Ecclesia Reformata

Christ and Culture

2008-05-31T05:03:00.003-04:00

"There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence
over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all,
does not cry: 'Mine!'"

Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920)

Does Scripture Influence Society?

2008-04-30T22:56:00.000-04:00

Obedience to the Lord’s teachings and commandments has personal and social implications. True regeneration is a cultural event. Scripture presents two means of influencing society with God’s Word, each of which is necessary: holy lives and verbal proclamation. As God’s Word influences society, there should be a marked difference in society as a whole, and it should be a difference that even the unbeliever will notice, for light will not go unnoticed by darkness (cf. Matt 5:13-16). Social benefits are often the result of holy lives and verbal proclamation of God’s Word, but societal improvement is not the gospel the church is charged to proclaim. Social action apart from the biblical Gospel often prioritizes the conversion of social structures, as opposed to personal salvation in Christ alone, which supposedly reaches its climax in the complete inauguration of the kingdom of God. God does have a purpose for all creation, but it awaits the redemption of the body for the saints according to the will of God (Rom 8:18-23; Phil 3:20-21). Before the foundation of the world, God chose those “to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth . . . to share in the glory of [the] Lord Jesus Christ.” Therefore, the church is to “stand firm and hold to the teachings” of the Gospel and to do so “in every good deed and word” (2 Thess 2:13-17). When the church stands firm, God will be glorified and society will be better for it!

Denial of Christ Jesus as the Only Begotten

2008-03-31T23:18:00.002-04:00

The New Testament refers to Jesus as the Son of God in numerous references. It is true that the redeemed are also sons of God, and angels are also referred to as sons of God. However, Jesus is the Son of God in a unique way. He is the “only Begotten” Son (John 3:16). The Greek word translated “only Begotten” [Gk. monogenes] indicates Jesus’ uniqueness (i.e. He is the Son of God in a way no one else is). The angels are the sons of God by creation. Human beings are the sons of God by the new birth. Jesus is the Son of God because He had no human father (Luke 1:35).

There exist various forms of gennao (“begat”) in the Old Testament both in a literal sense (Deut 23:8) and metaphorical (Job 38:28). In Psalm 2:7, gennao is used to reference God’s relation to HaMaschioch; it refers there to an individual relationship (Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5). Christ’s Sonship is clearly connected to His Davidic kingship. It is plausible that in the application to the Messianic King the intention would be of “divine ‘adoption’ to sonship” (cf. Gal 4:5). If begat were understood to speak of Christ prophetically then the word would extend beyond the meaning of adoption.

In the New Testament, the word is used rather literally (Matt 1:1-16). However, the metaphorical usage is still extended greatly For example, in 1 Corinthians 4:15 the word is used in the sense of converts begotten to eternal life. Of equal similarity to monogenes is the word describing believers in their relationship to God (John 1:13; 1 Pet 1:3). In other words, Christians are tekna (“children”) of God (John 1:12).

In contrast to believers as tekna of God, Jesus Christ is the unique huios (“son”) of God. As the “Son of God” (huios theou), Jesus alone is in a unique relationship with God the Father, whereas those who enter a relationship of sonship by believing in the huios theou are but tekna theou. Christ’s relation is not by an act of generation, rather it is the continual enjoyment of a unique relationship to the Father (John 1:18).

Jesus is one with God as His only-begotten Son. This is the proclamation formulated by the Nicene Council in the following way: “ . . . and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages: Light of Light. True God of True God. Begotten not made. Of one essence with the Father. Through whom all things were made. . . . ” These lines speak about the Son of God, also called the Word or Logos of God, before His incarnation. There is but one eternal Son of God. There never was a time when there was no Son of God. This is specifically what the heretic Arius taught. It is the doctrine formally condemned by the first ecumenical council. The only begotten Son always existed, or rather more accurately always “exists” as uncreated, eternal, and divine.

A Powerful Exhortation from the Pen of Wycliffe

2008-02-29T17:00:00.000-05:00

"The true Christian was intended by Christ to prove all things by the Word of God, all churches, all ministers, all teaching, all preaching, all doctrines, all sermons, all writings, all opinions, all practices. These are His marching orders. Prove all by the Word of God; measure all by the measure of the Bible; compare all with the standard of the Bible; weigh all in the balances of the Bible; examine all by the light of the Bible; test all in the crucible of the Bible. That which can abide the fire of the Bible, receive hold, believe, and obey. That which cannot abide the fire of the Bible, reject, refuse, repudiate, and cast away. This is the flag which He nailed to the mast. May it never be lowered! . . .

