.

Christmas Triumphant

2010-12-08T06:25:00.000-08:00

By Jill Carattini

Triumph, this time of year, seems to come in many shades of success. Try as we may to keep a perspective of readiness for the coming of Christ, many of us feel most ready for Christmas when we have successfully beat every shipping deadline and reciprocated every Christmas card. Victories that we might otherwise find slight seem to become great feats during the holidays—finding a parking spot, getting the last box of Christmas lights in stock, beating the mailman to the mailbox. Other battles continue to brew over the accepting or rejecting of manger scenes, messiahs, and "Merry Christmases" in the face of less specific holiday tales and greetings. Though we may oscillate between who or what we are fighting against—the clock, the perfect hostess, the agendas of others—we seem to work toward Christmas one small feat at a time.

But as I sang the lyrics to a song during the lighting of the second Advent candle, I was silenced by the image of a victory I need do nothing but join.
Joyful, all ye nations rise,
Join the triumph of the skies;
With th'angelic host proclaim,
"Christ is born in Bethlehem!"

The triumph Christians join as we celebrate Christmas is far bigger than our best Christmases and more real than our worst. There are generations of believers offering the same cries of victory shouted on the very first Christmas night: Christ was born! God came near. God is with us! Christ's birth was orchestrated at the hands of God long before the inn would be full or the shepherds would be in their fields by night, long before my traditions would seem etched in stone, or my culture would attempt to remove the Nativity from the public arena.

While there are perhaps some victories to rightfully seek this season, many others can likely be forsaken; for the triumph of a God who came near to bridge a separation forged long ago in the garden is a victory already won. The triumph Christians ask the world to join as we celebrate Christ's birth is a triumph known from the beginning, foreseen by the prophets, heralded by John the Baptist, and cherished by witnesses whose voices still cry out the incredible news of the Christmas story:
"And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.'
Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

'Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests.'"

Remembering Thanks

2010-11-23T08:41:00.000-08:00

By Margaret Manning

Most of us set off on the journey of life looking for a larger purpose, a grand plan, or the achievement of goals that have been set out for us like sign-markers on the road. In Christian circles, the language of "finding God's will for one's life" often serves as the destination on the road map for life's journey.

For many of us, attempting to find these sign-markers and just head in the direction that the map provides fills our lives with struggle and often with anxiety. Is my life following the right path? Did I make the right decision back there? Should I have turned to the right or to the left at that crossing? The publishing industry is filled with books to help us interpret life's maps. Indeed, bookshelves are filled with books on finding one's true purpose, and given the immense selection of writings, it can make a person feel that finding that destination is a complicated and difficult journey.

So it might surprise many to find a simple, straight path carved out in a letter to a young church. The apostle Paul cleared the way through the mire of finding God's will by reminding this new community to "give thanks in all things, for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 5:18). On the surface, this seems too easy and too simple to encompass something as deep and as wide as the grand narrative for one's life. And yet, praise and thanksgiving have always been the markers of a people who walked in the will the Lord, even those who struggled with circumstances in which we would be stretched to find any reason for praise.

For Paul, who was thoroughly steeped in the traditions of the Hebrews, the concept of thanksgiving was explicitly tied to remembering all that God had done on behalf of his people. The people are told to remember the God who "brought them out of the land of Egypt" and to remember "the days of old," when the Lord found them in a desert land and the howling waste of a wilderness. He encircled them, He cared for them, He guarded them as the pupil of his eye (Deuteronomy 5:15; 32:7-12). The psalmists remind the people to "remember that God was their rock, and the Most High God their Redeemer" (Psalm 78:35), and Job cries out in defiant praise after losing everything, "The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord" (Job 1:21).

A spirit of thanksgiving marked the earliest followers of Jesus as well. These early believers were so overjoyed at the Spirit's work among them that they shared meals, their property and possessions, and were continually praising God. Paul exhorted the Philippian Christians to offer their prayers and supplications with thanksgiving and the endless song around the throne of heaven in Revelation sounds the chorus for blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever. Indeed, it is the will of God, from beginning to end, for us to give thanks and praise.

The declaration, then, that it is God's big plan and indeed God's will for people to give thanks is a helpful reminder especially when life presents many challenges and the way ahead seems unclear. The act of thanksgiving calls every person to remember all that has gone before, all that has led to this point in life, and all the faithful people who have accompanied one on life's journey. Indeed, it is God's will for God's people because when we give thanks there is no room for jealousy of what others have, no room for complaining about what we lack. In times of deepest sorrow, there is a joy that rises up on the heart when praise comes, even when accompanied with tears. To live with thanksgiving makes the heart full of gladness, which overflows our lives and spills out into acts of kindness and generosity. When we are grateful, we cannot help but share our gratitude. And this is the will of God for the lives of those who want to follow.

It may be challenging to live into God's will by giving thanks in everything, every day of the year. Yet our lives may just be set on course by a heart filled with praise.

The Daughter of the King

2010-11-21T08:18:00.001-08:00

By BBJ

All right. Tell me this is not funny. I'll post the picture and links later, when I get to a computer that will let me.

The Israel Museum in Jerusalem has a gift shop that the Balabusta occasionally browses and drools over. Some of their stuff is either replicas of artifacts in the collection, or adaptations of them.

One collection object which appears in a number of forms in the shop, as necklace, earrings, bracelet, letter opener, etc. is a small seal from the period of the kings. It features a lyre, and is inscribed for "Ma'adana the king's daughter".

Think about it. "Ma'adana". Say it quickly. A lyre. A musical instrument, representing this woman, Ma'adana. The daughter of the king. Perhaps a secular title, but perhaps also a mystical one. Ma'adana, the musical mystic.

People, do you realize the spiritual importance of this? Madonna is not just an annoying celebrity kabbalist. She's a reincarnated Judean princess annoying celebrity kabbalist. And this is just the past life I've been able to track down. How many times have we been through this already, people? HOW MANY?

Isn't there some ceremony featuring black candles and a shofar that could put a stop to this? I'd chip in for the chickens.

Mere and Mirror

2010-11-13T18:05:00.000-08:00

By Matt Schmucker

Americans have a nasty addiction to success. Still
worse, success seems only to be defined as growth
(i.e. getting bigger and having more). In our addiction,
we want to measure our growth with better attendance,
more programs and products. We see this in business,
schools and churches.

It is the wise man who knows when to say enough is
enough. Growth is not always good. Growth can
distract and deplete.

Last Saturday night, I was asked to "leave a charge" with
the remaining board members and faculty of my children's
school as I had come to the end of my term serving on the
board.

I charged them to remain "mere". It is defined as "being
no more or better than what is specified". Do not become
laden with programs. Do not bend to the pressures for
more. Stay focused on the work specified.

If we can do this, we will mirror our Savior's life and work.
Jesus was not about to accumulate things in this world
or fight a war that was not his. He was about His Father's
work. And only His Father's work.

Jesus said, "My Father is always at His work to this very
day, and I too am working" (John 5:17).

He also said, "As long as it is day, we must do the work
of Him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can
work" (John 9:4).

So as the pressure comes to adopt this or that program,
hire this or that specialist, attend this or that meeting,
consider the charge to remain "mere" and in so doing
"mirror" the One you serve.

Our Father, the Weaver

2010-10-30T20:03:00.000-07:00

By Ravi Zacharias

Some years ago, I was visiting a place known for making the best wedding saris in the world. They were the producers of saris rich in gold and silver threads, resplendent with an array of colors. With such intricacy of product, I expected to see some elaborate system of machines that would boggle the mind in production. But this image could not have been farther from the real scene. Each sari was made individually by a father and son team. The father sat above the son on a platform, surrounded by several spools of thread that he would gather into his fingers.

The son had only one task. At a nod from his father, he would move the shuttle from one side to the other and back again. This would then be repeated for hundreds of hours, until a magnificent pattern began to emerge. The son certainly had the easier task. He was only to move at the father's nod. But making use of these efforts, the father was working to an intricate end. All along, he had the design in his mind and was bringing the right threads together.

The more I reflect on my own life and study the lives of others, I am fascinated to see the design God has for each one of us individually, if we would only respond.

All through our days, little reminders show the threads that God has woven into our lives. Allow me to share a story from my own experience. As one searching for meaning in the throes of a turbulent adolescence, I found myself on a hospital bed from an attempted suicide. It was there that I was read the 14th chapter of John's Gospel.

My attention was fully captured by the part where Jesus says to his disciples: "Because I live, you shall live also" (John 14:19). I turned my life over to Christ that day, committing my pains, struggles, and pursuits to his able hands.

Almost 30 years to the day after this decision, my wife and I were visiting India and decided to visit my grandmother's grave. With the help of a gardener we walked through the accumulated weeds and rubble until we found the stone marking her grave.

With his bucket of water and a small brush, the gardener cleared off the years of caked-on dirt. To our utter surprise, under her name, a verse gradually appeared. My wife clasped my hand and said, "Look at the verse!"

It read: "Because I live, you shall live also."

A purposeful design emerges when the Father weaves a pattern from what to us may often seem disparate threads. Even today, if you will stop and attend to it, you will see that God is seeking to weave a beautiful tapestry in your life.

The Sheep Gate

2010-10-22T17:10:00.000-07:00

"Shepherd" is not a career choice you often hear children dreaming about. Tending sheep is not as adventurous as being an astronaut or as glamorous as being a movie star. But to one small child in a Sunday school classroom, "shepherd" seemed the most logical answer. What do you want to be when you grow up? She wanted to be a shepherd because "Jesus is good at it and it makes him happy." This, I thought self-assuredly, was a child who was paying attention in my class.

Later, as I put the crayons back in the cupboard and turned to get the kids in line for church, my eyes caught the picture that hung on the wall behind me each week. It was one of Jesus, holding a lamb in his arms, smiling.

The Christian narrative is full of images of sheep and shepherding. The ancient prophet writes of God, "He tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young" (40:11). The gospel writer notes similarly of Christ, "When Jesus saw the crowds, he had compassion on them because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd" (Matthew 9:36). Hearing such descriptions, perhaps you recollect images of a Good Shepherd similar to the painting in my Sunday school classroom: Jesus standing peacefully among his flock, keeping watch and taking care. It is an image not far from some of those carefully painted in well-told stories: "The LORD is my shepherd I shall not be in want. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters, he restores my soul" (23:1-3).

When Jesus stood among crowds and spoke of sheep, familiar images of fields and grazing sheep would have come to the minds of his hearers as well. For some, the biblical images of God gathering lambs into his arms would have crossed their minds. But these wouldn't have been the only images that came to mind, particularly for those who heard Jesus in Jerusalem. "My sheep listen to my voice," he said, "I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand" (John 10:27-28).

Standing in the temple of Jerusalem, preaching to worshipers and religious leaders, these words of Jesus about sheep would have evoked a bold awareness of sounds and activities all around them. At tables nearby, bleating sheep were being sold and carried further into the temple, where they were led through a door to the place of sacrifice. Far from the peaceful setting of a pasture, Jesus spoke of sheep in the place where they were about to be slaughtered. Unlike the shepherd among passive lambs in many of our pictures, tending these sheep requires something more than a gentle hand and a watchful eye. These sheep needed to be saved.

So it is quite telling that Jesus first identifies himself, not as the Good Shepherd, but as the gate for the sheep. In the ancient walls of Jerusalem, there was a gate on the north of the city, by which animals were brought in from the countryside for sacrifice. It was called the Sheep Gate. Once inside the city and within the temple courts, there was only one door where the sheep went in, and no lamb ever came back out after entering the temple. They traveled in only one direction, and there they were sacrificed for the sins of men and women. For first-century hearers of Jesus's words about sheep, such knowledge added to the shock of Christ's words: "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep.... I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture" (John 10:7,9).

In the temple filled with sheep on their way towards death, Jesus declared there was a way out: "I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. I am the Good Shepherd" (John 10:11).

Like the child in my Sunday school class, I readily imagine the Good Shepherd delights in the task of caring for his flock. He goes willingly to search for the one that has gone astray. He gently holds us in his arms and guides us through valleys and beside still waters. He calls us by name and smiles at our recognition of his voice.

But he also breaks into courtyards where there is no longer hope. He refuses to cower through the course of our rescue, though he is accosted by our sin and humiliated by our denials. He provides a way, though it costs him everything. He is the Good Shepherd who lays down his life, so that even one lamb can get away.

The Cost of Distraction

2010-10-20T13:53:00.000-07:00

By Margaret Manning

"Being unable to cure death, wretchedness, and ignorance men have decided, in order to be happy, not to think about such things."

Though writing hundreds of years ago, Blaise Pascal captured the spirit of our present age prophetically and profoundly. With the reality of suffering and the specter of death facing us all, most seek lives of distraction. Whether or not we recognize that the fear of death is an underlying, albeit unconscious, motivation, we nevertheless recognize that our lives are filled with distractions. Whether it is in the juggling of priorities, the relentless busyness of our age, or perpetual media noise, our lives are so full that we rarely give ourselves space or time to reflect. Particularly in Western societies, we fill our lives with mindless consumption that numbs us to the eventuality of our mortal condition and our finitude. The advertising industry is not unaware of our propensity to consumptive distraction. Marketers spent over 295 billion dollars in total media advertising in 2007. Perhaps we mistakenly assume that our vitality is inextricably bound up in our ability to consume.

It is easy to understand how our fear of death and suffering would compel human beings to live lives of distraction. Yet, the cost of that distraction is a pervasive and deadening apathy—apathy not simply as the inability to care about anything deeply, but the diminishment for engagement that comes from caring about the wrong things. Kathleen Norris laments:

"It is indeed apathy's world when we have so many choices that we grow indifferent to them even as we hunger for still more novelty. We discard real relationships in favor of virtual ones and scarcely notice that being overly concerned with the thread count of cotton sheets and the exotic ingredients of gourmet meals can render us less able to care about those who scrounge for food and have no bed but the streets."

Sadly, our inability to recognize our own mortality and to live our lives in light of the fact that we will die leads to the diminishment of our ability to genuinely care for others—because our care, by its very nature, will demand our willingness to suffer, and to lose our lives for someone else. The more we love, the more we open ourselves up to vulnerability and the possibility of pain. And yet, if we choose against loving engagement, we are left with a diminished and distracted life.

The ancient Hebrew poets, while meditating on the brevity of life, prayed, "So teach us to number our days that we may present to you a heart of wisdom" (Psalm 90:12). It was the inevitability of death that motivated this prayer for wisdom for living. This was a wisdom that didn't try to hide from the realities of life—be they joys or sorrows—but rather sought to keep finitude ever before it. Indeed the poem ends with a cry for God to "confirm the work of our hands." Numbering life's days led to meaningful engagement in work—and this was the mark of wisdom.

Being mindful of our own deaths sadly leads some to distraction; yet it can lead others to wise engagement. Jesus, himself, faced his own death with intention and purpose as he walked the way of the cross, not only up the hill to Golgotha, but also as he offered his life in loving service to those around him. "I am the Good Shepherd and I lay down my life for the sheep... No one has taken it away from me, but I lay it down on my own initiative." The way of wisdom demonstrated by the life of Jesus calls us to engage our mortality as a catalyst for purposeful living.

While following Jesus insists on our laying down our lives in his service, it can be done in the hope that abundant life is truly possible even in the darkest of places. For the one who laid his life down is the one who was raised. He is the one who declared, "I am the resurrection and the life; the one who believes in me will live even though he dies."

Potter books: Wicked witchcraft?

2010-10-12T19:43:00.000-07:00

By Julie Foster

As kids around the world anxiously await the fall opening of Warner Bros.' film "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," an occult expert has released a documentary video, "Harry Potter: Witchcraft Repackaged, Making Evil Look Innocent," claiming the Harry Potter phenomenon is incompatibile with Christianity.

With four books of the seven-book series published since 1999, Harry Potter's popularity has skyrocketed. The young character is the creation of British author J.K. Rowling, who is expected to finish the fifth installment of the series next year. Now, with the first of several feature-film adaptations of the children's story set to open on Nov. 16, Harry Potter fever has started heating up again.

The books made headlines in the United States in 1999, after the first Harry Potter installment was released stateside. Shortly thereafter, many parents and religious groups expressed concern that the story should not be taken lightly as mere children's fantasy literature. Critics disapprove of the books' presentation of the occult as a positive, virtuous lifestyle.

To understand the controversy surrounding the books, it is necessary to review their content. While not all of the characters and story lines may be explored in this report, a few key elements should be discussed.

Set in England, the books chronicle the life of young Harry Potter, whose wizard parents were killed by the evil Lord Voldemort. Because Harry escaped the death curse of Voldemort, he was given a mark on his forehead – a lightening bolt. On his 11th birthday, Harry receives an invitation to the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Each of the four published books represents a year at Hogwarts.

Voldemort is a non-physical "dark magic" being who inhabits the bodies of various characters in the books. Perhaps most notably, Voldemort possesses Quirrell, Hogwarts' "Defense Against the Dark Arts" teacher.

Voldemort taught Quirrell, "There is no good and evil; there is only power, and those too weak to seek it."

The evil lord made Quirrell his slave and could be seen on the back of the teacher's head, which Quirrell covered with a turban. Book one explains this phenomenon:
Where there should have been a back to Quirrels head, there was a face, the most terrible face Harry had ever seen. It was chalk white with glaring red eyes and slits for nostrils, like a snake.

"See what I have become?" the face said. "Mere shadow and vapor. I have form only when I can share another's body but there have always been those willing to let me into their hearts and minds. Unicorn blood has strengthened me these past weeks. Once I have the Elixir of Life, I will be able to create a body of my own. "

Voldemort, according to Hogwarts' Headmaster Albus Dumbledore, "is looking for another body to share. not being truly alive, he cannot be killed." When Voldemort dispossessed Quirrell, the teacher died.

Rowling has said publicly that she intentionally created the graphic evil characters and scenes in her wildly popular series.

"I made a very conscious decision right at the beginning that I was writing about someone evil, and I wasn't going to tell a lie. I wasn't going to pretend that an evil person is a paper cutout and no one really gets hurt. OK, if you're writing about evil, I think generally you have a responsibility to show what that means, and that's the way I'm writing them. I think they're quite, well actually, I think they're very moral books," Rowlings told a television news program.

Many agree with the author's premise, but critics object to the use of witchcraft and wizardry in fighting evil, not to mention the book's graphic depictions of evil. Even the good wizards in Harry's world cause eyebrows to be raised in many circles. One such example is found in Headmaster Dumbledore.

Dumbledore is the one wizard Voldemort fears. In book one, the headmaster explains how his 666-year-old business partner Nicolas Flamel and Nicolas' wife, Perenelle, will die. The couple discusses with Dumbledore their eminent suicide, which will be a byproduct of their actions to stop Voldemort.

Explaining to an astonished Harry, the headmaster says, "To one as young as you, I'm sure it seems incredible, but to Nicolas and Perenelle, it really is like going to bed after a very, very long day. After all, to the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure."

There are varying degrees of opposition to the Harry Potter books, from those who choose not to allow their own children to read the series to those who would have the book banned. One woman, filmmaker and occult expert Caryl Matrisciana, focuses her efforts on explaining what she believes are the dangers of the series and how the books portray a lifestyle diametrically opposed to that of the Christian.

Matrisciana, co-founder of Jeremiah Films with her husband, Patrick Matrisciana, has spent 25 years researching the occult. A fifth-generation descendant of a British colonial family, Matrisciana was born and raised in Calcutta, India, where she was exposed to what she describes as the "black side" of Hinduism. While in India, she saw first-hand Hindu religious practices involving human blood and bones. She distinguishes the "black side" from the "everyday religious practices" of Hinduism, which involve heavy reliance on astrology for decision-making.

Upon moving to England, Matrisciana became involved in the occult – literally meaning "hidden knowledge." But the filmmaker said her deep-seated fear of the "black side" of mysticism, which she credits to her experiences in India, kept her from performing more graphic rituals. Eventually, she became a Christian and worked through the British media to raise awareness of the dangers of the occult.

Matrisciana encourages Christians in her new hour-long documentary video to take an honest look at the world children fantasize about when reading Rowling's books.

"Through Harry Potter books and audios, children as young as kindergarten age are being introduced to human sacrifice, the sucking of blood from dead animals and possession by spirit beings," the video states.

Matrisciana points to a quote from book one of the series, from which the upcoming film was produced. In chapter five, Harry finds a dead unicorn in the "Forbidden Forest."

It was a unicorn all right, and it was dead. Harry had taken one step toward it when a slithering sound made him freeze where he stood. A bush on the edge of the clearing quivered. Then, out of the shadows, a hooded figure came crawling across the ground like some stalking beast. The cloaked figure reached the unicorn, lowered its head over the wound in the animal's side, and began to drink its blood. The hooded figure raised its head and looked right at Harry – unicorn blood was dribbling down its front.

Then a pain like he'd (Harry) never felt before pierced his head; it was as though his scar were on fire.

While Matrisciana draws many symbolic parallels between Harry's world and Christianity – Voldemort's "slithering" form to that of Satan in the biblical account of creation, for example – the graphic nature of the scene is enough to turn many parents off.

Indeed, "Voldermort's agenda of cruel revenge to those who oppose him, and the ultimate physical death of Harry's friend, is carried out throughout the rest of the Harry Potter series," said Matrisciana, who has read all four books in the series.

Many parents, regardless of their faith, may not wish to have their children read about evil non-physical beings who drink the blood of animals to gain power. But the books are marketed to children ages 9-12. For Christians in particular, the acclamation given Harry Potter's world is seen as unbiblical.

In the book of Deuteronomy, one of the Bible's books of "law" in Jewish and Christian traditions, witchcraft and sorcery are specifically condemned.

Chapter 18, verses 10-14, read: "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord, and because of these detestable practices the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you. You must be blameless before the Lord your God. The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the Lord your God has not permitted you to do so."

Noted Matrisciana, "Divination and sorcery are taught in an assortment of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry classes, as is spell-casting. A medium, demon-possessed teacher prophesies a message of death in a very realistic trance state.

Spirits appear as those who died and arrive at strategic times to help Harry when he is in danger. His dead parents appear in the mirror of Harry's desire and give words of encouragement as they, too, help him in times of danger."

The video documentary details numerous similarities between the spells and magic used by Harry Potter and those used in the witchcraft of the Wiccan religion. Such striking similarity, said Matrisciana, is evidence that the author has meticulously researched Wicca and included its tenets in her children's books.

"My greatest concern is that godly fear that protects mankind from dabbling in the spirit world is being taken away from children who read these Harry Potter books.

