or it comes from some transcendent source. To get rid of God, then, is to remove the shadow of moral judgment. This doesn't mean that you completely eliminate morality, but it does mean that you reduce morality to a tool that human societies construct for their own advantages. It means that morality can change, and that old rules can be set aside. You can see why this would be a very attractive proposition for the guy who wants to live his life unmolested by the injunctions and prohibitions of Christian morality.

The Seeker Service at First Baptist

2008-12-03T21:45:00.000-05:00

The Porpoise Driven Life

2008-11-26T11:41:00.001-05:00

What's sad is that I can see someone actually producing something like this.

How much is enough?

2008-11-12T19:51:00.002-05:00

Today, the 9 Marks blog "Church Matters" put forth the following question asked by a reader:

"At what point in the process should a prospective pastor ask about the financial package to be offered by the church? I don't want to come across as though that is all I am concerned about, yet I have a family to support and consider in the decision of whether or not this will be a fit for us. I understand that if this is where God has called us He will provide, but I also do not want to wait until it comes to a vote in the church to find out the package will not support my family and end up wasting the church's time and ours."

I posted a response and to see it along with the others, go here.

John Owen Communion With God part 8

2008-11-03T14:11:00.001-05:00

(Sunday mornings before our worship service, our church is studying our way through Owen's book. This series consists of the notes handed out for the class).

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

Part 2, Chapter 3 continued:

Let our souls be persuaded of his sincerity and willingness in giving himself, in all that he is, as mediator unto us, to be ours; and let our hearts give up themselves unto him. Let us tell him that we will be for him, and not for another: let him know it from us; he delights to hear it, yea, he says, “Sweet is our voice, and our countenance is comely;”- and we shall not fail in the issue of sweet refreshment with him.

To strengthen our hearts in the giving of ourselves to Jesus as our husband, we will look at some of the personal excellencies of Him.

1. He is excellent and desirable in His Deity and the glory that comes from it.

He is “Jehovah our Righteousness” Jer. 23:6. John says “We have seen His glory, the glory of the only-begotten Son of God” John 1:14.

The choicest saints have been afraid and amazed t the beauty of an angel; and the stoutest sinners have trembled at the glory of one of those creatures in a low appearance, representing but the back parts of their glory, who yet themselves, in their highest advancement, do cover their faces at the presence of our Beloved, as conscious to themselves of their utter disability to bear the rays of His glory, Isa. 6:2; John 12:39-41. He is “the fellow of the Lord of hosts,” Zech. 13:7.

If anyone should ask, now, what is in the Lord Jesus, our beloved, more than in other beloveds, that should make him so desirable, and amiable, and worthy of acceptation? What is he more than others? I ask, What is a king more than a beggar? Much every way. Alas! This is nothing; they were born alike, must die alike, and after that is the judgment. What is an angel more than a worm? A worm is a creature, and an angel is no more; he hath made one to creep on the earth, - made also the other to dwell in heaven. There is still a proportion between these, they agree in something; but what are all the nothings of the world to the God infinitely blessed for evermore? Shall the dust of the balance, or the drop of the bucket be laid in the scale against him? This is he of whom the sinners in Zion are afraid, and cry, “Who amongst us shall dwell with the devouring fire, who amongst us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?”

Observe- the endless, bottomless, boundless grace and compassion that is in him who is thus our husband, as he is the God of Zion. It is not the grace of a creature, nor all the grace that can possibly at once dwell in a created nature that will serve our turn ..If, now, there be grace enough for sinners in an all-sufficient God, it is in Christ; and, indeed, in any other there cannot be enough. The Lord gives this reason for the peace and confidence of sinners, Isa. 54:4,5, “Thou shalt not be ashamed, neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame.” But how can this be? So much sin, and not ashamed! So much guilt and not confounded! “Thy Maker,” saith he, “is thine husband; the LORD of hosts in his name; and they Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; the God of the whole earth shall he be called.” This is the bottom of all peace, confidence and consolation,- the grace and mercy of our Maker, of the God of the whole earth.

And on this ground it is that if all the world should (if I may so say) set themselves to drink free grace, mercy and pardon, drawing water continually from the wells of salvation; if they should set themselves to draw from one single promise, an angel standing by and crying, “Drink, O friends, yea, drink abundantly, take so much grace and pardon as shall be abundantly sufficient for the world of sin which is in every one of you;”- they would not be able to sink the grace of the promise in one hair’s breath. There is enough for millions of worlds, if they were; because it flows into it from an infinite, bottomless fountain. “Fear not, O worm Jacob, I am God, and not man,” is the bottom of the sinner’s consolation.

This infiniteness of grace, in respect of its spring and fountain, will answer all objections that might hinder our souls from drawing nigh to communion with him, and from a free embracing of him. Will not this suit us in all our distresses? What is our finite guilt before it? Show me the sinner that can spread his iniquities to the dimensions (if I may so say) of this grace. Here is mercy enough for the greatest, the oldest, the stubbornest transgressor.

Consider, hence, his eternal, free, unchangeable love…”As the Father hath loved me, so hath I loved you,” John 15:9.

1) It is eternal: He himself is, “yesterday, to-day, and forever,” Heb. 13:8; and so is His love.
2) Unchangeable. Our love is like ourselves; as we are, so are our affections: so is the love of Christ like Himself. He is the LORD, and he changeth not: and therefore we are not consumed. Whom He loves, He loves to the end. His love is such as never had beginning, and never shall have ending.
3) It is also fruitful- fruitful in all its gracious issues and effects. The love of Christ, being the love of God, is effectual and fruitful in producing all the good things which he willeth unto his beloved. He loves life, grace, and holiness into us; he loves us also into covenant, loves us into heaven. Love in him is properly to will good to anyone: whatever good Christ by his love wills to any, that wiling is operative of that good.

These three qualifications of the love of Christ make it exceedingly eminent,and him exceeding desirable. How many millions of sins, in every one of the elect, every one whereof were enough to condemn them all, hath this love overcome! What mountains of unbelief doth it remove!

2. He is desirable and worthy of our acceptance when we also consider His humanity. Even there, when we see Him in comparison to us, He is exceedingly desirable. It is desirable in its a) freedom from sin; 2) its fullness of grace.

1) He was free from sin;- the Lamb of God, without spot, and without blemish; the male of the flock, to be offered unto God…sanctified persons, whose stains are in any measure washed away, are exceeding fair in the eye of Christ Himself, how fair, then, is he who never had the least spot or stain!

Communion With God, Part 7

2008-10-27T12:20:00.001-04:00

John Owen, Communion with God Part 2, Chapter 3

(Sunday mornings before our worship service, our church is studying our way through Owen's book. This series consists of the notes handed out for the class).

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

In chapter 2, Owen made the case for our communion with Jesus and now, in chapter 3, he discusses the way that we hold communion with Christ and he says that the Scriptures present our relationship to Jesus as a marital relationship- He is married to us, and we are married to Him and this is what gives us fellowship with him.

Isaiah 54:5 tells us: “For your Maker is your husband, the LORD of hosts in his name; and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, the God of the whole earth he is called.” This is why the church will not be ashamed or confounded in the midst of her troubles and trials, she is married to her Maker, and her Redeemer is her husband. Isaiah 61:10 says: “As a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.” And Isaiah 62:5 says: “As the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God rejoice over you.”

And just as those who are getting married are full of gladness, so it is with Jesus and His saints in this relationship with them.

To that purpose we have His engagement. He says to us in Hosea 2:19,20: “I will betroth you to me forever. I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy. I will betroth you to me in faithfulness.” And it is the main goal of the ministry of the gospel to press upon people to give themselves over to Jesus Christ as He reveals his kindness in this engagement. That is why Paul tells the Corinthians in 2 Cor. 11:2, that he had “I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.”

And this is the relationship wherein the Lord Jesus is exceedingly delighted, and invites others to behold Him in this, His glory. He calls us to consider Him as One who is betrothing and espousing His church to Himself.

And when we look upon Him, we will find on Him two things:

1- Honor. It is the day of His coronation, and His spouse is the crown wherewith He is crowned. Just as Christ is a diadem of and crown of glory to Zion (Isaiah 28:5), so Zion also is a diadem and a crown to Him: “For as a young man marries a young woman, so shall your sons marry you, and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God rejoice over you.”
2- Delight. The day that He takes poor sinful souls to Himself, is a day of gladness of His heart. Zeph. 3:17 says that “He rejoiceth with joy, He joys with singing.”

It is the gladness of the heart of Christ, the joy of His soul, to take poor sinners into this relation with Himself. He rejoiced in the thoughts of it from eternity, Prov. 8:31; and always expresseth the greatest willingness to undergo the hard task required thereunto, Psalm 40:7,8; Heb. 10:7; yea, He was pained as a woman in travail, until He had accomplished it, Luke 12:50. Because He loved his church, He gave Himself for it, Eph. 5:25, despising the shame, and enduring the cross, Heb. 12:2, that He might enjoy His bride, - that He might be for her, and she for Him, and not for another, Hosea 3:3. This is joy, when He is thus crowned by His mother. It is believers that are mother and brother of this Solomon, Matt. 12:49,50. They crown Him in the day of His espousals, giving themselves to Him, and becoming His glory, 2 Cor. 8:23.
Thus He sets out His whole communion with His church under this allusion and that most frequently. The time of His taking the church unto Himself is the day of His marriage; and the church is His bride, His wife, Rev. 19:7,8. The entertainment He makes for His saints is a wedding supper, Matt. 22:3. The graces of His church are the ornaments of His queen, Ps. 45:9-14; and the fellowship He hath with His saints is as that which those who are mutually beloved in a conjugal relation do hold, Cant. 1. Hence Paul, in describing these two, makes sudden and insensible transitions from one to the other,- Eph. 5, from verse 22 unto verse 32; concluding the whole with an application unto Christ and the church.

So how is it that we hold communion with Jesus in this type of marital relationship?

It can be reduced to two heads: 1) A mutual resignation of themselves one to the other; 2) Mutual, consequential affections.

1) There is a mutual resignation.