A church, which does not honor the Bible, is as useless as a body without life, or a steam engine without fire. A minister who does not honor the Bible is as useless as a soldier without arms, a builder without tools, a pilot without compass, or a messenger without tidings. Stand fast on old principles. Do not forsake the old paths. Let nothing tempt you to believe that multiplication of forms and ceremonies, constant reading of liturgical services, or frequent communions, will ever do so much good to souls as the powerful, fiery, fervent preaching of God's Word. If men want to do good to the multitude, if they want to reach their hearts and consciences, they must attack them through their ears; they must blow the trumpet of the everlasting Gospel loud and long; they must preach the Word."

Would that more churches be convicted of the doctrines of grace, which communicate that God creates and sustains His church by Scripture alone!

Alcohol and the Church

2008-01-31T16:16:00.000-05:00

Our county will soon vote regarding an alcohol beverage-related referendum. Although the primary motivation for the referendum has been stated regarding tax dollars, it appears some would regard the issue religiously (in terms of whether the Bible prohibits or demands abstaining from any alcohol consumption; and therefore, should be opposed on that basis). There are indeed significant ramifications of the counsel and witness of the church both corporately and individually regarding this matter.

Prior to the 1800s, there was nearly universal agreement by every denomination of orthodox Christianity regarding the moderate consumption of alcohol for health and pleasure. Condemnation of the moderationist position is maintained through the capricious rejection of centuries of church history—and most importantly, the assertions of the Bible—by granting priority instead for an ascetic fundamentalism that is deemed a greater standard of holiness and prudence than the Bible.
The plain teaching of the Bible concerning the moderate consumption of alcohol should promote church integrity and unity rather than spirited disagreement that is often manifested in contention and strife among the body of Christ. The church’s unity in belief and practice must be based upon the Bible solely. To demand abstinence and prohibit moderate alcohol consumption as a matter of faithfulness to God not only conflicts with the biblical and historical record, but also would be indictments upon Old Testament saints, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and unanimity of eighteen hundred years of church history. The prohibitionist position that all alcoholic beverages are inherently evil, and that any use is therefore sinful, pronounces a curse upon God’s blessing, and regards God’s blessing in this matter to be a curse. The abstentionist position often neglects Bible teaching of maturity and personal responsibility in regards to matters of church liberty. The Bible consistently condemns drunkenness (alcohol abuse) as sin, but never condemns use of alcohol (medicinally or moderately) as evil. Scripture declares that wine specifically is a good gift from God. The Bible and the entire Christian tradition have sternly condemned the sin of drunkenness (as should the church not only in our county, but also anywhere in the world). As a component of God’s creation, alcoholic beverages are something that may be enjoyed to the glory of God in moderation for both health and pleasure and with a thankful heart.

Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women? The sun, the moon, and stars have been worshiped. Shall we then pluck them out of the sky? Such haste and violence betray a lack of confidence in God. See how much he has been able to accomplish through me, though I did no more than pray and preach. The Word did it all. Had I wished I might have a started a conflagration at Worms. But while I sat still and drank beer with Philip and Amsdorf, God dealt the papacy a mighty blow. – Dr. Martin Luther

Christ and Melchizedek

2007-12-08T15:26:00.000-05:00

According to Hebrews 6:20, Christ “has entered [heaven] as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.” Previously the writer of Hebrews declared, “He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek” (5:10). The mention of Jesus as “high priest” in 6:20 follows the initial declaration that the believer has eternal preservation because of Messiah’s eternal priesthood; the mention in 5:10 was briefly interrupted by the warning of apostasy. In 6:20, the writer now begins his theme that Messiah’s high priesthood is superior to the Aaronic priesthood.