The terrors and horrors of black magic and occult practice, rituals, ceremonies and demon possession are being normalized," she said. "Alarmingly, the Potter books are engaging in pagan discipleship, disciplining our children to spiritual alternatives and also turning them away from the biblical principles and God's protection."

Some children who read the books, often more than once, may find themselves attracted to the magical world Harry lives in, she said. In attempting to create their own spells and charms, kids may turn to other books that teach witchcraft.

Just as Christians find themselves increasingly attracted to Scripture and the things of God, dabblers in the occult become more deeply entrenched in the dark arts, remarked Matrisciana, who lived through the experience herself.

But John Monk, an editorial writer for The State in Columbia, S.C., said the claim that Harry Potter lures children into the occult is "poppycock."

"You might as well say 'Gone With The Wind' teaches young readers to be slave owners, or 'Treasure Island' entices children to be pirates, or 'Peter Pan' urges children to run away from home," Monk wrote in a an October 1999 editorial, when anti-Potter sentiments began heating up.

Contrary to opponents' claims, "The Potter books promote – through their characters – friendship, love, bravery, self-reliance, the importance of family and tolerance toward those different from us. They depict the quest for knowledge, wisdom and right action – the universal journey every human takes. The books condemn bullies, falsity, rudeness, greed and Nazi-like tendencies to denigrate and hurt those who aren't like us," he continued.

Monk acknowledges Rowling's raw depiction of evil, and compares the characters to those in the Bible.

Rowling's characters, he wrote, "struggle within themselves. But no worthwhile book, the Bible included, has only plastic people. Life is played for keeps. Good books reflect that."

All that aside, however, Monk said he understands why some people dislike the books.
"Many people just don't understand that writers use the supernatural as a prop.

That's different from luring kids to the occult. That said, however, we certainly should respect parents' rights to choose what their own children read. We shouldn't force children to read books they aren't ready for. But school officials, librarians and teachers must stand firm against any attempt to ban Potter books from [South Carolina] classrooms or schools. This is a state where tens of thousands of children read below grade level. And Potter books are turning kids on to reading."

But in some schools, Harry Potter is not merely available to kids in the school library. The books' publisher, Scholastic, encourages teachers to read the books aloud in class and provides discussion guides for teachers and parents. On the publisher's website, children are invited to enter a "discussion chamber" where they answer questions about the Harry Potter series and related topics.

One such question asked kids, "Although students are prohibited to practice their magic in the Muggle world (the everyday, nonmagical world), what one spell would you most like to cast in the real world ... if you had the chance? Why?"

Erik, 11, answered, "I would cast a spell to have peace in the world."

Sam, 9, said, "I would like to turn some books into real places, characters, etc."
And 9-year-old Nicola replied, "I would like to cast a spell so when someone thought bad thoughts about you they would be sent to a corn field to work there until they started thinking nice things. The charm would be: 'Hocus Pocus 123 put this person in the corn field for me!'"

Other questions encourage kids to think about their own lives through the lens of Harry Potter's world. For example, one question reads, "Of all the characters in the Harry Potter book series, which one is most like you, and why?" Another asks kids, "You are to report on your home town for Muggle Studies class. What would wizards find most interesting?"

Matrisciana thinks introduction of the Harry Potter books into the classroom as a springboard for curriculum is unacceptable. Because the books are so well-researched, the values and ceremonies portrayed closely resemble Wicca, which is a legitimate, government-recognized religion. A key tenet of that religion is that there is no absolute truth, said Matrisciana. With a captive audience, public school teachers are able, consciously or not, to embrace Wiccan teachings, conditioning children to believe there are no absolutes, she explained.

"The only absolute is that Christianity is wrong," she added.

But even some Christians are endorsing Harry Potter. In a November 1999 broadcast of his radio series "Breakpoint," author Chuck Colson commended Harry and his friends for their "courage, loyalty and a willingness to sacrifice for one another – even at the risk of their lives." Colson dismissed the pagan practices as "purely mechanical, as opposed to occultic. That is, Harry and his friends cast spells, read crystal balls and turn themselves into animals – but they don't make contact with a supernatural world. [It's not] the kind of real-life witchcraft the Bible condemns."

And popular Christian publication World Magazine reviewed book one of the series in May 1999, calling it "a delight – with a surprising bit of depth." Author Roy Maynard assured World readers that "Rowling keeps it safe, inoffensive and non-occult. This is the realm of Gandalf and the Wizard of Id, not witchcraft. There is a fairy-tale order to it all in which, as Chesterton and Tolkien pointed out, magic must have rules, and good does not – cannot – mix with bad."

But Matrisciana disagrees with her Christian colleagues, and finds it hard to believe the books do not portray the occult. As an example, she points to book four, the most recent of the series, which contains a gruesome narrative in the chapter titled, "Flesh, Blood and Bone".

In the chapter, Harry is magically transported with his friend Cedric to a dark, scary graveyard. There, Harry is tied to the headstone of Lord Voldemort's father's tomb by Voldemort's slave, Wormtail – a shapeshifter who takes the form of a rat. A slithering snake, synonymous with the presence of Voldemort, circles around Harry.

Following an order to kill from a voice of unknown origin, the slave utters a death curse. In shock, Harry witnesses the murder of his friend Cedric.

"While Rowling had warned there'd be a death in this book and said Harry's world would be getting darker, this is not a death per se. It isn't even a murder per se," said Matrisciana. "The diabolical truth is this is an intentional human sacrifice, a symbolic human sacrifice and very necessary for the ritual that is about to take place within the next page or so. In serious magic, a human sacrifice is essential for the power to work."

After Cedric's murder, the largest cauldron Harry has ever seen, filled with a magic brew, is heated over flames Wormtail has magically conjured up. At another command, Wormtail lifts a bundle Harry thought looked like a baby and lowers it into the heated sparkling juice in the cauldron. But the thing is not a baby – it is a gruesome crouching creature that turns out to be the human skeletal being of Voldemort.

"Ugly, slimy, blind, hairless and scaly-looking, dark, raw, reddish black, thin, feeble, flat and snakelike face with gleaming red eyes," the book reads.

This hideous frail human body makes "a soft thud" as it hits the bottom of the boiling cauldron. Then Wormtail, using his wand and words of power, commands bone to ascend out of Lord Voldemort's father's grave and join his son in the cauldron.

Powdered bone magically travels into the cauldron. The ritual continues as the self-sacrificing slave performs a morbid self-inflicted mutilation with his silver dagger and chops off his right arm. Writhing in pain over "the bleeding stump of his arm, gasping and sobbing," he throws his fresh flesh into the brew. With his spare left arm, Wormtail draws blood from Harry in a grotesque ceremony. When Harry's powerful blood touches the smoking liquid of the cauldron, the concoction is complete, and Voldemort is reborn.

"This is a satanic ritual, repulsively diabolical, because in Satan's twisted method, it is meant to duplicate, with blasphemous sarcasm, God's requirements for creation and resurrected, born-again life," said Matrisciana. "In perfection, these only come through the power of God's word and work of his Holy Spirit. 'Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh' was Adam's acknowledgment to God for Eve's physical new creation. Jesus' self-sacrificing flesh and blood were sacrificially given as a penalty for our sins, and through a personal acceptance of that free gift, there is spiritual rebirth and newness of a resurrected life. But in actuality, what is rising? A spirit creature that needs human flesh and blood in order to survive? A type of cannibal and vampire? What is taking place here?

"It's hard to imagine Rowling can get darker than the following story but she promises she will," the filmmaker continued. "Christians need to understand that God finds witchcraft evil," she said, adding that the books cleverly mask the true nature of their contents by repackaging evil in a fascinating, alluring child's world.

"Most people are probably reading this from the superficial level. But if you start looking into the symbology of it, you see that it's a real religion," she said. "If you start on the assumption that witchcraft is evil, then you can read it with open eyes."

Known to Christians as the personification of evil and "Father of Lies," Satan's purpose is destruction and turning Christianity on its head, she added.

"Christians are so nave because they've been sheltered by Christian America," she said. "This very Christian culture, while it's being protective, it has also bred a sort of lukewarm Christian" that doesn't see evil as evil, the filmmaker concluded.

Regeneration Precedes Faith

2010-10-10T11:04:00.000-07:00

By R. C. Sproul

One of the most dramatic moments in my life for the shaping of my theology took place in a seminary classroom. One of my professors went to the blackboard and wrote these words in bold letters: "Regeneration Precedes Faith."

These words were a shock to my system. I had entered seminary believing that the key work of man to effect rebirth was faith. I thought that we first had to believe in Christ in order to be born again. I use the words in order here for a reason. I was thinking in terms of steps that must be taken in a certain sequence. I had put faith at the beginning. The order looked something like this:

"Faith - rebirth -justification."

I hadn’t thought that matter through very carefully. Nor had I listened carefully to Jesus’ words to Nicodemus. I assumed that even though I was a sinner, a person born of the flesh and living in the flesh, I still had a little island of righteousness, a tiny deposit of spiritual power left within my soul to enable me to respond to the Gospel on my own. Perhaps I had been confused by the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Rome, and many other branches of Christendom, had taught that regeneration is gracious; it cannot happen apart from the help of God.

No man has the power to raise himself from spiritual death. Divine assistance is necessary. This grace, according to Rome, comes in the form of what is called prevenient grace. "Prevenient" means that which comes from something else. Rome adds to this prevenient grace the requirement that we must "cooperate with it and assent to it" before it can take hold in our hearts.

This concept of cooperation is at best a half-truth. Yes, the faith we exercise is our faith. God does not do the believing for us. When I respond to Christ, it is my response, my faith, my trust that is being exercised. The issue, however, goes deeper. The question still remains: "Do I cooperate with God's grace before I am born again, or does the cooperation occur after?" Another way of asking this question is to ask if regeneration is monergistic or synergistic. Is it operative or cooperative? Is it effectual or dependent? Some of these words are theological terms that require further explanation.

A monergistic work is a work produced singly, by one person. The prefix mono means one. The word erg refers to a unit of work. Words like energy are built upon this root. A synergistic work is one that involves cooperation between two or more persons or things. The prefix syn -

means "together with." I labor this distinction for a reason. The debate between Rome and Luther hung on this single point. At issue was this: Is regeneration a monergistic work of God or a synergistic work that requires cooperation between man and God? When my professor wrote "Regeneration precedes faith" on the blackboard, he was clearly siding with the monergistic answer. After a person is regenerated, that person cooperates by exercising faith and trust. But the first step is the work of God and of God alone.

The reason we do not cooperate with regenerating grace before it acts upon us and in us is because we can- not. We cannot because we are spiritually dead. We can no more assist the Holy Spirit in the quickening of our souls to spiritual life than Lazarus could help Jesus raise him for the dead.

When I began to wrestle with the Professor's argument, I was surprised to learn that his strange-sounding teaching was not novel. Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield - even the great medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas taught this doctrine. Thomas Aquinas is the Doctor Angelicus of the Roman Catholic Church. For centuries his theological teaching was accepted as official dogma by most Catholics. So he was the last person I expected to hold such a view of regeneration. Yet Aquinas insisted that regenerating grace is operative grace, not cooperative grace. Aquinas spoke of prevenient grace, but he spoke of a grace that comes before faith, which is regeneration.

These giants of Christian history derived their view from Holy Scripture. The key phrase in Paul's Letter to the Ephesians is this: "...even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace have you been saved)" (Eph. 2:5). Here Paul locates the time when regeneration occurs. It takes place 'when we were dead.' With one thunderbolt of apostolic revelation all attempts to give the initiative in regeneration to man are smashed. Again, dead men do not cooperate with grace. Unless regeneration takes place first, there is no possibility of faith.

This says nothing different from what Jesus said to Nicodemus. Unless a man is born again first, he cannot possibly see or enter the kingdom of God. If we believe that faith precedes regeneration, then we set our thinking and therefore ourselves in direct opposition not only to giants of Christian history but also to the teaching of Paul and of our Lord Himself.

What Does It Mean to Keep Yourself?

2010-10-09T06:21:00.000-07:00

by Paul Shirley

Scripture makes it clear that our salvation and security rests in the Hands of God. However there are several places in the Scriptures that seem to indicate responsibility on our part. For instance, in Jude 20-21, Jude says,
“But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.”

The question is what does it mean to keep yourself? In order to answer that let’s look at this verse just a little bit.

First of all, it is important to understand that there is one command in this passage (keep yourselves in the love of God), and then three supporting participial phrases that teach us how to keep ourselves in the love of God (building yourselves up in the holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit; and waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life). So the key to this passage is Jude’s command to keep ourselves in the love of God. But what does it mean to keep yourself in the love of God? To answer that question we need to start all the way back in verse 1. There Jude referred to Christians as those who are loved and kept by God. So, in verse 21 Jude is commanding us to do the very thing that God is already doing within us. It seems confusing that Jude would give this command, however Jude is simply appealing to our responsibility to respond to God’s work in our life. George Zemek explains this mixture of God’s work and our responsibility to respond to that work in this way:

…What God has done or what He has promised to do becomes the basis and/or the incentive for us to exercise our responsibility… to make progress in holy living.

As God works in our life we have a responsibility to live our lives in a way that is consistent with that work. Let me put it another way using another passage of Scripture as an illustration. In Ephesians 2:8-9 we learn that it is “by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.” Here we see that God has provided a means of salvation through Jesus, and this salvation is a gift. But that is not all that this passage has to say on this issue. Ephesians 2:10 then goes on to tell us what we have been saved unto, or to put it another way, we are being kept for:

For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

On the one hand we have been saved by God’s grace and we are being kept by God. But at the same time God has saved us to do good works, and so we must work hard to do what God has created us to do. Jesus spoke to this responsibility in John 14:15:

If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.

Therefore, when Jude tells us to keep ourselves in the love of God he is essentially telling us to live like real Christians.This makes sense because if we are going to fight for the faith then we can’t be like these fake Christians who have snuck into the church (See Jude 3). Instead, we must demonstrate the work that God has done in our lives by glorifying God with our actions. The problem is that we do not always do this; we do not always live like people who have been transformed by the gracious power of God. The truth is that practically speaking there are many areas of our own lives in which we struggle to follow Jesus. It for this reason that Jude has commanded us to keep ourselves in the love of God, In essence Jude is telling us that we must secure our own position before we can go on the offensive in our fight for the faith.

Misplaced

2010-10-07T18:57:00.000-07:00

By Jill Carattini

I ran away once as a kid. I was mad about something ten year-olds get mad about—mad enough that I had to step up my normal fit or else risk being interpreted as only typically mad. The most untypical thing I could think to do was to pack a backpack of snacks and books and run away. So I ran to the backyard, climbed into my tree fort, and sat fuming in the snow.

After an hour or so, I decided it was time to go home. I was sure my mom was worried, troubled at the thought of me being lost and alone. I was also out of snacks, freezing, and beginning to see that my brilliant plan was riddled with inconveniences. So I made the long trek back to the house, expecting a reunion of apologies and hot cocoa. After all, to them, I was lost and now found, and this seemed a necessary occasion to celebrate. I converged, however, on a much less climactic scene. Nobody had even noticed I was missing. And when no one is looking for you, it loans a hopeless dimension to being lost.

Centuries before this scene, a man named Zacchaeus entered a big crowd only to be largely ignored. He was trying to join the group that had gathered to see Jesus as he passed through Jericho. Zacchaeus was a small man, but he was also the chief tax collector, and so he was chiefly despised. The walls of men and women who blocked his view were excluding more than a man of diminutive size. They were shutting out a man of depravity, wealth, and corruption. So Zacchaeus climbed a tree.

The rest of the story is equally unusual. Zacchaeus was sitting inconspicuously in a tree when Jesus walked by, looked up, and called him down. At his invitation, the morally bankrupt, socially shunned tax collector came down from the tree and his life took a dramatic turn. At the conclusion of their time together, Jesus proclaimed, "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost" (Luke 19:10). Zacchaeus had been found.

A friend of mine taught me that the Greek word for "lost" in this passage is best understood, not as doomed or damned as is sometimes interpreted, but "not in the right place." The effect is that the finality of "lostness" is somewhat assuaged, conveying first that there is indeed a "right" place, but also the notion that the quality of lostness is known. Inherent in the description of a misplaced coin or a sheep that has gone astray is that someone is looking for the thing that is known to be lost. That is to say, someone is looking in a way he wouldn’t if it was in the right place or if he thought it was gone forever. What is lost and in the wrong place is being sought by the one who knows the right place. Likewise, what is lost is missed. And as I discovered as a ten year-old, it is this quality that makes all the difference. It is also this quality that makes the journey of faith and belief one that is worth taking. Someone is looking.

Prior to meeting Jesus, like those of us displaced by our sense of failure, banished by the judgment of others, or lost in anger or fear, Zacchaeus was simply in the wrong place. But he was not beyond the saving reach of one who wanted to see him turned around. He was lost, but there was someone looking, someone missing even the one person misplaced. This one came to Jericho and to Jerusalem neither confirming customary exclusions nor endorsing social and spiritual hierarchies. In fact, immediately following his encounter with Zacchaeus, a man lost in wealth and corruption, he came beside a man lost in blindness and poverty. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost. Thus, despite his way of life up to this point, Zacchaeus was not to be cut off from the people of God or God himself. "For this man, too, is a son of Abraham," said Jesus. And his words seemed to be spoken as much to the crowd who shunned the sinner as to the sinner himself.

Losses Overcome

2010-09-30T12:17:00.000-07:00

By C.H. Spurgeon

"And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten" (Joel 2:25).

Yes, those wasted years over which we sigh shall be restored to us. God can give us such plentiful grace that we shall crowd into the remainder of our days as much of service as will be some recompense for thoseyears of unregeneracy over which we mourn in humble penitence. The locusts of backsliding, worldliness, lukewarmness, are now viewed by us as a terrible plague. Oh, that they had never come near us! The LORD in mercy has now taken them away, and we are full of zeal to serve Him.

Blessed be His name, we can raise such harvests of spiritual graces as shall make our former barrenness to disappear. Through rich grace we can turn to account our bitter experience and use it to warn others. We can become the more rooted in humility, childlike dependence, and penitent spirituality by reason of our former shortcomings. If we are more watchful, zealous, and tender, we shall gain by our lamentable losses.

The wasted years, by a miracle of love, can be restored. Does it seem too great a boon? Let us believe for it and live for it, and we may yet realize it, even as Peter became all the more useful a man after his presumption was cured by his discovered weakness.

LORD, aid us by Thy grace.

The Disappointing Grace of God

2010-09-24T08:04:00.000-07:00

By Jill Carattini

A friend of mine describes coming to terms as a little girl with the sad thought that she would never be God's favorite. Knowing that God had so many children, knowing that good fathers love equally, she knew her hope of being the favorite was never going to pan out.

When I first heard her say this, I smiled at the idea of a little girl worrying so seriously about God's fairness and how it affected her. God is much more often accused of being un-fair. But the more I thought about my friend’s disappointment, the more I think this is exactly the difficulty most of us have with God—although most of us will never admit it. The unguarded sincerity of a child voices what we do not: If we are being honest, no one really wants to be seen as equal to all others.

The desire to be the best at something, to exceed the expectations of those around us, to be known for being better than most—at anything—has been fostered within us since birth. New mothers happily report when their toddlers are in the highest percentile in motor, social, or language skills. A child delights in winning the spelling bee; employees strive to get ahead, to be noticed, to be superior. At every turn, we are as horrified by equality as we are at mediocrity. Even if the desires remain unvoiced, we want to be the best at something. We long to be someone's—anyone's—favorite.

For souls in tune with this quality, there is one story Jesus tells that probably disturbs us more than others. In this parable, Jesus describes a landowner who went out in the morning and hired workers for his vineyard. All agreed upon a wage of a denarius, they were sent to the vineyard, and the work began. A few hours later, the master went out and hired more laborers for his vineyard. A few hours after this, again a few hours later, and yet again after this, he hired some more. When evening came, the owner of the vineyard called the workers forward to collect their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first. Jesus explains, "The workers who were hired about the eleventh hour came and each received a denarius. So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. 'These men who were hired last worked only one hour,' they said, 'and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day'" (Matthew 20:9-12).

Equality in this story is nothing short of offensive. Those who have worked harder and longer want only to be recognized, favored for their work, commended for their superiority over the others. But the landowner only responds with words that further offend: "'Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?'" (vv. 13-15).

In this difficult parable, Jesus gives us a clear look at our definitions of injustice, our sense of superiority, and our hatred of God's fairness when it fails to favor us. When generosity is showered on someone else, when equality shatters our sense of being on top, God's goodness often elicits not goodness, but envy, hostility, disappointment, and anger. But the master reminds his disgruntled workers that he did exactly what was promised. It was only when they compared themselves to the others that they began to feel slighted.

Jesus proclaims the coming of a kingdom that turns this world as we know it on its head and requires a complete reframing of perspective. God's grace is not meant to be a source of disappointment nor is God's kingdom meant to be a hierarchy of skill and favoritism. On the contrary, God reminds us that greatness comes in ways that shock and disorient our many rules and systems. For God's grace bestowed at any hour is generous and confrontational, the power of the Cross is scandalous and underserved, the love of the Father always boldly given and lavished. Receiving the generosity of the master, we are united with the Son in whom God is well-pleased. In his economy, we are made heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ himself. And there is no greater favoritism.

Mask and Mirror

2010-09-23T18:25:00.000-07:00

By Jill Carattini

Hans Christian Andersen tells of the emperor who loved new clothes. This emperor so admired modeling new robes that he spent all of his time in his dressing room. In fact, he had little concern for anything else in his kingdom.

One day two swindlers came to town announcing they were weavers of the finest clothes imaginable. Their royal colors and fabrics, they claimed, were exceptionally stunning. In fact, they were of such quality that they were only visible to the finest few! Those who were unfit for their office or were hopelessly stupid would not be able to see them at all.

The emperor was immediately taken by this description and provided the weavers with large amounts of money. He wanted to know those who were unfit for their posts; he also wanted to see the foolish and the clever within his empire. Yet when the emperor went to try on the garments, he was most distraught to realize that it was he who saw nothing at all. But the king would not admit his stupidity or incompetence; he would not let anyone think him a fool. He announced that the cloth was very beautiful, and all the courtiers rapidly agreed. In a great procession the next day, everyone spoke in admiration of the emperor's new clothes. They loved the detail! The colors were beautiful! The garments were like no other, they said. But then from the back of the crowd a child spoke up, observing what the rest would not: The emperor was wearing nothing.

Imagine finding out that the one thing you have desperately attempted to keep veiled in secrecy was not actually veiled at all. The thought bears the unsettling sense of finding yourself unclothed before a crowded room. Would you feel foolish? Would you run and hide? Or would you insist the veil was still there? Andersen ends with a glimpse into the mind of the king: "[The words of the child] made a deep impression upon the emperor, for it seemed to him that they were right. But he thought to himself regardless, 'Now I must bear up to the end.'" Idols are not easy to own up to; how much more so, when what we idolize is not really there in the first place.

