It was recently brought to my attention the significant impact the reading of Christian biographies had the spiritual and ministerial development of C.H. Spurgeon and George Whitfield. Scripture itself places emphasis on our learning from others around us and from those who have gone before us. We must always recognize the saints on whose shoulders we stand in the work of building God's church!
With that in mind, allow me to ask a question. What good Christian biographies have you recently read... contemporary or from generations gone by? Please post in the comment section so we can all add to our "must read" lists.
I am currently reading The Biography of Robert Murray McCheyne by Andrew Bonar. I recently finished a more contemporay biography, The Hand of Providence: The Faith of Ronald Reagan.
What are you reading that you would recommend?
Grace to You!
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
There Are No Athiests!
EDITOR'S NOTE: This post is being republished. It was originally posted on Feb 23, 2005. In light of some recent study, I decided to repost it for your encouragement and interaction. Grace and Peace to you through our Lord Jesus Christ!
I teach a class at my church on Tuesday nights called Grace Evangelism. We meet at 6:00 PM for a time of study then go out on visitation. This week the topic of study was the evangelistic implications of Romans 1.18-20 and Romans 2.14-15.
Romans 1.18 "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."
There are certain gospel truths that all humankind already know. God uniquely designed the entire universe to point to Himself. From creation, there are at least two attributes of God that all humanity have embedded on their minds. According to verse 20, all men clearly perceive God's eternal power and His divine nature.
God's eternal power is evidenced in His personal creation of all the world through the person of Jesus Christ and his moment by moment sustaining its very existence. Every man, woman and chiild who every lived or ever will live on this earth knwo that. Why do you think people instinctively call on God when an earthquake or a tsunami rattles their existence? Why do they call out to God when traumatic circumstance beset them? Because they instinctively know of the eternal power of God.
All humankind are also clearly aware of God's divine nature, that is His goodness and grace commonly spread to all humanity. To a limited degree, God's grace is made available to every person without regard to location, religion, gender, race, etc. He rains on the just and the unjust alike (cf Matt 5.45). This is why even the unsaved both plead for God to deliver rain and curse His name when they get too much of it. They know the divine nature of God.
Os, if the Bible is true, and I believe that it always is, there are no atheists! There may well be professing atheists, much as there are professing Christians who are not genuine. All men have the very existence of God already etched on their minds. According to verse 18, they "By their unrighteousness supress the truth." That means it is there, just pushed down under layers of disobedience, rebellion and denial. But it is there. I have a friend named John who claimed for many years to be an atheist. He is very intellectual, very sharp. The very beauty and order of the created world sent him on a religious search for the essence of reality and source of life. He eventually landed at the Gospel and God turned his life around. What was it in John that sent him searching for Truth? That's right, it was the very truth of God already inscribed on his heart.
What is the evangelistic implications of this truth? There are no atheists, so what of those who claim to be atheists? We do not argue for the existence of God or His authority. We rather confront the point of sinful rebellion by building on the foundation of truth God has already put in his heart. Evangelism is the work of God. We get to be His mouthpieces as He completes the work He began in creation!
Grace to You!
I teach a class at my church on Tuesday nights called Grace Evangelism. We meet at 6:00 PM for a time of study then go out on visitation. This week the topic of study was the evangelistic implications of Romans 1.18-20 and Romans 2.14-15.
Romans 1.18 "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."
There are certain gospel truths that all humankind already know. God uniquely designed the entire universe to point to Himself. From creation, there are at least two attributes of God that all humanity have embedded on their minds. According to verse 20, all men clearly perceive God's eternal power and His divine nature.
God's eternal power is evidenced in His personal creation of all the world through the person of Jesus Christ and his moment by moment sustaining its very existence. Every man, woman and chiild who every lived or ever will live on this earth knwo that. Why do you think people instinctively call on God when an earthquake or a tsunami rattles their existence? Why do they call out to God when traumatic circumstance beset them? Because they instinctively know of the eternal power of God.
All humankind are also clearly aware of God's divine nature, that is His goodness and grace commonly spread to all humanity. To a limited degree, God's grace is made available to every person without regard to location, religion, gender, race, etc. He rains on the just and the unjust alike (cf Matt 5.45). This is why even the unsaved both plead for God to deliver rain and curse His name when they get too much of it. They know the divine nature of God.
Os, if the Bible is true, and I believe that it always is, there are no atheists! There may well be professing atheists, much as there are professing Christians who are not genuine. All men have the very existence of God already etched on their minds. According to verse 18, they "By their unrighteousness supress the truth." That means it is there, just pushed down under layers of disobedience, rebellion and denial. But it is there. I have a friend named John who claimed for many years to be an atheist. He is very intellectual, very sharp. The very beauty and order of the created world sent him on a religious search for the essence of reality and source of life. He eventually landed at the Gospel and God turned his life around. What was it in John that sent him searching for Truth? That's right, it was the very truth of God already inscribed on his heart.
What is the evangelistic implications of this truth? There are no atheists, so what of those who claim to be atheists? We do not argue for the existence of God or His authority. We rather confront the point of sinful rebellion by building on the foundation of truth God has already put in his heart. Evangelism is the work of God. We get to be His mouthpieces as He completes the work He began in creation!
Grace to You!
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
Blinded By Might
According the ever vocal John Gibson over at “Fair and Balanced” Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155422,00.html) “The very same team that was helping to get John Kerry elected, muttering the whole time that Bush lied to get the country into a war…” are now helping Prime Minister Tony Blair in his bid for a third term by insisting that he did not lie about the war. Interesting how Bush was a conniving liar and Blair was simply mislead. But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of an agenda, by all means!
This really shouldn’t come as a surprise. Democrats, like most politicians (I almost said “all,” but I am still optimistic that there are a few honest ones out there) get blinded by their grab for power and influence that they readily compromise integrity. They simply assume most American won’t pay attention to what is happening on the other side of the big pond. They can say one thing here and another thing over there and be growing their power bases in both places. This is all par for the political course.