Since his mention in Scripture is brief, Melchizedek is often considered an enigmatic figure. The only Old Testament accounts of Melchizedek are recorded in Genesis 14:17-20 and he is mentioned again in Psalm 110:4. He is not mentioned again until the Book of Hebrews. Nevertheless, God predestined the events of his life so he would be a type of the Messiah (cf. 7:3). According to Hebrews 7:1, Melchizedek was “king of Salem” (early name of Jerusalem), and “priest of the Most High God.” Abraham met him when returning from a military victory and “apportioned a tenth part of all the spoils” (7:2). Hebrews 7:7 records the significance of this tithe: “But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.” The tithe of Abraham to Melchizedek is expanded in Hebrews 7:4, 6, 8-10.

Levitical priests “have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people” (7:5). The Jewish people and priests trace their heritage to Abraham. When Melchizedek, “the one whose genealogy is not traced from them,” received the tithe from Abraham, the former had no genealogical relation to the chosen people. However, Abraham recognized a non-Jewish priest as his superior. In the Aaroninc priesthood, “mortal men receive tithes” (7:8) to continue the succession of the priests. Since there is no mention of Melchizedek’s death, his priesthood must be perpetual. Melchizedek received the Levitical tithes, which means the Aaronic priesthood paid tithes to him (7:9). The argument of Hebrews 7:11-20 is that a change in the priesthood has occurred. “Another priest . . . according to the order of Melchizedek” (7:11) is the Messiah; Messiah’s “indestructible life” (7:16) qualifies Him to be a Priest like Melchizedek. Psalm 110:4 confirmed the perpetual priesthood of Messiah.

The first coming of Messiah to Earth was to be obedient unto death. Since He was obedient and faithful unto death, Jesus became the sinner’s substitute under the wrath of God, but He is sinless, and therefore, rose from the grave and ascended to the Father, returning to the glory which He had with the Father before the world was created. Following His ascension, the Messiah entered the heavenly throne room and was declared the Son of Man (i.e., the Son relating to mankind who was a partaker of humanity; Heb 2:14). The Son of Man approached the Ancient of Days to be exalted and glorified (John 13:31-32; cf. Phil 2:8-11; Heb 12:2). Presently, the Son of Man is seated at His Father’s right hand (Psa 110:1) which occurred after He was presented as the Son of Man to His Father (Dan 7:13-14). Following the Son of Man’s presentation to the Ancient of Days (7:13-14), Christ entered the Holy of Holies through (by means of) His own blood, and is now seated at His Father’s right hand. All worldwide authority is given to Jesus, the Son of Man. The Father has divinely directed for the Son of Man to co-reign with Him over all creation (Psa 110:1; Dan 7:13-14; Eph 1:20-22). At the end of the age, the Son of Man will depart from the heavenly throne room of the Ancient of Days and will return to Earth in power and glory to reign historically and visibly as Messiah upon the throne of David.

The priesthood of Messiah assures the fulfillment “of a better covenant” (7:22) which means the realization of the Abrahamic, Land, Davidic, and New Covenants. Although “the former priests...existed in greater numbers,” the Messiah “holds his priesthood permanently” (7:23-24). God’s “oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever” (7:28). The oath of God was referenced in 7:21 which quoted from Psalm 110:4. Human priesthood has been replaced by a divine, perpetual priesthood of Messiah.

Absolutely Fantastic Psychologist :-)

2007-11-30T11:42:00.000-05:00

P.S. The video is simply entertaining; it would be wonderful if psychologists actually advised people in this manner, as opposed to offering godless secularism.

Drive-Thru Church

2007-11-12T13:26:00.000-05:00

”For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths” (2 Tim 4:3-4)

P.S. It is a parody of how many "churchians" think regarding the purpose of the body of Christ?

The Divine and Human Attitude in Evangelism

2007-11-10T22:59:00.000-05:00

When discussing evangelism, it seems important to begin with an understanding of both the divine and human attitude. In 2 Cor 5:16-21, the divine attitude is revealed. Verse 18 teaches that God is the Author of reconciliation; verse 19 teaches Jesus is the Agent of reconciliation; and, verse 20 teaches the Christian is the Ambassador of reconciliation. The responsibility and privilege of the Christian in God’s work of reconciliation could not be clearer. Furthermore, it is evident that evangelism begins with God. Evangelism is more about the glory of God than about those who are separated from Christ or those who are proclaiming the Gospel.