Christ makes Himself over to the soul, to be his, as to all the love, care, and tenderness of a husband; and the soul gives up itself wholly unto the Lord Christ, to be His, as to all loving, tender obedience. And herein is the main of Christ’s and the saints espousals. This, in the prophet, is set out under a parable of himself and a harlot, Hosea 3:3, “Thou shalt abide for me,” saith he unto her, “thou shalt not be for another, and I will be for thee.” “Poor harlot,” saith the Lord Christ, “I have bought thee unto myself with the price of mine own blood; and now, this is that which we will consent unto, - I WILL BE FOR THEE, AND THOU SHALT BE FOR ME, and not for another.

First, Christ gives Himself to the soul, with all His excellencies, righteousness, preciousness, graces, and eminencies, to be its Savior, head, and husband forever to dwell with it in this marital relationship. Christ looks upon the souls of the saints and sees them as very beautiful, Ezek. 16:14: “your beauty…was perfect through the splendor that I had bestowed on you.”

Because He is righteousness, He is “The LORD our Righteousness,” Jer. 23:6. Because He is the wisdom of God, and the power of God, He is “made unto us wisdom,” etc., 1 Cor. 1:30. Thus, “the branch of the LORD is beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth is excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel,” Isa. 4:2. This is the first thing on the part of Christ, the free donation and bestowing of Himself upon us to be our Christ, our Beloved, as to all the ends and purposes of love, mercy, grace, and glory; whereunto in His mediation He is designed, in a marriage covenant never to be broken. This is the sum of what is intended:- The Lord Jesus Christ, fitted and prepared, by the accomplishment and furniture of His person as mediator, and the large purchase of grace and glory which He hath made, to be a husband to His saints, His church, tenders Himself in the promises of the gospel to them in all His desireableness; convinces them of His good-will toward them, and His all-sufficiency for a supply of their wants; and upon their consent to accept of Him, - which is all He requires or expects at their hands- He engageth Himself in a marriage covenant to be theirs for ever.

Secondly. On the part of the saints, it is their free, willing consent to receive, embrace, and submit unto the Lord Jesus, as their husband, Lord, and Savior,- to abide with Him, subject their souls unto Him and to be ruled by Him for ever.

Communion With God Part 6

2008-10-22T14:40:00.002-04:00

John Owen’s Communion With God- Part 6

Part 2, Chapter 1

Having discussed our communion with the Father, Owen now moves on to considering our communion with the Son. His goal in this chapter is to: 1) declare that we have fellowship with the Son of God, 2) show what that fellowship or communion consists of.

To demonstrate that we do, indeed, have fellowship with the Son, Owen takes us to:

1 Cor. 1:9- “God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.” We are called of God the Father, as the Father, in pursuit of his love, to communion with the Son, as our Lord.

Rev. 3:20- “Behold I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and him with me.” Certainly this is fellowship, or I know not what is. Christ will eat with believers: he refreshes himself with his own graces in them, by his Spirit bestowed on them.

Understanding that we do enjoy fellowship with Jesus Christ, the question posed is “in what sense do we particularly fellowship with Jesus.” In other words, Owen has made the case that we enjoy “love” peculiarly from the Father and love is what we are to return particularly to Him.

So what is it that we particularly receive from Christ? It is grace.

John 1:14, 16-17: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth….And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”

We have communion with him in grace; we receive from him all manner of grace whatever; and therein have we fellowship with him.

2 Cor. 13:14 “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”

2 Thessalonians 3:17-18 “I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the sign of genuineness in every letter of mine; it is the way I write. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.”

Grace is a word that can be used in various ways. For the most part, it can be referred to under one of the following three heads:

Grace of personal presence and attractiveness. This in Christ is the matter of half the book of Song of Solomon; and it is also mentioned in Psalm 45:2 “You are the most handsome of the sons of men; grace is poured upon your lips…”

He is beyond comparison, more beautiful and gracious than any here below

Grace of free favor and acceptance. It is by this grace that we are saved.
The fruits of the Spirit. The sanctifying and renewing of our natures, enabling unto good, and preventing from evil, are so termed. Thus the Lord tells Paul that His grace was sufficient for him – that is, the assistance against temptation which was given him.

These last two graces are “purchased grace,” having been purchased by him for us; and our communion with Him in these two graces are termed “a fellowship in his sufferings, and the power of his resurrection,” Phil. 3:10.

Considering the grace of personal presence and attractiveness, the grace of Jesus consists of 3 things: 1) His fitness to save due to the uniting of the natures of God and man in Him; 2) His fullness to save, from the grace of communion; 3) His excellency to endear from his complete suitableness to all the wants of the souls of men.

1) His fitness to save comes from the grace of His union.

The uniting of the natures of God and man in one person made him fit to be a Savior to the uttermost. He lays His hand upon God, by partaking of His nature, Zech. 13:7; and He lays His hand upon us by partaking of our nature, Heb. 2:14, 16: and so becomes a days-man or umpire between both. By this means He fills up all the distance that was made by sin between God and us; and we who were far off are made nigh to Him. Upon this account it was that He had room enough in His breast to receive, and power enough in His spirit to bear all the wrath that was prepared for us. p. 51

2) His fullness to save, from the grace of communion or the effects of his union, which are free; and consequences of it…”He is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him,” Heb. 7:25; having all fullness unto this end communicated unto Him: “for it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell,” Col. 1:19; and he received not “the Spirit by measure,” John 3:34. And from this fullness He makes out a suitable supply unto all that are his “grace for grace,” John 1:16. Had it been given to Him by measure, we had exhausted it.

3) His excellency to endear, from his complete suitableness to all the wants of the souls of men. There is no man whatever, that hath any want of the souls of men. There is no man whatever, that hath any want in reference unto the things of God, but Christ be unto him that which he wants: I speak of those who are given him of his Father. Is he dead? Christ is life. Is he weak? Christ is the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Hath he the sense of guilt upon him? Christ is complete righteousness, - “The Lord our Righteousness.” Many poor creatures are sensible of their wants, but know not where their remedy lies. Indeed, whether it be life or light, power or joy, all is wrapped up in him.

This, then, for the present, may suffice in general to be spoken of the personal grace of the Lord Christ:- He hath the fitness to save, having pity and ability, tenderness and power, to carry that work to the uttermost; and a fullness to save, of redemption and sanctification of all our souls: whereby he becomes exceedingly desirable, yea, altogether lovely; as afterward will appear in particular. And as to this, in the first place, the saints have distinct fellowship with the Lord Christ.

In what condition soever you may be, compare a little what you aim at, or what you do, with what you have already heard of Jesus Christ: if any thing you design be like to him, if any thing you desire be equal to him, let him be rejected as one that hath neither form nor comeliness in him; but if, indeed, all your ways be but vanity and vexation of spirit, in comparison of him, why do you spend your “money for that which is not bread, and your labor for that which satisfieth not?”

Use 1: You that are yet in the flower of your days, full of health and strength, and, with all the vigour of your spirits, do pursue some one thing, some another, consider, I pray, what are all your beloveds to this Beloved? What have you gotten by the? Let us see the peace, quietness, assurance of everlasting blessedness that they have given you? Their paths are crooked paths, whoe’er goes in them shall not know peace. Behold here a fit object for your choicest affections, - one in whom you may find rest to your souls, - one in whom there is nothing will grieve and trouble you to eternity. Behold, he stands at the door of your souls, and knocks: O reject him not, lest you seek him and find him not. Pray study him a little; you love him not, because you know him not. Why doth one of you spend his time in idleness and folly, and wasting of precious time, - perhaps debauchedly? Why doth another associate and assemble himself with them that scoff at religion and the things of God? Merely because you know not our dear Lord Jesus. Oh, when he shall reveal himself to you, and tell you he is Jesus whom you have slighted and refused, how will it break your hearts, and make you mourn like a dove, that you have neglected him!

Use 2: You that are, perhaps, seeking earnestly after a righteousness, and are religious persons, consider a little with yourselves,- hath Christ his due place in your hearts? Is he your all? Does he dwell in your thoughts? Do you know him in his excellency and desirableness? Do you indeed account all things all things “loss and dung” for his exceeding excellency? Or rather, do you prefer almost any thing in the world before it?

Watch

2008-10-13T13:58:00.000-04:00

Looking for relationship advice? Classic!

2008-10-09T15:15:00.003-04:00

Bishop Thomas Weeks will be hosting a reality show where he looks for wife #3 while counseling others on their relationship woes. I'm certainly not recommending his show, I just thought that this quote was priceless:

The 30-minute Atlanta-based reality series will include Weeks sharing the spotlight with singles and broken-hearted couples on the mend. The twice-divorced Pentecostal pastor will dole out relationship advice drawing on his experience as an author, minister and a first-time felon who pleaded guilty to aggravated assault on his ex-wife, national evangelist Juanita Bynum.

Full article (not that you'd want to read it) here.

John Owen's Communion With God- Part 5

2008-10-05T13:10:00.000-04:00

John Owen’s Communion With God- Part 5

(Sunday mornings before our worship service, our church is studying our way through Owen's book. This series consists of the notes handed out for the class).

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

Owen concludes chapter 3 by answering a potential objection to his claim that God’s love is like Himself: “equal, constant, not capable of augmentation or diminuation.”

But you will say,’This comes nigh to that blasphemy, that God loves His people in their sinning as well as in their strictest obedience; and, if so, who will care to serve Him more, or to walk with Him unto well-pleasing”
He answers:

The love of God in itself is the eternal purpose and act of His will. This is no more changeable than God Himself: if it were, no flesh could be saved; but it changeth not, and we are not condemned. What then? Loves He His people in their sinning? Yes; His people- not their sinning. Alters He not the purpose of His will, but the dispensations of His grace. He rebukes them, He chastens them, He hides his face from them, He smites them, He fills them with a sense of His indignation; but woe, woe would it be to us, should He change in His love, or take away His kindness from us! Those very things which seem to be demonstrations of the change of His affections toward His, do as clearly proceed from love as those which seem to be the most genuine issues thereof. “But will not this encourage to sin?” he never tasted of the love of God that can seriously make this objection.
Chapter 4- pg. 31

Because the typical Christian has seen God as being a God of anger that they fear rather than a God of love, Owen now seeks to give some directions to help us to experience this communion with God.

1) Eye the Father as love; look not on Him as an always lowering Father, but as one most kind and tender. We should see the Father as having kind thoughts towards us. We cannot commune with Him otherwise. Our first thought of the Father should be “as one full of eternal, free love” towards us. If we would do this we could not bear an hour’s absence from Him; whereas now, perhaps we cannot watch with Him one hour.