The concern I have this morning is the parallel that I see between modern politicians and many evangelical leaders. Power and influence are dangerous weapons that, when possessed, can be wielded to effect far reaching change. This is just as true for evangelicals as it is for politicians. This proven fact is demonstrated throughout recent evangelical history. For the most obvious example, look at the influence that Rev. Billy Graham has had on numerous American presidents. His son and assumed heir, Franklin Graham is already beginning to wield that political power that comes as a result of his status as an evangelical leader. Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan, Gary Bauer, Tony Perkins, James Dobson and more recently Al Mohler, are all examples of how evangelical influence translates to political influence. This can all be well and good, even helpful to the greater cause of evangelicalism, namely the spread the gospel of faith alone in Christ alone – the good news that Christ appeased the wrath of God and opens the narrow door of heaven for all who would believe in Him alone.
The rub comes when evangelical leaders, like their political counterparts, begin to compromise their integrity, or worse, the integrity of the gospel, to gain political clout. Democratic leaders like Bob Shrum and Stan Greenberg blatantly call Bush a liar and then rush to wrap their arms around Blair precisely because it seems apparent the Blair will glide to an easy victory and the Democrats want a bit of influence with Blair and other Europeans. So what if their integrity is a bit compromised? The political clout they will gain far outweighs any potentially negative press they will get here in the States. Evangelical leaders like Dobson are doing the same thing. They are sidling up with Roman Catholics, as well as many liberal evangelicals, that deny the very claims of the gospel in the hopes of gaining political clout to effect change. Those changes would be helpful and well received by most of us evangelicals, but not at the expense of throwing the gospel out the window.
As I have commented before, (as has Steve Camp and James White much more fluently – and boldly – as I) there is nothing helpful or loving about fixing the cultural and political climate while denying the claims of the gospel – the only means to fix the real issue of lost people’s hearts. Once the evangelicals have hijacked the political system and effected the desired changes, how will they be able to come back and preach the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone that they have marginalized for the last decade?
No doubt about it, there is much needed political change in America, starting right here in Toledo and going all the way to the Supreme Court and even the White House. I am working to effect that change in small, grass roots ways. I hope to help in some small way to get Rob Ludeman elected Mayor of Toledo. I hope to be a part of getting Kenneth Blackwell elected Governor of Ohio. But in this process, I must never compromise the heart of the Gospel or my own integrity to effect a temporal change.
May evangelicals everywhere be able to say as Paul, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation for all who believe.” (Rom 1.16)
Grace to You!
This really shouldn’t come as a surprise. Democrats, like most politicians (I almost said “all,” but I am still optimistic that there are a few honest ones out there) get blinded by their grab for power and influence that they readily compromise integrity. They simply assume most American won’t pay attention to what is happening on the other side of the big pond. They can say one thing here and another thing over there and be growing their power bases in both places. This is all par for the political course.
The concern I have this morning is the parallel that I see between modern politicians and many evangelical leaders. Power and influence are dangerous weapons that, when possessed, can be wielded to effect far reaching change. This is just as true for evangelicals as it is for politicians. This proven fact is demonstrated throughout recent evangelical history. For the most obvious example, look at the influence that Rev. Billy Graham has had on numerous American presidents. His son and assumed heir, Franklin Graham is already beginning to wield that political power that comes as a result of his status as an evangelical leader. Jerry Falwell, Pat Buchanan, Gary Bauer, Tony Perkins, James Dobson and more recently Al Mohler, are all examples of how evangelical influence translates to political influence. This can all be well and good, even helpful to the greater cause of evangelicalism, namely the spread the gospel of faith alone in Christ alone – the good news that Christ appeased the wrath of God and opens the narrow door of heaven for all who would believe in Him alone.
The rub comes when evangelical leaders, like their political counterparts, begin to compromise their integrity, or worse, the integrity of the gospel, to gain political clout. Democratic leaders like Bob Shrum and Stan Greenberg blatantly call Bush a liar and then rush to wrap their arms around Blair precisely because it seems apparent the Blair will glide to an easy victory and the Democrats want a bit of influence with Blair and other Europeans. So what if their integrity is a bit compromised? The political clout they will gain far outweighs any potentially negative press they will get here in the States. Evangelical leaders like Dobson are doing the same thing. They are sidling up with Roman Catholics, as well as many liberal evangelicals, that deny the very claims of the gospel in the hopes of gaining political clout to effect change. Those changes would be helpful and well received by most of us evangelicals, but not at the expense of throwing the gospel out the window.
As I have commented before, (as has Steve Camp and James White much more fluently – and boldly – as I) there is nothing helpful or loving about fixing the cultural and political climate while denying the claims of the gospel – the only means to fix the real issue of lost people’s hearts. Once the evangelicals have hijacked the political system and effected the desired changes, how will they be able to come back and preach the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone that they have marginalized for the last decade?
No doubt about it, there is much needed political change in America, starting right here in Toledo and going all the way to the Supreme Court and even the White House. I am working to effect that change in small, grass roots ways. I hope to help in some small way to get Rob Ludeman elected Mayor of Toledo. I hope to be a part of getting Kenneth Blackwell elected Governor of Ohio. But in this process, I must never compromise the heart of the Gospel or my own integrity to effect a temporal change.
May evangelicals everywhere be able to say as Paul, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation for all who believe.” (Rom 1.16)
Grace to You!
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
The Runaway Bride
She may not be able to double as Julia Roberts, but Jennifer Wilbanks is going to be the butt of many jokes for a long time to come. Maybe rightfully so. Afterall, she sent local authorities on a very expensive and time consuming hunt for something that was never going to be found. She toyed with the emotions of a whole community (and thanks to the big media with nothing else to do, a whole country). There may be a legitimate price to pay for the taxpayer funded wild goose chase.