I believe, however, that there can be another response—besides denial or shame—to the startling realization that we stand unveiled before family, friends, or God Himself. We can find ourselves enveloped in gratitude, clothed by meekness. The masks we were so certain were necessary, the act we put on to appease the crowd, the lies we told to protect ourselves were maybe not quite as necessary as we thought. Could you take off the costume you thought you were wearing if you realized you were only wearing it for yourself?

Perhaps Paul's instruction to "put off falsehood" is sometimes a call to "put off" what is not even there. The call of Christ is no different. He calls us unto himself and requires that we give him everything, but we must come without costume or pretense. We must come as much ready to be honest with ourselves as with him. In the journey of the Christian pilgrim, we walk with Christ through crowds of lost and deceived sheep toward the Cross, and like the disciples on the road to Emmaus our eyes are opened to our own lost and deceived ways. It is as if Jesus himself is a mirror and we are inspecting our new clothes. But he will take from our shoulders our robes of self-importance and false security. He will tear from our grasp our garments of self-pity and shame. Then he will clothe us with garments of salvation and array us in robes of righteousness, and he will remind us that we are his bride.

My Retraction: A 15-year Baptist turns Paedobaptist and Becomes Reformed.

2010-09-20T10:23:00.000-07:00

A little bit about my journey in understanding how Covenant Theology is the overwhelming these of God's Redemptive plan, and how God sanctified me further. A Baptist turns to be a theologian of Covenant Theology. How could such a thing happen?

In the latter years of Augustine’s life, after sifting through his literary works as a whole, in book 2 of his Anti-Pelagian Works, we find him writing down a number of “retractions.” What are retractions? Augustine revisited certain topics on which he had previously written, and much to his dismay, there was much that he knew he had written in error. In desiring to be as biblical as he could, he mentioned the errors in a “retraction” of their validity and then explained what his position had become. He recanted of what he had written, and then revisited the topic under a more thoroughly biblical view. For instance, he withdrew his ideas concerning the Platonic view of the pre-existence of the soul to accept a biblical view. This was quite honorable for Augustine to do so in keeping with being a faithful steward of God’s Word. Yet, at the same time, Christians can relate to Augustine's retractions as a whole. In other words, as Christian's grow in grace, they are weaned away from poor theology and receive that which the Spirit of God lavishes upon them during their faithful study.

I have read much of Augustine. I was moved by his retractions because in his day and age it was hard to make statements as one in the lime-light, and then retract. It is amazing how we, now, can read his works and see his humility in his move from error to the truth. Retractions are difficult. I can personally relate on how it is very difficult to make a retraction. How would you feel if after fifteen years of believing something, and contending for something, (something you thought was the absolute truth) that you found it was biblically inconsistent? What if you had taught "wrong doctrine" for fifteen years and causes other to believe it, and then found you were wrong?

Retractions are not easy to deal with. Even the great Martin Luther stuttered a moment when the King demanded he retract his writings and recant at the Diet of Worms in 1521. Contrary to popular belief, Luther did not shake his fist in the wind and stand his ground – rather, he asked for more time to think about it. In the end he made the right choice, but it certainly was not without difficulty and sacrifice. Retractions are difficult.

I have a retraction of my own to declare. This retraction is a very difficult retraction to make since it affects my entire theological outlook concerning covenant theology, the bible and covenant signs. It is also a very complicated one to make in light of all the positive email response I have had to “God’s glory” in dealing with this issue faithfully from the Dispensational and Baptistic point of view. For those who have agreed with me on this issue in the past, you will need to be patient with me, because you are going to violently disagree with me. You will shake your head, maybe even your fist, or even maybe weep. I have moved, in aligning my thoughts with the faithful of the historical church, to what I believe is a more consistently biblically view of the bible as a whole. This retraction will be difficult for “faithful friends” to believe. I have vehemently debated many Presbyterian and Reformed brethren on the issue of Paedobaptism, or Infant Baptism, and how I thought I was being covenantally faithful. I have written against them on countless occasions in hundreds of emails, and have published 14 articles on the web demonstrating the “utter folly” of that “pernicious error of Paedobaptism;” or as the Baptist RBC Howell states, the “evils” of that error. Even at that point, I was not through, for I had another 8 articles to publish on the subject. I also had in mind to systematically destroy Turretin’s “illogical arguments” in his third volume of Elenctic Theology, as well as silencing Calvin’s barking in his Institutes on the subject, book 4, chapter 16. I had read all the major works written by faithful Baptist ministers and I knew my position well. As it stands right now, I may honestly say that I know the Baptist arguments inside out and backwards as I have understood them for 15 years. I know the exegetical ideologies. I know the hermeneutic behind the debates. And not only this, but in my desire to be firmly acquainted with the “deviant view,” I had faithfully read and reread the best divines of the past who held to Infant Baptism: Turretin, Ames, Dabney, Hodge, Calvin, Berkhof, Edwards, Owen, Perkins, Love, and the like. I had attended a Presbyterian Seminary and knew all of the arguments from a contemporary view. I listened attentively to such teachers as Sinclair Ferguson, RC Sproul, John Gerstner, J.I. Packer, Reggie Kidd, and Richard Pratt on this subject in their own classrooms during my seminary years. I was as sure as the day was long that I was biblically sound and exegetically solid in my defense of credo-baptism, or believer’s baptism, alone. I attempted to be as biblically careful as I could, since, I could not allow myself to be wrong on such a vital issue where so many great preachers and teachers in the history of the church believed such a doctrine.

In other words, I knew church history. I knew that as an honest Baptist, I had to admit that for over 1600 years, since Christ, the church had theology wrong. Their ecclesiology and redemptive theology was simply mistaken, and on key point, the Baptists finally got it right. Yes, not until 1689 (the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith) the Baptists set the record straight though all of the predecessors had their ideas about entrance into the church, and the manner of God in dealing with covenant families was just plain wrong. No one had it right until "we Baptists" came to town. Was that arrogant of me? Yes. And Historically impossible to prove, but it was the logical outcome of my adherence to "credo-baptism". Though the greatest minds through the history of Christendom differed with me, I had to stand on the bible. I could not allow my desire to be aligned with great men be a temptation to me (who would not want to be associated with them?). I had to be sure I was right, and I honestly thought I was. I truly believed that Covenant Theology and that wicked practice of infant baptism was a great evil, and I said so with a brutal confidence.

But in all this, I was in error.

I have retracted and recanted the “Baptist” position against Covenant Theology and Infant Baptism. There are good and valid reasons why this is so. It is not that I went looking to change my entire theological outlook on this issue from a newly renovated covenantal perspective. It was not that I was reading Owen or Edwards on the subject once again, and that sparked my thoughts. In all honesty, and with a sincere heart, I must admit that it was the Bible, and the Bible alone that changed my outlook on this. I know the next couple of paragraphs are going to be very difficult for my Baptist brethren to hear, but I must say, I have really, honesty and truly changed my position as a result of exegetical study and reflection.

I thought being "Reformed" was believing in predestination, or TULIP. Well, that was a huge mistake. I wanted to be "Reformed" and so I changed the definition of "Reformed" to suit my taste. I wanted to be counted in the theological outlook of Westminster, with just a few tweaks here or there, so I fell into the same trap that "Reformed Baptists" fall into today - they claim the title and are not honest to admit that they cannot possibly be Reformed with holding to Reformed Theology. So instead, I redefined "Reformed" to simply mean - I believe in TULIP. Historically, this is a misnomer. It simply is historically impossible to demonstrate. Ask any Baptist where "Reformed" came from, and he'll point you to the Synod of Dorst. Little does he know it is a direct reference, written by a Lutheran, to explain the ecclesiology of Calvin's Institutes. In other words, being Reformed meant 1) Covenant Theology, 2) Paedobaptist, 3) following Calvin's view of the Lord's Supper, and 4) the ecclesiology of the Institutes. In other words, Baptists simply cannot be Reformed in any sense of the word.

In attempting to be as sensitive as I can to those who “followed my thoughts” on the Baptist position and thanked me for such articles, I must first tell you where this change took place. Have you ever stood “outside” yourself while you were talking and thought to yourself, “Self, why are you saying that? That does not make any sense at all?” – but then you keep right on talking? Hopefully you can identify with that. Oftentimes it is a result of a “slip of the tongue” and we say to ourselves, “OUCH! I should never have said that!” But sometimes we stand outside of ourselves and think about what we are saying while we say it. We listen to ourselves and hear the arguments afresh. It is almost as if we are arguing with ourselves to come to a specific conclusion about something. Well, in my case, this happened during a study at my home. I was teaching on the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints. A question arose on the warning passages of the New Testament, and there I was suddenly, listening to myself answer this question which was put to me, but I knew I was not correct in my answer, though it was my standard baptistic answer. This seemingly innocent question tumbled me into an immense theological debate with myself later that night. I reread the Old Testament and New Testament passages on covenant, baptism and circumcision. I reread all the major writers again on the subject of the covenants and the covenant signs of infant baptism and baptism. Then it dawned on me, and it became clear: it was a question of my hermeneutic.

Some of you long standing Congregationalists or Presbyterians reading this may be saying, “Well of course your hermeneutic is the answer!” That is all well and good to say, but to communicate it in a way in which you HELP the Baptist understand why you think he is interpreting the Bible with incorrect presuppositions is the key. Leading neophytes step by step, clearly and succinctly is how they learn. Not just blathering a host of theological ideas that fly over their head. This neophyte would have loved some step by step instructions in those days. But oftentimes, the arguments surround "Baptism" and not what they should - 1) hermeneutics, and 2) Covenant Theology. Forget baptism for a moment. Forget circumcision for a moment. Forget the last 5 minutes of the conversation. Its the preceding 5 HOURS of the Covenant Theology that needs to be straight before we ever get to the application of Covenant Theology in the covenant sign.

Many times the great reformers and puritans simply “barked.” Calvin is among the best. When he is on your side you cheer him on. When he is against you, then you scowl. Well, I scowled at Calvin many times on this issue. He said “…in this age, certain frenzied spirits have raised, and even now continue to raise, great disturbance in the Church on account of Paedobaptism, I cannot avoid here, by way of appendix, adding something to restrain their fury.” (Institutes, 4:19.1) You see, for someone trying to learn or understand the Scriptures, it is not always helpful to mimic Calvin here. It would be more constructive to deal with core issues rather than ad hominem arguments. On the other hand, many puritan divines will argue upon secondary issues which are not the heart of the matter. When this happened, I was always confused as to why Calvin, Owen, Reynolds, Love, Van Mastricht, Ames, Turretin, Edwards, etc., would be “so off course.” I neglected to ascertain their complete mind on the ideas behind the covenant of redemption and of grace, and was arguing against infant baptism without a proper view of those foundational ideas. Not only was I putting the cart before the horse, I was putting the stall before the horse before the cart, before the....well you get my meaning.

Arguing secondary issues is not restricted to ancient writers. RC Sproul debated Alister Begg at great lengths on secondary issues at a Ligonier conference some years ago that I attended. RC never addressed why he thought Alister was wrong at the heart of his hermeneutic. He just argued with Alister about the issues surrounding the subject - baptism. He argued for familial solidarity when he should have been dealing with hermeneutics and the foundations of the Covenant of Redemption and Covenant of Grace.

Why was there confusion for me as a Baptist? Why did I think that Infant Baptist was not dealing with “texts” which “proved” their case? Why did I think this way in particular? I was simply dumbfounded at the Presbyterian’s lack of exegetical prowess when it came to Infant Baptism. Why? It was the answer to this question that helped me understand why I was wrong on this issue for so long. I thought I was “Reformed” but in reality, I could not escape a form of Dispensationalism, which I now believe, is inherent in the Baptistic position, and inescapable. I abrogated certain aspects of the Old Testament’s form and substance. (It is the “and substance” which makes the difference.) The Puritans divines I love so much simply confounded the issue all the more because they continually dealt with the secondary issues of arguing specific texts, without ever taking to task my faulty hermeneutic in the first place. Now that is not to say they did not do an exemplary job at the text and its exegesis. But they never dealt with the heart of the matter at the time they were arguing their case. They should have told me to go back to understanding the Old Covenant before I tackled the New Covenant, and they should have opened my eyes to certain non-negotiable (eternal) traits of the Covenant of Grace which run historically through the entire Bible - those I thought I knew all about, but really swept under the rug.

What I have to say next is critical to understand. I see four main reasons why I was a Baptist: 1) I was dispensational to in my thinking because of an abrogation of the Old Testament covenant in an extreme manner, 2) I studied the doctrine of the “covenant” from the New Testament backwards to the Old Testament (in other words, I did theology backwards), 3) I defined the “sign” of Baptism strictly as, “the outward sign of the inward work of regeneration,” and 4) I thought that the terms "salvation" and "new covenant" were coextensively the same thing.

In point “1”, there is much to explain and most “Baptists” will vehemently deny this as I did (I can already hear them mumbling to themselves in consternation!). Suffice it to say that I will be addressing this in future articles (such as these: Turretin's Views of Covenant, John Owen's Views of Covenant, Children in the Covenant Of Grace, The Internalization of the Law Not "New", Covenant - God, to you and your children). My “Baptistic” theology, from a covenantal perspective, was dispensational – I could not escape this to some extent even though I did not see how this could possibly be.

Point “2” is more prevalent. If you attempt to understand the Bible beginning from the New Testament and work backwards into the Old Testament you will almost always end up Baptistic. If you argue from the New Testament backwards then you have begun with a wrong hermeneutic. This idea is very important. I had, in reality, neglected it.

Point “3” is also very important. The very ideas associated with the ordinance of baptism in the new covenant for me as a Baptist were different than one who believes in Covenantal Theology. This is a result of the manner in which I understood what “covenant” theology is all about. I was in error about my understanding of covenant theology. This again will be addressed in future articles.

Point 4 is critical. If you think the New Covenant is coextensive with salvation, you will always wind up Baptistic. This is probably the most serious error in trying to understand the arguments here. Every covenant in the Bible, from Adam forward, included unbelievers. The New Covenant, in this respect, is no different. That is why Christ can promise salvation and damnation in the same breath to those in the New Covenant. (1 Cor. 11, Heb. 6 and 10). Until the Baptist comes to grips with this, there is no way for him to understand Covenant Theology because he radically transforms the nature of God's covenant when he deals with the New Testament. The substance of the Covenant of Grace changes, which makes the Baptist, inescapably, Dispensational.

In my “switch” I realized that as a Baptist I continually and forever argued against secondary notions and not by the basic and key ideas which are foundational for the rest of biblical interpretation. I was arguing about the color of the horse when all along I should have been arguing about the structure of the cart he was pulling.

It may be that you as a Baptist, reading this very brief (but important) retraction, cannot believe your eyes or ears (you are shaking your head right in front of your monitor as you read!). You may be even praying for me right now – that I would come to my senses! Maybe you are saying, “Oh what a wretched mistake he is making! What a horrible hermeneutic he has embraced!” Please, do not ever stop praying for me. I always need your prayers. However, certain pieces of the puzzle that always seemed to “puzzle me” have fallen rapidly into a grid locked picture of the grace of covenant theology. I believe they should have been there all along.

But at least take this to heart, if you are a Baptist - in your position, you must, if you are at least humble and honest, agree with me that your position is relatively new. It sprung up int he 17th century. It was not held until the heretical Anabaptists appeared on the scene. That means that the church has been wrong about her theology for 1700 years until you, my friend, and your partners in this new fangled theology, got it right. It means that God, in all His great wisdom and providence, waited 1700 years before He "enlightened" His ambassadors to the truth of how He wanted His church run. It even, on a base level, questions the very providence of God in the way He deals with His church. It calls into question Jude's admonition, that the faith HAS been once delivered to the saints. But you, friend, are saying that we have all had it wrong, and that we are just getting it right. You, friend, are saying that the historical position of the church's ecclesiology, by the greatest minds the church has known, were, for all intents and purposes, completely wrong about how the church should be run, and what God desired for His church. Not only did we not know the truth, but God allowed His church to purposefully languished for one thousand seven hundred years until the Baptists came along. They all had it wrong. And you, and a few others, have it right. (On that note alone, ponder promptly and heavily.)

As a result of all of this, I have reposted my position in many articles. There are many texts to reconsider and fit into their proper places. There are a host of concepts to deal with. I will deal with all the texts that I as a Baptist used to argue over as time goes on. Many are already published, and many of them have been consolidated into a concise book called, "A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology". (This book is available through Puritan Publications.) I also have much to say in a compendium of articles on covenant theology and the issues surrounding the biblical ideas contained therein, in the Covenant Theology section of this site.

For those who had been following my articles on Believer’s baptism as I have posted them pertaining to adults, please understand that the Paedo-Baptist does not discount that adults should be baptized. I still believe that men should repent and be baptized. However, I will now covenantally insist that the seed of the believer should be baptized as well, lest God count them as unclean. There are theological and biblical reasons for this, both exegetically and creedal.

I covet your prayers, and deeply regret that I have lead many of you down a long path that excluded some of the most glorious truths of the bible. I publicly ask your forgiveness for my own personal irresponsible exegesis, subtle dispensational thinking and my backwards hermeneutic.

Your Humble Servant,

Dr. C. Matthew McMahon
www.apuritansmind.com

Don't you feel any excitement?

2010-09-15T12:34:00.000-07:00

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” ~ Matthew 28:19-20

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” ~ Mark 16:15

The word "Go" is a verb. These two scriptures are known as the Great Commission.

For many professed Believers, we tend to stay in our comfort zones.
Sure, it’s easy to boldly proclaim the Gospel within our own circles
or church congregations.

But do we go “outside our camp” to share Jesus?

If you feel uneasy with your answer, please consider the following the fact that most Christians are often nervous when they first begin sharing the gospel. While some take the "all out" approach to evangelism and immediately start witnessing one-on-one, others look for a way to ease themselves into sharing the gospel.

Gospel tracts are a great place to start!

“Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate. So, let us go out to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach. For here we do not have a lasting city, but we are seeking the city which is to come. Through Him then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name. And do not neglect doing good and sharing, for with such sacrifices God is pleased” (Hebrews 13:12-16).

Check out the following testiomy:

………

At The Mall
by Carl Bezeugen

Craig, Todd and I met for lunch at the mall. I was handing out Dallas Cowboys Trivia tracts as I entered the mall and while ordering lunch at in the food court. I would simply ask “do you like the Cowboys” and if they said yes, I’d give them the tract. One guy said “no, I like the Steelers” so I gave him a different tract.

While waiting for Terriaki Chicken to be grilled, Todd and I had a good dialog with the cook. I started by asking what came first, the chicken or the egg. Even though I did not have any of our “which came first tracts” with me, it still made a good discussion starter. When I shared with him that Genesis 1 indicated that “God created everything according to it’s kind” he got very interested. He handed me a piece of paper and asked me to write down the verses that said that. So I did. I gave him the paper and a tract. The conversation was edifying to both of us.

After lunch, I talked to a guy named Masu. He was from Napal and had just graduated from BYU. He had some interesting stories about how the Mormons tried to convince him to get baptized and so forth. I asked him what he would be doing next. Graduate school, he said. I continued on that line of questioning through marriage, having children, retiring, moving back to Napal and eventually death. This is a line of questioning that Mark Cahill talks about in his book “One Thing You Can’t Do in Heaven”.

Masu is a hindu. I got to share the Law and Gospel with him. I asked if he had a Bible. He said, no, but I have a book of Mormon. I went to my car and got him a Bible and gave it to him. Please pray that he reads it. I put a bookmark at the Gospel of John for him.

……….

How To Use gospel Tracts

Like I said before, tracts are an excellent way to begin sharing the gospel. Not only are they a start, but they are a method of sharing the gospel that you can use every single day. I began by simply leaving tracts wherever I went. Here are some great places to leave tracts (remember, they can go anywhere, the following list simply gives some suggestions):

• Letters and bills
• Gas stations
• Restaraunts (you could leave a tract with the bill and tip)
• Car windows
• Beer and soda cases (simply slide a smaller tract into the slit)
• Newspaper racks
• 'Free giveaway' tables (often if I see a table with free papers to pick up, I will simply drop 20 or 30 tracts on the table)
• Fast food restaraunt windows (hand one out when you pay)
• ATM machines
• Inside relgious books (when the His Dark Materials books [anti-Christian fiction] were popular, I would slide a tract into the middle of each book)

Leave tracts anywhere and everywhere you go! You can, and should, also hand tracts directly to people walking by. Simply reach out a tract with a friendly smile and ask, "Did you get one of these?" People sometimes turn you down, but will often take the tract. You will be surprised how often people ask, "What is it?" There you go!

Simply say, "It's a gospel tract. Do you know what that is?" Once when a young woman asked me what I had handed her, I said, "A ticket to Heaven. Do you need it?" Now you are in a conversation about eternity, all thanks to a simple gospel tract.

………..

***Recommended Gospel Tracts:

Throughout the years I have seen a number of tracts and used a number of tract suppliers. Below are the ones I feel are the best:

• http://bezeugen.org/ (Free Biz Card Tracts)

• http://www.livingwaters.com/

• http://onemilliontracts.com/

• http://www.customtractsource.com/

………….

The Task is Great!!

2010-09-14T08:59:00.000-07:00

There are 2.3 million men and women behind bars in America. Their sins have landed them there. But the unseen victims of their crimes are their 1.7 million children who serve time along with them… imprisoned by heartache, shame and resentment.

But prayer is greater.

We don't know all of these 1.7 million children. But we know God calls each one by name, wanting so much for each one to come to Him. We can help these kids find their way. And all it takes is serving a little time… in prayer.

Will you join us in prayer as part of a nationwide team of friends just like you? It's so easy to do!

Just click below to register.

**Then:

*Choose a day and time you will commit to pray for the child of a prisoner.

*Await your weekly Prayer Team email with the story of a child and a personal prayer request.

*Regularly visit the Prayer Team's webpage to see the prayers and thoughts of fellow prayer warriors and, of course, add your own if you wish.