To do this we must consider:

a. Whose love it is. It is the love of Him who does not need to share His love with others. He lacks nothing that He needs to share His love with us in order to receive anything in return and yet His love is so great that He seeks out our good by showing us a love of kindness and bounty.

b. What kind of love it is. It is:

i. Eternal- it was fixed upon us before the foundation of the world (Rom. 9:11,12; Acts 15:18; 2 Tim. 1:9, 2:19; Prov. 8:31; Jer. 31:3). Before we were, or had done the least good, then were His thoughts upon us,- then was His delight in us;- then did the Son rejoice in the thoughts of fulfilling His Father’s delight in Him (Prov. 8:30). It was from eternity that He designed our happiness and the very thought of that ought to make us leap for joy as John the Baptist did in Elizabeth’s womb.

ii. Free. The Father loves us because He wills to love us. There has been nothing in us and there is nothing in us for which we should be loved. If we deserved God’s love, it would not be as valuable to us- we are typically not grateful for things that are owed to us. Love which is antecedent to our being must, by definition, be free. Rom. 9:11; Eph. 1:3, 4; Titus 3:5; James 1:8.

iii. Unchangeable. Though we change every day, the Father’s love for us does not change. If there was anything that we could do to cause Him to stop loving us, He would have stopped loving us long ago. It is His love’s unchangeableness which enables Him to show us infinite patience and forbearance, without which we would die. 2 Peter 3:9

iv. Distinguishing. He has not loved the whole world in this way- “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” Why should He put His love on us and pass by millions that we are no different from in our natures? I name but the heads of things. Let them enlarge whose hearts are touched.

2) Eye it as to receive it. Unless this be added, all is in vain as to any communion with God. We do not hold communion with Him in anything, until it be received by faith. This, then, is that which I would provoke the saints of God unto, even to believe this love of God for themselves and their own part,- believe that such is the heart of the Father towards them,- accept of His witness herein. His love is not ours in the sweetness of it until it be so received. Continually, then, act thoughts of faith on God, as love to thee, -as embracing thee with the eternal love before described. When the Lord is, by His word, presented as such unto thee, let thy mind know it, and assent that it is so; and they will embrace it, in its being so; and all thy affections be filled with it. Set thy whole heart to it; let it be bound with the cords of this love. If the King be bound in the galleries with thy love, shouldst thou not be bound in heaven with His?

3) Let it have its proper fruit and efficacy upon thy heart, in return of love to Him again. We should walk in the light of God’s love for us, holding communion with Him all day long, not dealing with Him unkindly or unthankfully.

It is important to understand that our holding communion with Him in this way is “exceeding acceptable” to Him.

Flesh and blood is apt to have very hard thought of him, - to think that He is always angry….How unwilling is a child to come into the presence of an angry father! Consider, then, this in the first place,- receiving of the Father as He holds out love to the soul, gives him the honour He aims at, and is exceeding acceptable unto Him….Men are afraid to have good thoughts of God. They think it boldness to eye God as good, gracious, tender, kind , loving…Is this not soul-deceit from Satan? Was it not his design from the beginning to inject such thoughts of God? Assure thyself, then, there is nothing more acceptable unto the Father, then for us to keep up our hearts unto Him as the eternal fountain of all that rich grace which flows out to sinners in the blood of Jesus (pgs. 34-35).

To understand this will endear your heart to God and will cause you to delight in Him.

If the love of the father will not make a child delight in him, what will? Put, then, this to the venture: exercise your thoughts upon this very thing, the eternal, free, and fruitful love of the Father, and see if your hearts are not wrought upon to delight in Him. I dare boldly say, believers will find it as thriving a course as ever they pitched on in their lives. Sit down a little at the fountain, and you will quickly have a farther discovery of the sweetness of the streams. You who have run from Him, will not be able, after a while, to keep a distance for a moment.

Owen then says that some might say that they cannot get their hearts to return love to God and, if only they could, then they would be enabled to believe that He actually did delight in them.

Owen answers:

This is the most preposterous course that possibly thy thoughts can pitch upon, a most ready way to rob God of His glory. “Herein is love,” saith the Holy Ghost, “not that we loved God, but that He loved us” first, 1 John 4:10,11. Now, thou wouldst invert this order, and say, “Herein is love, not that God loved me, but that I love Him first.” This is to take the glory of God from him: that whereas He loves us without a cause that is in ourselves, and we have all cause in the world to love Him, thou wouldst have the contrary, - namely, that something should be in thee for which God should love thee, even thy love to Him; and that thou shouldst love God, before thou knowest any thing lovely in Him, -namely , whether He love thee or no. This is a course of flesh’s finding out, that will never bring glory to God, nor peace to thy own soul. Lay down, then, thy reasonings; take up the love of the Father upon a pure act of believing, and that will open thy soul to let it out unto the Lord in the communion of love. P. 37

Watching Movies for the Glory of God

2008-10-03T23:40:00.002-04:00

Ekklesia's movie night begins in October. To get you prepared, read this helpful article from Reformation 21: "Watching Movies for the Glory of God."

Martin Luther on Harsh Language

2008-10-01T14:45:00.007-04:00

Following up on the harsh language debate (see previous post):

I have heard some use Martin Luther as an example of, and justification for, the use of harsh and course language. For anyone who has ever read his works, you are confronted with the fact that his language was very colorful to say the least. Al Mohler, however, has noted that, in using Luther as an example, we must recognize that his culture was very rustic and the language of his that we find "colorful" would not have raised an eyebrow among his peers.

Well, Pulpit Magazine has gone further and has done us a service by pointing us to Martin Luther's sermon on Ephesians 5:3-4 and the following excerpt from this sermon shows that Luther was, in fact, conscientious about his use of language and felt that those who used "scandalous talk" should be reproved or else they would bring the congregation an "ill repute."

He said:

“Filthiness”—scandalous talk—is unchaste language suggestive of fornication, uncleanness and carnal sins. It is common in taverns and generally found as accompaniment of gluttony, drunkenness and gambling. Especially were the Greeks frivolous and adepts in this respect, as their poets and other writers attest.

What Paul refers to in particular is the lewd conversation uttered in public without fear and self-restraint. This will excite wicked thoughts and give rise to serious offenses, especially with the young. As he states elsewhere (1 Cor 15, 33), “Evil companionships [communications] corrupt good morals.”

Should there be any Christians forgetful enough to so transgress, the offense must be reproved; otherwise it will become general and give the congregation an ill repute, as if Christians taught and tolerated it the same as the heathen....

“Jesting” has reference to those conversational expedients which pander to gaiety in the form of scandal; they are called among us banter and badinage. Laughter, mirth and gaiety is their purpose, and we meet with them generally in society and high life. Among the heathen, jesting was counted a virtue, and therefore received the title “eutrapelia” by Aristotle.

But Paul calls it a vice among Christians, who certainly may find conversational expedients of a different kind, such as will inspire a cheerful and joyous spirit in Christ. True, Christians are not all so pure but that some may err in this matter; but the Christian Church does not command jesting, nor suffer any member to abandon himself to the practice. It reproves and prohibits it, particularly in religious assemblies, and in teaching and preaching. For Christ says (Mt 12, 36) that at the last day men must give account of every idle, unprofitable word they have spoken.

Christians should be a very firm, though courteous, people. Courtesy should be coupled with seriousness, and seriousness with courtesy, according to the pattern of the life of Christ supplied in the Gospel.

Understanding 700 Billion

2008-09-30T22:30:00.002-04:00

Wizbang helps us to get a grip on what 700 Billion could really do. Homeowners- if they want to give it away, wouldn't you rather get it to pay down your mortgage than give it to directly to the banks?

Pulpit Freedom to Do What?

2008-09-29T19:16:00.003-04:00

This past Sunday was "Pulpit Freedom Sunday."

The Alliance Defense Fund organized this day stating that on Sept. 28 pastors in 20 states "will reclaim their constitutional right (and) from the pulpit, they will advise their congregation what scripture says about today's issues, apply(ing) those issues to the candidates standing for election just like their forefathers did 150 years ago."

Cal Thomas is a political commentator who happens to be a Christian (I say it that way to make it clear that he is not a "Christian political commentator" working for CBN or something like that).

His column this week has some wise insights into this issue. You can read the full article here.

Disclaimer: I do believe that Christians ought to vote and ought to vote for the candidates who will best bring into the public arena the values which best reflect the nature and values of God. I, for example, though not a "single-issue voter" don't know that I could ever vote for a candidate which was pro-abortion and I do believe that discussing the issues that face voters from a biblical perspective is the right thing to do.

But I do believe that Thomas' cautions are right on.

Thomas writes that people do not attend worship services to hear stumping for a politician. The reason for church: is not, or should not be, in order to pledge allegiance to a party, candidate or earthly agenda. One can spend inordinate amounts of time on that subject simply by watching cable TV, or listening to talk radio, or reading the newspapers. No matter how hard they try to protect the gospel from corruption, ministers who focus on politics and politicians as a means of redemption must minimize their ultimate calling and message. The road to redemption does not run through Washington, D.C. Politicians can't redeem themselves from the temptations of Washington. What makes anyone think they can redeem the rest of us?

The law has done churches a favor, however inadvertent, by protecting most of them from the downside of electioneering, but a strong constitutional challenge would most likely overturn it. The flip side would be whether the politicians would then allow churches to maintain their tax-exempt status.

Whether the law is repealed, or not, churches and ministers would do better to keep their attention focused on the things above, rather than the things below, because politics can be the ultimate temptation and pollute a far superior and life-changing message.

The Emerging Church- Part 6

2008-09-29T13:19:00.005-04:00

We are going to turn our attention now to two books as being representative of how the emerging church works out of their belief systems in their interactions with the Bible and the implications they draw from it for our lives.

The two books I will consider are "A Generous Orthodoxy" by Brian McLaren and "Velvet Elvis" by Rob Bell (And no, I'm not going to create hyperlinks to Amazon.com so you can purchase them!).

I realize that "A Generous Orthodoxy" is a few years old now and that McLaren has written more since then, but I use it because it has been one of the most influential books among emergents (we will see its influence clearly on Bell as we look at Velvet Elvis) and its influence is still widely felt. I also realize that Bell has refused to be labeled as "emergent" but I believe that this is for pragmatic "political" reasons only. When you read Bell, when you note who he claims to be his main influences, and when you note who he has as guest speakers at his own church, it is clear where he is coming from. If the emergent shoe fits, he should wear it.