But let's slow down for a minute. My friend, Fritz Wenzel, a political and media consultant, made a striking observation on his blog (www.heartlandpolitics.com) regarding Ms. Wilbanks. Surely good can be found and grace can be given to this woman who got cold feet and had her second thoughts BEFORE she said her "I do." Now I am rarely one to suspend due process and release someone of the just consequences of breaking the law, but if ever there was a time to be very slow and cautious before pressing charges, this would be it. Think of how much heartache and trauma could be avoided if more people gave serious consideration to the deeply profound implications of saying "I do."
Marriages are a dime a dozen and finding so-called "clergy" that will "perform" them is easier than finding wasted taxpayer money at the local public school board. Americans have such a consumer driven idea of marriage that it will only be a matter of time until you will be able to get your marriage license signed at a drive through window.
This all throws out the Biblical imagery of marriage being the imperfect picture of how Christ perfectly loves His bride, the Church. God has called out for His own glory a people that He will present to Christ as His Bride. Christ endlessly, sacrificially, intentionally loves that Bride, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and health. And we, His church, are very often, worse, poorer, and sick and yet Christ continues to love us. Even when we cheat on Him with our gods of self, pleasure, dreams, ambitions, etc... He loves us always.
Mr. John Mason, the would-be groom, has modeled a bit this kind of unconditional love. He has insisted that his love for her has in no way diminished. He wants to give her time to work through her problems and proceed with the relational commitment he has made. How many men you know would jump ship even AFTER the wedding if his partner did something like this? Mr. Mason understands the commitment he made and is sticking by it.
I pray that more people will give series consideration to the ramification of marriage before they go to the altar. I make it my goal, in the first counseling session I do with a couple leading up to marrying them, to convince them not to get married. If i can talk them out marriage in a one hour session, they shouldn't be getting married in the first place.
I hope we all learn something from this, regardless of what legal ramifications this might have on Ms. Wilbanks, they are far better than the far reaching devastation that would have resulted from her running a few days after then wedding instead of a few days before.
Grace to You!
But let's slow down for a minute. My friend, Fritz Wenzel, a political and media consultant, made a striking observation on his blog (www.heartlandpolitics.com) regarding Ms. Wilbanks. Surely good can be found and grace can be given to this woman who got cold feet and had her second thoughts BEFORE she said her "I do." Now I am rarely one to suspend due process and release someone of the just consequences of breaking the law, but if ever there was a time to be very slow and cautious before pressing charges, this would be it. Think of how much heartache and trauma could be avoided if more people gave serious consideration to the deeply profound implications of saying "I do."
Marriages are a dime a dozen and finding so-called "clergy" that will "perform" them is easier than finding wasted taxpayer money at the local public school board. Americans have such a consumer driven idea of marriage that it will only be a matter of time until you will be able to get your marriage license signed at a drive through window.
This all throws out the Biblical imagery of marriage being the imperfect picture of how Christ perfectly loves His bride, the Church. God has called out for His own glory a people that He will present to Christ as His Bride. Christ endlessly, sacrificially, intentionally loves that Bride, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and health. And we, His church, are very often, worse, poorer, and sick and yet Christ continues to love us. Even when we cheat on Him with our gods of self, pleasure, dreams, ambitions, etc... He loves us always.
Mr. John Mason, the would-be groom, has modeled a bit this kind of unconditional love. He has insisted that his love for her has in no way diminished. He wants to give her time to work through her problems and proceed with the relational commitment he has made. How many men you know would jump ship even AFTER the wedding if his partner did something like this? Mr. Mason understands the commitment he made and is sticking by it.
I pray that more people will give series consideration to the ramification of marriage before they go to the altar. I make it my goal, in the first counseling session I do with a couple leading up to marrying them, to convince them not to get married. If i can talk them out marriage in a one hour session, they shouldn't be getting married in the first place.
I hope we all learn something from this, regardless of what legal ramifications this might have on Ms. Wilbanks, they are far better than the far reaching devastation that would have resulted from her running a few days after then wedding instead of a few days before.
Grace to You!
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Giving God Advice
Surely he was speaking tongue-in-cheek, but his comments were quite interesting. During an audience with German Catholics, Benedict XVI offered a bit of telling humor. "As the trend in the ballots slowly made me realize that — in a manner of speaking, the guillotine would fall on me — I started to feel quite dizzy," the 78-year-old Benedict told his countrymen, smiling and chuckling. "I thought that I had done my life's work and could now hope to live out my days in peace. "I told the Lord with deep conviction, 'Don't do this to me. You have younger and better (candidates) who could take up this great task with a totally different energy and with different strength.' Evidently, this time he didn't listen to me."
See the whole story here –
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&u=/ap/20050425/ap_on_re_eu/pope&printer=1
Again, in this immediate context, it is obvious that Benedict XVI was “working the crowd.” He was having some fun. But it is quite telling regarding his theological persuasion. Of course the Pope thinks he can not only give God advice, but actually add to or change the existing, authoritative and final Word of God. If you believe that theology evolves it must be interpreted by someone. The Catholic Church puts that onus on the Pope. He not only interprets the Scripture for the masses, he speaks authoritatively as the “vicar of Christ.” Thus, the development of Catholic Church traditions and writings are on even plain with the once delivered, final Word of God.
This is much like the so called progressive historians that believe the United States Constitution is an evolving document that must be interpreted and explain with each new generation. Thus, we have the oligarchy in black we call the Supreme Court that “interprets” (rather rewrites) the Constitution with each new case before them.
It is easy for us to take shots at the Catholic concept of giving God advice, however; we evangelicals as even worse. We claim to have a final authority in the Word and then live as though we can interpret that final authority based on our feelings or the relative circumstances of a given situation. How many times do we here comments like: “God has told me to…” “I feel God wants me to …” “God is leading me to …”
As Christians who claim to hold the view of the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, we must be careful to let the Word speak in its historical, grammatical, contextual reality first. Only then can we had an idea of what the Scripture calls us to do today. God only speaks through His Spirit revealing His Word to the minds of regenerate men and women.