Romans 1:1-17 reveals the human attitude. The “I am” statements from the Apostle Paul should be true of every Christian. His statement “I am under obligation” in verse 14 stresses the responsibility to proclaim the Gospel. The “I am eager” statement indicates the proper attitude to characterize all Gospel preaching. The “I am not ashamed” statement indicates the proper testimony of every witness for Christ. These three statements should be characteristic of every Christian. The foundational attitudes taught in these verses should immediately result in the development of a strategy for proclaiming the Gospel.

Happy Reformation Day!

2007-10-31T12:22:00.000-04:00

The Reformation Polka
by Robert Gebel (oldlutheran.com)
[Sung to the tune of "Supercalifragilistic-expialidocious"]

When I was just ein junger Mann I studied canon law;
While Erfurt was a challenge, it was just to please my Pa.
Then came the storm, the lightning struck, I called upon Saint Anne,
I shaved my head, I took my vows, an Augustinian! Oh...

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let's start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

When Tetzel came near Wittenberg, St. Peter's profits soared,
I wrote a little notice for the All Saints' Bull'tin board:
"You cannot purchase merits, for we're justified by grace!
Here's 95 more reasons, Brother Tetzel, in your face!" Oh...

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let's start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

They loved my tracts, adored my wit, all were exempleror;
The Pope, however, hauled me up before the Emperor.
"Are these your books? Do you recant?" King Charles did demand,
"I will not change my Diet, Sir, God help me here I stand!" Oh...

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation -
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let's start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

Duke Frederick took the Wise approach, responding to my words,
By knighting "George" as hostage in the Kingdom of the Birds.
Use Brother Martin's model if the languages you seek,
Stay locked inside a castle with your Hebrew and your Greek! Oh...

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation -
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let's start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

Let's raise our steins and Concord Books while gathered in this place,
And spread the word that 'catholic' is spelled with lower case;
The Word remains unfettered when the Spirit gets his chance,
So come on, Katy, drop your lute, and join us in our dance! Oh...

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation -
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let's start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

The Illuminating Ministry of the Holy Spirit

2007-10-18T12:54:00.000-04:00

The Holy Spirit empowers the believer in his battle with the “flesh.” One of the ways the Spirit empowers the believer is by imparting spiritual truth and wisdom. “The Holy Spirit is the great Interpreter (John 16:13). Without Him all our efforts at fully understanding His Word are doomed to failure.” The Holy Spirit teaches the believer from the Word of God by illuminating the Scriptures. For example, 1 John 2:20 explains that believers will know the truth when they hear it because they “have an anointing from the Holy One.” According to 1 Corinthians 2:6-13, the Holy Spirit reveals “the depths of God” and enables the believer (“he who is spiritual”) to appraise all things (2:15). The result is that the believer is able to know the truth or will God as revealed in the Scriptures. Some have added “guidance in decision making” to the ministry of the Holy Spirit, but there does not appear to be any biblical evidence of that kind of guidance apart from the work of revealing and making plain the Word of God. The obvious question then is whether impulses and feelings come from the Holy Spirit independent of His use of the Word of God. There appears no such biblical evidence. The one exception is Acts 16:6-10 where the Holy Spirit intervened directly in the travel plans of the Apostle Paul. However, since the Acts 16 event was during the apostolic period (i.e. before the canon was closed), it cannot be cited as support for the normal manner in which the Holy Spirit illumines the mind or ministers to believers in the current time.

Songs of Churchianity

2007-09-21T16:05:00.000-04:00

A painfully accurate portrayal of what happens when worship is not about the glory of God.

When the "worship" service is all about one's preferences and singing of "God as my girlfriend," it certainly does portray the true nature of the heart. The modern therapeutic approach to Christianity certainly has created many false converts who view the local church as all about meeting one's felt needs.

Moral Dilemmas - Part III

2007-09-04T23:07:00.000-04:00

Joshua 2:1-24

God sent two spies into the land of Canaan before the armies of Israel crossed as a group. The spies were necessary before the whole of Israel entered the land. For instance, the spies were necessary to gather information. Joshua was wise in seeking information prior to any action. Even though God had promised help in the conquest of Canaan, he acted prudently by gathering all facts before making a decision for action.