Let's start with McLaren and then we will jump back and forth between the two books. (And let me start by saying that my critique was helped by the reviews of Doug Wilson and Dale VanDyke).

We are going to jump right in at page 68 of Chapter One where McLaren says:

While I believe that actual miracles can and do happen (though I notice they sometimes create nearly as many problems as they solve, and so I see why they aren't given "on demand"), I am sympathetic with those who believe otherwise, and I applaud their desire to live out the meaning of the miracle stories even when they don't believe the stories really happened as written.

First of all, this a denial of the integrity of, not only the Word of God, but of Jesus Himself and of the Holy Spirit who inspired those very words of Scripture. How can anyone be sympathetic with such a stance? At what point does your sympathy stop and do you begin to resist their doubts? Are you sympathetic with those who doubt that Jesus was born of a virgin? Are you sympathetic with those who doubt the resurrection of Christ? If not, why not? How can you pick and choose which points of doubt which you are sympathetic to? And if so, then your faith, according to Paul, is in vain (1 Cor. 15:14).

At the beginning of chapter 2 (pg. 77), McLaren assures us: I am a Christian because I have confidence in Jesus Christ- in all his dimensions (those I know, and those I don't). I trust Jesus. I think Jesus is right because I believe God was in Jesus in an unprecedented way.

I have discovered that, as you read emergent writers, you must read their words as if they were politicians. You can never be assured that you know what the meaning of "is" is. Reading these sentences reminds me of this caution. What does McLaren mean by "in all his dimensions" or "in an unprecedented way"? The first time I read them, these words did not strike me as particularly notable (especially in comparison to the other things he says- except for the fact that that they beg the question- what is your confidence founded upon if not the assurance that the word of God is accurate in all that it says?) but now I see them differently.

Having read much of what McLaren has written and said, and I do want to be cautious here and acknowledge that God alone is judge, but I don't see these words as a the words of a believer in Christ the way in which we, evangelicals would define being a believer in Christ. These are the words, it seems to me, of someone who sees Jesus on the level of a g0d-enlightened newage guru. Think about this- what genuine believer that you know of speaks of Jesus like this? Consider the quote in Part 5 of McLaren's answer to what the Gospel is. Is that the answer of someone who really believes?

Well, on page 82 McLaren apologizes for using masculine pronouns to speak of God. He says that he avoids their use as much as he can because "God is not male." He says that in affirming this, he is following the footsteps of men like C.S. Lewis (pg. 83). Of course it was not only C.S. Lewis that affirmed that God is not male in the strict sense of the word- EVERYONE affirms this. But McLaren uses Lewis as a way to lend credibility to what he says next:

The masculine biblical imagery of "Father" and "Son" also contribute to the patriarchalism or chauvinism that has too often characterized Christianity.

That being the case, I sure am glad (my tongue is planted firmly in cheek) that McLaren has apologized for something that neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit seemed to see a need to apologize for! I guess McLaren is more sensitive to the feelings of our sisters in Christ than their heavenly Father is!

It is striking to me that McLaren sees the use of the masculine pronoun to speak of God as such a danger while being sympathetic to those who deny that the miracles of the Scriptures actually happened. Is there not something wrong here?

What is striking even further is that after apologizing for what Jesus clearly did and affirmed, McLaren wants to convince us that Jesus is Lord:

Jesus asserts that he is the leader who gives commands (not our wish-granting genie, taking commands from us). He has authority; we answer to him, not the reverse. His commands should be followed wholeheartedly (it's those who actually "walk the walk" by practicing His teachings who are blessed, Jesus says, not just those who "talk the talk" by mouthing "Lord, Lord). As the saying goes, there is one Lord, and you are not it. (pg. 92).

This is an interesting comment for him to make considering that he has just apologized for what Jesus clearly does. Should we not infer from this that if Jesus were in the room with McLaren that he would have a "heart to heart" with Jesus about cleaning up His vocabulary? Why is it that McLaren will use Jesus' teachings to try to justify only the things that fit his own personal (enlightened might he say?) take on things, yet will contradict Jesus on the things which do not fit his own view- all while saying that "he (Jesus) has authority and we answer to him, not the reverse"?

McLaren criticizes today's church saying: we developed theological systems that taught us how to avoid many of Jesus' teachings and reinterpret those we couldn't avoid. (pg. 95).

Now wait a minute here fella! Isn't that exactly what McLaren has been guilty of doing thus far? "Don't want to believe in Jesus' miracles? That's okay- I sympathize. Don't like Jesus calling God "Father" or referring to Him as "He"? Me neither, that doesn't fly in today's world."

What gives? McLaren can't have it both ways.

Like I said, you have to read them like you are reading a politician.

John Owen's Communion With God- Part 4

2008-09-29T12:10:00.002-04:00

John Owen’s Communion With God- Part 4

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

Having called us to recognize that love comes to us primarily from the Father he has been telling us how we must receive that love by faith. We closed last week with Owen’s comment that, if we would see Christ as the “stream” that leads us to the “fountain” of eternal love, that we would find great spiritual improvement in our lives.

Picking up from there, he then writes:

This is what is aimed at. Many dark and disturbing thoughts are apt to arise in this thing. Few can carry up their hearts and minds to this height by faith, as to rest their souls in the love of the Father; they live below it, in the troublesome region of hopes and fears, storms and clouds. All here is serene and quiet. But how to attain to this pitch they know not. This is the will of God, that he may always be eyed as benign, kin, tender, loving and unchangeable therein; and that peculiarly as the Father, as the great fountain and spring of all gracious communications and fruits of love. This is that which Christ came to reveal, - God as Father. (pg 23)

Owen now points out that the Father’s giving of love to us requires a suitable return from us which also consists of love- “God loves, that he may be beloved.”

“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind” this is the return that he demandeth.”

As long as the Father is seen as acting only in ways which are contrary to love, it causes dread and an aversion to Him. But when God is considered as a father, acting in love upon our souls, it causes us to love Him in return and this, in faith, is the ground of all acceptable obedience (Deut. 5:10; Exod. 20:6; Deut. 5:12, 11:1 and 13, 13:3). It begins in the love of God, and ends in our love to him.

Owen now points out how the love of God to us and our love to Him are alike and how the love of God to us and our love to Him are different.

They are alike in two ways:

1) They are both love in “rest” and “complacency.”

a. God’s love is like this.

Zephaniah 3:17 “The Lord thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy, he will rest in his love; he will joy over thee in singing.” The original Hebrew reads: “He shall be silent because of His love.” Here we see that two things are described in relation to God’s love: “rest and delight.”

To rest with contentment is expressed by being silent; that is, without repining, without complaint. This God doeth upon the account of his own love, so full, so every way complete and absolute, that it will not allow him to complain of anything in them whom he loves, but he is silent on the account thereof. Or “Rest in his love;” that is, he will not remove it, - he will not seek farther for another object. It shall make its abode upon the soul where it is once fixed, forever. And COMPLACENCY AND DELIGHT: ‘He rejoiceth with singing;’ as one that is fully satisfied in that object he has fixed his love on.

When God speaks of those who are not the recipient of His love, He says of them that he is “not well pleased” 1 Cor. 10:5, or that His soul “has no pleasure in him” Heb. 10:38; Jer. 22:28; Hos. 8:8; Mal. 1:10. But, those whom He loves, He takes great pleasure in. He sings to the church: “A vineyard of red wine: I the LORD do keep it,” Is. 22:2,3.

He wills good to us that He may rest in that will.

b. The love that we return to God is also a love of rest and delight. David says: “Return unto thy rest, O my soul” Psalm 116:7.

He makes God his rest; that is, he in whom his soul doth rest, without seeking farther for a more suitable and desirable object. “Whom have I,” saith he, “in heaven but thee? And there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee,” Psalm 73:25. Thus the soul gathers itself from all its wanderings from all other beloveds to rest in God alone,- to satiate and content itself in Him; choosing the Father for his present and eternal rest. And this also with delight. “Thy loving-kindness,” saith the psalmist, “is better than life; therefore will I praise thee,” Psalm 63:3. P.26

2) The love of God and the love of Christians for God are alike in that the way of communicating it is in Christ alone. The Father communicates His love of us through Christ and we cannot return love to Him except through Christ.

He is the treasury wherein the Father disposeth all the riches of his grace, taken from the bottomless mine of his eternal love; and he is the priest into whose hand we put all the offerings that we return unto the Father.

a. The Father loves us and chose us “before the foundation of the world;” but in pursuit of that love, He “blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ.” Eph. 1:3,4

From His love, He sheds or pours out the Holy Spirit richly upon us, through Jesus Christ our Savior, Titus 3:6. In the pouring out of His love, there is not one drop falls besides the Lord Christ. The holy anointing oil was all poured on the head of Aaron, Ps. 133:2; and thence went down the skirts of his clothing. Love is first poured out on Christ; and from him it drops as the dew of Hermon upon the souls of the saints. The Father will have him to have “in all things the pre-eminence,” Col. 1:18.

So that though the saints may, nay, do see an infinite ocean of love unto them in the bosom of the Father, yet they are not to look for one drop from Him but what comes through Christ. He is the only means of communication. Love in the Father is like honey in the flower;- it must be in the comb before it be for our use. Christ must extract and prepare this honey for us. He draws this water from the fountain through union and dispensation of fullness;- we by faith, from the wells of salvation that are in him. P. 27

b. Our return of love to God are all in Christ and by Christ also.

And well is it with us that it is so. What lame and blind sacrifices should we otherwise present unto God! He bears the iniquity of our offerings, and he adds incense to our prayers. Our love is fixed on the Father; but it is conveyed to him through the Son of his love. He is the only way for our graces as well as our persons to go unto God; through him passeth all our desire, our delight, our complacency, our obedience.

Our loves differ as well :

1) The love of God is a love of “bounty” while our love to Him is a love of “duty.”

a. The love of the Father is a love of bounty. It is a love of choosing (Rom. 9:11,12).

It is a love like that of the heavens to the earth, when, being full of rain, they pour forth showers to make it fruitful; as the sea communicates its waters to the rivers by the way of bounty, out of its own fullness, - they return to it only what they receive from it. It is the love of a spring, of a fountain, always communicating- a love from whence proceeds everything that is lovely in its object. It infuseth into, and creates goodness in, the person beloved.

b. Our love to God is a love of duty, the love of a child.