*And most importantly… pray!

www.HelpBreakTheCycleThroughPrayer.org

Foolish Stories

2010-09-13T13:39:00.000-07:00

By Ravi Zacharias International Ministries

"I don't believe in God," begins Julian Barnes in his book Nothing to Be Frightened Of, "but I miss him." Though he admits he never had any faith to lose (a "happy atheist" as an Oxford student, Barnes now considers himself an agnostic), he still finds himself dreading the gradual ebbing of Christianity. He misses the sense of purpose that the Christian narrative affords, the sense of wonder and belief that haunts Christian art and architecture. "I miss the God that inspired Italian painting and French stained glass, German music and English chapter houses, and those tumbledown heaps of stone on Celtic headlands which were once symbolic beacons in the darkness and the storm." Such are the thoughts that surface as Barnes attempts to confront his fears of death and dying in this memoir. He believes Christianity to be a foolish lie, but insists, "[I]t was a beautiful lie."

There is certainly room for beauty in the description the apostle Paul gave of the gospel. Like Julian, Paul saw its foolishness clearly as well: "For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God decided, through the foolishness of our proclamation, to save those who believe" (1 Corinthians 1:21). He also noted the weakness inherent in the Christian proclamation. At the heart of the Christian religion is one who "emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness, and being found in human form" (Philippians 2:7). On this much Paul and Julian agree: however beautiful, foolishness and weakness imbibe the Christian story.

But unlike Julian, Paul saw the foolishness of the gospel as a reason—not to disbelieve—but to believe. "For God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to reduce to nothing things that are" (1 Corinthians 1:27-28). It is indeed difficult to explain why at the heart of the Christian narrative there is a child, why God would answer the dark silence of 400 years with the cry of a displaced and homeless infant, why God would take on the weakness of humanity in an attempt to reach humanity with power. Most of us would know better than to create, or to perpetuate, a story so foolish. However beautiful, the story of Christ is difficult to explain; that is, unless it was not crafted with human wisdom at all.

The story of the God-Man stepping into history is indeed astonishing, as astonishing an idea as the resurrection. That God chose to come into the world with flesh, flesh that would suffer, is strange and paradoxical, beautiful and foolish. Perhaps it is also wise beyond our comprehension. "For God's foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God's weakness is stronger than human strength" (1 Corinthians 1:25).

Though the word incarn is now used infrequently, it was once used medically, describing the flesh that grows over a wound. Applied to healing, the word refers to the recovery of wounded flesh due to the presence of new flesh. The Incarnation, the astonishing event at the center of Christianity, the story that has inspired music, architecture, and hope, is God's way of doing exactly that: Christ comes in flesh to cover our mortal wound. God comes near in body and in weakness to bring healing to weak and wounded bodies. This may seem a foolish mission, but to the blind who receive their sight, the lame who now walk, the diseased who are cleansed, the deaf who hear, the dead who are raised, and the poor who have good news brought to them, it is the most beautiful foolishness ever known.

Empty Shanty

2010-09-11T11:13:00.000-07:00

By Wesley L Duewel

Occasionally God surprises us by letting us find out how
He used some word we spoke or action that we took years
ago and perhaps forgot all about.

About a century ago, Stephen Grellat was led one day to go
out to a heavily forested area of America to preach. It was a
strong inward compulsion of the Holy Spirit. When he arrived
at the loggers' camp, he found they had moved to another
location, and their shanties were deserted. However, he was
so sure he was sent by God that he went into an empty shanty and
preached to the bare walls the sermon God
had placed upon his heart. He then returned to his home,
He could never understand why God would send him to
preach to an empty shanty.

Many years later, as he walked across a bridge, a
man grasped his arm, "I found you at last," the man
said. "I think you are mistaken," said Mr. Grellat. "No,
Didn't you preach in an empty shanty in the woods
years ago?" "Yes," Mr. Grellat admitted, "but no one
was there."

"I was the foreman in charge of the loggers," the
stranger explained. "We had moved to a new location,
before long I realized I'd left one of my tools behind. I
returned to get it and heard a voice in one of the shanties,
I peered through a crack between the logs and saw you.
You never saw me, but I listened to the rest of the sermon,
God touched my heart that day and I became so convicted
of my sins, that after some time I purchased a Bible,
repented of my sins, and became a Christian, then I
began to win my men to Christ. Your sermon has led
over a thousand people to Christ, and three of them have
gone on to become missionaries!"

Blessing the Discontent

2010-09-08T17:59:00.000-07:00

By Jill Carattini

There is an uncomfortable line of thought within the Christian worldview, particularly for those who would choose a religion for the favorable qualities it offers. That is, the life of a believer is not one which is void of disappointment. The believer does not cease to live with discontent because he lives with Christ. Though the sources of our disappointment will vary, it can play an important role in the journey of a believer. In fact, the experiences of the earliest followers show that God makes good use of disappointment in the lives of those God loves.

In the Old Testament, God speaks of the disappointment in the hearts of the people of Israel as a signpost to truth. When we have wandered away from our first love, when we have settled for something less than God's promises, disappointment can show us the way back home. God identified the dissatisfaction among the people of ancient Israel as an indicator that all things apart from his presence will always fall short of filling their hearts. The second chapter of Jeremiah is filled with the imagery of inevitable disappointment for those who seek to supplement the love of God with other pursuits:

"Now why go to Egypt
to drink water from the Shihor?
And why go to Assyria
to drink water from the River?

Why do you go about so much,
changing your ways?
You will be disappointed by Egypt
as you were by Assyria.

You will also leave that place
with your hands on your head,
for the LORD has rejected those you trust;
you will not be helped by them" (Jeremiah 2:18, 36-37).

When we face disappointment we are faced with a choice. It can lead us further into futile pursuits for fulfillment or it can be the signpost that causes us to turn around and be welcomed back into the arms of the Father. If we will allow Him, this is one way God can use disappointment in lives of believers.

But this type of disappointment is far different from what we might call holy discontent, the unsatisfied hunger that reminds us we have indeed been ushered in to a great banquet, but the feast has not fully been served. In the hands of God, this can be an equally powerful signpost.

Saint Augustine is often quoted for his words about restlessness and dissatisfaction. On the first page of his Confessions, Augustine summarizes the story of his life in a single confession to God: "You have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You." So often this line is quoted as the quality that distinguishes the believer from the unbeliever, the rested from the restless. But I don't think this is what Augustine intended, nor do I think it is a helpful place to draw the line. Those who confess Christ as Lord do not cease to confess disappointment. Moreover, one cannot read Augustine's Confessions without realizing that he saw himself as a restless soul! He saw all of us this way, and for good reason. As believers, we still struggle with sin and disappointment. We are still restless, still longing, still hungry, and at times discontent. Our thirst is partially satisfied now because we are partially sanctified. We have, in the Spirit, a taste of what is to come. But the table of God is not fully here yet, and at times we are filled with discontent at the thought of it. With all of creation, I am still groaning for restoration, reconciliation, redemption—to sit at the table that has been prepared for me and recline with the one who's prepared it.

I believe the rest that Augustine is talking about is eschatological rest—and we are not there yet. Our way there is full of longing, filled with discontent that the world is not as it will be, marked by the difficulty of waiting, and the hunger for more than we now taste and see. But how beautiful this longing is! For our disappointment is a testimony to the promise that we will rest in God, and such a signpost is an unlikely blessing in the midst of our need. I believe this is why Jesus declares throughout the beatitudes that those on the verge of disappointment, those in the grasp of pangs for something more—these are the blessed among us. Blessed are the poor in spirit. Blessed are those who mourn, and those who are meek. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. Such hunger is a declaration that we are indeed on our way to a great banquet and God is truly reconciling all things so that we—and our enemies—have a place at the table. Our restlessness can thus be deeply devotional, our discontent a constant confession that we anticipate nothing less than redemption and restoration, a place at the great table of God. Blessed indeed are the hungry.

My Messy House

2010-09-03T10:29:00.000-07:00

By Jill Carattini

Kathleen Norris tells a story of a little boy who wrote a poem called "The Monster Who Was Sorry." The poem begins with a confession: he doesn't like it when his father yells at him. The monster's response is to throw his sister down the stairs, then to destroy his room, and finally to destroy the whole town. The poem concludes: "Then I sit in my messy house and say to myself, 'I shouldn't have done all that.'"

The confession of Saint Paul bears a fine resemblance: "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but I do what I hate" (Romans 15:7). Regret has a way of shining the flood lights on the mess within us. Norris further expounds the faithful candor of the child describing his own muddled story: "'My messy house' says it all: with more honesty than most adults could have mustered, the boy made a metaphor for himself that admitted the depth of his rage and also gave him a way out. If that boy had been a novice in the fourth-century monastic desert, his elders might have told him that he was well on the way toward repentance."

The journey of a Christian through the many rooms of faith posits countless opportunities to peer at the monster within. There are days in the life of faith when I question whether I am living up to the title of Christian or disciple—or even casual pilgrim. In certain rooms of awareness I find there is no question: I am not. Yet, as G.K. Chesterton wrote in his autobiography, I have only ever found one religion that "dared to go down with me into the depth of myself." This is precisely the invitation of Christianity. What we find are messy houses, filled with hidden staircases built of excuses, and idols of good deeds atop mantels of false security—in short, the home of Christ in disarray at our own hands.

If we were to remain shut up in this place alone, we might begin to wonder why we should ever hope for anything other than mess and wreckage. Paul's confession marks the futility of our own efforts to clean the house. But we do not make the journeys to the depths of ourselves alone. In fact, we should not have discovered the messes had they not been shown to us in the first place. We are guided to these places in our consciences, to images of ourselves unadorned, and finally to broken and contrite hearts. Faith in Christ is the opportunity to be searched by the Spirit of Truth, the Breathe of Holiness, the God who maneuvers us through messy rooms and sin-stained walls and exposes our monstrous ways. It would indeed be a futile journey if we walked this path alone.

Instead, the very Spirit that shows us the monster in a messy house shows us the one who removes the masks, clears the wreckage, and makes us human again. In a scene from C.S. Lewis's Narnia, the great Aslan is seen tearing the costume off the child in front of him. The child writhes in pain from the razor sharp claws that feel as though they pierce his very being. With mounting intensity, Aslan rips away layer after layer, until the child is absolutely certain he will die from the agony. But when it is all over and every last layer has been removed, the child delights in the new-found freedom, having long forgotten the weight of the costume he carried.

The journey of a soul through its messiest rooms is not merely a drive-by glimpse of the depths of our sin and our need for repentance. We are shown the weight of our masks and the extent of our messes; we are handed the great yoke of our own failures: All so we can be shown again the one who asks to take them all from us. "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows... But he was pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities" (Isaiah 53:4-5).

Quite mercifully, it is through the dingy windows of a messy house that one has the clearest view of the cross.

Concerning Division in the Church

2010-08-27T11:48:00.000-07:00

By Pastor John Samson

"I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name." - 1 Cor 1:10-15 (ESV)

As the Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian Church there were many issues that were of concern to him, one of which he outlines in this passage, namely division in the Church. He wished to see harmony and unity and was alarmed to hear reports that there were four factions amongst the Church members. The King James Bible states the problem this way, “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.” In considering the four groups a few things come to mind.

The first group he mentions were followers of Paul. Now lets remember who is writing this. It’s Paul! Yet Paul seems just as much concerned that people would follow him blindly as they would anyone else. Paul saw his ministry as a gift to the whole body of Christ, and he was not in this to gain a following, but to point people to Christ. He looks back at his time of ministry in the city and now knowing of these factions is happy when he remembers he did not baptize them, except for the two people he names, Crispus and Gaius. If he had baptized most of the Christian Corinthians (even though doing so would not have violated any Scriptural principle at all) then it might have added fuel to the fire, so to speak, further cementing the ridiculous idea that these Christians are unified by their love for Paul, rather than another prominent Christian leader. Paul wanted the Church to look to Christ alone as the Head and that there be no divisions amongst them, united in the same mind and the same judgment (v. 10).

The second group were followers of Apollos. We are told that he was a very eloquent speaker, mighty in the Scriptures (Acts 18:24). It is easy to see why certain members of the Church might gravitate towards him and enjoy his ministry. There is nothing wrong with enjoying a ministry. The problem comes when we can only hear one minister. Christ did not give just one ministry gift to the Body of Christ (Eph 4:8-12) and no one sees the complete picture by themselves. Proverbs 11:14 tells us, "There is safety in the multitude of counsellers," and likewise, there is safety when the people are exposed to more than one ministry gift.

The third group were followers of Cephas (or Peter). Peter was, like Paul, an obvious leader amongst the Apostles and was a leader amongst leaders. He is prominent not merely in the Gospels, but preached the opening sermon on the Day of Pentecost when 3,000 people came to Christ. Very little needs to be said about why believers would feel safe following Peter’s lead.

The fourth group is intriguing though – the “followers of Christ.” Isn’t that exactly what Paul was longing to produce - followers of Christ?

Well, yes, and no. Yes, Paul would want people to be followers of Christ and nothing would please him more to see this, but it would seem from the context that in the division that was taking place in the church at Corinth it would be fair to say that these “followers of Christ” had just as much a divisive spirit as the others. They are listed as one of the four splinter groups in the Church.

Perhaps they would only listen to Christ’s words, and not listen to any Apostle of Christ. Perhaps they would not submit to any human leader, and this too would be wrong. All Christians are called to the safety and nourishment of the local Church body where pastors (elders) are given oversight in order that they might nourish and care for their spiritual wellbeing. This is the way of Christ for us all. Hebrews 13:17 says, "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you."

I have met Christians who have this "I am of Christ" mindset in our day. They say they love Jesus but have no time for Paul. In a recent conversation I had, one lady said Paul was wrong (concerning the issue under discussion) and she felt much more comfortable with Jesus. Of course, I was immediately alarmed by this and sought to point out that although no human being except Christ was ever perfect, when Paul wrote Scripture, he wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. More than that, to be an apostle of Christ is to be one sent forth by Christ with the full authority of Christ. If someone rejects an apostle of Christ, they also reject the One who sent him. Jesus made this principle clear even as He sent out the 72, “The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Luke 10:16) . Sadly, the exchange I had with the lady did not go well. She refused to listen. I pray God will open this dear lady’s eyes as to her folly and the seriousness of her error. Her issue is not merely with the Apostle Paul, but with the Lord Jesus Christ who sent him.

As I consider the factions in Corinth from the super-spiritual “I am of Christ” group, even to the followers of Paul, Peter and Apollos, I think we can all take note of the error of putting any one man on a spiritual pedestal. Instead, as we serve Christ in His body the Church, let us enjoy and submit to the many gifts God has placed there for our edification. Not even Paul sought followers of Paul, and each of us as ministers of Christ should never seek to make people dependent on us.

We can promote the right thing always by pointing away from ourselves and to the Christ who not only saves, but nourishes and tenderly cares for His sheep as the masterful Shepherd. As Paul wrote later to the Corinthians, “For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake.” (2 Cor 4:5)
Comments:

I was certainly one of those Christians that says, "I follow Christ" to mean that I did not need anyone else, and even considered not going to church once. But the Scriptures clearly say that God designed the church so that we would all need each other and it is essential to use our gifts for others edification. Christians are missing out on some blessings by not going to church or refusing to be blessed by others in the church.

Why Pick On Me?

2010-08-26T12:45:00.000-07:00

By Hilda J. Born

On the second day of her Mexican holiday, Eunice
Brant and her husband, Len, headed for town. Just
as she stepped off the bus, Eunice felt her purse
slide from under her arm. Startled, she saw a young
man knock over a nearby ice cream stand in his rush
to get away.

"Polizia! Polizia!" Eunice shouted in hopes of getting
attention. Len followed the robber through irregular
alleys, facing down fierce dogs, but the thief got away.

The Brants' repeated calls for help brought two men
with guns, who offered a ride to the police station. At
least, that is what Eunice hoped they meant since she
did not understand Spanish.

"Should we trust them?" she asked Len.

"What choice have we got?" he retorted.

At the police station, they reported the theft of Eunice's
purse. It held her passport, her camera, a bank card,
a "Four Spiritual Laws" witnessing booklet and some
money. The Spanish-speaking attendants gave them
the papers to fill out.

Visibly upset, the Brants came back to notify their
hotel of the robbery. Eunice lamented her loss.
"Of all the people on that bus, why did he pick on
me?" she wondered. "I just hope the guy reads those
Four Spiritual Laws that are in my bag. Too bad they're
in English."

Three days later, word came that the purse had been
found and the thief caught. When the Brants returned
to the police station, they were greeted by a bilingual
clerk. She listed the purse's contents, including the
gospel pamphlet.

Eunice asked her, "Will you please translate it into
Spanish and give a copy to the young thief?"

"May I read it, too?" the policewoman asked.

"Certainly," Eunice answered.

Then, she mused, "Maybe this is why my purse was
snatched."

"You intended to harm me, but God intended it for
good to acomplish what is now being done, the
saving of many lives" (Genesis 50:20).

A “New Agnosticism” — Coming Soon?

2010-08-17T12:32:00.000-07:00

By Albert Mohler

Given what is at stake, living on the basis of a mere assumption that we cannot know if God exists seems a bit flimsy.

No one seems quite sure what to do with agnostics. In a sense, they are the odd cousins at the theological family reunion. The atheists and the theists know where they stand, but the agnostics? Who knows?

Writing recently at Slate.com, Ron Rosenbaum suggests that perhaps the time has come for a “new agnosticism” to match wits with the “New Atheists,” such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. It’s time for a “revivified agnosticism,” Rosenbaum argues. As he says, their T-shirts will read simply, “I just don’t know.”

Rosenbaum makes an interesting case for his proposed revival of agnosticism. As he cites, the word itself was coined by Thomas Henry Huxley, Charles Darwin’s aggressive sidekick. Huxley was known as “Darwin’s bulldog” for a good reason, for he was totally committed to evolutionary theory and he was nothing less than pugnacious in argument.

Huxley defined agnosticism in terms of his principle that no one should claim objective knowledge “unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty.” In Huxley’s view, this principle of thought rules out any form of theism. At the same time, it supposedly renders atheism unnecessary. In the view of Huxley, atheism actually conceded too much to theism, for it seemed to allow that some adequate evidence for or against the existence of God might be brought forward.

Rosenbaum takes this argument a step forward. Atheists, he insists, actually “display a credulous and childlike faith, [and] worship a certainty as yet unsupported by evidence — the certainty that they can or will be able to explain how and why the universe came into existence.”

Thus, Rosenbaum wants “a distinct identity for agnosticism, to hold it apart from the certitudes of both theism and atheism.” This is not a small project.
“Let’s get one thing straight,” he insists: “Agnosticism is not some kind of weak-tea atheism. Agnosticism is not atheism or theism. It is radical skepticism, doubt in the possibility of certainty, opposition to the unwarranted certainties that atheism and theism offer.”

At this point Rosenbaum’s argument gets really interesting. He accuses the New Atheists of intolerance and their own form of heresy hunting, and ridicules them for their untenable faith that all the big questions can be answered with satisfaction by science. The New Atheists, he laments, “seemed to have stopped thinking since their early grade-school science fair triumphs.”

But Rosenbaum has no tolerance for theism, either. In fact, he basically accepts the atheistic rejection of any belief in a personal God. “Let me make clear that I accept most of the New Atheist’s criticism of religious bad behavior over the centuries, and of theology itself,” he asserts. “I just don’t accept turning science into a new religion until it can show it has all the answers, which it hasn’t, and probably never will.”

Well, if Rosenbaum generally accepts the atheist argument, where can his own argument go? It goes to the one “big question” that seems to vex him most — “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

Now, that is one of the perennial questions of philosophy and theology, but it is an arbitrary and somewhat eccentric question to establish at the center of his argument. The more central question is, of course, the existence or non-existence of God. But Rosenbaum’s point here seems to be that he lacks any confidence that science can supply an adequate or certain answer to the question of existence itself.

On these big questions, Rosenbaum proposes uncertainty. “Agnosticism doesn’t fear uncertainty.” he insists. “It doesn’t cling like a child in the dark to the dogmas of orthodox religion or atheism. Agnosticism respects and celebrates uncertainty and has been doing so since before quantum physics revealed the uncertainty that lies at the very groundwork of being.”

Rosenbaum clarifies that agnostics do not lack certainty on all questions of knowledge. They accept that some truths can be known, verified, and defended. But not the question of God’s existence or the primary existence of anything at all.

But, in a fascinating twist, Rosenbaum suggests, contrary to Huxley, that the existence of God is not, in principle, unknowable. “I can conceive of logically possible states of affairs in which a God is knowable, and I can conceive of cases in which it is certain that no God exists.”

Well, what might these “logically possible states of affairs” be? At this point in Rosenbaum’s essay, I feel cheated. How can he simply assert that he can conceive of some intellectual conditions for theism or atheism without naming them?

In the end, Rosenbaum’s argument for a “new agnosticism” seems more rooted in attitude than in logic. He accuses both the New Atheists and classical theists of intolerance and a lack of intellectual humility.

But, check out this rather striking sentence: “Agnosticism is not for the simple-minded and is not as congenial as atheism and theism are.” Ah, so by implication, theism and atheism might be for the simple-minded, but it takes a higher intellect to be agnostic. How humble.

He continues: “The courage to admit we don’t know and may never know what we don’t know is more difficult than saying, sure, we know.”

This is one of the central problems with agnosticism as a worldview. In claiming to take a humble approach, it actually ends up in a posture that is rather lacking in humility. The agnostic argues that we, as human creatures, are capable of deciding the intellectual terms when it comes to the big questions such as, first and foremost, the existence and possible knowledge of God.

A first principle of the Christian faith is the fact that special revelation is necessary in order to have any adequate certainty on these questions. Prior to this, the Christian worldview affirms that God has implanted the knowledge of himself in nature. In both forms of revelation, God sets the terms for his own knowability.

The intellectual state of affairs that makes theism possible is the knowledge given by God himself in revelation. Atheism rejects the possibility or actuality of such revelation. Fair enough; at least we know where we stand. Agnosticism requires what divine revelation does not offer — certainty on our own arbitrary terms.

The second major problem with agnosticism is more practical. It just doesn’t work as a middle position or alternative to theism and atheism. Why? Because the question of God’s existence or non-existence is simply too important and fundamental to human life. Every human being acts either upon the assumption that God exists, or that He does not exist. In the main, agnostics side with the atheists on this question, and operate on the assumption that God does not exist.

On this score, the atheists have it over the agnostics in terms of argument. There is little real difference in the two positions in terms of everyday life. Thus, agnostics are counted among the non-believers. But, to Ron Rosenbaum’s consternation, they actually seem less intellectually confident than the atheists.

Given what is at stake, living on the basis of a mere assumption that we cannot know if God exists seems a bit flimsy.

Ron Rosenbaum’s argument is worthy of consideration even as it shows where a “new agnosticism” might lead. But, I’m guessing that “I just don’t know” isn’t going to end up as a best-selling T-shirt.