The king of Jericho received word that the spies had entered the house of Rahab. Believing “they have come to search out all the land” (2:3), the king summoned Rahab to deliver the spies. In the process of their military expeditions, these men were unaware that God would bring them into contact with a person who needed spiritual encouragement. According to the testimony of Rahab (2:9-11), knowledge of God was widespread even in the city of Jericho. Rahab knew that God had given the land to the Jewish people. Consequently, she acted on this knowledge and confessed faith in the “LORD your God” (1:11). It was the evidence of her faith that she was willing to hide the spies in her home, and even lie about their presence in her home in an effort to save their lives (2:4-5). God commended Rahab for her faith in hiding the spies (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25), yet the lie was a sin of weakness. Her desire to help the spies was just, but her lie was not.

Rahab lied to the soldiers concerning the men sent as spies, while helping the latter to safety. There is a seeming moral dilemma: (1) obedience to the soldiers as representative of the city government of Jericho, and (2) recognition of the sanctity of human life by not bringing the spies to the soldiers of Jericho. It is clear that Rahab lied, and she is nowhere commended for her falsehood. The deception by which she sought to avoid all suspicion of assisting the spies was not necessary. Rahab was rightly convinced that God would give the land to the Jewish people; therefore, any opposition to God’s plans would be futile.

In the account in Josh 6 (cf. Heb 11:31), God blessed Rahab for her faith and how she treated Israel. God rewarded her in spite of the fact that she lied rather than because of her lie. God not only spared her life, but also her family. Scripture does not say anything more about the lie, but it simply records what was done. The one quality that resulted in God’s blessing was Rahab’s genuine faith in Him. The “scarlet thread” was the evidence of her trust in the promise of deliverance.

Moral Dilemmas - Part II

2007-09-04T23:06:00.000-04:00

Exodus 1:8-22

Following the death of Joseph, “the sons of Israel were fruitful and increased greatly, and multiplied, and became exceedingly mighty, so that the land was filled with them. Now a new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph” (1:7-8). The new king feared because “the sons of Israel [were] more and mightier than [the Egyptians]” (1:9). The first policy of the new king was to appoint “taskmasters over them to afflict them with hard labor” (1:11). The policy failed because “the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and the more they spread out, so that they were in dread of the sons of Israel” (1:12).

The second policy of the new king was to attack the children. Pharaoh instructed the Hebrew midwives, Shiprah and Puah, to kill all the male babies (1:15-16). It appears that the murder of the male babies was not to be necessarily obvious, but blamed on the difficulty of the birth (1:16). The female babies would not be a threat to the Egyptian dynasty, as they would likely serve the lusts of the Egyptians.

Moses told his readers that these two midwives had a fear of God, “and did not do as the king of Egypt had commanded them, but let the boys live” (1:16). Whether the midwives were Egyptian or Hebrew is not clear. The midwives, nevertheless, understood the law of God and knew it to be more important to obey God than man. Shiprah and Puah would not violate the sanctity of life. These midwives could not obey the command of the king of Egypt. The moral dilemma for them was murder of the innocent and disobedience to government.

Nowhere does the passage state that the midwives lied to Pharaoh. When questioned concerning their obedience to the king’s command, the explanation was that the Hebrew women were athletic and vigorous, and gave birth to their children before the midwife could get to them. It is true that slave women were not as delicate as the women of Egypt, but had well toned muscles to deliver their babies much faster than women who live a sedentary style of life. The midwives succeeded in answering Pharaoh with this explanation. It is possible that the midwives could have delayed their birth, which would have given sufficient opportunity for both Hebrew mothers and babies, following birth, to be taken to some safe place.
God blessed the justice of the midwives (1:20-21), and “established households for them.” The midwives opposed the unjust government, which had no moral basis to commit murder. God rewarded the midwives’ just actions of disobeying the unjust command of Pharaoh.

Moral Dilemmas - Part I

2007-09-04T23:04:00.000-04:00

Genesis 12:10-20

Genesis 12 provides the account of Abram’s journeys to Egypt. God promised land to Abram and to his seed, but a famine resulted in Abram leaving the promised land. Abram went to Egypt to take refuge there until the famine had passed. The occurrence of the famine was to prove the faith and obedience of Abram.

The moral dilemma of journeying to Egypt is indicated by Abram’s fear that the Egyptians would be taken with the beauty of Sarai and kill him. The behavior of the Egyptians was certainly cause for a moral dilemma (Gen 19). Knowing they were a lustful people, Abram feared he would be murdered as Sarai’s husband, which would mean it would be free and lawful for one of the Egyptians to marry her. Abram’s resolution of the dilemma was for Sarai to say that she was his sister. There is a certain degree of truth in the statement since Sarai was his half-sister (11:29). However, the intent of Abram was to conceal truth and to deceive the Egyptians.