His love descends upon us in bounty and fruitfulness, our love ascends to him in duty and thankfulness. He adds to us by his love; we nothing to him by ours… Though he requires our love, he is not benefited by it (Job 35:5-8; Rom. 11:35, Job 22:2,3). It is indeed made up of four things- 1. Rest; 2. Delight; 3. Reverance; 4. Obedience. By these do we hold communion with the Father in his love. Hence God calls that love which is due him as a father, “honor” Mal. 1:6. “If I be a father, where is mine honor?” It is a deserved act of duty.

2) The love of God is an antecedent love; our love to Him is a consequent love.

a. The love of God is antecedent in respect to our love- 1 John 4:10. He loved us before we loved Him. It is also antecedent in respect of all cause for love. Romans 5:8- He loved us while we were still sinners. His kindness appears to us when we are foolish and disobedient.

b. Our love is consequential in both of these regards. In respect of the love of God, no one would turn their love to Him if He did not first love them. In respect to the causes of love, God must be revealed unto us as lovely and desirable, as a fit and suitable object unto the soul to set up its rest upon, before we can bar any love unto Him. The saints (in this sense) do not love God for nothing, but for that excellency, loveliness and desireableness that is in Him.

3) They differ in that the love of God is like himself- equal, constant, not capable of augmentation or diminuation; our love is like ourselves, - unequal, increasing, waning, growing, declining. His, like the sun, always the same in its light, though a cloud may sometimes interpose; ours as the moon, hath its enlargements and straightening. P. 30

John Owen's Communion With God- Part 3

2008-09-29T12:02:00.004-04:00

John Owen’s Communion With God- Part 3

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

Owen begins by making it clear that anytime he attributes anything to a particular person of the Godhead, that it should be understood that the others share in it as well, but it is simply that the attribute is found principally in one of the three and secondarily in the others.

These few observations being premised, I come now to declare what it is wherein peculiarly and eminently the saints have communion with the Father; and this is LOVE,- free, undeserved, and eternal love. This the Father peculiarly fixes upon the saints; this they are immediately to eye in him, to receive of him, and to make such returns thereof as he is delighted withal. This is the great discovery of the gospel: for whereas the Father, as the fountain of Deity, is not known any other way but as full of wrath, anger and indignation against sin, nor can the sons of maen have any other thoughts of him,- here he is now revealed peculiarly as love, as full of it unto us; the manifestation whereof is the peculiar work of the gospel.

1) 1 John 4:8 “God is love.” In this verse, “God” is referring to the Father which we can tell because He is distinguished from the Son in verse 9.

“The Father is love;” that is, not only of an infinitely gracious, tender and compassionate, and loving nature, according as he hath proclaimed himself (Exod. 34:6-7), but also one that eminently and peculiarly dispenseth himself unto us in free love.

Verses 9-10 tell us that “In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”

2) 2 Corinthians 13:14- “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, THE LOVE OF GOD, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.”

Ascribing sundry things unto the distinct persons, it is love that he peculiarly assigns to the Father.

3) John 16:26,27

Saith our Saviour, “Take no care of that, nay, impose that not upon me, of procuring the Father’s love for you; but know that this is his peculiar respect towards you, and which you are in him: ‘He himself loves you.’ It is true, indeed, (and as I told you), that I will pray the Father to send you the Spirit, the Comforter, and with him all the gracious fruits of his love; but yet in the point of love itself, free love, eternal love, there is no need of any intercession for that: for eminently the Father himself loves you. Resolve of that, that you may hold communion with him in it, and be no more troubled about it. Yea, as your great trouble is about the Father’s love, so you can no way more trouble or burden him, than by your unkindness in not believing of it.”

4) Romans 5:5 “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.” God is here distinguished from the Holy Spirit and is distinguished from the Son in verse 8. See also 2 Cor. 13:11 and 1 John 4:8.

5) Two types of love are ascribed to the Father. A love of “good pleasure and destination,” and a love of “friendship and approbation.”

a. John 3:16 With the love of His good purpose and good pleasure, he determinate will of doing good. This is distinctly ascribed to him, being laid down as the cause of sending his Son. See also Rom. 9:11, 12; Eph. 1:4,5; 2 Thess. 2:13,14; 1 John 4:8,9

b. John 14:23 The love of friendship and approbation. “If anyone loves me, he will keep my words and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him.”

6) Yea, and as this love is peculiarly to be eyed in him, so it is to be looked on as the fountain of all following gracious dispensations. Christians walk oftentimes with exceedingly troubled hearts, concerning the thoughts of the Father toward them. They are well persuaded of the Lord Christ and his good-will; the difficulty lies in their acceptance with the Father,- what is his heart towards them? “Show us the Father, and it sufficeth us,” John 14:8. Now, this ought to be so far away, that his love ought to be looked on as the fountain from whence all other sweetnesses flow. Thus the apostle sets out, Titus 3;4, ‘After that the kindness and love of God our Savior toward man appeared.’ It is of the Father of whom he speaks; for, verse 6, he tells us that ‘he makes out unto us,’ or ‘sheds that love upon us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Savior.; And this love he makes hinge upon which the great alteration and translation of the saints doth trun; for saith he, verse 3, ‘we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another.’ All naught, all out of order, and vile. When, then, is our recovery? The whole rise of it is from this love of God, flowing out by the ways here described.

Now for our communion with the Father in love to be complete, two things are required of believers: That they receive it from Him; and that they make a suitable returns to Him.

1) Receive it. Communion consists of giving and receiving. Until someone receives love from the Father, they do not have communion with Him. How do you receive it? By faith. And what are we to believe in concerning Him? His love.

It is true that there is no way to have faith in the Father, but through the Son (John 14:6). It is through Jesus as our merciful high priest that we have access to the Father. But when we, through Christ, have access to the Father, we then see His glory and we see the love of the Father towards us and we then respond in faith. We are to see love, to believe in love, to receive love, in and from the Father, it coming to us through Christ alone.

Though there be no light for us but in the beams, yet we may be beams see the sun, which is the fountain of it. Though all of our refreshment actually lie in the streams, yet by them we are led up unto the fountain. Jesus Christ, in respect of the love of the Father, is but the beam, the stream; wherein though actually all our light, our refreshment lies, yet by him we are led to the fountain, the sun of eternal love itself. Would believers exercise themselves herein, they would find it a matter of no small spiritual improvement in their walking with God.

The Danger of Pedestals

2008-09-27T10:40:00.002-04:00

Every Sunday morning our church prays the for persecuted Christians around the world. Oftentimes I will share a story of what has happened in the previous week and we will lift these brothers and sisters up by name. Other times we might simply pray for the believers in a certain country. We do this because we feel that it is the right thing to do but also because it challenges us to consider our own spiritual walks and our willingness to suffer for Christ's sake. My prayer is that, the more we hear other's stories, the more we will be emboldened as we live out our own.

There is, however, a danger of exalting those facing persecution to the point of near sainthood because of what they have faced. This week I was witnessing to a Muslim couple and they were asking how many prophets Christianity has. I told them that the way that they view the office of prophet and how we see prophets are different. They asked "Then what do you think of Abraham or Moses?" I replied that they were very godly men who God used in mighty ways, but our focus is not on them and we do not give them undue honor- our focus is on Jesus Christ, the one that they pointed us to. This week the Voice of the Martyrs published this article that argues that we must take the same care to not put today's Christian martyrs on a pedestal either. I found it to be a very good reminder.

You can read it here.

The Use of Harsh, Crude Language

2008-09-27T00:59:00.002-04:00

This topic is hot right now- Al Mohler has even said that said that this topic is the number one topic that he is e-mailed about.

For an insightful discussion and introduction to the current debate and its main players I'd recommend checking this out.

John Owen's Communion With God- Part 2

2008-09-27T00:34:00.005-04:00

"Communion With God" by John Owen- Part Two

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

At my church, we are doing a Sunday morning series (before worship) through John Owen's Book- "Communion With God." This is the first book in our series that I am calling "Theology from a Bunch of Dead Guys."

Part Two:

Thus far, in Part 1, Chapter 1 of Communion With God, Owen has made several points:

1) He points out that the early church faced persecution and hardship and asked what could possibly motivate someone to leave the relative comfort of a non-Christian life and purposely choose to join into a community that was facing persecution? He notes that the central appeal that the Apostle John made to others for them to consider joining their church fellowship was that they had fellowship with the Father, and Jesus Christ His Son (1 John 1:3) (pg. 5). We noted that this is something that the modern church should mull over while considering what our typical “sales pitches” proclaim to be the benefits of joining today’s church (i.e. “your best life now”). And the question is, in turn, put before us: “Do you find fellowship with the Father and Son to be of such value that a) you would risk persecution to enjoy it, b) that you would be able to convince people that it is worth risking persecution to partake of it?”

2) The offer of communion with God is one that needs to be made because, by nature, no one has communion with Him. Sin separates us from God and He cannot be approached by us. “Men in such a condition have neither Christ, nor hope, nor God” (pg. 6).

3) This communion with God comes through Christ: “The manifestation of grace and pardoning mercy, which is the only door of entrance into any such communion, is not committed unto any but unto Him alone in who it is, by whom that grace and mercy was purchased, through whom it is dispensed, who reveals it from the bosom of the Father” (pg. 6).

4) Once we enter into a communion with God through Christ, we enjoy a communion with God that is greater than that enjoyed by Abraham, David or Enoch (or any other O.T. saints for that matter). Though they had communion with God, “yet they did not have a boldness and confidence in that communion” (pg. 6). This comes only through Christ who, as our High Priest, entered into the most holy place for us, removing the veil that separated us from God and giving us a “boldness and access with confidence the saints of old were not acquainted with” (pg.7). This ought to put to rest any thoughts of the saints of old having a leg up on us in terms of our spiritual walks. As Peter told us in 2 Peter 1:16-21, “we have something more sure” than the experiences of those (including Peter) that came before us: “the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place.”

And, as Owen writes: “for sinners to have fellowship with God, the infinitely holy God, is an astonishing dispensation.”

Now Owen will describe what such a communion is composed of:

Communion in general is “a joint participation in anything whatever, good or evil, duty or enjoyment, nature or actions.” Communion may exist between two friends even while there may be some differences between them but, left to ourselves, the disparity that exists between God and man makes it impossible for there to be any communion between them.