4 RULES OF LIFE: "DRINK, STEAL, SWEAR & LIE"

2010-08-14T11:22:00.000-07:00

I met this guy while I was in Albuquerque and he hasa motto he lives by everyday. He said listen carefully andlive by these 4 rules: Drink, Steal, Swear, & Lie.

I was shaking my head 'no', but he then told me to listenwhile he explained his four rules. So here they are:

1.. "Drink" from the "everlasting cup" every day.

2.. "Steal" a moment to help someone that is in worse shapethan you are.

3.. "Swear" that you will be a better person today thanyesterday.

4.. And last, but not least, when you "lie" down at nightthank God you live in America and have freedom. I am not as good as I should be.I am not as good as I could be.But THANK GOD, I am better than I used to be !

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

As you pray, remember to, ". . . Come boldly unto the throneof grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help inthe time of need" (Hebrews 4:16).

The New School Prayer

2010-08-10T14:09:00.000-07:00

By Unknown Author

Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule.
For this great nation under God
Finds mention of Him very odd.

If Scripture now the class recites,
It violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
Becomes a Federal matter now.

Our hair can be purple, orange or green,
That's no offense; it's a freedom scene.
The law is specific, the law is precise.
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.

For praying in a public hall
Might offend someone with no faith at all.
In silence alone we must meditate,
God's name is prohibited by the state.

They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.
We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the 'unwed daddy,' our Senior King.

It's "inappropriate" to teach right from wrong,
We're taught that such "judgments" do not belong.
We can get our condoms and birth controls,
study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.

But the Ten Commandments are not allowed.
No word of God must reach this crowd.
It's scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns the school's a mess.

So God, please listen when I cannot speak,
And hold my hand through school, all week.

Dance

2010-08-08T11:47:00.000-07:00

By Carol Knapp

Let them praise his name in the dance. . . . For the
Lord taketh pleasure in his people. . . Psalm 149:3–4.

It was billed as a summer hoedown at Monte
Vista Grove Homes, the retirement community
where I was taking care of my elderly aunt. A
barbecue luncheon would be followed by a country
& western duo singing and strumming guitars.

When the music began, I noticed 89-year old Betty,
a former military nurse, tapping her fingers in time to
it. Leaving my table, I invited her to dance. Without
hesitation, she held my hands and bounced to the
beat. The years vanished in her broadening grin, and
she was that spunky young nurse cadet again.

Then Bonnie shuffled my way. She had once taught
midwifery in Africa. "I've never danced," she announced,
"and I want to try something new on my eighty-sixth
birthday." Her heart condition limited her to gentle
swaying, but behind her glasses her eyes shone, and
in them I could glimpse the adventuring girl.

I sauntered among the tables, hands outstretched,
inviting anyone to share a dance. Bob, wearing western
plaid, twirled me in circles. Sherman, partially paralyzed
from a stroke, balanced against my shoulder while his
knees rocked to the tune.

Sheer joy spread through the room, and others began
to dance. This was more than good food and small talk.
God's Spirit was moving among us, drawing us together
through our spontaneous gestures of caring and
connection.

I floated home, euphoric, thinking that the angels in
heaven surely must strum a guitar or two and dance
a little country.

Jesus, lead me in the dance that connects us with
You. You know the steps so well.

Is Your Hut Burning?

2010-08-08T11:45:00.000-07:00

Unknown Author

The only survivor of a shipwreck was washed up
on a small, uninhabited island. He prayed feverishly
for God to rescue him, and every day he scanned
the horizon for help, but none seemed forthcoming.

Exhausted, he eventually managed to build a little
hut out of driftwood to protect him from the weather,
and to store his few possessions.

But then one day, after scavenging for food, he arrived
home to find his little hut in flames, the smoke rolling
up to the sky. The worst had happened; everything
was lost. He was stunned with grief and anger. "God,
how could you do this to me!" he cried.

Early the next day, however, he was awakened by the
sound of a ship that was approaching the island. It had
come to rescue him. "How did you know I was here?"
asked the weary man of his rescuers. "We saw your
smoke signal," they replied. It is easy to get discouraged
when things are going badly. But we shouldn't lose heart,
because God is at work in our lives, even in the midst
of pain and suffering.

Remember, next time your little hut is burning to
the ground---it just may be a smoke signal that
summons the grace of God.

The Face Phenomenon

2010-08-06T09:24:00.000-07:00

By Jill Carattini

Thomas Grüter has always had trouble putting names with faces. But unlike most of us who might have trouble recollecting the name of the man who just said hello, Grüter's trouble lies in recognizing the face of the man who just said hello—even if it is his own father's. His condition is called prosopagnosia or "face blindness," and until recently the disorder was thought to be exceedingly rare. But new research led by a team that included Grüter himself shows the disorder is surprisingly common.

Those affected with prosopagnosia are not forgetful or inattentive, nor are they the social snobs they are often accused of being. When it comes to faces—even their own—they see very little that distinguishes one from another. The part of the brain that signals face recognition simply does not respond. As a result, they may greet acquaintances as strangers, struggle to keep up with plots in movies, and have difficulty finding their own children at school pick-up time. "I see faces that are human," notes one woman of her condition, "but they all look more or less the same. It's like looking at a bunch of golden retrievers: some may seem a little older or smaller or bigger, but essentially they all look alike."(1)

The more I think about what it would mean to live unable to recognize faces, the more I am amazed at our ability to do so at all. Human faces are quite complex, differing in both great and minute details. Our faces change with expression or circumstance, angle or shift of light; they are transformed by emotions and altered by different situations. Given the intricacy of the task, it is phenomenal that we should be able to recognize so many faces so effortlessly in the first place.
Yet the face is one of the very first things we learn to respond to as infants.

Developmental psychologists speak readily of the importance of the human face in the life of a newborn, particularly the faces of mother and father, which the child quickly comes to recognize. Princeton professor James Loder speaks of the tendency of an infant to smile when one holds the mere configuration of a face on a stick beside the crib. Writes Loder, "[T]he face phenomenon is not strictly something that comes only from the environment; it is also a construct created by the child and developed out of the child's inherent resources and deep-seated longing.

Children seem uniquely endowed with a potential capacity to sum up all the complexity of the nurturing presence in the figure of the face."(2) For the child, the face plays a central role in their developing sense of the order of the universe. Thus, when the face of the loving nurturer goes away in any capacity (which is inevitable), the child's world is upset on some real level. For what has gone away is not merely a static face but a much greater presence.

In this, children inherently illustrate a correlation drawn in biblical language. In both Greek and in Hebrew, the word for "face" is also the word for "presence." Though we do not literally behold the face of God, it is the Father's greater countenance that we seek, God's presence that comforts above all. The psalmist's plea is that the confirming presence of God's love would remain with him always: "Do not hide your face from me, do not turn your servant away in anger; you have been my helper. Do not reject me or forsake me, O God my Savior. Though my father and mother forsake me, the LORD will receive me" (Psalm 27:9-10). Scripture seems to pronounce what is echoed in the skills and longings of a developing child. Namely, our years urge us to pursue "a relationship with the One who is the cosmic ordering, self-confirming presence," notes Loder.(3) That is to say, the enduring pursuit of the faithful is a pursuit of the Face that will not go away.

I cannot imagine the hardship of those for whom no face is familiar. But there are times when God's face is certainly obscure to me, and it is a painful discomfort. I know the signs of God's assuring presence are around me, but I am at times hard-pressed to recognize it. It is in such times when I am reminded by my own longing that God is near. Though recognition is a task that doesn't always come effortlessly, the longing to know the face of God is a sign placed deeply within us, in the smallest among us, an assuring mark of God's very presence. Wherever we are in our stages of recognition, that promise is extended: For now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; but then we shall see face to face.

Not Guilty

2010-08-05T10:08:00.000-07:00

By Pam Nixon

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous
to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness" (John 1:9).

During the early years of her Christian walk, Teri
understood that Jesus died for her sins. But after
awhile, she began to feel guilty over some of her
past sins. She repented - again and again - but
she didn't feel forgiven. The guilt always returned
to haunt her.

One day, Teri poured out her heart to the Lord
again, begging Him for forgiveness for a sin she
committed long ago. She sensed that He was
speaking to her: "Why do you keep confessing
the same sins you've already asked Me to forgive?
Was My sacrifice not enough for you?"

Teri came to attention and thought about what she
had just heard in her spirit. She began to realize
that she had been listening to the lies of the enemy.
She resolved that since God has told us He forgives
us and no longer remembers our sins, she should
believe His Word instead of the enemy's lies.

Isaiah 1:18 says, " 'Come, let us discuss this,' says
the LORD. 'Though your sins are like scarlet, they
will be as white as snow; though they are red as
crimson, they will be like wool.' " In this verse, we
have God's assurance that He will forgive our sins
when we confess our wrongdoing, repent, and ask
His forgiveness. No matter how bad we think our
sins are, God assures us that there is nothing too
big for Him to forgive.

Throughout the Bible, we see people who have
committed all sorts of sins: David committed
adultery and murder. Paul murdered Christians.
Rahab earned her living as a prostitute. Abraham
lied. Peter denied knowing Jesus. But all found
forgiveness and the grace of God.

Psalm 103:12 says, "As far as the east is from
the west, so far has He removed our transgressions
from us." Not only does God take away our sins,
but He also forgets them. "I will forgive their wrong-
doing and never remember their sin" (Jeremiah 31:34).

Once you've confessed your sins and repented,
let them go. Don't let the enemy bring you under
condemnation. God has forgiven you, so embrace it.

Free Moral Agent?

2010-08-02T13:46:00.000-07:00

We do have a free moral agency, but not a free will. The meaning of a free will would mean I can do whatever I want with no influence from God or Satan. Meaning that God is not sovereign in any way shape or form. This is totally unbiblical considering that God is in control of everything. If He wasn't, then He wouldn't be God. Does that make sense?

Some scripture to ponder:

God's Sovereignty

1. Rom. 11:8, "just as it is written, 'God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes to see not and ears to hear not, down to this very day.'"

2. Mark 4:11-12,"And He was saying to them, "To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God; but those who are outside get everything in parables, 12in order that while seeing, they may see and not perceive; and while hearing, they may hear and not understand lest they return and be forgiven."

3. 2 Thess. 2:11, "And for this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they might believe what is false."

4. Rom. 9:18, "So thenHe has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires."

5. Exodus 4:21, "And the Lord said to Moses, 'When you go back to Egypt see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your power; but I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go."

a). See also Exodus 7:3; 9:12; 10:1; 11:10; 14:4 where God hardens Pharaoh's heart.

b). Exodus 8:32, "But Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also, and he did not let the people go."

6. Exodus 14:17, "And as for Me, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they will go in after them; and I will be honored through Pharaoh and all his army, through his chariots and his horsemen."

7. Deut. 2:30, "But Sihon king of Heshbon was not willing for us to pass through his land; for the Lord your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, in order to deliver him into your hand, as he is today."

8. 2 Chron. 25:20, "But Amaziah would not listen, for it was from God, that He might deliver them into the hand of Joash because they had sought the gods of Edom."

9. Isaiah 6:10, "Render the hearts of this people insensitive, their ears dull, and their eyes dim, lest they see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and return and be healed."

10. Rom. 9:18, "So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires."

Also along with the fact that us as being totally depraved evil beings that nothing is good inside of us except God. When we do as Romans 10:9 says for us to do thats when God's goodness comes in. When we aren't following God it shows our depravity.

Total Depravity

1. Jer. 17:9, "The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?"

2. Mark 7:21-23, "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23"All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man."

3. John 3:19, "And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil."

4. John 8:34, "Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin."

5. Rom. 3:10-12, "as it is written, “There is none righteous, not even one; 11There is none who understands. There is none who seeks for God; 12All have turned aside, together they have become useless; There is none who does good, There is not even one.”

6. Rom. 5:6, "For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly."

7. Rom. 6:20, "For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness."

8. Rom. 7:18, "For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the wishing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not."

9. Rom. 7:23, "but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members."

10. 1 Cor. 2:14, "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised."

a). 1 Cor. 2:1-5, Paul did not come by the power of human wisdom, but the power of the Holy Spirit.

b). 1 Cor. 2:6-9, Paul speaks God’s wisdom which the world does not understand.

c). 1 Cor. 2:10, The Spirit of God reveals the sacred and spiritual things of God.

d). 1 Cor. 2:11-12, Christians have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit of God, which is why the Christians know the things freely given from God.

e). 1 Cor. 2:13-14, "which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. 14But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." Therefore, 1 Cor. 2:14 is not saying that the natural man, the unregenerate person, cannot understand God's wisdom, it is also saying that they cannot understand because they do not have the Spirit of God. This means that the unsaved cannot understand spiritual things because they do not have the Spirit of God.

11. Eph. 2:1, "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins."

12. Eph. 2:3, "Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." In this verse "nature" is the Greek phusei. It is the dative case (indirect object). This means that the text is not saying that we are by nature children of wrath because we sin. It is saying that we are by nature children of wrath.

13. 1 Tim. 1:9, "Realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers."

Questions?

We would like to hear them. Email us at LighthousePrayerLine3@gmail.com .

SIN Handout: (Part 5 of 5)

2010-07-31T10:46:00.000-07:00

22 Biblical Words for Sin

Hebrew

The Old Testament uses 6 different nouns and 3 verbs to describe sin:

râ‛âh

This term is used more than 600 times and is most often translated as "evil" or "bad" ([Strong's #7451]). It carries the implication of something that is contrary to God's nature.

chaṭṭâ'âh

This term is used almost 300 times and is most often translated as "sin" or "offense" ([Strong's #2403]). It carries the implication of that which is deserving of punishment.

râshâ‛

This term is used more than 250 times and is most often translated as "wicked" ([Strong's #7563]). It carries the implication of something that is morally wrong.

‛âvôn

This term is used more than 200 times and is most often translated as "iniquity" [Strong's #5771]). It carries the implication of being perverse, crooked or twisted.

pesha‛

This term is used almost 100 times and is most often translated as "transgression" ([Strong's #6588]). It carries the implication of rebellion.

'âsham

This term is used more than 30 times and is most often translated as "guilty" ([Strong's #816]). It carries the implication of offense or trespass.

tâ‛âh

50 hits [Strong's #8582] A primitive root; to vacillate, that is, reel or stray (literally or figuratively); also causatively of both: - (cause to) go astray, deceive, dissemble, (cause to, make to) err, pant, seduce, (make to) stagger, (cause to) wander, be out of the way.

pâsha‛

41 hits [Strong's #6586] A primitive root (rather identical with H6585 through the idea of expansion); to break away (from just authority), that is, trespass, apostatize, quarrel: - offend, rebel, revolt, transgress (-ion, -or).

shâgâh

21 hits [Strong's #7686] A primitive root; to stray (causatively mislead), usually (figuratively) to mistake, especially (morally) to transgress; by extension (through the idea of intoxication) to reel, (figuratively) be enraptured: - (cause to) go astray, deceive, err, be ravished, sin through ignorance, (let, make to) wander.

Greek nouns

hamartia

174 hits [Strong's #266] From G264; sin (properly abstract): - offence, sin (-ful).

paraptōma

23 hits [Strong's #3900] From G3895; a side slip (lapse or deviation), that is, (unintentional) error or (wilful) transgression: - fall, fault, offence, sin, trespass. (Galatians 6:1)

parabasis

7 hits [Strong's #3847] From G3845; violation: - breaking, transgression.

asebeia

6 hits [Strong's #763] From G765; impiety, that is, (by implication) wickedness: - ungodly (-liness). (Romans 1:18)

hamartēma

4 hits [Strong's #265] From G264; a sin (properly concrete): - sin.
Greek adjectives

ponēros

76 hits [Strong's #4190] From a derivative of G4192; hurtful, that is, evil (properly in effect or influence, and thus differing from G2556, which refers rather to essential character, as well as from G4550, which indicates degeneracy from original virtue); figuratively calamitous; also (passively) ill, that is, diseased; but especially (morally) culpable, that is, derelict, vicious, facinorous; neuter (singular) mischief, malice, or (plural) guilt; masculine (singular) the devil, or (plural) sinners: - bad, evil, grievous, harm, lewd, malicious, wicked (-ness). See also G4191. (Matthew 5:45)

kakos

51 hits [Strong's #2556] Apparently a primary word; worthless (intrinsically such; whereas G4190 properly refers to effects), that is, (subjectively) depraved, or (objectively) injurious: - bad, evil, harm, ill, noisome, wicked. (Romans 13:3)

adikos

12 hits [Strong's #94] From G1 (as a negative particle) and G1349; unjust; by extension wicked; by implication treacherous; specifically heathen: - unjust, unrighteous. (I Corinthians 6:9)

anomos

10 hits [Strong's #459] From G1 (as a negative particle) and G3551; lawless, that is, (negatively) not subject to (the Jewish) law; (by implication a Gentile), or (positively) wicked: - without law, lawless, transgressor, unlawful, wicked. (I Timothy 1:9)

enochos

10 hits [Strong's #1777] From G1758; liable to (a condition, penalty or imputation): - in danger of, guilty of, subject to. (Matthew 5:21)

Greek verbs

hamartanō

43 hits [Strong's #264] Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly to miss the mark (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) to err, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass. (I Corinthians 6:18)

planaō

39 hits [Strong's #4105] From G4106; to (properly cause to) roam (from safety, truth, or virtue): - go astray, deceive, err, seduce, wander, be out of the way. (I Corinthians 6:9)

parabainō

4 hits [Strong's #3845] From G3844 and the base of G939; to go contrary to, that is, violate a command: - (by) transgress (-ion).

** More verses to consider:

• Phil. 3:12-14
• 2 Cor. 3:18
• 2 Peter 3:18
• Hebrews 5:11-6:4
• John 17:17
• Col. 3:16
• 1 Peter 2:2-3
• Col. 3:9-10
• Gen. 6:5
• Rom 3:10-17

Luke 4:1-2

Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert, [2] where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry.

God can distinguish between temptation:

James 1:13-15 (New International Version)

13When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

Name something you’ve ever been tempted by & didn’t act upon it. If your honest, lust or coveting has already occurred; either way, you’ve sinned. And for man, it is always a sin!

It’s important to note that “temptation” is not just an act. It is a process from holiness(A) to sinfulness(B). At any point on this line just short of A, sin abounds.

Matthew 5:27-28 (New International Version)

27"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[a] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Read John Calvin’s strong remarks concerning these verses: “As it is generally by the wantonness of the eyes that temptations are presented to the mind, and as lust enters, as it were, by that door, Christ used this mode of speaking, when he wished to condemn lust: which is evident from the expression, to lust after her. This teaches us also, that not only those who form a deliberate purpose of fornication, but those who admit any polluted thoughts, are reckoned adulterers before God. The hypocrisy of the Papists, therefore, is too gross and stupid, when they affirm that lust is not a sin, until it gain the full consent of the heart. But we need not wonder, that they make sin to be so small a matter: for those who ascribe righteousness to the merit of works must be very dull and stupid in judging of their sins.”

A Working Faith

2010-07-30T14:35:00.000-07:00

By Margaret Manning

Many of us recall from our flannel-graph Sunday school
classes the story of the short, little man who climbed into
a sycamore tree to get a glimpse at Jesus. As I revisited
this story recently, I noticed that Jesus calls Zaccheus a
"son of Abraham," and I was struck by how discordant this
title would have seemed in its application to Zaccheus.
Abraham, the great patriarch of Israel was called by God
to leave his homeland and follow God into a land that God
would show him. Scripture tells us that "Abraham believed
God and it was counted to him as righteousness" (Genesis
15:6). How then could Jesus count a scheming, conniving,
tax-collecting swindler as a "son of Abraham"? What was
the great demonstration of faith by this much-hated man
that would prompt this commendation of Jesus?

As we examine the details of his story we begin to get
glimpses into Zaccheus's faith. Understanding his place
in society as a chief tax collector gives us our first instance
of faith. As a chief tax collector, Zaccheus would have had
many "junior" tax collectors working for him. In a town like
Jericho, which was quite prosperous and large, Zaccheus
would have been very rich, and would have had quite a
large business profiting off of cheating fellow Israelites out
of their money. Yet prosperity did not insulate Zaccheus
from being hated by his countrymen. After all, he profited
from a system prone to abuse, which rewarded tax
collectors for excessive collections.(1) Thus, the Jews saw
tax collectors as mercenaries and thieves, and a Jew to be
in business with the Romans meant utter ostracism from
the Jewish community.(2) So we can understand why Luke
points out that all who heard Jesus invite himself over to
Zaccheus's house for dinner grumbled and muttered.
Zaccheus was not a popular guy in his society.

But hearing the news of Jesus's arrival in his town, this
much-maligned man pushed his way through the crowds,
hoisted up his garments in a most undignified manner just
to get a glimpse of Jesus. Zaccheus had obviously heard
the stories about this Jesus--his healings, his radical love
and acceptance, and his remarkable, authoritative teachings.
He had heard about Jesus, but now his curious faith
compelled him to see for himself if all that he had heard
was really true.

We also glimpse Zaccheus's faith at work in his response
to Jesus inviting himself over for dinner. Jesus extends
gracious acceptance to one despised. In response,
Zaccheus overflows with generous gratitude: "Lord, half
of my possessions I will give to the poor" (Luke 19:8).
Jesus has asked for nothing but hospitality from Zaccheus,
and in response, Zaccheus, the very rich man, willingly
surrenders half of his wealth. This is not an attempt of
Zaccheus to earn Jesus's favor by works, but rather a faith-
motivated response to Jesus's love and acceptance.
Zaccheus's willingness to let go of half of his wealth
demonstrates a faith that trusts in God's gracious provision.
God's graciousness towards him prompts his faith-fueled
donation.

Zaccheus's faithful response goes beyond gratitude as he
seeks to restore justice to those whom he has defrauded.
It wasn't enough for Zaccheus to give away half of his wealth
in response to Jesus' grace and acceptance; he insists on
repaying those he has defrauded. Now, the Old Testament
requirement for restitution is for the amount defrauded plus
one-fifth.(3) Zaccheus doesn't simply meet the letter of the
law; he exceeds it by offering to repay four times as much
as he has defrauded others! Four-fold restitution will
impoverish Zaccheus, as he's already committed to give
away half of his wealth. In response to Jesus's gracious
acceptance, Zaccheus parts with his wealth as a sign of
his faith at work--a sign of his salvation. Jesus declares,
"Today, salvation has come to this house, because he too
is a son of Abraham" (Luke 19:9).

Like Abraham, Zaccheus responds with faith. Abraham
believed God and it was "counted as righteousness"
(Genesis 15:6). Abraham's belief in God prompted action.
His faith compelled him to follow God's lead even though
that meant leaving family, land, comfort, and security. In
the same way, by voluntarily impoverishing himself,
Zaccheus demonstrates that he too is a child of Abraham
because he lives by faith--faith that demonstrates its true
character in action.