Based on the promise of 12:1-3, Abram should have trusted God to protect and care for him. One can certainly understand Abram’s fear but as a result of falling into unbelief, his actions were not just. It is probable that Abram did not understand the actual outworking and fulfillment of the promise that God had made with him. However, it was absolutely uncertain how Abram expected to keep his honor and possession of Sarai by stating that she was his sister. Being mindful of the promise of God, it would have been easier in Egypt for Abram to acknowledge Sarai as his wife.

The problem with Abram’s actions is that he should have never journeyed to Egypt. Though there was a famine in the land of promise, God could have supplied his needs (especially in light of the covenant with him). However, once in Egypt, Abram should have been mindful to not compromise his faithfulness to God. God could have protected Abram in Egypt so that Abram did not need to leave with the rebuke of Pharoah.

God had promised to raise a nation through Abram that would bring blessing to the world. Even though he acted in deception, God graciously protected the promise. The unjust actions of Abram could not deliver him from his deceptive actions. The account demonstrates that lack of justice is never a means to accomplish justice.

Even though Abram prospered from his injustice, his acquired riches from Egypt would provide continual problems with Lot, and then with Hagar. The esteem of God should be the most treasured possession of any believer. When the justice of God was not sought by Abram, the riches he acquired where a diversion from the glory of God.

War on Britain's Jews

2007-08-20T18:27:00.000-04:00

This is an excellent documentary by British journalist Richard Littlejohn concerning the resurgence of anti-Semitism (particularly in identifying the anti-Semitism of the Left). Should YouTube remove the videos, Daniel Chew of "Daniel's Place" (http://puritanreformed.blogspot.com/) has graciously imported the videos to his multi-blog at http://astronova.multiply.com/video.

Video 1

Video 2

Video 3

Video 4

Video 5

Video 6

Authentic Not Synthetic Evangelism

2007-08-17T08:05:00.000-04:00

In his work, Today's Gospel:Authentic or Synthetic, Walter Chantry reminded his readers:

A. Products of modern evangelism are often sad examples of Christianity.
B. Attention has focused on large crowds, thrilling choruses, emotional hype—a great deal of noise and dramatic excitement.
C. Evangelists today are making the dreadful miscalculation that sinners know who God is. They plunge into “five things God wants you to know.”
D. In the name of evangelicalism, there is too much preaching on the easy steps to heaven.
E. The empty phrase “accept Jesus as your personal Savior” has become a substitute for authentic repentance.
F. Though unintentionally so, deceit marks many modern invitations to Christ. Reminded of the sadness, loneliness, and discouragements, of life, sinners are invited to come to Christ, who will change all of that and put a smile on their faces. No suggestion is given that following Jesus is sacrificial and painful.
G. Today’s evangelicals propose three easy steps to heaven. It is as simple as A, B, C. Just accept, believe, and confess. A three-sentence prayer and you will be safe for eternity.

Chantry’s work did address evangelism abuses, but he also focused upon the positive dimensions of the authentic Gospel as outlined in Mark 10.

1. The Preaching of the Character of God (10:17-18)
2. The Preaching of the Law of God (10:19-21a)
3. The Preaching of Repentance Toward God (10:21a)
4. The Preaching of Faith Toward God’s Son (10:21b)
5. The Preaching of Acceptance With God (10:22)
6. The Preaching With Dependence Upon God (10:23-27)

Can the Emerging Church Get Any Worse?!?

2007-08-09T17:06:00.000-04:00

Although satirical from Next-Wave (http://the-next-wave-ezine.info/issue103/index.cfm), the magazine covers do seem somewhat consistent with the video below.

Emergents Blaspheme Baptism

2007-07-11T16:58:00.000-04:00

The newest postmodern trend, the Emerging Church, is now blaspheming baptism. Scott Hodge, lead "pastor" of The Orchard Church Community, has posted a "How To" baptism video. The "emergent baptism" reduces the holy and precious things of God to a BBQ pool party, implied nudity, and expletives. If even the "pastors" regard baptism as a joke, is it any wonder this "church" boasts of more than 80 people committed to be baptized? These boys have no reverence for God . . . they portray a counterfeit Christ and Gospel that is not much different than the foolishness and wickedness of this age. Unfortunately, this is yet another example of how unrelevant the Emergents are, as they trample under their feet the precious things of God.