However, through Christ, we have a new foundation laid for us and communion has been made possible.

What does it look like?

“Our communion with God consisteth in his communication of himself unto us, with our returnal unto him of that which he requireth and accepteth, flowing from that union which in Jesus Christ we have with him. And it is two-fold: 1-Perfect and complete, in the full fruition of his glory and total giving up of ourselves to him, resting in him as our utmost end; which we shall enjoy when we see him as he is;- and, 2- Initial and incomplete, in the firstfruits and dawnings of that perfection which we have here in grace; which only I shall handle.

It is, then, I say, of that mutual communication in giving and receiving, after a most holy and spiritual manner, which is between God and the saints while they walk together in a covenant of peace, ratified in the blood of Jesus, whereof we are to treat” (pg. 9).

Part One, Chapter 2

Owen says that now that he has claimed that Christians have communion with God and has defined what communion is, now he is going to move on to discussing the manner of how this communion is carried on and the matter of which it consists.

First, Owen points out that the Scriptures say that we have communion with the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit:

That is, distinctly with the Father, and distinctly with the Son, and distinctly with the Holy Spirit. (pg. 9).

To make this point he sends us to 1 Corinthians 12:4-6:

“Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.”

Owen points out that the “Spirit” is the Holy Spirit (as we see in verse 11), that the “Lord” is Lord Jesus, and that “God” is the Father.

Our access unto God (wherein we have communion with Him) is “through Christ,” “in the Spirit,” and “unto the Father”- the persons being here considered as engaged distinctly unto the accomplishment of the counsel of the will of God revealed in the gospel.

Sometimes, he notes, that our relationship with God is spoken of in relation to the Father and the Son (as in 1 John 1:3 or John 14:23). Sometimes it is spoken of only in relation to the Son (as in 1 Cor. 1:9). And sometimes

only the Spirit is mentioned (as in 2 Cor. 13:14).

Owen then shares with us how we particularly fellowship with each of the persons of the Godhead.

With the Father.

Faith, love, obedience, etc. are peculiarly and distinctly yielded by the saints unto him; and he is peculiarly manifested in those ways as acting peculiarly towards them; which should draw them forth and stir them up thereunto (pg. 11).

Looking at 1 John 5:9, whose testimony is it that we are called to believe?

“If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, for this is the testimony of God that he has borne concerning His Son.”

In verse 10, if we believe in Jesus, we do so based upon the testimony of who?

“Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself.”

And, so, looking at verse 10, if we deny Christ, who are we denying?

“Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son.”

Now, looking at 1 John 2:15:

“Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

Here, we are called to not love the world, but, instead, to direct our love to the Father.

And this love of the Father is what He refers to as His “honor” in Malachi 1:6- “A son honors his father, and a servant his master. If then I am a father, where is my honor?”

Owen now notes that our prayers and praises are peculiarly directed to the Father:

“If you call on him as Father…..” 1 Peter 1:17

“For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named…” Ephesians 3:14,15

“By myself I have sworn; from my mouth has gone out in righteousness a word that shall not return; to me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance. “ Isaiah 46:23

The Son

John 14:1 “Believe in God; believe also in me” says Jesus.

Just as there is a faith distinctly placed upon the Father, there is a faith that is directed to the Son, as the Son of God.

1 John 5:13- “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.”

John 3:16- “God (the Father) so loved the world that whosoever believes in him (that is the Son) should not perish.”

3:18 “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already., because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

John 6:29 “This is the work of God that you believe in him whom he has sent.”

There is also faith, hope, and love which are due from the saints and directed to the Son:

Revelation: 1:5-6 “To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever. Amen.”

Rev. 5:8 “The four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls of incense which are the prayers of the saints.”

5:13, 14- “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!”

The Father and the Son (he that sits upon the throne, and the Lamb) are held out jointly, yet distinctly, as the adequate object of all divine worship and honor, forever and ever.

The Holy Spirit of grace.

Romans 15:30 “I appeal to you, brothers, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit”

2 Corinthians 13:14- “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”

Matthew 28:19- “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

The Point:

Now, of the things which have been delivered this is the sum:- there is no grace whereby our souls go forth unto God, no act of divine worship yielded unto him, no duty or obedience performed, but they are distinctly directed unto Father, Son and Spirit. Now, by these and such like ways as these, do we hold communion with God; and therefore we have that communion distinctly, as hath been described (pg. 15).

Now that we have considered how what we offer up to God is offered to each person distinctly, Owen now calls us to consider that what we receive from God is received from the persons of the Godhead distinctly.

We see this in two ways:

When the same thing is, at the same time, ascribed jointly and yet distinctly to all the persons of the Deity and respectively to each of them.

Rev. 1:4,5- “Grace to you and peace from him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings on earth.” Understanding the “seven spirits” to be the Holy Spirit considered as the perfect fountain of every perfect gift and dispensation. All here are joined together, and yet all mentioned as distinguished in their communion of grace and peace unto the saints.

When the same thing is attributed severally and singly unto each person.

For example in the instance of teaching:

a) The Father- John 6:45- “It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me.”

When we come to Jesus it is because we hear the Father and learn from the Father.

b) The Son- John 12:32 “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” Owen points out that the means by which He draws us is by teaching- “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to Him” Matt. 17:5. “Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ” Matt. 23:10.

c) The Holy Spirit- John 14:26- “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things…”

This, then, further drives on the truth that lies under demonstration; there being such a distinct communication of grace from the several persons of the Deity, the saints must needs have distinct communion with them.

It remains only to intimate, in a word, wherein this distinction lies and what is the ground thereof. Now, that is, that the Father doth it by way of original authority; the Son by the way of communicating from a purchased treasury; the Holy Spirit by the way of immediate efficacy (p. 16).

So:

1) God the Father communicates grace by way of original authority. James 1:18 “Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.”

Life giving power is, in respect of original authority, invested in the Father…

John 14:26: “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name…”

2) The Son, by the way of a purchase:

Isaiah 53:10,11 “Yet is was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring; eh shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.”

3) The Spirit by immediate efficacy. Rom. 8:11- “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.”

And thus, is the distinct communion whereof we treat both proved and demonstrated.

John Owen's "Communion With God" Part One

2008-09-27T00:00:00.004-04:00

"Communion With God" by John Owen- Part One

To read John Owen is to enter a rare world. Whenever I return to one of his works I find myself asking “Why do I spend time reading lesser literature?”
—Sinclair B. Ferguson

At my church, we are doing a Sunday morning series (before worship) through John Owen's Book- "Communion With God." This is the first book in our series that I am calling "Theology from a Bunch of Dead Guys."

John Owen is considered one of the (if not the) greatest minds that Christianity has ever had ("the greatest among the Puritan theologians" according to J.I. Packer) and this book is considered the best of his works by many.

You can read many of his works online here.

A website devoted to him is here.

Something that struck me as I was preparing for this series came from looking a time line of Owen's life. John Owen had 11 children. All 11 of them died before he did (only one making it to adulthood). What is really amazing is that 8 of them had died before Owen had published this book. Looking at the time line I was reminded of a comment John Piper made in his biographical sketch of Owen which I paraphrased at the beginning of my class stating: "Anyone who can lose 8 children and then write a book called 'Communion With God' is someone I need to learn from." And learn from him I have and I hope the class proves to be benefitial and that the notes will be a great reminder of what we have discussed and, perhaps, incentive to get you to pick up the book and read it yourself.

What is in italics is a quote from the book, the rest are paraphrases or my own thoughts/questions.

Part 1, Chapter 1

1 John 1:3 “That which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.”

Question: Considering that early believers were persecuted and that their leaders were seen as “the filth of this world,” and as the “offscouring of all things,” why in the world would they think that anyone would want to join in fellowship with them?

What benefit is there in communion with them? Is it anything else but to be sharers in troubles, reproaches, scorns, and all manner of evils?

How would you make the pitch? Why should they risk it all to join in our fellowship?

Notwithstanding all the disadvantages their fellowship lay under, unto a carnal view, yet in truth it was, and would be found to be, very honorable, glorious, and desirable.

Why?

For “truly,” saith he, “our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.”

This being so earnestly and directly asserted by the apostle, we may boldly follow him with our affirmation, - namely, “That the saints of God have communion with him.” And a holy and spiritual communion it is, as shall be declared.

How do we usually promote our faith and church communities?

How does our appeal differ from that of 1 John 1:3 and why do you think that is?

By nature, because of sin, no one has communion with God.

He is light, we darkness; and what communion hath light with darkness? He is life, we are dead, - he is love, and we are enmity; and what agreement can there be between us?

In our natural condition, we do not have Christ, so we do not hope, nor God.

Since two cannot walk together unless they are agreed (Amos 3:3), there is no walking together with God in fellowship or communion. And since our interest in God was been lost by sin, there is no possibility in ourselves to return to God and God cannot be approached by sinners in peace.

The only door of entrance into a communion with God comes through a manifestation of grace and mercy which was committed to Christ who purchased it and through whom it is dispensed.

Therefore, in the Old Testament, we do not find the same type of communion and fellowship with God described as in the New Testament.

The thing itself is found there; but the clear light of it, and the boldness of faith in it, is discovered in the gospel, and by the Spirit administered therein. By that Spirit we have this liberty. 2 Cor. 3:17,18. Abraham was the friend of God, Is. 41:8; David, a man after his own heart; Enoch walked with him, Gen. 5:22; - all enjoying this communion and fellowship for the substance of it. But the way to the holiest was not yet made manifest whilst the first tabernacle was still standing. Heb 9:8. Though they had communion with God, yet they had not a boldness and confidence in that communion. This follows the entrance of our High Priest into the most holy place, Heb. 4:16, 10:19. The veil also was upon the, that they had not freedom and liberty in their access to God, 2 Cor. 3:15, 16. But now in Christ we have boldness and access with confidence the saints of old were not acquainted with.

When we think of Abraham and David and Enoch, don’t we tend to think the opposite way about their experience? That they had a closer communion with God than us? Why? Why are we wrong in that?

Through Jesus alone is the distance between us and God taken away. Upon this new foundation, by this new and living way sinners are admitted into communion with God and have fellowship with him.

And truly, for sinners to have fellowship with God, the infinite holy God, is an astonishing dispensation.