I believe in the priesthood of every believer, but not the infallibility of every man’s feelings.
Some things to think about this morning!
Grace to You!
See the whole story here –
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&u=/ap/20050425/ap_on_re_eu/pope&printer=1
Again, in this immediate context, it is obvious that Benedict XVI was “working the crowd.” He was having some fun. But it is quite telling regarding his theological persuasion. Of course the Pope thinks he can not only give God advice, but actually add to or change the existing, authoritative and final Word of God. If you believe that theology evolves it must be interpreted by someone. The Catholic Church puts that onus on the Pope. He not only interprets the Scripture for the masses, he speaks authoritatively as the “vicar of Christ.” Thus, the development of Catholic Church traditions and writings are on even plain with the once delivered, final Word of God.
This is much like the so called progressive historians that believe the United States Constitution is an evolving document that must be interpreted and explain with each new generation. Thus, we have the oligarchy in black we call the Supreme Court that “interprets” (rather rewrites) the Constitution with each new case before them.
It is easy for us to take shots at the Catholic concept of giving God advice, however; we evangelicals as even worse. We claim to have a final authority in the Word and then live as though we can interpret that final authority based on our feelings or the relative circumstances of a given situation. How many times do we here comments like: “God has told me to…” “I feel God wants me to …” “God is leading me to …”
As Christians who claim to hold the view of the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, we must be careful to let the Word speak in its historical, grammatical, contextual reality first. Only then can we had an idea of what the Scripture calls us to do today. God only speaks through His Spirit revealing His Word to the minds of regenerate men and women.
I believe in the priesthood of every believer, but not the infallibility of every man’s feelings.
Some things to think about this morning!
Grace to You!
Monday, April 25, 2005
The Burden of Leadership
My friend Steve Camp has once again sounded the alarm for the recognized leaders of the Evangelical community to stand up and be counted on the side of the Gospel. Read his compelling plea at his web ministry Audience One in an article titled The New Religious Common Ground. http://a1m.org/index.php
Allow me to muse here regarding the burden I feel as one who has accepted a certain level of leadership in the evangelical world, much lesser than the likes of Steve Camp or the men he calls out in his article. Even less than my own Senior Pastor, however, a certain level of influence I do have and thus the burden is upon me properly exercise that influence.
Three passages come to my mind, so allow me to briefly comment on each.
James 3.1-2 speaks of leadership in terms of ones role as a communicator. “1Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2For we all stumble in many ways, and if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body.” (ESV) Here we see the challenge of leadership to be one of controlling our tongue. The text goes on to emphasize the untamableness of the Herhuman tongue. The power and greatness of the spoken word ios referred to as a bit in horse’s mouth, a rudder on a ship, a small spark that ignites a devastating forest fire, and a wild beast. The context is clear, for in verse 13 James continues speaking of leadership and maturity in the area of wisdom. Therefore, one of the great challenges of leadership (i.e. “teaching”) is to be careful what you say and when and how you say it. As evangelical leaders, we must be unquestionably clear on, above all else, the heart of the gospel. Our tongues cannot spill forth words of praise for a man who teaches such heresies as papal infallibility and grace received from the Treasury of Merit dolled out in accordance to penance and yet speak of grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. As James 3.11-12 says “11 Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? 12Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water.” Clear, bold challenge for teachers/leaders to speak clearly the gospel.
2 Timothy 1.8-14 is Paul’s exhortation to Timothy to guard with great diligence the gospel that has been entrusted to him. “(8) Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God… (14) By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you.” (ESV) There is in Scripture an overwhelming and oft repeated call for leaders to contend earnestly for the faith. This is the repeated theme throughout the pastoral epistles of Paul, as well as the overarching theme of Christian ministry in general. A leader can do a lot of things well, but if you fail to stand firmly for the doctrines of grace, you fail your role as a spiritual leader. As Steve Camp so aptly remarked, “it doesn’t matter if we work hard to get proper medical supplies, food and water to those who are starving to death in impoverished countries, but fail to provide them the nourishment needed for their starving souls—the Bread of Life—the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
Matt 18.1-6 is perhaps the most grace and fearful of the challenges of leadership. In response to a question regarding greatness (i.e. leadership) in the kingdom of heaven, Jesus calls a little child to himself. He then uses this child to illustrate the humbleness needed to come to faith in Christ. After the question is answered, Christ uses the opportunity he created to emphasize the need for those who do humble come to faith in Christ like a child to be taught/lead. He gives this warning to those who would assume the role of leading these new humble Christians. “5Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, 6but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” The onus of faithful leadership is weighty.
Indeed, every individual believer will give an account for his beliefs and actions, but those who stand in leadership will be given a stricter judgment and have a weightier task of carefully choosing where, when and what to speak. May God graciously give to me the wisdom necessary for such a huge task.
Grace to You!
Allow me to muse here regarding the burden I feel as one who has accepted a certain level of leadership in the evangelical world, much lesser than the likes of Steve Camp or the men he calls out in his article. Even less than my own Senior Pastor, however, a certain level of influence I do have and thus the burden is upon me properly exercise that influence.
Three passages come to my mind, so allow me to briefly comment on each.
James 3.1-2 speaks of leadership in terms of ones role as a communicator. “1Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2For we all stumble in many ways, and if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body.” (ESV) Here we see the challenge of leadership to be one of controlling our tongue. The text goes on to emphasize the untamableness of the Herhuman tongue. The power and greatness of the spoken word ios referred to as a bit in horse’s mouth, a rudder on a ship, a small spark that ignites a devastating forest fire, and a wild beast. The context is clear, for in verse 13 James continues speaking of leadership and maturity in the area of wisdom. Therefore, one of the great challenges of leadership (i.e. “teaching”) is to be careful what you say and when and how you say it. As evangelical leaders, we must be unquestionably clear on, above all else, the heart of the gospel. Our tongues cannot spill forth words of praise for a man who teaches such heresies as papal infallibility and grace received from the Treasury of Merit dolled out in accordance to penance and yet speak of grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. As James 3.11-12 says “11 Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? 12Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water.” Clear, bold challenge for teachers/leaders to speak clearly the gospel.