Ethics and the iPhone

2007-07-06T09:39:00.000-04:00

As an avid Apple fan and user, the launch of the iPhone has received my attention. No, I will not be rushing to buy an iPhone. I find myself in ample agreement with Dr. Bruce Weinstein's excellent article for Business Week entitled "Ethics and the iPhone."

"Our society has devolved into a mass of turned-on, tuned-out, and plugged-in technophiles. Whatever distinction used to exist between public and private life is all but gone, as one can witness on any city street, bus, plane, or shopping mall. Waiting in line at the grocery store or post office used to mean striking up a conversation with the person in front of you. It now involves blurting the intimate details of one's love life into a cell phone for all to hear or scrolling through a playlist for just the right song, or surfing the Web for something we want but don't really need."

Dr. Weinstein calls this new type of behavior, "iSolation." He makes good points. I remember the days of actually talking with people while waiting in a line for a sporting event. There was a sense of community, which has been lost due to everyone being wireless. The shallowness of modern culture is a valid concern. Of equal concern is the loss of time to think (cf. Phil 4:8).

"When our brains are constantly stimulated by electronic data, they are, of necessity, precluded from taking anything else in, such as the random thoughts that can be the genesis of great ideas. The nonstop avalanche of images and sounds from electronic media (among other distractions) is a barrier, not a portal, to creativity."

Watch the Church Growth Movie

2007-06-25T21:41:00.000-04:00

http://www.oldtruth.com/blog.cfm/id.2.pid.239

Losing the Biblical Focus

2007-06-06T11:58:00.000-04:00

Some churches have lost their focus by designing their worship services for the very people, unbelievers, who are incapable of worshipping God. While no one would question these churches’ concern for lost people, their zeal for “winning souls” has replaced their zeal for the one thing that will outlast every other ministry—even evangelism—namely, worship of God. Other churches have lost their focus by building “miniature kingdoms” where Christians huddle to escape the “evil” influence found in public schools, athletic facilities, and other secular institutions. Every Christian is “safe” from the world’s influence but at the same time poorly equipped to be the salt and light Christians have been called to be. There is a need for more biblically based churches that will keep the “Greatest Commandment” the “greatest.”

As evident in the following quote, Robert Reymond (A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith) also stressed the priority of worship.

To worship God—that is the primary reason why the Christian should go to church. In today’s church climate this is a radical idea. Nevertheless, Christians should go to church, not to evangelize, not to provide a comfortable “consumer-friendly” setting for the unchurched, not even primarily for the benefit which fellowship with other Christians provides, and definitely not just for lectures and devotionals, but in order to worship God. Christians should also understand that evangelism and the missionary task are not the most important tasks the church has.

Such efforts exist among the nations, as John Piper argues in his Let the Nations Be Glad, only because worship of the true God among them does not! . . .

Anyone who will take the time to study the matter will have to conclude that worship in evangelical churches in this generation is, speaking generally, approaching bankruptcy. There is neither rhyme nor reason, much less biblical warrant, for the order of and much that goes on in many evangelical church services today. The fact of the matter is, much evangelical “worship” is simply not true worship at all.

For decades now evangelical churches have been conducting their services for the sake of unbelievers. Both the revivalistic service of a previous generation and the “seeker service” of today are shaped by the same concern—appeal to the unchurched. Not surprisingly, in neither case does much that might be called worship by Christians occur. As a result, many evangelicals who have been sitting for years in such worship services are finding their souls drying up, and they have begun to long for something else.

Accordingly, they have become vulnerable to the appeal of the mysterium of hierarchical liturgical services. This is why some today are “on the Canterbury trail” of defecting to Greek Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Others who have been simply spectators for years in their worship services are getting caught up in the people-involving worship of charismatic services. . . .