Emerging Church Part 5

2008-09-24T11:19:00.002-04:00

The originally intended "Part 5" is coming soon, as soon as I can get a few minutes to do it, but in the mean time, I came across this today. The "Everything Must Change" conference in Canada was this past weekend and the question was asked to the panelists as to what the Gospel is.

Brian McLaren was the only one to answer and this is what he said:

...the good news isn't the good news of Christianity, it's the good news of the Kingdom of God. And I think that Fatmire [Muslim peace activist also present at conference and sitting next to him on the panel] working for peace, is an agent for peace, and I'd much rather her be working for peace being who she is than... becoming a person in a church worrying about the list over there on that wall. [on "the list" are things non-essentials like speaking in tongues, etc.)

So, to me there's something we really have to grapple with about whether the border of a religion is the border of the kingdom of God. And I think that's a question we'd be wise to raise. I liked what you said about there not being despair when you're among the extremely needy people. Wouldn't it be interesting if we found out that God is present wherever there's suffering because God is there bringing healing and God is really present wherever people are working against injustice because that's the work of God, wherever people are working for peace. And then the we find that the place that God isn't is where you have a bunch of affluent people who are self-absorbed... and that wouldn't surprise me why they would get depressed, because, in some way, it's not that God isn't present but they're snoring through the presence of God.

Does that answer bother you?

It should.

I read some dialog on McLaren's comments and there were a lot of obtuse explanations, justifications, etc. But I found this simple comment (by someone named hashman) to be the wisest:

i’m not a sharp as many who will comment on this, BUT…

Heaven help me if someone asks me what the gospel is and I don’t mention either 1) the name Jesus 2) his death 3) his resurrection 4) faith.

But again, I’m not very sophisticated.
kbh

That, right there, is what we need more of- "heaven help me" Christians. Those who able to see through the garbage and simply say "Heaven help me if I don't preach the simple Gospel."

Oh, BTW, by time I get this series over, it will be obsolete, I understand that the term "emerging" will soon be dropped because it has too much baggage attached to it. May I say, "rightfully so"?

Uh

2008-09-20T15:23:00.002-04:00

This is worth a chuckle.

If you are not familiar with wordle, it is really cool and you can check it out here.

Well, someone did a transcript of an Obama speech and the word cloud above is what wordle put together (apparently the same results come up no matter what speech you do).

Despite the hype, might he be the least eloquent presidential nominee?

Where I've Been

2008-09-20T15:09:00.003-04:00

Don't worry, I will do the "Emerging church Part 5" next week. The business of the last two weeks have kept me from being able to devote the time necessary to do it.

In the mean time, I have been noticing and commenting on a few blog posts that I found worthy of note.

There is this one at 9 Marks which asks "Does your church music stink?" I reply to "Shawnie" with some reflections from our first church plant.

There is this one at the Pyromaniacs concerning the evangelistic methodology of the emergent movement. I reply to it making the point that you can't debate Paul's methodology with those who do not hold to Paul's theology.

Then there is this post at Challies which links to an interview with Tony Jones about Obama. Tony Jones is one of the main reps of the emerging church and I simply say that we would be better off if we would stop treating them as if they were indeed Christians.

A Pastor's Witness Against His People- Wow.

2008-09-16T16:27:00.002-04:00

This has got to be the most powerful posting that I have read in a long while.

What is the Gospel? Dever and Piper Respond

2008-09-16T12:35:00.002-04:00

DWYL shirts

2008-09-13T16:33:00.002-04:00

For the first time, "Don't Waste Your Life" shirts are now being offered by Desiring God. Get yours here and start a conversation with those in line with you at the food court.

Should Sarah Stay At Home?

2008-09-13T15:48:00.002-04:00

This video clip was brought to my attention by a concerned brother. Is Voddie Bauchum being sexist? Is he rightly handling the Word of God? I really dig Voddie, but I'm not too sure about this. I'm going to be spending some thinking about it. What do you think?

The Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, which is typically, dead on with their take on issues such as this, takes a different stand. Here is the first of a 4 part series that they have done concerning Mrs. Palin's run asking the question: "Does Sarah Palin Present a Dilemma for Complementarians?"

Emerging Church Part 4

2008-09-12T19:36:00.002-04:00

We will soon be turning to two books which will reveal to us where emergents are coming from by two notable representatives: Brian McLaren and Rob Bell. But for today, I just want to introduce to a third member of the group who wrote the emerging church's "Response to our critics" that I mentioned in Part One- Doug Pagitt.

Doug Pagitt is pastor of a church in Minneapolis called Solomon's Porch

For a video introduction to Solomon's Porch, a church where there is "no statement of belief" and "no authority structure," where the members say that "the only thing that matters is knowing you have a friend at the end of the day" and that "I see the Bible as changing" and thinking otherwise is a "waste of time,"enjoy the following:

Now, I'm just going to direct you to some stuff from the Pyromaniac's blog. They have audio and video and commentary that is dead on.

For a take on Pagitt's defense of yoga and how it is better than the Scriptures for reducing stress go here.

For his response to questions on the afterlife go here.

Can anyone seriously view, listen, read this and see Biblical Christianity represented?
Yet Pagitt's stuff is published by "Christian" book houses and speaks at "Christian" conferences.

Where, may I ask, is our discernment?

Emerging Church Part 3

2008-09-11T10:09:00.005-04:00

So far we have seen what the emergents say that they are for and what they are against and it is likely that many of us would agree on many points.

But now is where it gets scary.

To what and to whom do they find their solutions?

9 Marks has done us a tremendous service by preserving a suggested reading list from the emergent village and giving us some biographical information about the authors. Take a look at the list, and remember, these are the guys that are influencing those who are driving this movement.

The list is here.

When looking over the list, did you notice a common thread running through all the authors? They all share the common low view of the Scriptures. The Scriptures are not authoritative, inerrant, absolute truth. They are something that must be redefined, reinterpreted, reimagined. And worse.

Notice a term that Stan Grenz employed: "trajectory." That word gets used a lot. Bell uses it. McLaren uses it. What does it mean?

What has been called the "trajectory hermeneutic" is the idea that the words of Scripture were truth for the original hearers/readers, but it is not true for us in the same sense that it was for them. The words of Scripture, instead, were launched out on a trajectory path from that point, where we, now, are receiving them at another point in the arch. A more enlightened point. A greater evolved point. An emerged point.

So, for example, the Scriptures clearly tell us that homosexuality is wrong. They reply- well, it was wrong, for them. But they received that "truth" at its most basest level, when, at that stage in the evolution of man's thinking, they couldn't have comprehended anything less- but then it was launched forward through space and time and we have received that "truth" at a time when we are more intelligent, more enlightened. We understand that homosexuality is caused by numerous factors and cannot rightly be called "sin." Thus, we don't take the passages at their face value, but we look for the principles underlying the passage that give us an idea of the trajectory that passage has been on. We know, now, that the main concern was not homosexuality, but it was freedom from bondage, etc. So we now see that we are called to liberate homosexuals from the artificial bondage our society has put them under.

That, in its most simplified form, is kind of the idea.

When we get to Bell's "Velvet Elvis" you will see what I mean.

Speaking of Rob Bell and influences. I listened to a message of his some years back and he recommended several books to his congregation. One of those books made it into the footnotes of his book "Velvet Elvis."

Footnote #143 reads: "For a mind blowing introduction to emergence theory and divine creativity, set aside three months and read Ken Wilbur's A Brief History of Everything (Boston:Shambhala 2001).

Do you know who Ken Wilbur is? Check this out.

That's right. Bell, a pastor of a "Christian" church, author of "Christian" books, tells everyone to spend three months- three months!!- studying the writings of a new age, Buddhism-practicing guy to understand the universe.

Scroll down his wikipedia page and you will find this excerpt from the book that Rob Bell recommends we spend three months on:

Are the mystics and sages insane? Because they all tell variations on the same story, don't they? The story of awakening one morning and discovering you are one with the All, in a timeless and eternal and infinite fashion. Yes, maybe they are crazy, these divine fools. Maybe they are mumbling idiots in the face of the Abyss. Maybe they need a nice, understanding therapist. Yes, I'm sure that would help. But then, I wonder. Maybe the evolutionary sequence really is from matter to body to mind to soul to spirit, each transcending and including, each with a greater depth and greater consciousness and wider embrace. And in the highest reaches of evolution, maybe, just maybe, an individual's consciousness does indeed touch infinity—a total embrace of the entire Kosmos—a Kosmic consciousness that is Spirit awakened to its own true nature. It's at least plausible. And tell me: is that story, sung by mystics and sages the world over, any crazier than the scientific materialism story, which is that the entire sequence is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying absolutely nothing? Listen very carefully: just which of those two stories actually sounds totally insane?

– Ken Wilber, A Brief History of Everything, 42-3

This, right here, is enough to get me to put Bell's book down and not bother with anything he says ever again.

But I know that many will pooh pooh it and say: "Well, I believe that truth can be found everywhere...yada yada yada." Okay, I get "all truth is God's truth" but, my friends, Wilber is not promoting "truth." His is promoting, what the Bible calls "the doctrines of demons."

But we'll see more of that as we go when we actually crack open Bell's and McLaren's books.

"Against You, You Only, Have I Sinned"

2008-09-10T13:26:00.004-04:00

In case you missed it: a music pastor for a church in Australia recently confessed (after being outed first apparently) to having faked cancer in order to cover up an addiction to porn. While faking undergoing cancer treatments (utilizing an oxygen mask and shaving his head etc.), he released a song called "Healer" speaking of his trust that God would heal him of the cancer. The song became a hit, making it to number 2 on the Australian charts and was released on a Hillsong album. Here is an Australian news story on the tragic story.

He apologizes for the masquerade but notice, however, what is not included in his apology:

Did you catch it?

He is so sorry for how he lied to friends and family and the people in his church, but who is it that he really sinned against? Granted, he could have made his true confession before his Heavenly Father in private, but it seems to me that such since of brokenness before the Father should have made it into the interview.

What did David say about his affair with Bathsheeba (after he was outed also we must remember): "For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and have done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment." (Psalm 51:3-4).

Someone who prays a prayer like that demonstrates the reality of the faith that was hidden within them as they outwardly sinned. Believers like that can rest in the knowledge that Christ will not crush them, but will minister to them, showing them grace and restoring them to spiritual health.