Has your faith motivated you to action? Has it filled you
with gratitude so that you abundantly give of your time,
your talents, and your resources? Has it shown up through
visible and tangible demonstrations of love and justice? Or,
is faith a random, disjointed collection of ideas that make
no claim on the way you live your life? As we remember
the story of Zaccheus, will it be said of you and of me:
"Today salvation has come to this house, for he, too, is
a son of Abraham?"

(Margaret Manning is associate writer at Ravi Zacharias
International Ministries in Atlanta, Georgia.)

SIN Handout: (Part 4 of 5)

2010-07-24T05:53:00.000-07:00

Emulating God’s Character?

Pelagianism Resurrected Evangelical Style: Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!" 4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke. 5 And I said: "Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!" (Isaiah 6:2-5 ESV)

But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. (Matthew 15:18-19 ESV)

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9 ESV)

It never fails that Pharisees emphasize their own personal holiness, goodness and righteousness rather than their own unworthiness in comparison to Christ and to God's absolute holiness. The old cliché, what would Jesus do is based on the false assumption that sinful human beings can rival, equal or even excel above God's own holiness. Pharisees love to emphasize the law of God and you will rarely hear them mention the doctrine of salvation by grace alone. Why is this? It is because they have an overly high opinion of themselves as inherently holy rather than inherently sinful and corrupt. Even regenerated, justified and converted Christians retain the sinful nature and an inward corruption.

An Evangelical minister I know regularly emphasizes our faithfulness, our righteousness, and our emulation of God's character. But he does so self-righteously since the Bible continually says that there is none righteous (Romans 3:10-12; 3:20-23). In fact, the word emulation means:

–verb (used with object)

1. to try to equal or excel; imitate with effort to equal or surpass: to emulate one's father as a concert violinist.

2. to rival with some degree of success: Some smaller cities now emulate the major capitals in their cultural offerings.
Our efforts to emulate the character of God fall so short that the comparison is similar to a mentally challenged child trying to play Mozart on piano or violin. The results come so far short as to not even resemble the original composition. Human beings are totally corrupt to the point that the divine image is hardly recognizable anymore. Even Christians retain this corruption (Romans 7:22-25). This is the apostle Paul's personal "testimony" that he struggled with sin. If you are struggling with sin, do not feel like the lone ranger. Everyone is a sinner, even the best Christian you know. All Christians sin in thought, word and deed on a daily basis--even those so deluded as to think they are no longer sinful.

The reason "Evangelical" Pharisees emphasize good works over and above justification by faith alone is that they do not really believe they are guilty of original sin or any actual sins. They falsely assume a state of sinless perfection in this life. And the definition of sin is always something along the Wesleyan holiness line that sin is only the violation of a known moral law. This is especially strange since the 1662 Book of Common Prayer recommends daily Morning and Evening Prayer where we confess our sins twice a day. And how does the 1662 Prayer Book define sin? It defines sin as Scripture does; that is, sin is anything that fails to do what God commands, anything that violates God's moral law in thought, word or deed. The distinction between temptation and sinful thoughts is a false one for sinful human beings. Only the first Adam and Jesus Christ were capable of being tempted without sinning. You see, even if we do not give in to temptation to sin in actual deeds, simply by contemplating what is sinful sinners have sinned in their thoughts. Cursing, swearing, hating, lusting, coveting, worshipping the creature rather than the creator are all sinful thoughts as well as sinful deeds. Jesus said that it is the heart that is wicked and out of the heart proceed all sinful actions.

Repent of your self-righteousness today and trust in the righteousness of Christ alone to save you. Why? Because you sin by thinking that your righteousness can equal that of God in your own sinful heart. Those trusting in their own inherent righteousness to make themselves right with God are inwardly full of dead men's bones. It is the righteousness that is outside of us that justifies us--the righteousness of Christ.

Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith-- (Philippians 3:8-9 ESV)

And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God. (Galatians 6:16 ESV)

Those who count their own works as anything other than trash or rubbish have built their salvation on the false foundation of good works. (1 Corinthians 3:11). Unless we build on the foundation of Christ's active obedience and Christ's passive obedience we simply condemn ourselves. (Romans 10:3; Titus 3:5; Philippians 3:9).

False prophets love to say, "Oh, I agree with you, brother," when confronted with their overly optimistic view of their own personal holiness. But on closer examination they lead people to hell by teaching them that they are able to do what they are unable to do: be absolutely sinless and holy. We fall short of the mark no matter how holy we "think" we are. That is why even the holiest and best Christians in and of themselves deserve hell. It is only the sinless life of Christ that can make us holy and that holiness is not our inherent, subjective holiness. Rather it is the objective holiness of Christ credited to our account. This is why even the thief on the cross could be saved at the last instant (Luke 23:39-43). If personal holiness were the basis of salvation, then logically criminals and the wicked have no chance to be saved since they can never do enough penance to make themselves right with God. But the clincher is that would also mean that no Christian at all could be saved since all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. In other words, we are all law breakers, criminals, and sinners in God's eyes and all of us deserve hell as much as any murderer or adulterer. Only by God's mercy and grace can anyone be made right with God, not by our own righteousness, emulation of Christ or God, or any other righteousness of our own heart.

Are you like the tax collector who went into the temple to pray? Or are you like the Pharisee? (Luke 18:10-14). Choose today whether you will work your way to heaven or if you will trust only in God's mercy to save you, an unworthy, miserable sinner who can never repay the debt you owe to God. (Matthew 18:24-34). Pharisees exalt themselves above others who owe less than they themselves owe. Beware of being overly righteous lest you yourself be lost:

Be not overly righteous, and do not make yourself too wise. Why should you destroy yourself? 17 Be not overly wicked, neither be a fool. Why should you die before your time? (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17 ESV)

Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. (1 Corinthians 10:12 ESV)

Just a Psychological Crutch

2010-07-22T09:55:00.000-07:00

By Amy Orr-Ewing

I remember getting into a cab outside a central London church.(1) The cabbie took one look at my Bible and launched into his opinion of Christianity. He explained to me that belief in God is a crutch for weak, pathetic people who don't have the strength to take responsibility for their own lives. When I answered, "Thank you very much," with just a hint of irony, he blustered on with, "Well, I'm just saying it for your own good. A girl like you doesn't need religion!"

This idea that Christian faith is a psychological crutch for needy people is a pervasive one, based on a number of assumptions. The first is that God is merely a psychological projection: he doesn't actually exist in any real sense, but exists only in the minds of his followers, who have created him out of their own need—a need for a father figure or a need to give significance to their existence. The most famous proponent of this view was the Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). In arguing against the existence of God, Freud theorized that one's view of God springs from the view one has of one's father. When people grow up and find themselves thrust into the cruel, cold world, they look for a haven of security and protection from it. An adult can no longer look to parents for this protection, if he or she is to maintain dignity. Yet, Freud mused, we look for another 'Someone' to do this job for us and this leads to the idea of a 'Higher Power' or God.

From this perspective, God is merely a creation of the human mind, a projection emanating from human need and desire rather than a distinct reality. For Freud, God is made in humanity's own image, the 'ultimate wish-fulfillment,' the end product of human desire for a loving father.

Can God really be explained away so easily by one aspect of psychology? One obvious point to make is that the argument about projection cuts both ways. After all, isn't it equally possible to say that Freud and other atheists deny the existence of God out of a need to escape from a father figure, or to argue that the non-existence of God springs from a deep-seated desire for no father figure to exist?

Clearly this doesn't prove that God is real, but it does show that Freud's arguments cannot prove that God does not exist while at the same time helping us tackle the question of projection. After all, dismissing God as a psychological projection while claiming neutrality in our own psyche is disingenuous as best and cannot be an adequate basis for rejecting God.

It also quickly becomes apparent that a Freudian belief in God as a human projection cannot provide us with an explanation for the Christian faith of converts such as C.S. Lewis or Alister McGrath, who would rather not believe but find themselves compelled by the evidence that Christianity is true and real.

In fact, we may go further by suggesting that a desire for a God who can fulfill our needs and provide moral order exists precisely because human beings have been created to desire him. The man floating on a raft at sea is unbearably thirsty, but he won't get a drink of water simply by being thirsty. But the very existence of his thirst does show that a way for his desire to be satisfied actually exists: fresh water. As C.S. Lewis put it, "Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists." Ultimately for the Christian the important question is not whether I have a psychological need for a father figure, or a desire for a father figure not to exist. Rather, the question is about what actually exists: Is God really there? The way to come to any conclusions about that is to investigate the evidence for his existence.

The second assumption we encounter is that because belief in God provides the faithful with a crutch, this means it is somehow suspect. The skeptic implies that since the believer finds protection from the cruelty of nature and the evil of the world, the idea of God is like a talisman, an irrational superstition. But surely, if belief in God provides a positive moral framework that helps people to live constructively, that is not a reason to disbelieve in him. Similarly, if relationship with God enables to believer to find healing, wholeness, and comfort in the midst of human suffering, we should not be surprised. After all, if God is real, his existence will have a massive impact on life and on the experience of life. It is only if he is not real that we ought to be worried about the 'crutch' he provides.

Finally, the third assumption is that people who make use of this 'crutch' of relationship with God, and find it practical, meaningful, and effective, must be weak or inferior. This is a rather strange idea, since surely it makes sense to access real sources of support and relationship that are there for us. If a God of love does exist, the rational thing to do is accept his love, to come to know him. Entering into that relationship will have a positive effect, and that does not make the person weaker than or somehow inferior to anyone else. On the contrary, it is the logical, reasonable response if God himself is real.

"Work Out" What God "Works in" You

2010-07-15T18:57:00.000-07:00

By Oswald Chambers

" . . . work out your own salvation . . . for it is God who works in you . . ." (Philippians 2:12-13).

Your will agrees with God, but in your flesh there is a nature that renders you powerless to do what you know you ought to do. When the Lord initially comes in contact with our conscience, the first thing our conscience does is awaken our will, and our will always agrees with God.

Yet you say, "But I don't know if my will is in agreement with God." Look to Jesus and you will find that your will and your conscience are in agreement with Him every time. What causes you to say "I will not obey" is something less deep and penetrating than your will. It is perversity or stubbornness, and they are never in agreement with God. The most profound thing in a person is his will, not sin. The will is the essential element in God's creation of human beings — sin is a perverse nature which entered into people.

In someone who has been born again, the source of the will is Almighty God. ". . . for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." With focused attention and great care, you have to "work out" what God "works in" you — not work to accomplish or earn "your own salvation," but work it out so you will exhibit the evidence of a life based with determined, unshakable faith on the complete and perfect redemption of the Lord.

As you do this, you do not bring an opposing will up against God's will — God's will is your will. Your natural choices will be in accordance with God's will, and living this life will be as natural as breathing.

Stubbornness is an unintelligent barrier, refusing enlightenment and blocking its flow. The only thing to do with this barrier of stubbornness is to blow it up with "dynamite," and the "dynamite" is obedience to the Holy Spirit.

Do I believe that Almighty God is the Source of my will?

God not only expects me to do His will, but He is in me to do it.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

The Twilight Saga: Calling Evil Good

2010-07-10T10:44:00.000-07:00

It’s time someone offered a long overdue reality check regarding the current vampire pop culture craze.

Hollywood is influencing and promoting the latest vampire craze while many Christians are indifferent about the seductive powers of the books, movies and TV shows that have become a cult. While some in the church are clueless, others are engaging in all the hype. Is this innocent "fictitious" entertainment or the latest cult following? A cult has to do with "extreme or excessive admiration" and the entertainment industry is feeding us an excessive amount of "vampirism". For example, there is the popular HBO True Blood series and the prime time TV series The Vampire Diaries. The most popular by far is Stephanie Meyers' The Twilight Saga that has sold over 85 million books not to mention movie sales. What does all this mean? It is a growing obsession with the supernatural ... the dark side.

The Vampire craze has also infiltrated the seeker sensitive church who has not only embraced The Twilight Saga but will vehemently defend it. It seems some are more passionate about it than the Passion of the Christ! Are we so hungry for the supernatural that we are willing to accept a counterfeit and dabble in the occult? Since we are made in God's image, we are hungry for things of a spiritual nature and are to fight against the powers of darkness. Ephesians 6:12 states: "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places" (NKJV). Where the church often does not acknowledge the supernatural, the secular world does. In many churches, the Holy Spirit has been disabled or ignored which leads Christians to feel powerless, so they turn to the Harry Potter series and The Twilight Saga to fill the spiritual void.

Women of all ages are obsessed with The Twilight Saga that is about a teen girl named Bella that falls in "love" with a vampire—Edward. Bella is willing to do anything to be with Edward—even give up her soul. Women are being lured by the romance between the two main characters but in reality are opening doors to the occult (i.e. supernatural powers, mind reading, psychics, etc.). We are to be filled with spiritual wisdom and understanding not counterfeit romance novels dealing in the occult. We are to partake in the kingdom of light as Christ rescued us from the dominion of darkness. (see Col. 1:9-14) And let's not forget that Bella wants to give up her soul to be with the vampire. Somehow, we overlook these details because Edward "seems" chivalrous and romantic! "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness" (Isaiah 5:20).

What is missing from Christian women's lives that have caused them to be seduced by the supernatural vampire craze? What is so appealing about the so-called "good evil" vampire? Is it that he is handsome and exudes sex appeal that makes girls swoon and women's hearts faint? Or is it somehow meeting unmet needs spiritually and emotionally?

Saul and the Holy Spirit

2010-07-10T07:28:00.000-07:00

In my Sunday School class, we have been studying the throning of kings in 1 Samuel. In doing so, a point that is surely worth drawing attention to is the regenerate power of the Holy Spirit. In other words, does the fact that Saul lost the Holy Spirit indicate that he was saved (or regenerated cf. Belgic Confession, Article 35)?

Balaam, a Midianite, also received the Holy Spirit to prophesy (Numbers 24:1-2) but he was a non-Israelite and died in his sins (Numbers 31:8 cf. Revelation 2:14). There is no indication that Balaam was saved from anything nor received the spirit unto salvation. Why would we say anything different with Saul when there is no indication that he had faith and works, both of which are indisputable signs of regeneration? When God gives a person the Holy Spirit unto regeneration they believe (1 Corinthians 2:14; 1 John 5:1) and they do good works (Matthew 7:18-20; Ephesians 2:1-10) and do not commit sin (1 John 3:9).

Furthermore, the argument that Saul had the Holy Spirit unto salvation from vs. 6 and vs. 9 is spurious. Vs. 6 reads "turned to a man another" and vs. 9 reads "God turned to him a heart another." (my translation) The word turned is not the word used in the OT/NT to refer to regeneration (as per Ezekiel 11:19; 36:26; Jeremiah 31:31; John 3:5; Titus 3:5) Indeed the same word is used in Psalm 105:25 to refer to the enemies of Israel whom God "turned their heart to hate his people, to deal subtilly with his servants." Thus the word does not have to mean, and does not mean, that Saul was regenerate (for as we noted above, where is the evidence of his regeneration?). Nor does the use of the word "another" imply "˜new.´ If the word new was used then it would refer to something in regards to regeneration done in the heart of Saul. But where is his new heart? I see no such thing. Where is the heart that God gives "to cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them." (Ezekiel 36:27)

However it is obviously referring to the turning of something in Saul´s life and person, but what? The obvious answer is "˜courage´ for Saul already questions his choosing in chapter 9:21. He would need that courage to defeat the Philistines for God´s people (10:16).That he had this lack of courage within himself is indicated by Saul´s later hiding amongst the baggage (10:22) Finally the "˜other heart´ is also for prophesying, which no one can do unless God directs and strengthens a man to do so.

Likewise Balaam never would have spoken for Israel precisely because he was being paid to do the opposite. But he did as God compelled; God´s will was done even though it did not include Balaam´s salvation. Similarly God can turn the heart of the Assyrian king unto the people for their good (Ezra 6:22 cf. Isaiah 45:1) but he was not regenerate (anymore than God hardening Pharoah´s heart was an indication of His favor to him).

The narrative explicitly tells us that Saul was the handsome and tallest man in Israel (9:2) In contrast, however, when David is chosen we read: 1 Samuel 16:7 "œBut the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart." David did not need another heart, but had a new heart unlike Saul. Saul was temporarily given the Holy Spirit to aid him in his work but not because the Lord was saving or regenerating him. Indeed, the Spirit leaves Saul as soon as He descends upon David. But David did not need the Spirit in that capacity to regenerate him because, as we have noted, he already was. Thus Saul was never regenerate and David was.

We also must remember that Saul was a punishment to Israel. (1 Samuel 8) God had promised a king to them, (Genesis 49:10; Deuteronomy 17:14-20; 1 Kings 2:10) but they did not want to have God reign over them (vs. 7) and therefore He gives them a man who is no good for them (1 Samuel 8:10-18) Saul was not a man after God´s own heart but David was. Clearly the choosing of Saul was to illustrate God´s sovereign purposes in doing what is good for Israel, even when she acts and chooses badly. When God decides what is right and when we are ready to have it, then it is good. As soon as we act (selfishly) on our own impulses disaster results.

(Note also Ursinus´ explanation of David´s repentance in his remarks below).

Commentary:

The interpretation I gave of Saul and "another heart" is shared by every commentator I consulted as well as John Calvin as demonstrated in his Institutes: 2.2.17; 2.3.4

John Calvin:

2.2.17

God inspires special activities, in accordance with each man´s calling. Many examples of this occur in The Book of Judges, where it is said that "the Spirit of the Lord took possession" of those men whom he had called to rule the people [Judges 6:34]. In short, in every extraordinary event there is some particular impulsion. For this reason, Saul was followed by the brave men "œwhose hearts God had touched" [1 Samuel 10:26]. And when Saul´s consecration as king was foretold, Samuel said: "Then the Spirit of the Lord will come mightily upon you, and you shall be another man" 1 Samuel 10:6]. And this was extended to the whole course of government, as is said afterward of David: "œThe Spirit of the Lord came upon him from that day forward" [1 Samuel 16:13].

2.3.4

"we point out what special grace the Lord has bestowed upon the one, while not deigning to bestow it upon the other. When he wished to put Saul over the kingdom he
"œformed him as a new man" [1 Samuel 10:6 p.]. This is the reason that Plato, alluding to the Homeric legend, says that kings´ sons are born with some distinguishing mark. For God, in providing for the human race, often endows with a heroic nature those destined to command."

Zacharias Ursinus, in his commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, notes:

"The Holy Spirit left Saul who was one of the elect. Therefore he may leave others also. Ans. It was not the Spirit of regeneration and adoption which forsook Saul, but the spirit of prophecy, of wisdom, courage and other gifts of a similar character with which he was endowed. Neither was he chosen unto eternal life, but merely to be king, as Judas was chosen to the apostleship. It is still further objected: The Spirit of regeneration may also forsake the elect; for David prayed, "Restore unto me the joys of thy salvation."To this we reply that the godly may, and often do lose many of the gifts of the Spirit of regeneration; but they do not lose them wholly: for it cannot possible be that they should lose every particle of faith, inasmuch as they do not sin unto death; but from the weakness of the flesh, not being perfectly renewed in this life. This the apostle John expressly affirms when he says, "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." (1 John 3:19) David in his fall, lost the joy which he had felt in his soul, the purity of conscience, and many other gifts which he earnestly prayed might be restored unto him; but he had not wholly lost the Spirit of God."

Likewise Matthew Henry explains:

What occurred by the way, v. 9. Those signs which Samuel had given him came to pass very punctually; but that which gave him the greatest satisfaction of all was this, he found immediately that God had given him another heart. A new fire was kindled in his breast, such as he had never before been acquainted with: seeking the asses is quite out of his mind, and he thinks of nothing but fighting the Philistines, redressing the grievances of Israel, making laws, administering justice, and providing for the public safety; these are the things that now fill his head. He finds himself raised to such a pitch of boldness and bravery as he never thought he should be conscious of. He has no longer the heart of a husbandman, which is low, and mean, and narrow, and concerned only about his corn and cattle; but the heart of a statesman, a general, a prince. Whom God calls to any service he will make fit for it. If he advance to another station, he will give another heart, to those who sincerely desire to serve him with their power.

Confessions

Furthermore, let us bear in mind the words of the Canons of Dordrecht who warn us of speaking about men cooperating with and then losing God´s regenerating grace (how can this view of Saul being regenerate be matched with what the Canons say here? Either one is right but not both together).

CD 3/4; RE Paragraph 8

Who teach: That God in the regeneration of man does not use such powers of His omnipotence as potently and infallibly bend man's will to faith and conversion; but that all the works of grace having been accomplished, which God employs to convert man, man may yet so resist God and the Holy Spirit, when God intends man's regeneration and wills to regenerate him, and indeed that man often does so resist that he prevents entirely his regeneration, and that it therefore remains in man's power to be regenerated or not.

For this is nothing less than the denial of all the efficiency of God's grace in our conversion, and the subjecting of the working of Almighty God to the will of man, which is contrary to the apostles, who teach that we believe according to the working of the strength of his might (Eph. 1:19); and that God fulfills every desire of goodness and every work of faith with power (II Thess. 1:11); and that his divine power hath granted unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness (II Peter 1:3).

CD 5; RE Paragraph 3 & 4

Who teach: That the true believers and regenerate not only can fall from justifying faith and likewise from grace and salvation wholly and to the end, but indeed often do fall from this and are lost forever.

For this conception makes powerless the grace, justification, regeneration, and continued preservation by Christ, contrary to the expressed words of the apostle Paul: That, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from the wrath of God through him (Rom. 5:8, 9).

And contrary to the apostle John: Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed abideth in him; and he can not sin, because he is begotten of God (I John 3:9). And also contrary to the words of Jesus Christ: I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who hath given them to me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand (John 10:28, 29).

SIN Handout: Part 2 of 5

2010-07-03T05:27:00.000-07:00

What Does John Mean by "Sin"?

Now let's go to our text and look at it against this bigger backdrop. When 1 John 3:6 says, "No one who abides in him sins; no one who sins has either seen him or known him," and when verse 9 says, "No one who is born of God practices sin," the key is to realize that the present tense verbs used here in Greek for "sins" (verse 6) and "practices" (verse 9) imply ongoing, continuous action. This probably means that, in John's mind, what is impossible for the Christian is a life of unchanged continuation in sin the same as when he was not born of God. In view of all his insistence that Christians do sin, we can't take these verses to mean Christians don't sin at all. We should take them to mean that Christians don't go on sinning without conflict and confession. Christians see it, hate it, confess it and fight it. And they do so with increasing vigilance as they grow up into Christ.