The Christian and Amoral Issues

2007-05-30T12:02:00.000-04:00

There are general principles in Paul’s advice to the Corinthians that should guide the Christian in regard to amoral issues. First Corinthians 8:1-13, 10:23-33 (cf. Rom 14:1—15:13) have much to say about different types of Christians. Therefore, in the context of the matter of meats sacrificed to idols (cf. 1 Cor 8:1), Paul stated, “Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one. . . . However, not all men have this knowledge; but some, being accustomed to the idol until now, eat food as if it were sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled” (8:4, 7). The consequences of the Christian who uses his knowledge without love for his brother is stated in 1 Cor 8:11-12. “For through your knowledge he who is weak is ruined, the brother for whose sake Christ died. And thus, by sinning against the brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.”

The first principle to recognize is that knowledge is the determining factor that separates these two types of Christians. The strong Christian is more knowledgeable in his theological insights in regard to amoral issues; the weaker Christian lacks knowledge and does not perceive the neutrality of certain practices. The strong Christian may not be a mature believer; that is, he may be knowledgeable, but may not be exercising it in love under the control of the Holy Spirit. The strong Christian can be arrogantly insensitive (8:1-3) and may act indifferently toward the needs of others in the church. Every local church is composed of Christians with equally diverse levels of insight and understanding. Therefore, sensitivity to one another is essential.

Paul inferred that many amoral issues exist, but should not be practiced if they cause harm to a fellow believer. Meat is food, wine is drink, and days are temporal limitations in and of themselves (Rom 14; Col 2:16). However, certain implicit connotations were inseparable from these temporal limitations that caused some Christians to react strongly against the use or recognition of them. The meat referenced had been sacrificed to idols and then sold for consumption (1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Some Christians feared compromise and would only eat vegetables to protect themselves from eating such contaminated flesh. Charles Hodge suggested that the use of wine is similar to the issue regarding meat offered to idols. “They feared they might be led to use wine which had been offered to the gods; to which they had the same objection as to meat which had been presented in sacrifice.” The matter of days (cf. Col 2:16) referred to the legal requirements of the Mosaic Law in which certain days and times were considered holy and sacred; therefore, such days and times demanded restricted activity. It is clear that some Christians were strongly opposed to certain practices, while others had no hesitation. The point that Paul made is that these amoral issues are not inherently evil; it is the context that makes them questionable.

Often it is context that creates many contemporary problems regarding amoral issues. For example, Dr. Kevin Bauder has recently written a series [Kevin T. Bauder, “Fundamentalists and Theater,” 5 December 2006—16 January 2007 (forum on-line); available from http://www.sharperiron.org] that addresses many factors of the arts in general, and of theater in particular. Bauder objected strongly to movie attendance by many Christians. One objection is that the money exchanged for movie attendance supports the establishment. It is interesting that Paul never condemned the purchase of meat that had been sacrificed at the “meat market” (1 Cor 10:25), even though such a purchase would help to enable the lifestyles of the priests who performed the pagan rituals.

Although he stressed the responsibility of the strong Christian, Paul did not exclude certain amoral issues. First Corinthians 10:25-27 states that the eating of meat could be pursued, but one must be careful not to do it if a weaker brother may become aware of it. Scripture is not emphasizing hiding one’s actions, but the exercising of discernment. Christians can be involved in many amoral (“gray”) issues. Another principle to be noted is that a public expression of one’s involvements is not necessary. Many Christians fail to be prudent and make all their activities public knowledge. Conversely, if the Christian was to restrict his activities to those things that had mutual agreement, there would be nothing to do but merely eating and sleeping. Therefore, 1 Cor 8:13 must be balanced with 1 Cor 10:27.

Ultimately, one of the final principles that can be gleaned from Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians is that all activities must be determined with an eternal perspective. Many pursuits in life are amoral, but in light of the shortness of life and the impact that they may have upon others and oneself, it should be considered whether they are worthy pursuing (cf. Phil 1:9-10). Furthermore, “All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify” (1 Cor 10:23). The priority in life is the spiritual welfare of each Christian. The unregenerate may exalt independence and isolation, but the church must earnestly guard themselves from such an attitude of selfishness. In the case of the strong Christian, he must not be arrogant, but loving; in the case of the weak Christian, he must not be critical, but understanding.

Joel Osteen reveals his complete ignorance of the biblical Gospel (cf. John 14:6; Acts 4:12)

2007-05-07T11:58:00.000-04:00

Joel Osteen's Scripture Twisting and Prosperity Gospel

2007-05-07T09:06:00.000-04:00