2 Timothy 1.8-14 is Paul’s exhortation to Timothy to guard with great diligence the gospel that has been entrusted to him. “(8) Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God… (14) By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you.” (ESV) There is in Scripture an overwhelming and oft repeated call for leaders to contend earnestly for the faith. This is the repeated theme throughout the pastoral epistles of Paul, as well as the overarching theme of Christian ministry in general. A leader can do a lot of things well, but if you fail to stand firmly for the doctrines of grace, you fail your role as a spiritual leader. As Steve Camp so aptly remarked, “it doesn’t matter if we work hard to get proper medical supplies, food and water to those who are starving to death in impoverished countries, but fail to provide them the nourishment needed for their starving souls—the Bread of Life—the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
Matt 18.1-6 is perhaps the most grace and fearful of the challenges of leadership. In response to a question regarding greatness (i.e. leadership) in the kingdom of heaven, Jesus calls a little child to himself. He then uses this child to illustrate the humbleness needed to come to faith in Christ. After the question is answered, Christ uses the opportunity he created to emphasize the need for those who do humble come to faith in Christ like a child to be taught/lead. He gives this warning to those who would assume the role of leading these new humble Christians. “5Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, 6but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” The onus of faithful leadership is weighty.
Indeed, every individual believer will give an account for his beliefs and actions, but those who stand in leadership will be given a stricter judgment and have a weightier task of carefully choosing where, when and what to speak. May God graciously give to me the wisdom necessary for such a huge task.
Grace to You!
Thursday, April 21, 2005
Semi-pelagian Catechism
**********
EDITOR'S NOTE: The tongue-in-cheek catechism below was clearly written by a covenant minded Presbyterian, hence the jokes about Baptism. But it is still humorous. Don't take it too seriously, have some fun!
**********
WARNING! If you think you might be able to do something worthy of earning heaven, you might be a bit offended... but read on anyway!
The Semi-Pelagian Narrower CatechismThe Semi-Pelagian Narrower Catechism
1. Q: What is the chief end of each individual Christian?
A: Each individual Christian's chief end is to get saved. This is the first and great commandment.
2. Q: And what is the second great commandment?
A: The second, which is like unto it, is to get as many others saved as he can.
3. Q: What one work is required of thee for thy salvation?
A: It is required of me for my salvation that I make a Decision for Christ, which meaneth to accept Him into my heart to be my personal lord'n'saviour
4. Q: At what time must thou perform this work?
A: I must perform this work at such time as I have reached the Age of Accountability.
5. Q: At what time wilt thou have reached this Age?
A: That is a trick question. In order to determine this time, my mind must needs be sharper than any two-edged sword, able to pierce even to the division of bone and marrow; for, alas, the Age of Accountability is different for each individual, and is thus unknowable.
6. Q: By what means is a Decision for Christ made?
A: A Decision for Christ is made, not according to His own purpose and grace which was given to me in Christ Jesus before the world began, but according to the exercise of my own Free Will in saying the Sinner's Prayer in my own words.
7. Q: If it be true then that man is responsible for this Decision, how then can God be sovereign?
A: He cannot be. God sovereignly chose not to be sovereign, and is therefore dependent upon me to come to Him for salvation. He standeth outside the door of my heart, forlornly knocking, until such time as I Decide to let Him in.
8. Q: How then can we make such a Decision, seeing that the Scripture saith, we are dead in our trespasses and sins?
A: By this the Scripture meaneth, not that we are dead, but only that we are sick or injured in them.
9. Q: What is the assurance of thy salvation?
A: The assurance of thy salvation is, that I know the date on which I prayed the Sinner's Prayer, and have duly written this date on an official Decision card.
10. Q: What is thy story? What is thy song?
A: Praising my Savior all the day long.
11. Q: You ask me how I know he lives?
A: He lives within my heart.
12. Q: And what else hast thou got in thine heart?
A: I've got the joy, joy, joy, joy down in my heart.
13. Q: Where??
A: Down in my heart!
14. Q: Where???
A: Down in my heart!!
15. Q: What witness aid hath been given us as a technique by which we may win souls?
A: The tract known commonly as the Four Spiritual Laws, is the chief aid whereby we may win souls.
16. Q: What doth this tract principally teach?
A: The Four Spiritual Laws principally teach, that God's entire plan for history and the universe centereth on me, and that I am powerful enough to thwart His divine purpose if I refuse to let Him pursue His Wonderful Plan for my life.
17. Q: What supplementary technique is given by which we may win souls?
A: The technique of giving our own Personal Testimony, in the which we must always be ready to give an answer concerning the years we spent in vanity and pride, and the wretched vices in which we wallowed all our lives untilthe day we got saved.
18. Q: I'm so happy, what's the reason why?
A: Jesus took my burden all away!
19. Q: What are the means given whereby we may save large crowds of souls in a spectacular manner?
A: Such a spectacle is accomplished by means of well-publicized Crusades and Revivals which (in order that none may be loath to attend) are best conducted anywhere else but in a Church.
20. Q: Am I a soldier of the Cross?
A: I am a soldier of the Cross if I join Campus Crusade, Boys' Brigade, the Salvation Army, or the Wheaton Crusaders; of if I put on the helmet of Dispensationalism, the breastplate of Pietism, the shield of Tribulationism, and the sword of Zionism, having my feet shod with the gospel of Arminianism.
21. Q: Who is your boss?
A: My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
22. Q: Hath God predestined vessels of wrath to Hell?
A: God hath never performed such an omnipotent act, for any such thing would not reflect His primary attribute, which is Niceness.