In his fabulous book "The Bruised Reed," Richard Sibbes points out the actual benefits that come to the church through the failings of leaders:

Such bruising may help weaker Christians not to be much discouraged, when they see stronger ones shaken and bruised.

Mentioning Peter's denial of Christ, Sibbes writes:

The people of God cannot be without these examples. The heroic deeds of those great worthies do not comfort the church as much as their falls and bruises do.

Whether or not this leader's failings will strengthen or weaken the church remains to be seen, but a good portion of that may depend upon the sincerity of his apology and the reality of his faith.

Emerging Church Part 2

2008-09-10T12:20:00.004-04:00

thanks to www.teampyro.blogspot.com

In part one, you read what the emergent church movement says that they are for. But behind each of their positive statements lies a protest. Being "for" something new means that they are "against" what they are seeing now. Scot McKnight says that, at its heart, the emergent movement is a protest movement.

Read what the emerging church is against, according to McKnight, here.

In that list, if you are like me, you will find much that you agree with. In fact, this is the area where I am definitely on the emerging church's side. What they are protesting against are the same things that John Piper is protesting against in his book "Brothers, We Are Not Professionals."

And the same thing that James White and Tom Ascol were protesting against in my previous post here.

One wonders how anyone could possibly be "pro" for the things that the emergents are against, but clearly there is a large contingency of pastors/churches which are. I'm afraid that a large segment of the Southern Baptist Church is under the spell of professionalism and the Kingdom of God is paying a heavy price for it.

David Wells, in his book "The Courage to Be Protestant," after describing how consumerism in the West drives our culture, describes how pastors have allowed it to drive our churches:

"Why not pitch to them? Why not compete for them? Why not bring into the church the proven techniques of penetration? Why not speak the language of the marketplace...and sell, sell, sell! Why not pitch the church to these consumers as a product, as an experience that will meet the needs they are experiencing in this type of world? Can the church fail to do so and survive? A mailer from a church in Mesa, Arizona reads: 'Is your life everything you want it to be? You hear all kinds of offers to improve your life, but do they work? God is offering you a way to make your life everything you truly want it to be.' So there it is! The difference between this offer and the others is that this one works. Here the customer can match self-perceived need with a product. And bingo! Success!

Wells then warns:

All consumers, we need to remember, are sovereign, and the consuming impulse, once it enters the church makes individual preferences the deciding factor, the driving factor in what the church becomes. These preferences become the standard by which the church is measured. Can we argue against success? I believe we can. More than that I believe we should What we have here are churches reconfigured around evangelism that abandons much of the fabric of biblical faith to succeed. They have taken a part of that faith, modified it in deference to consumer impulse and then made of that part all there is to the Christian faith. Here is a methodology for success that can succeed with very little truth; indeed its success depends on not showing much truth." (pp. 51-52).

This is proven when you find the same marketing principles used to grow Christian churches taught to Jewish and even Muslim groups to increase their numbers as Rick Warren did last year (from the Christian Post- original article here):

Rick Warren Counsels Jews on Recruiting Congregants

By Jennifer Riley

Christian Post Reporter

Mon, Dec. 17 2007 02:58 PM EST

Megachurch pastor Rick Warren attended a large Reform Jewish gathering last week to share tips on how to build a community.

Warren - who saw his church expand from seven people meeting in his house to 22,000 people worshipping in an expansive treasure island-like campus – said the key to holding onto visitors is involving them in a small group.

“We believe congregations have to grow large and small at the same time,” Warren said Thursday, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune newspaper. “We don’t really feel like people are in the congregation until they’re in small groups.”

The “Purpose-Driven” pastor spoke to thousands of Jewish leaders Thursday night at the Union for Reform Judaism’s biennial convention in San Diego.

With the holiday season in mind, Warren urged clergy to take advantage of crowded events to publicize other programs so people can get involved in the community through smaller groups.

“There are some principles that apply regardless of our faith, if it’s Jewish or Christian,” he said at the convention.

One of his principles: “Just be nice to people. Smile.”

After Warren spoke a few minutes at the podium, he sat alongside two popular Southern California rabbis for a casual talk about strengthening congregational life.

Other advice given by Warren included looking at everything from an outsider’s viewpoint, such as simplifying worship terms, making strangers feel welcome, and encouraging interaction.

“The congregation that really loves people, you have to lock the doors to keep people out,” said Warren, whose Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., is scheduled to host 14 Christmas services this year with an estimated crowd of 45,000 people.

The biennial meeting of the largest Jewish denomination in North America began Dec. 12 and concluded on Sunday.

Other guests at the conference included the Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners and Dr. Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America.

Okay, after reading that, I hope you are shaking your head in disbelief as I am.
Clearly, if the techniques work in a Jewish context or a Muslim context, then they are techniques that don't require the truth of Jesus Christ. Indeed, as Wells pointed out, they succeed all the better when the truth is not made clear.

Where do we get these ideas from? Clearly not from the Bible.

2 Corinthians 4:7-11 tells us: "We have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our bodies. For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh."

I don't see much marketing going on there, do you?

We could go on and on over this subject, but lets suffice it to say that many of the complaints of the state of the church today that the emergents have, we would likely agree with.

The problem is not in their complaints, it is in their solutions.

More on that next time.

Christless Christianity interview with "Fun-gi" R.C. Sproul

2008-09-09T16:16:00.003-04:00

Michael Horton interviews R.C. Sproul over the state of the church today.

Watch this. Pass it on. This is important.

Emerging Church- Part One

2008-09-09T14:02:00.010-04:00

"Maturity: Yeah, when I was like you, I never doubted the Bible either. But I outgrew that."
thanks to teampyro.blogspot.com

This past weekend I gave a presentation at our state convention's Leadership Conference, critiquing the emergent church. Over the next several posts I'm going to share with you a somewhat abridged version of what I shared with them.

I'm going to, when possible, provide links to the original sources that I quoted during my talk. This will make it less work for me :) and more authoritative for you when you are talking to someone else and can quote "from the horses mouth" so to speak.

My prayer here is what I prayed at the conference: "God, may you be glorified in what is presented here and may You turn someone from error and towards truth. Amen."

After devoting myself to studying this topic, I feel like one of the most urgent tasks facing the church is to strongly refute this movement and to make it clear, in no uncertain terms, what they stand for- especially for our brothers and sisters who in their college years and who are being targeted by this movement.

Two books I highly recommend are: "Why We're Not Emergent (by two guys who should be)" by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck and "The Courage to Be Protestant" by David Wells.

(buy these or other books from monergism - using the links or this banner- and you get a great deal, cheap shipping, you are supporting a great ministry, you gain wisdom, and I get kick backs for leading you there to boot! Howzat for a good thing?)

----------

Okay, first, who and what is the emergent church?

I prefer to let them tell us rather than for us to define it for them. So I direct you over to the Emergent Village to read their history and what it is that they stand for.

They define "emergent" and tell a brief history here.

They list their values and practices here.

Now, granted, we must acknowledge what they say about how no one person speaks for the movement. They give a response to criticisms making this point here.

But, as DeYoung and Kluck point out:

"Fine but if seven men get together and respond to their critics in one article, they should at least admit that they not only share much common ground, but they are some of the lead influencers in the conversation."

Speaking of the word "conversation," David Wells has a humorous take on it that I posted earlier here.

Now, before you read what they have to say, you need to know that you must read their comments as if they were coming from a politician. I promise you, it is not always clear what the definition of "is" is. You will begin to see what I mean as these posts progress. But let's suffice it to say for now that the words "emerging," "dreaming," "imagining," "evolution," "trajectory" are not simply nice words to add color to their writing. There are meanings behind these words that are not readily apparent to those outside of their movement and that makes almost everything that they say slippery and dangerous.

A few quotes from their "Values and Practices" call for caution- my questions (which will be answered as we go) in italics:

"Friendship" Because we firmly hold that living in reconciled friendship trumps traditional orthodoxies- indeed, orthodoxy requires reconciliation as a prerequisite. So, in other words "right belief" (orthodoxy) is less important than being friends. So what do you do about the "emergent Mormon"? At what point does orthodoxy matter. How far is too far?
We are committed to honor and serve the church in all its forms- Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, Anabaptist. We practice "deep ecclesiology"- rather than favoring some forms of the church and critiquing and rejecting others, we see that every form of the church has both weaknesses and strengths, both liabilities and potential. "Deep ecclesiology" as opposed to what us knuckleheads practice which I suppose can only be termed superficial ecclesiology. Is it deep to accept conflicting, diametrically opposed views as both being equally valid? It may be fine to unite despite differences over the mode of baptism, but what about the definition of justification? How about the loss of salvation and what that implies about the work Christ accomplished on the cross? Again, how far is too far?
To be actively and positively involved in a local congregation, while maintaining open definitions of "church" and "congregation." "Open definitions"- how do you define that? How open- and is there a limit?
We identify ourselves as members of this growing, global, generative and non-exclusive frienship. We welcome others into this friendship as well. What do you mean by "generative"? What do you mean by "non-exclusive"? Do you welcome non-Christians into your fellowship as members as well?

Now, don't worry. If you have read this and are still wondering what the fuss is all about, stay with me, you will see in short order why I think they should be, not only avoided, but spoken out against.

But, for now, this was enough to digest.

We have seen what they say that they are "for." Next time, we'll look at what they are "against." And, as a protest movement, you will likely actually find that you agree with most of what they say. And that, of course, is their appeal.

It is not their complaints that are the problem, it is their solutions that are so off base.

Pre-Game Coin Toss Points to Randomness of Life

2008-09-08T23:09:00.003-04:00

I'll be starting a series on the emerging church, but for the moment, check out this Onion sports news parody that does make a pretty good job at pointing out the futility of life which is absent an overarching purpose.

Pre-Game Coin Toss Makes Jacksonville Jaguars Realize Randomness Of Life

Revival Video

2008-08-20T17:40:00.005-04:00

With all the news about revivals happening in Florida, I thought I'd check it out. I discovered this video of a worship service that had an "outpouring":

Okay, just foolin'. But I do believe that if you watch the whole thing you will certainly be moved!
Enjoy!

Note the picture of Snow White hanging on the wall in the background (could this get any more bizarre?). And the guys in suits dancing is priceless!

And now that I watch it again- you tell me if that isn't the Napoleon Dynamite dance! There is no way that they didn't use this as a choreographic guide. Awesome!