Look at this carefully. Verse 6 says that "David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works." But the quotation from Psalm 32:1-2 doesn't say that – that God "credits righteousness" to us. It says that God does not credit sin to us.

Here's the quote from Psalm 32:1-2 in verse Romans 4:7-8. "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven, and whose sins have been covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account." You see that last phrase: "the Lord will not take into account." The word there is the same as the word for "credit" or "reckon" in verses 3, 4, 5, and 6. So verse 8 is saying, "Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not credit – will not reckon, will not lay to his account, will not impute to him.

So to see the surprising connection boil the text down to verses 6 and 8: "David speaks a blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works" and here's the blessing that David speaks (verse 8): "Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not credit." One thing is sure from this surprising connection: Paul does not see justification as the imputation of righteousness alone or as the forgiveness of sin alone. For him forgiveness of sin must include the positive imputation of God's righteousness. And the imputation of God's righteousness must include the forgiveness of sin. And the blessedness of both conditions is that each is "apart from works."

Forgiveness is not obtained by works, and righteousness is not obtained by works. Both are obtained by faith alone "apart from works," as verse 6 says: the blessing that David speaks is "apart from works." Where in Psalm 32 does Paul see that sin is forgiven and righteousness is credited "apart from works"? He does not say. But it may be verse 10, "Many are the sorrows of the wicked, but he who trusts in the LORD, lovingkindness shall surround him." The opposite of being wicked is trusting the Lord – depending on the Lord. So the righteousness of the Psalmist is by faith. However Paul sees it, this is his teaching, and we may rejoice in it.

The Law . . .

• Romans 3:21, "But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested."
• Romans 3:28, "We maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."
• Romans 4:13-14, "The promise to Abraham . . . was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified."
• Romans 5:20, "The Law came in so that the transgression would increase."
• Romans 7:6  The Law hinders life in the Spirit. You must be released from it, "so that you may serve in the newness of the Spirit.
Galatians 5:2-4,

Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Three observations: 1) If you want to claim that your partial lawkeeping in, say the act of circumcision, is part of your justifying righteousness, then you have to realize that you are indebted to keep the whole law (verse 3). If you want to provide any of your righteousness as the basis of your right standing with God, you must provide all of it. That is what it means to be “under law.” Christ did it. We can’t. We need his righteousness, not ours.

2) In verse 4 “seeking to be justified by law” is the same as “wanting to be under law” in 4:21. That is, wanting to be “under law” is the same as wanting lawkeeping to be part of our righteousness before God. That is what “justified by law” means.

3) If you try to provide any or all of your own righteousness before God, Christ will be of no advantage to you. Verse 2: “If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.” In other words, Christ will be all your righteousness or none of it. If you try to provide some of your righteousness alongside Christ’s righteousness as the ground of your justification, you nullify grace (Galatians 2:21). Or, we could say, you are not “under grace.”

--
If we fix our eyes upon the ends (not breaking the law), then (in our ignorance) are opposed to the means (Christ). Consider first Galatians 4:4-5, “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under [the] Law, (5) so that He might redeem those who were under [the] Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.” The word “the” is not there in the original. The phrase is identical to what we have here in Romans 6:14. Christ was born “under law” to redeem those “under law.”

Being “under law” is something that we sinful creatures want to avoid at all costs if we can, but that Christ embraced to rescue us from it. Being under law means that lawkeeping is the way we will provide a righteousness that lets us stand before God. If we treat the law in such a way that lawkeeping provides the righteousness that justifies us, then we are under law. And this is true whether you are trusting God to enable you to keep the law or trusting yourself. It doesn’t make any difference when the issue is: What provides the righteousness that justifies me? If it is lawkeeping, I am “under law.”

It is people whose Christianity is a group of ideas about Christ, not an experience of the preciousness of Christ. Their Christianity is all truth and no treasure. All “choices” and no cherishing. All logic about Christ and no love for Christ. All “decision” and no delight. And O how many people there are who come to church and are in this category!

When a saved person commits sin, that sin is already under the blood in reference to eternal life. Colossians 2:13 states, "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses." All trespasses (or sins) have already been forgiven us. You see, before God saved you, He knew every sin you had ever committed but He also knew every sin you would commit. He gave you eternal life with that knowledge and forgave you of all your sins at that moment.

This goes back to the method by which we are saved. God does not save us by giving us a clean slate that we now must keep cleaned up in order to make it to heaven. God saves us by making a switch. He puts our sin on Christ and He puts the righteousness of Christ on us. 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." Christ was made sin for us so that we might be made righteous in Him. [By the way, what if God only put your past sins on Christ? He would have to put each new sin on Him as you confessed it. Certainly, this did not happen. Christ paid the entire debt for sin on the cross. Each person who believes in Him enters into forgiveness through Him.]

You may recall that the New Testament often speaks of the believer as being in Christ or in Him. You see, when the Father looks on us concerning our eternal condition, He does not see us as standing in our own righteousness, but in the righteousness of Christ. Concerning Christ, Paul said that he wanted to be "found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith" (Philippians 3:9). When we trust in Jesus Christ by faith, we are placed into Christ and are seen by the Father as having His righteousness.
Now, you may ask, why do we need to ask for forgiveness of sins at all if they are all forgiven? The reason is that the present forgiveness of sins which we seek on a continuing basis deals with something entirely different from salvation. Though we are saved eternally by our position in Christ, we have a walking relationship with God in this life that is based on obedience and submission to His will. Even though we can never cease being saved, we can cease to be in a good present relationship with God.
Let me give you an example. When my children were little, they would sometimes disobey me and get in a wrong relationship with their father. I might even be angry with them and use some form of correction with them. However, there was nothing they could do, no matter how bad, that would make them cease to be my children. They were flesh of my flesh. To deny them would be to deny myself. Their family relationship to me was based on their birth (just as our eternal relationship to God is based on the new birth). Yet, they (just as us with God) could be my children and still not have all things right with me. They never ceased to be my children and I never had to make them my children a second time, but there were many times that we had to work out a right relationship that had gone sour. This is the way it is with God.

Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross pays that person’s sin-debt in full—past, present, and future wrongdoing is forgiven and removed. Since sin was the barrier separating mankind from holy God, the new believer is now welcome in His presence.

By trusting in Jesus, we each become a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17). Yet, since the body and mind don’t change automatically, self-serving habits developed before salvation can remain ingrained and tempting. Though we may sometimes give in, we aren’t suddenly unsaved because we sinned. Once God’s grace is bestowed, it can’t be removed—salvation cannot be lost, nor can the Spirit’s power be revoked. Our relationship with God remains intact. It is our fellowship with God that is interrupted by our sin, but that fellowship can be restored through confession and repentance.

Being saved is not about keeping a perfect record of behavior. If we could do that, we wouldn’t need the Father’s grace. He knows we are human and prone to making selfish choices contrary to His will. When we do, Jesus Christ acts as our advocate, because His sacrifice is what makes possible our relationship with the Father.

***14 years after Paul’s conversion:

1 Timothy 1:15 - Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.

Romans 7:15-20 - 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[a] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Paul is still sinning? But God’s GRACE is STILL SUFFICIENT!!

Missed Opportunites

2010-06-30T08:37:00.000-07:00

By Muriel Larson

Jesus told about a Pharisee who stood in the temple and prayed, "God, I thank You that I am not like all other men - robbers, evildoers, adulterers - or even like this tax collector" (Luke 18:11).

The tax collector, however, bowed his head in humble contrition before God and beat his breast, saying, "God, have mercy on me, a sinner." Too often, we prefer to reach well-groomed, nice, middle or upper-class people for the Lord. We tend to dismiss the alcoholics, drug addicts and others we consider blatantly sinful.

Michelle worked in an office with a number of other young women. She found one new employee, Suzanne, particularly obnoxious. She cringed at the foul language that peppered Suzanne's conversations. Then, one day, Suzanne asked Michelle to go to lunch with her. Michelle was afraid of what other employees would think, but finally Suzanne persuaded her to go.

"What is it you have?" Suzanned asked as they ate. Because of this question, Michelle was able to present the gospel to her and lead her to Christ. Suzanne became a new person with a new vocabulary and great zeal for the Lord. Because she had dismissed Suzanne as a sinner, Michelle had almost missed an opportunity to lead her to Christ.

What opportunities might we miss because of our short-sightedness?

John Dillinger was put out of Sunday school when he was 12 because he was disruptive. He never came back. He grew up to become one of the most notorious criminals of all time. His life ended in a gutter, his body riddled with bullets. What might have happened if some Christian had taken a personal interest in the boy, visited him and led him to Christ?

At your Christian group, church or place of work, do you ever encounter people who smoke, swear or do other things that are offensive to you? Even though people may act as if they want nothing to do with Christ or His church, they may have a deep hunger in their hearts that is never satisfied by the world.

The Bible says that God "wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4). We can look the other way when we encounter people whose lifestyles and attitudes are repulsive to us. Or we can change society by having compassion for people who are entangled in the ungodly morals of our day. We need to learn to look at them as needy people who have chosen the wrong way to fill the aching void they feel inside. We need to get involved in their need and help them come to know Christ.Don't miss your next opportunity: Read Luke 10:30-37.

Doormat Theology

2010-06-25T14:01:00.000-07:00

By Margaret Manning

Many times over the years, I have heard it taught in church sermons, Sunday school classes, or bible studies that while we are called to serve others, we should never be doormats. In other words, we should never let people walk over us, or take advantage of us. To do so is at best undignified, and at worst it infringes upon "our rights."

Psychologists have added to this understanding by defining individuals who allow others to consistently take advantage of them as co-dependent. Co-dependence, though clinicians have not agreed on a precise definition, is defined in part by the compulsive sacrifice of one's own values or preferences.(1) Clearly, when this is done out of fear, as a result of abuse, or because of a low-nurturance upbringing,
we can understand how this might not be a desirable pattern in relating to others.

Yet most of us, if we are honest, are averse to service of any kind that asks more of us than we are willing to give. We measure out our service as we would our sugar and cream for coffee. If service cuts into our time, or our convenience or comfort, then it must be making us doormats to others, and surely that is not what Jesus meant by calling us to serve one another. Surely Jesus couldn't have really meant that his followers should "not resist him who is evil; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you, and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. And whoever shall force you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you" (Matthew 5:38-42). If that is not a call to be taken advantage of, then I'm not sure what is!

But this is not the advantage of the co-dependent. Rather, it is the freely chosen offering of oneself in service to God, just as Jesus offered himself in service.

Indeed, the apostle Paul looks back to the life of Jesus as he implores the believers at Philippi to "do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of
others...have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped" (Philippians 2:3-6). The life of a Christ-follower is to be marked by putting the interests of others on par with our own interests. Moreover, our lives are to be marked by viewing others as more important than ourselves. More important than ourselves. If we seek to follow Jesus in this way, we can expect for others to take advantage of our willingness to serve.

Indeed, in calling us to offer our lives for others, we are called to practice "doormat theology"--the willing practice of laying down our lives on behalf of others--even when that service is abused or misused.

Many in our Christian world today bristle at such a suggestion. Surely, this kind of theology leads to low self-esteem and reduced self-image, they argue. Yet, a doormat theology doesn't lead to a diminished sense of self. On the contrary, it leads to our deepened identity in Christ. James Loder adds, "Christian self-understanding
drives toward the goal of giving love sacrificially with integrity after the pattern of Christ. This means the willing breaking of one's wholeness potential for the sake of another, a free choice that has nothing to do with oppression because it is an act of integrity and everything to do with Christ's free choice to go to the cross as an act of love."(2) Indeed, if Jesus found his mission and calling in laying down his own life so that we could take advantage of the grace offered on our behalf, how can we do otherwise? The laying down of our lives provides the opportunity for others to walk over us, across us, and through us to the one who first laid down his life for us.

SIN Handout: Part 1 of 5

2010-06-24T20:48:00.000-07:00

When we say we have not sinned . . . (1 John 1:5-10)  To take this in the most literal sense (although translated) , we’ll find conflicting truths expressed here.

And what of 1 John 5:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” (Redeemed sinners are still that, redeemed sinners.)

• 2 Corinthians 5:21 – God's righteousness becomes ours in Christ (not b/c of works).

• Romans 5:12 … all men sinned.

• 1 Peter 4:8 … love covers sin (grace covers sin).

• Philippians 3:8-9 – "I count everything as rubbish that I may . . . be found in [Christ], not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."

• 1 Corinthians 1:30 – "It is from God that you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness. . . ."

• Romans 8:1 – "Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (See also Romans 5:19.)

• John 17:6-26 – (many are called (not effectually) but FEW are CHOSEN … for sanctification) Jesus prays for those who the Father gives Him only (not for the world). [Note: John 3:16’s “world” is those who are saved of it (not all) – 7 different Greek words are used for the English word, “world”] KJV is riddled with errors. NASB would serve as a much precise interpretation.

*The Hebrew word for sin is 'chata.' It means 'to miss the mark or go astray.' Spiritually it means that we do not come up to God's standards of holiness and righteousness. We all struggle with sin daily and those who deny this are simply fooling themselves. Here are some scripture references that reveal this very clearly:

a) Isaiah 53:6 … All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

b) Romans 14:23 … And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Therefore sin is not only following the temptation to disobey God, to act wickedly, or to break God's law; it is also within the temptation that we have sin.

*Temptation can be broken down into three categories:

1 John 2:16 explains how temptation is activated in our lives. "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

a) The lust of the flesh. This refers to the cravings of sinful man. It describes those sinful things that make us feel good. Eve saw that the fruit was good for food.

b) The lust of the eyes. So many things seem to be beautiful to us and we must have them right away. It describes our sinful desire for material possessions. The fruit was pleasant to Eve's eyes.

c) The pride of life. Almost everyone is full of his or her own self-importance. It describes the notion that we are better than the next person. Eve saw the fruit could make her wise and a god.

*CONVICTION—Spirit wrought conviction ought to lead to humble confession. If it does not, the conviction continues. The Holy Spirit makes His grieved presence felt (Eph. 4:30). The true believer can never be comfortable in his sin, even as righteous Lot’s soul was vexed in Sodom (2 Pet. 2:7-8). We can thank God that He makes us miserable when we are not right with Him. When we are disobedient we are unsettled, unpeaceful, unhappy. Thank God it is so!

*CHASTENING—If the sinning believer does not respond in the right way to God’s conviction in the heart, then the Father will chasten His child whom He loves (1 Cor. 11:31-32). Maximum chastisement can even result in the physical death of the believer (1 Cor. 11:30). As a good human father will not permit his child to continue doing wrong, so the Heavenly Father will not permit His child to continue in wickedness.

Also in Hebrews 12:5-11, God punishes every son He loves. No matter how sinful you are, He always love you and will allow you to go through as much suffering as is necessary for you to finally believe Him.
A person who is living sinfully, who knows he is living sinfully, who enjoys living in such a manner, who intends to continue that sinful way of living—that person does not have the Holy Spirit living within him. The very fact that he is ‘comfortable’ about his sin is proof of the Spirit’s absence. His spiritual vital sign registers ‘no life.’

Now what Paul is exulting over, here in Romans 4, is that this justification is not based on works, but on faith alone. He is so thrilled with this part of the gospel that he takes all of chapter 4 to drive it into our hearts by using Abraham and David from the Old Testament to make his point: all our sins are imputed to Christ, and all God's righteousness is imputed to us by faith alone apart from works! Romans 4:2 says, “For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.” Where does man have a right to glory before God after justification to think that he is now treated on some higher level in which God views him as if he had never sinned? In reality, he knows, much deeper, that he is a sinner, and his whole life is a continual reflection of that fact to a deeper degree.

As Romans 7:15 states, “For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.” Sinners are still sinners. Even in heaven, we will be redeemed sinners. Though the remnants of sin will be vanquished, we will still remember our sinfulness and what Jesus did, “And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.” (Revelation 5:9) The very song we will sing is a reflection of our remembrance that we are redeemed sinners, though we will never sin again. Thus, to say that we are able to glory in our newfound “goodness” is simply an extension of Arminianism, and at its essence, it has God exalting man instead of the Savior.

The New Testament consistently portrays eternal life as a "free gift" (Rom. 6:23) and emphasizes that God is not obliged to grant eternal life, but that he chooses to grant eternal life (1 Cor. 1:21; Eph. 1:5; Col. 1:20,21). Salvation is not a commodity to be purchased by merit: "Now to one who works, wages are not reckoned as a gift but as something due" (Rom. 4:4).

God freely grants holiness and salvation to those who ask for forgiveness and desire to obey him. Ofcourse, we will not obey him perfectly; hence the promise of ongoing forgiveness (1 John 1:9).

………….

***Arguments against the literalist-perfectionist who takes non-idiomatic English as a just cause to distort the Word of God (whether by intent or by ignorance). [Let’s use just 2 sets of scripture as our examples.]

(#1) Gatatians 5:

~ Charles Spurgeon Commentary:

v. 21 - What can be conceived more dreadful than that men should walk after the flesh, and shut themselves out from the kingdom of God? Who will dare to treat lightly the “abominable things which God hates?” (Jeremiah 44:4.)

But in this way, we shall be told, all are cut off from the hope of salvation; for who is there that is not chargeable with some of those sins? I reply, Paul does not threaten that all who have sinned, but that all who remain impenitent, shall be excluded from the kingdom of God. The saints themselves often fall into grievous sins, but they return to the path of righteousness, “that which they do they allow not,” (Romans 7:15,) and therefore they are not included in this catalogue. All threatenings of the judgments of God call us to repentance. They are accompanied by a promise that those who repent will obtain forgiveness; but if we continue obstinate, they remain as a testimony from heaven against us.

v. 23 – “Against such there is no law.” Some understand these words as meaning simply that the law is not directed against good works, “from evil manners have sprung good laws.” But Paul’s real meaning is deeper and less obvious; namely, that, where the Spirit reigns, the law has no longer any dominion. By moulding our hearts to his own righteousness, the Lord delivers us from the severity of the law, so that our intercourse with himself is not regulated by its covenant, nor our consciences bound by its sentence of condemnation. Yet the law continues to teach and exhort, and thus performs its own office; but our subjection to it is withdrawn by the Spirit of adoption.

………………..

~ Martin Luther King’s Commentary:

v. 18 - Verse 18. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Here someone may object: "How come we are not under the law? You yourself say, Paul, that we have the flesh which wars against the Spirit, and brings us into subjection."

But Paul says not to let it trouble us. As long as we are led by the Spirit, and are willing to obey the Spirit who resists the flesh, we are not under the Law. True believers are not under the Law. The Law cannot condemn them although they feel sin and confess it.

Great then is the power of the Spirit. Led by the Spirit, the Law cannot condemn the believer though he commits real sin. For Christ in whom we believe is our righteousness. He is without sin, and the Law cannot accuse Him. As long as we cling to Him we are led by the Spirit and are free from the Law.

……………………

(#2) 1 John 3:4-10

~ John Piper Commentary:

Then you can show someone who is stumbling over the perfectionistic verses that there is another side to the issue.

1 John 1:8-10 - "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us." This is written to Christians. The "we" of verse 9 is believers. We must confess our sins, because we do sin.

1 John 2:1 - "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." Here is the heartening realism: "If anyone does sin, we have an advocate." The aim is that we not sin, but the reality is that we do sin.
1 John 3:2 - "Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is." We are already God's children because of immense and incomprehensible love, but we are not yet like him the way we will be when he comes. There is yet a purifying work to do.

1 John 5:16-17 - "If anyone sees his brother committing a [omit "a" - the Greek text does not require it] sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a [omit "a"] sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this. All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a [omit "a"] sin not leading to death." This last verse seems to be targeted pointedly at perfectionists who say: all sinning is equally damning and the only person who can escape judgment is the one who commits no sin. John emphatically says in verse 17b, "There is a [omit "a"] sin not leading to death."

** (Part 2 of 5 will be posted soon.)

IT IS GOOD FOR ME THAT I HAVE BEEN AFFLICTED

2010-06-21T19:29:00.000-07:00

Testimony of John Farese

It is good for me that I have been afflicted, That I may learn Your statutes. The law of Your mouth is better to me Than thousands of coins of gold and silver. Your hands have made me and fashioned me; Give me understanding, that I may learn Your commandments. Those who fear You will be glad when they see me, Because I have hoped in Your word. I know, O LORD, that Your judgments are right, And that in faithfulness You have afflicted me. Let, I pray, Your merciful kindness be for my comfort, According to Your word to Your servant. Let Your tender mercies come to me, that I may live; For Your law is my delight. (Psa 119:71-77)

And He (God) has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and have our being... Acts 17:26-28a

John Farese lives in Florida with his brother Paul and sister-in-law Janis and their four children. He enjoys a very productive life, is keenly interested in a variety of sports, and has a special involvement in information technology, including the maintenance of his own Web site.

He has been disabled since birth, is paralysed in both arms and legs, and has been unable to sit up for over 10 years.

I came into this world on 27 August 1956, the second of Vincent and Joan Farese's seven children. My older brother Bernie was born with spinal muscular atrophy, a severely crippling disease that meant that he was never able to walk. So was I - and a younger sister Tina. In each case, the doctors told my parents that the child concerned would not live beyond its eighth birthday. Tina died of pneumonia when she was four years old.

I was brought up as a Roman Catholic, and quietly accepted the doctrines taught to me by my parents and the parish priest, especially the idea that a person got right with God by obeying the sacraments of the church. At one stage I was told that if I recited forty-five prayers from a particular Catholic prayer book every day for a whole year I would escape the pains of purgatory and hell, and be immediately accepted into heaven when I died. I never missed a day - but had no assurance that my discipline would pay off.

One special highlight I remember was a trip to Lourdes, in France. My mother took my brother Bernie and me there to seek healing from the Blessed Virgin Mary - but we came back home in exactly the same state as before.

My early years were spent in suburban Boston, Massachusetts, but when I was fifteen my father's business relocated our family to Florida, so we all moved south. Leaving behind relatives and friends in whom I had found a sense of security was devastating to me, yet in God's providence it was to prove the best move of my life. Brought up in a city where Catholicism was a dominant factor, I had come to believe that anyone outside of that tradition was beyond salvation. Yet four months after moving to Fort Lauderdale, and when I was still home-sick for Boston, our next door neighbour invited my mother to a home Bible study. Although we had a large white family Bible in our home, it was hardly ever opened, and I was shocked when my mother accepted the invitation. There was another shock when she agreed to the Bible study leader's suggestion that her son, who was then a freshman at Florida Bible College, might come and talk about the Christian faith to my brother and me
That visit, and others which followed, had very different sequels. Bernie and I were so impressed by what John Tardonia told us about Jesus Christ as the one and only Saviour that we both gave intellectual assent to the gospel of grace and said a 'sinner's prayer'. In Bernie's case, this marked a dramatic change. He began to pray, study the Bible and go to church, and eventually enrolled in Bible College. Even more marked was a radical change in his lifestyle, which now seemed driven by a daily desire to please God.