23. Q: What is sanctification?
A: Sanctification is the work of my free Will, whereby I am renewed by having my Daily Quiet Time.
24. Q: What rule hath God for our direction in prayer?
A: The rule that we must bow our hands, close our heads, and fold our eyes.
25. Q: What doth the Lord's Prayer teach us?
A: The Lord's Prayer teacheth us that we must never memorize a prayer, or use one that hath been written down.
26. Q: What's the book for thee?
A: The B-I-B-L-E.
27. Q: Which are among the first books which a Christian should read to his soul's health?
A: Among the first books which a Christian should read are the books of Daniel and Revelation, and The Late Great Planet Earth.
28. Q: Who is on the Lord's side?
A: He who doth support whatsoever is done by the nation of Israel, and who doth renounce the world, the flesh, and the Catholic Church.
29. Q: What are the seven deadly sins?
A: The seven deadly sins are smoking, drinking, dancing, card-playing, movie-going, baptizing babies, and having any creed but Christ.
30. Q: What is a sacrament?
A: A sacrament is an insidious invention devised by the Catholic Church whereby men are drawn into idolatry.
31. Q: What is the Lord's Supper?
A: The Lord's Supper is a dispensing of saltines and grape juice, in the which we remember Christ's command to pretend that they are His body and blood.
32. Q: What is baptism?
A: Baptism is the act whereby, by the performance of something that seems quite silly in front of everyone, I prove that I really, really mean it.
33. Q: What is the Church?
A: The Church is the tiny minority of individuals living at this time who have Jesus in their hearts, and who come together once a week for a sermon, fellowship and donuts.
34. Q: What is the office of the keys?
A: The office of the keys is that office held by the custodian.
35. Q: What meaneth "The Priesthood Of All Believers"?
A: The Priesthood Of All Believers meaneth that there exists no authority in the Church, as that falsely thought to be held by elders, presbyters, deacons, and bishops, but that each individual Christian acts as his own authority in all matters pertaining to the faith.
36. Q: Who is the Holy Spirit?
A: The Holy Spirit is a gentleman Who would never barge in.
37. Q: How long hath the Holy Spirit been at work?
A: The Holy Spirit hath been at work for more than a century: expressly, since the nineteenth-century Revitalization brought about by traveling Evangelists carrying tents across America.
38. Q: When will be the "Last Days" of which the Bible speaketh?
A: The "Last Days" are these days in which we are now living, in which the Antichrist, the Beast, and the Thief in the Night shall most certainly appear.
39. Q: What is the name of the event by which Christians will escape these dreadful entities?
A: The event commonly known as the Rapture, in the which it is our Blessed Hope that all cars driven by Christians will suddenly have no drivers.
40. Q: When is Jesus coming again?
A: Maybe morning, maybe noon, maybe evening, and maybe soon.
41. Q: When the roll, roll, roll, is called up yonder, where will you be?
A: There.
42. Q: Hallelu, hallelu, hallelu, hallelujah!
A: Praise ye the Lord!
43. Q: Praise ye the Lord!
A: Hallelujah!
44. Q: Where will we meet again?
A: Here, there, or in the air.
45. Q: Can I hear an Ay-men?
A: Ay-men.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The tongue-in-cheek catechism below was clearly written by a covenant minded Presbyterian, hence the jokes about Baptism. But it is still humorous. Don't take it too seriously, have some fun!
**********
WARNING! If you think you might be able to do something worthy of earning heaven, you might be a bit offended... but read on anyway!
The Semi-Pelagian Narrower CatechismThe Semi-Pelagian Narrower Catechism
1. Q: What is the chief end of each individual Christian?
A: Each individual Christian's chief end is to get saved. This is the first and great commandment.
2. Q: And what is the second great commandment?
A: The second, which is like unto it, is to get as many others saved as he can.
3. Q: What one work is required of thee for thy salvation?
A: It is required of me for my salvation that I make a Decision for Christ, which meaneth to accept Him into my heart to be my personal lord'n'saviour
4. Q: At what time must thou perform this work?
A: I must perform this work at such time as I have reached the Age of Accountability.
5. Q: At what time wilt thou have reached this Age?
A: That is a trick question. In order to determine this time, my mind must needs be sharper than any two-edged sword, able to pierce even to the division of bone and marrow; for, alas, the Age of Accountability is different for each individual, and is thus unknowable.
6. Q: By what means is a Decision for Christ made?
A: A Decision for Christ is made, not according to His own purpose and grace which was given to me in Christ Jesus before the world began, but according to the exercise of my own Free Will in saying the Sinner's Prayer in my own words.
7. Q: If it be true then that man is responsible for this Decision, how then can God be sovereign?
A: He cannot be. God sovereignly chose not to be sovereign, and is therefore dependent upon me to come to Him for salvation. He standeth outside the door of my heart, forlornly knocking, until such time as I Decide to let Him in.
8. Q: How then can we make such a Decision, seeing that the Scripture saith, we are dead in our trespasses and sins?
A: By this the Scripture meaneth, not that we are dead, but only that we are sick or injured in them.
9. Q: What is the assurance of thy salvation?
A: The assurance of thy salvation is, that I know the date on which I prayed the Sinner's Prayer, and have duly written this date on an official Decision card.
10. Q: What is thy story? What is thy song?
A: Praising my Savior all the day long.
11. Q: You ask me how I know he lives?
A: He lives within my heart.
12. Q: And what else hast thou got in thine heart?
A: I've got the joy, joy, joy, joy down in my heart.
13. Q: Where??
A: Down in my heart!
14. Q: Where???
A: Down in my heart!!
15. Q: What witness aid hath been given us as a technique by which we may win souls?
A: The tract known commonly as the Four Spiritual Laws, is the chief aid whereby we may win souls.
16. Q: What doth this tract principally teach?
A: The Four Spiritual Laws principally teach, that God's entire plan for history and the universe centereth on me, and that I am powerful enough to thwart His divine purpose if I refuse to let Him pursue His Wonderful Plan for my life.
17. Q: What supplementary technique is given by which we may win souls?
A: The technique of giving our own Personal Testimony, in the which we must always be ready to give an answer concerning the years we spent in vanity and pride, and the wretched vices in which we wallowed all our lives untilthe day we got saved.
18. Q: I'm so happy, what's the reason why?
A: Jesus took my burden all away!
19. Q: What are the means given whereby we may save large crowds of souls in a spectacular manner?
A: Such a spectacle is accomplished by means of well-publicized Crusades and Revivals which (in order that none may be loath to attend) are best conducted anywhere else but in a Church.
20. Q: Am I a soldier of the Cross?
A: I am a soldier of the Cross if I join Campus Crusade, Boys' Brigade, the Salvation Army, or the Wheaton Crusaders; of if I put on the helmet of Dispensationalism, the breastplate of Pietism, the shield of Tribulationism, and the sword of Zionism, having my feet shod with the gospel of Arminianism.
21. Q: Who is your boss?
A: My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
22. Q: Hath God predestined vessels of wrath to Hell?
A: God hath never performed such an omnipotent act, for any such thing would not reflect His primary attribute, which is Niceness.
23. Q: What is sanctification?
A: Sanctification is the work of my free Will, whereby I am renewed by having my Daily Quiet Time.
24. Q: What rule hath God for our direction in prayer?
A: The rule that we must bow our hands, close our heads, and fold our eyes.
25. Q: What doth the Lord's Prayer teach us?
A: The Lord's Prayer teacheth us that we must never memorize a prayer, or use one that hath been written down.
26. Q: What's the book for thee?
A: The B-I-B-L-E.
27. Q: Which are among the first books which a Christian should read to his soul's health?
A: Among the first books which a Christian should read are the books of Daniel and Revelation, and The Late Great Planet Earth.
28. Q: Who is on the Lord's side?
A: He who doth support whatsoever is done by the nation of Israel, and who doth renounce the world, the flesh, and the Catholic Church.
29. Q: What are the seven deadly sins?
A: The seven deadly sins are smoking, drinking, dancing, card-playing, movie-going, baptizing babies, and having any creed but Christ.
30. Q: What is a sacrament?
A: A sacrament is an insidious invention devised by the Catholic Church whereby men are drawn into idolatry.
31. Q: What is the Lord's Supper?
A: The Lord's Supper is a dispensing of saltines and grape juice, in the which we remember Christ's command to pretend that they are His body and blood.
32. Q: What is baptism?
A: Baptism is the act whereby, by the performance of something that seems quite silly in front of everyone, I prove that I really, really mean it.
33. Q: What is the Church?
A: The Church is the tiny minority of individuals living at this time who have Jesus in their hearts, and who come together once a week for a sermon, fellowship and donuts.
34. Q: What is the office of the keys?
A: The office of the keys is that office held by the custodian.
35. Q: What meaneth "The Priesthood Of All Believers"?
A: The Priesthood Of All Believers meaneth that there exists no authority in the Church, as that falsely thought to be held by elders, presbyters, deacons, and bishops, but that each individual Christian acts as his own authority in all matters pertaining to the faith.
36. Q: Who is the Holy Spirit?
A: The Holy Spirit is a gentleman Who would never barge in.
37. Q: How long hath the Holy Spirit been at work?
A: The Holy Spirit hath been at work for more than a century: expressly, since the nineteenth-century Revitalization brought about by traveling Evangelists carrying tents across America.
38. Q: When will be the "Last Days" of which the Bible speaketh?
A: The "Last Days" are these days in which we are now living, in which the Antichrist, the Beast, and the Thief in the Night shall most certainly appear.
39. Q: What is the name of the event by which Christians will escape these dreadful entities?
A: The event commonly known as the Rapture, in the which it is our Blessed Hope that all cars driven by Christians will suddenly have no drivers.
40. Q: When is Jesus coming again?
A: Maybe morning, maybe noon, maybe evening, and maybe soon.
41. Q: When the roll, roll, roll, is called up yonder, where will you be?
A: There.
42. Q: Hallelu, hallelu, hallelu, hallelujah!
A: Praise ye the Lord!
43. Q: Praise ye the Lord!
A: Hallelujah!
44. Q: Where will we meet again?
A: Here, there, or in the air.
45. Q: Can I hear an Ay-men?
A: Ay-men.
WHY DO I FEEL THE NEED TO DEFEND POPE BENEDICT XVI
The pope is a heretic. Catholic theology is heretical. They deny the sufficiency of the perfect sacrifice of Christ. The Scriptures calls for this kind of heresy to be an anathema. Why do I feel the need to go to the defense of Pope Benedict XVI?
It is amazing, though not surprising, the extremely negative, though guarded, opinions set forth regarding the elevation of Cardinal Ratzinger to the papacy on the editorial pages of the elite American media. A survey of April 20 editorials alone was telling. The New York Times had five articles focused on Benedict XVI. Four had extremely negative headlines and bias. They called him “conservative” eighteen times. 18! The Los Angeles Times said of Ratzinger, “serving as the pope's doctrinal enforcer... he has been a largely polarizing force in the church, coming down hard on Catholic leaders who sought social justice in Latin America or dissented from the Vatican in their teachings.” How dare the man charged with defending Catholic orthodoxy actually defend Catholic orthodoxy! What a… a… CONSERVATIVE. As if they couldn’t come up with a worse term. The Washington Post said, “we hope he'll weigh the possible benefits of new medical technologies, and not dismiss them out of hand,” referring to Ratzinger's long held argument against reproductive technology, human cloning, and stem cell research. The Boston Globe lamented the fact the Benedict XVI would continue the hard line regarding priestly celibacy and ordination of women, hinting that these were the chief reasons for the decline of the faithful American Catholics. Maureen Dowd, the ever honest and fair columnist (Gag me!) made a concerted effort to point out Ratzinger’s involvement in the Hitler Youth organization as a young teenager in Bavaria, Germany. She conveniently failed, however, to mention that in Bavaria participation was compulsory and that Ratzinger deserted the Nazi Army after being drafted at age 16. But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of your bias, Maureen, that has never stopped you before!
Again, why am I rushing to the defense of a Catholic heretic? The elite, mainstream media will continue to disparage anyone with conviction. Anyone who has the audacity to claim to know a certain absolute truth will be marginalized and categorized as an extremist. Pope Benedict XVI is the not the first and will certainly not be the last to be called an extremist, anti-intellectual, right-wing, conservative, simply because he holds to the existence of absolute truth. Look at Rev. Jerry Falwell. He is frequently demonized for his public stance on conservative, biblical morality. Admittedly, his methods are often unnecessarily acerbic, however, his conviction of the absolute authority of the Word of God is what brings him the bulk of his criticism.
Scripture reminds us to preach the word in season and out of season, warning that people will not put up with sound doctrine, but rather gather teachers that feed their passions. Today the passions of Americans include promiscuity, the elevated role of women to leadership positions, denominational and even religious ecumenism and many others. Passions are what drive us. People gather unto themselves teachers that will tell them what they want to hear and make them feel good. Anyone who place authority outside of the individual passions of the people will be marginalized and demonized.
Any evangelical preacher worth his salt will understand what I am saying. If people have never been offended by the preaching of the word under your ministry, you are not unashamedly preaching the gospel. The cross and the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ alone offends the unbeliever, and many so-called believers as well.
Pope Benedict XVI will continue to be categorized as a polarizing figure. He will be cast as an un-enlightened old-school conservative. But remember, the “orthodoxy” that makes Benedict XVI such a polarizing figure is heresy. He holds that Mary is the Co-Repemptrix, the Church (meaning the papacy) is absolutely authoritative and the Priest, as a papal representative, can absolve the sin of the faithful who do proper penance.
We must continue to stand against the heresy of Romanism and guard our people from the wolves that present themselves in the sheep’s wool. However, we must be reminded from the elite media attention that Benedict is getting, we will be challenged, even demonized, when we stand for the absolute truth of God’s Word.
Stand firm my friends, the days are evil.
Grace to You!
It is amazing, though not surprising, the extremely negative, though guarded, opinions set forth regarding the elevation of Cardinal Ratzinger to the papacy on the editorial pages of the elite American media. A survey of April 20 editorials alone was telling. The New York Times had five articles focused on Benedict XVI. Four had extremely negative headlines and bias. They called him “conservative” eighteen times. 18! The Los Angeles Times said of Ratzinger, “serving as the pope's doctrinal enforcer... he has been a largely polarizing force in the church, coming down hard on Catholic leaders who sought social justice in Latin America or dissented from the Vatican in their teachings.” How dare the man charged with defending Catholic orthodoxy actually defend Catholic orthodoxy! What a… a… CONSERVATIVE. As if they couldn’t come up with a worse term. The Washington Post said, “we hope he'll weigh the possible benefits of new medical technologies, and not dismiss them out of hand,” referring to Ratzinger's long held argument against reproductive technology, human cloning, and stem cell research. The Boston Globe lamented the fact the Benedict XVI would continue the hard line regarding priestly celibacy and ordination of women, hinting that these were the chief reasons for the decline of the faithful American Catholics. Maureen Dowd, the ever honest and fair columnist (Gag me!) made a concerted effort to point out Ratzinger’s involvement in the Hitler Youth organization as a young teenager in Bavaria, Germany. She conveniently failed, however, to mention that in Bavaria participation was compulsory and that Ratzinger deserted the Nazi Army after being drafted at age 16. But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of your bias, Maureen, that has never stopped you before!
Again, why am I rushing to the defense of a Catholic heretic? The elite, mainstream media will continue to disparage anyone with conviction. Anyone who has the audacity to claim to know a certain absolute truth will be marginalized and categorized as an extremist. Pope Benedict XVI is the not the first and will certainly not be the last to be called an extremist, anti-intellectual, right-wing, conservative, simply because he holds to the existence of absolute truth. Look at Rev. Jerry Falwell. He is frequently demonized for his public stance on conservative, biblical morality. Admittedly, his methods are often unnecessarily acerbic, however, his conviction of the absolute authority of the Word of God is what brings him the bulk of his criticism.
Scripture reminds us to preach the word in season and out of season, warning that people will not put up with sound doctrine, but rather gather teachers that feed their passions. Today the passions of Americans include promiscuity, the elevated role of women to leadership positions, denominational and even religious ecumenism and many others. Passions are what drive us. People gather unto themselves teachers that will tell them what they want to hear and make them feel good. Anyone who place authority outside of the individual passions of the people will be marginalized and demonized.
Any evangelical preacher worth his salt will understand what I am saying. If people have never been offended by the preaching of the word under your ministry, you are not unashamedly preaching the gospel. The cross and the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ alone offends the unbeliever, and many so-called believers as well.
Pope Benedict XVI will continue to be categorized as a polarizing figure. He will be cast as an un-enlightened old-school conservative. But remember, the “orthodoxy” that makes Benedict XVI such a polarizing figure is heresy. He holds that Mary is the Co-Repemptrix, the Church (meaning the papacy) is absolutely authoritative and the Priest, as a papal representative, can absolve the sin of the faithful who do proper penance.
We must continue to stand against the heresy of Romanism and guard our people from the wolves that present themselves in the sheep’s wool. However, we must be reminded from the elite media attention that Benedict is getting, we will be challenged, even demonized, when we stand for the absolute truth of God’s Word.
Stand firm my friends, the days are evil.
Grace to You!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)