In my case, the only change was for the worse. I had made some new friends whose lifestyle was rampantly self-centred and immoral, and I pitched in with them, determined not to let my disability keep me from enjoying life to the full. For the next twelve years gambling, heavy drinking, marijuana abuse, weekly visits to strip clubs and frequent engagements with call girls provided a means of escape from the pain, loneliness and emptiness I was experiencing.

Some years after Bernie and I went our separate ways, my younger brother Paul, who was a popular athlete in high school, joined me in the sex and drugs scene, until he went away to College on an athletic scholarship. During his first term, he got into so much trouble that he was on the verge of being expelled, yet when he came home for Christmas two months later there had been an amazing change. Like Bernie, he had become a committed Christian, and he was soon urging me to turn away from my dissolute lifestyle and get right with God. I knew in my heart that he was right, and even prayed with tears that God would change my life, but I loved what I was doing, and found myself unable to break my destructive habits.

At this point Bernie gave me a Bible, which I promised to read, but it sat unopened on a shelf for the next six months, while I went back to gambling, sex and drugs. Yet there was a difference. For the first time, I began to feel uncomfortable doing what had given me such undisturbed pleasure before. I kept remembering my conversations with Paul and my promise to Bernie that I would read the Bible. These nagging thoughts eventually became so strong that I took the Bible down and began to read it. I began at the first page, and in three months had read it right through - but by then I too had become a Christian. It was while I was reading the Sermon on the Mount that God opened my eyes to the truth about my sin, the inability of religion to deal with it, and the need to repent and trust in Jesus Christ as my own personal Saviour. As I did, I was given an assurance that my sins had been forgiven and that I had become a true child of God.

Like most new Christians, I found myself full of zeal. I wanted to be baptized, join a Bible-believing church, and do whatever I could to serve others. I remembered Jesus had said that he 'did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many' (Matthew 20:28) and that 'no servant is greater than his master' (John 13:16). Being bedridden, I was not sure that I could contribute anything to others, but by the grace of God I am able to be of energetic service in ways far beyond anything I had imagined.

In light of my physical condition, I am often asked the age-old question, 'How can an all-powerful God of love allow you to suffer in this way? Surely the Bible says that God always does what is right? Yes it does - and he does! I have come to see that suffering is one of the many ways in which God demonstrates his unfailing love to those who have come to put their trust in him. Writing out of his own painful experience, the Psalmist says, 'It was good for me to be afflicted, so that I might learn your decrees' (Psalm 119:71) - and I gladly endorse every word of that testimony.

Among other things, suffering empties us of pride and self-dependence, and makes us realize our complete dependence upon God. When we reach the point where we have nowhere to turn except to God, we begin to get a clearer view of who and what he is. Day by day, I am discovering more and more of his wisdom, love and grace. I am also finding that God's power is made perfect in my weakness, and that 'when I am weak, then I am strong' (2 Corinthians 12:10)

Jesus went through appalling suffering, physical, mental and spiritual, yet at the end of it all he was to 'see the light of life and be satisfied' (Isaiah 53:11). I count it a privilege to experience in some small way 'the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings' (Philippians 3:10) Although I am bedridden, struggle to breathe comfortably, and often have to contend with painful bed sores, I count them as 'light and momentary troubles' (2 Corinthians 4:17) For all the difficulties they cause, I know that they are achieving for me 'an eternal glory that far outweighs them all' (2 Corinthians 4:17) How trivial they will all seem in the light of the eternal bliss that awaits God's children in the world to come!

One of the psalmists wrote, Come and listen, all you who fear God; let me tell you what he has done for me' (Psalm 66:16) - and I gladly do so. He has turned my mourning into laughter and my desolation into joy. He has made my heart rejoice with 'an inexpressible and glorious joy' (1 Peter 1:8). When I struggled to escape from his grace, he drew me to himself. I bear witness that never servant had such a master as I have, never brother such a kinsman, never spouse such a husband. No sinner ever had a better Saviour than Jesus, no mourner a better comforter. I want none beside him. In life he is my life, and in death he shall be the death of death. In poverty, he is my riches, in sickness my health, in darkness my sun.

Jesus is to me all grace and no wrath, all truth and no falsehood: and of truth and grace he is full, infinitely full.

Fueling Reformation

2010-06-12T06:01:00.000-07:00

By R.C. Sproul

I’m always puzzled when I see church billboards announcing a coming revival. They give the times and the dates when the church will be engaged in revival. But I wonder, how can anybody possibly schedule a revival? True revivals are provoked by the sovereign work of God through the stirring of His Holy Spirit in the hearts of people. They happen when the Holy Spirit comes into the valley of dry bones (Ezek. 37) and exerts His power to bring new life, a revivification of the spiritual life of the people of God.

This kind of thing cannot be manipulated by any human program. Historically, no one scheduled the Protestant Reformation. The Welsh revival was not on anyone’s agenda, nor was the American Great Awakening penciled into someone’s date book. These epic events in church history resulted from the sovereign work of God, who brought His power to bear on churches that had become virtually moribund.

But we have to understand the difference between revival and reformation. Revival, as the word suggests, means a renewing of life. When evangelism is a priority in the church, such outreach will often bring about revival. However, these revivals of spiritual life do not always result in reformation. Reformation indicates changing forms of church and society. Revivals grow into reformations when the impact of the gospel begins to change the structures of the culture. Revival can produce a multitude of new Christians, but these new Christians have to grow into maturity before they begin to make a significant impact on the surrounding culture.

Reformation can involve a change for the better. We must not be so naïve as to think that all change is necessarily good. Sometimes when we feel that we are in the doldrums or that progress has been stultified, we cry out for change, forgetting for the moment that change may be regressive rather than progressive. If I drink a vial of poison, it will change me, but not for the better. Nevertheless, change is often good.

In our day, we have seen the rise of what has been called the “New Calvinism,” which tends to focus primarily on the so-called five points of Calvinism. This movement within the church has attracted a great deal of attention, even in the secular media.

Yet it would be wise to not identify Calvinism exhaustively with those five points. Rather, the five points function as a pathway or a bridge to the entire structure of Reformed theology. Charles Spurgeon himself argued that Calvinism is merely a nickname for biblical theology. He and many other titans of the past understood that the essence of Reformed theology cannot be reduced to five particular points that arose centuries ago in Holland in response to controversy with the Arminians, who objected to five specific points of the system of doctrine found in historic Calvinism. For the purposes of this article, it might be helpful to look at both what Reformed theology is and is not.

Reformed theology is not a chaotic set of disconnected ideas. Rather, Reformed theology is systematic. The Bible, being the Word of God, reflects the coherence and unity of the God whose Word it is. To be sure, it would be a distortion to force a foreign system of thought upon Scripture, making Scripture conform to it as if it were some kind of procrustean bed. That is not the goal of sound systematic theology. Rather, true systematic theology seeks to understand the system of theology that is contained within the whole scope of sacred Scripture. It does not impose ideas upon the Bible; it listens to the ideas that are proclaimed by the Bible and understands them in a coherent way.

Reformed theology is not anthropocentric. That is to say, Reformed theology is not centered on human beings. The central focal point of Reformed theology is God, and the doctrine of God permeates the whole of Reformed thought. Thus, Reformed theology, by way of affirmation, can be called theocentric. Indeed, its understanding of the character of God is primary and determinant with respect to its understanding of all other doctrines. That is to say, its understanding of salvation has as its control factor — its heart — a particular understanding of God’s sovereign character.

Reformed theology is not anticatholic. This may seem strange since Reformed theology grew directly out of the Protestant movement against the teaching and activity of Roman Catholicism. But the term catholic refers to catholic Christianity, the essence of which may be found in the ecumenical creeds of the first thousand years of church history, particularly those of the early church councils, such as the Council of Nicea in the fourth century and the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century. That is to say, those creeds contain common articles of faith shared by all denominations that embrace orthodox Christianity, doctrines such as the Trinity and the atonement of Christ. The doctrines affirmed by all Christians are at the heart and core of Calvinism. Calvinism does not depart on a search for a new theology and reject the common base of theology that the whole church shares.

Reformed theology is not Roman Catholic in its understanding of justification. This is simply to say that Reformed theology is evangelical in the historical sense of the word. In this regard, Reformed theology stands strongly and firmly with Martin Luther and the magisterial Reformers in their articulation of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, as well as the doctrine of sola Scriptura. Neither of these doctrines is explicitly declared in the five points of Calvinism; yet, in a sense, they become part of the foundation for the other characteristics of Reformed theology.

All this is to say that Reformed theology so far transcends the mere five points of Calvinism that it is an entire worldview. It is covenantal. It is sacramental. It is committed to transforming culture. It is subordinate to the operation of God the Holy Spirit, and it has a rich framework for understanding the entirety of the counsel of God revealed in the Bible.

So it should go without saying that the most important development that will bring about reformation is not simply the revival of Calvinism. What has to happen is the renewal of the understanding of the gospel itself. It is when the gospel is clearly proclaimed in all of its fullness that God exercises His redeeming power to bring about renewal in the church and in the world. It is in the gospel and nowhere else that God has given His power unto salvation.

If we want reformation, we have to start with ourselves. We have to start bringing the gospel itself out of darkness, so that the motto of every reformation becomes post tenebras lux — “after darkness, light.” Luther declared that every generation must declare freshly the gospel of the New Testament. He also said that anytime the gospel is clearly and boldly proclaimed, it will bring about conflict, and those of us who are inherently adverse to conflict will find it tempting to submerge the gospel, dilute the gospel, or obscure the gospel in order to avoid conflict. We, of course, are able to add offense to the gospel by our own ill-mannered attempts to proclaim it. But there is no way to remove the offense that is inherent to the gospel message, because it is a stumbling block, a scandal to a fallen world. It will inevitably bring conflict. If we want reformation, we must be prepared to endure such conflict to the glory of God.

Emulating God's Character?

2010-06-06T12:39:00.000-07:00

Pelagianism Resurrected Evangelical Style

By Charlie Ray

Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!" 4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke. 5 And I said: "Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!" (Isaiah 6:2-5 ESV)

But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. (Matthew 15:18-19 ESV)

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9 ESV)

It never fails that Pharisees emphasize their own personal holiness, goodness and righteousness rather than their own unworthiness in comparison to Christ and to God's absolute holiness. The old cliché, what would Jesus do is based on the false assumption that sinful human beings can rival, equal or even excel above God's own holiness. Pharisees love to emphasize the law of God and you will rarely hear them mention the doctrine of salvation by grace alone. Why is this? It is because they have an overly high opinion of themselves as inherently holy rather than inherently sinful and corrupt. Even regenerated, justified and converted Christians retain the sinful nature and an inward corruption.

An Evangelical minister I know regularly emphasizes our faithfulness, our righteousness, and our emulation of God's character. But he does so self-righteously since the Bible continually says that there is none righteous (Romans 3:10-12; 3:20-23). In fact, the word emulation means:

–verb (used with object)

1. to try to equal or excel; imitate with effort to equal or surpass: to emulate one's father as a concert violinist.

2. to rival with some degree of success: Some smaller cities now emulate the major capitals in their cultural offerings.
Our efforts to emulate the character of God fall so short that the comparison is similar to a mentally challenged child trying to play Mozart on piano or violin. The results come so far short as to not even resemble the original composition. Human beings are totally corrupt to the point that the divine image is hardly recognizable anymore. Even Christians retain this corruption (Romans 7:22-25). This is the apostle Paul's personal "testimony" that he struggled with sin. If you are struggling with sin, do not feel like the lone ranger. Everyone is a sinner, even the best Christian you know. All Christians sin in thought, word and deed on a daily basis--even those so deluded as to think they are no longer sinful.

The reason "Evangelical" Pharisees emphasize good works over and above justification by faith alone is that they do not really believe they are guilty of original sin or any actual sins. They falsely assume a state of sinless perfection in this life. And the definition of sin is always something along the Wesleyan holiness line that sin is only the violation of a known moral law. This is especially strange since the 1662 Book of Common Prayer recommends daily Morning and Evening Prayer where we confess our sins twice a day. And how does the 1662 Prayer Book define sin? It defines sin as Scripture does; that is, sin is anything that fails to do what God commands, anything that violates God's moral law in thought, word or deed. The distinction between temptation and sinful thoughts is a false one for sinful human beings. Only the first Adam and Jesus Christ were tempted without sinning. You see, even if we do not give in to temptation to sin in actual deeds, simply by contemplating what is sinful sinners have sinned in their thoughts. Cursing, swearing, hating, lusting, coveting, worshipping the creature rather than the creator are all sinful thoughts as well as sinful deeds. Jesus said that it is the heart that is wicked and out of the heart proceed all sinful actions.

Repent of your self-righteousness today and trust in the righteousness of Christ alone to save you. Why? Because you sin by thinking that your righteousness can equal that of God in your own sinful heart. Those trusting in their own inherent righteousness to make themselves right with God are inwardly full of dead men's bones. It is the righteousness that is outside of us that justifies us--the righteousness of Christ.

Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith-- (Philippians 3:8-9 ESV)

And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God. (Galatians 6:16 ESV)

Those who count their own works as anything other than trash or rubbish have built their salvation on the false foundation of good works. (1 Corinthians 3:11). Unless we build on the foundation of Christ's active obedience and Christ's passive obedience we simply condemn ourselves. (Romans 10:3; Titus 3:5; Philippians 3:9).

False prophets love to say, "Oh, I agree with you, brother," when confronted with their overly optimistic view of their own personal holiness. But on closer examination they lead people to hell by teaching them that they are able to do what they are unable to do: be absolutely sinless and holy. We fall short of the mark no matter how holy we "think" we are. That is why even the holiest and best Christians in and of themselves deserve hell. It is only the sinless life of Christ that can make us holy and that holiness is not our inherent, subjective holiness. Rather it is the objective holiness of Christ credited to our account. This is why even the thief on the cross could be saved at the last instant (Luke 23:39-43). If personal holiness were the basis of salvation, then logically criminals and the wicked have no chance to be saved since they can never do enough penance to make themselves right with God. But the clincher is that would also mean that no Christian at all could be saved since all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. In other words, we are all law breakers, criminals, and sinners in God's eyes and all of us deserve hell as much as any murderer or adulterer. Only by God's mercy and grace can anyone be made right with God, not by our own righteousness, emulation of Christ or God, or any other righteousness of our own heart.

Are you like the tax collector who went into the temple to pray? Or are you like the Pharisee? (Luke 18:10-14). Choose today whether you will work your way to heaven or if you will trust only in God's mercy to save you, an unworthy, miserable sinner who can never repay the debt you owe to God. (Matthew 18:24-34). Pharisees exalt themselves above others who owe less than they themselves owe. Beware of being overly righteous lest you yourself be lost:

Be not overly righteous, and do not make yourself too wise. Why should you destroy yourself? 17 Be not overly wicked, neither be a fool. Why should you die before your time? (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17 ESV)

Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. (1 Corinthians 10:12 ESV)

The Gettysburg Address:

2010-06-03T09:28:00.000-07:00

Honoring Union Soldiers & Dishonoring Confederate Soldiers

By Charlie Ray

Most school children are taught the politically correct version of the Civil War as being fought over slavery and that the South fought to preserve slavery. Along with this politically correct version we are told that the Gettysburg Address honors the fallen soldiers of the battle of Gettysburg. What they do not tell you is that the address was meant only to honor the fallen Union soldiers since the war raged on for two more years. Fallen Union and Confederate soldiers, due to the biological hazards involved, were buried immediately.

However, the Union soldiers were buried in individual graves and later re-interred in the national cemetery at Gettysburg. The dead Confederates were buried in a mass grave and were never given an honorable burial:

“The dead of Gettysburg were piled upon the battlefield, quickly decomposing in the hot summer air. Sanitary concerns required an immediate response, so the Union dead were initially disposed of in field graves: hastily dug, shallow graves close to where the soldiers fell in battle. (The Confederate dead were simply piled into mass, unmarked graves as was deemed appropriate for an enemy.) But sentiment and politics demanded that the dead be commemorated in a more long-lasting and honorable way. Land was purchased near the battle site and designated as a national cemetery, and thirty-five hundred Union soldiers were reinterred in graves organized in radiating semicircles according to the eighteen states whose soldiers participated in the battle.

Four months after the terrible battle, the Soldiers' Cemetery at Gettysburg (now the Gettysburg National Cemetery) was dedicated with a public ceremony. Fifteen thousand people gathered to participate, including many family members who had lost loved ones in the battle.”

I find it amazing that some ministers of the Gospel still believe that our modern United States is somehow "blessed of God" and a "Christian nation." The Billy Sunday civil religion view of the USA is alive and well apparently. However, given the fact that only 20% of the population attends church at all and this number is falling daily, one has to wonder if the United States is a Christian nation in any sense of the word? Materialistic atheism is the secular party line for the public school system and there is no longer any prayer allowed in public schools or at sporting events sponsored by public schools. Abortion, legally endorsed by our "Christian" nation, is the officially sanctioned murder of unborn children sacrificed to the god of convenience and the mother's right to kill her own child.

While there are certainly Christian influences in our founding documents, the idea that this in and of itself makes America "blessed of God" is just wrong. Of course, providence has it that the USA is still here. But that could change at any time. Just as Israel disappeared in the dispersion for a time and just as the Roman Empire no longer exists, so the United States could at any time be cut off from the face of the earth by God Almighty. It is overly optimistic to think that it cannot happen to us.

To confuse patriotism with Christianity can lead to atrocities like the holocaust in Nazi Germany. The United States has committed acts that by modern standards would be considered unjust war, including the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II. Giving blanket approval to the United States government as somehow divinely approved and endorsed by the Almighty is downright dangerous.

The truth is the visible church is the New Israel. To confuse the United States of America with the New Testament church is inexcusable (Galatians 6:16; Deuteronomy 29:18-29). The political philosophy of Manifest Destiny has been used to justify the taking of Native American lands and to justify the policy of genocide of Native American tribes which refused to reside on reservations, among other things. Divine favor is invoked to justify all kinds of injustices, including slavery. The truth is the Civil War was fought over states rights versus a strong central and federal government, not over slavery. As wrong as slavery was, the North cared little for the rights of slaves but rather cared more for maintaining their domination of the states in the South.

The situation continues today in the ongoing culture war between the theologically and politically liberal northern states and the theologically and politically conservative southern states known traditionally as the "Bible" belt. The mistake made by the Moral Majority is to argue that this is a Christian nation. It is not and never has been a "Christian" nation anymore than the Roman Empire or Nazi Germany were "Christian" nations. We do have many Christian influences in our foundational documents like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights but those are so generic as to be nothing more than deism at best.

Modern Evangelical Christians should recognize that we are to be good citizens (Romans 13:1-6) of the nation in which we reside. We should pay our taxes and obey the government (Luke 20:22). But we should not commit the sin of idolatry by placing America on a pedestal as if it were somehow the New Israel. America is becoming more pagan by the minute. Our true citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20). Nations pass away but our God lives forever (Isaiah 40:15). To confuse political allegiances with our faith in God and our loyalty to Jesus Christ is nothing short of idolatry whether it is someone loyal to the Union or someone who is proud to be from the South.

I'm proud to be born a southerner and I'm proud of my southern heritage. But ultimately my loyalty is not to the Confederacy or to the Union or to modern America. My loyalty is to Christ and to preaching the Gospel of salvation by grace alone (Acts 22:25-29; Philippians 3:20; Romans 1:16-17).

“So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone”, (Ephesians 2:19-20 ESV).

Bible or TV Guide

2010-05-31T09:39:00.001-07:00

By Unknown Author

On the table side by side:
The Holy Bible and the TV Guide.
One's well worn but cherished with pride
(Not the Bible, but the TV Guide).
One's used daily to help folk decide,
No! It isn't the Bible,it's the TV Guide.

As pages are turned, what will they see?
Oh, what does it matter, turn on the TV.
Then confusion reigns, they can't all agree
On what they will watch on the old TV.
So they open the book in which they confide
(Not the Bible, it's the TV Guide).

The Word of God is seldom read-
Maybe a verse o'er they fall into bed
Exhausted and sleepy and tired as can be,
(Not from reading the Bible: from watching TV).
So then back to the table, side by side,
Are the Holy Bible and the TV Guide.

No time for prayer, no time for the Word.
The way of salvation is seldom heard.
Abiding in Christ so full and free
is found in the Bible, not on TV.

Evangelism Is Not Working!

2010-05-28T14:00:00.000-07:00

By Mark Greene
WorkLife.org

Evangelism is not working.

But it could be…

Here’s a riddle:

When is the Church not the Church?
When is a Christian not a Christian?
When is a minister not a minister?
When is the Spirit not the Spirit?

The answer to all four questions is essentially the same – the workplace.

Amongst all the huff and puff, wailings and gnashing of teeth about the state of the Church, one central fact has been overlooked… the bulk of church-generated initiatives have nothing to do with the way people spend the bulk of their waking hours. That’s why over 50% of evangelicals have never heard a sermon on work… not one. How can we possibly pretend that the Church is supporting its people where they are when the vast majority have no support whatsoever for the way they spend 60 or 70% of their waking lives? And if it’s true that most people think their work is spiritually inferior to the pastor’s and the missionary’s, if it’s true that most people have very little idea why their particular work as secretary, bricklayer, stockbroker, housewife, engineer might be of significance to God, then it’s also true of evangelism.

In today's church evangelism is singing outside in the streets , it's events, it’s acting in shopping malls, it's inviting friends to seeker services, it's developing relationships with our neighbors, it's evangelism programs, it’s lots of things. But one thing it isn't - it isn't about equipping the people of God to think Christianly, live Christianly and share Christ right where they are. The one place people are not actively encouraged and equipped to make a difference is the place many people spend 50, 60, 70 percent of their waking hours. The one where Christian and non-Christian have to meet. The one place where the playing field is even, where Christian and non-Christian are subject to the same corporate culture, may have the same boss, the same pressures...the one place where the non-Christian can actually see the difference that Christ can make to a life - not for a couple of hours over dinner but over a couple of years for twenty, thirty, forty, fifty hours a week. The workplace.

Are many ministers inadvertently letting their zeal for evangelism and their desire to build a strong local church distract them from asking how God might want to use their people outside the local context? There is a danger, I believe, that we will view church members exclusively in terms of how they can contribute to the local household of God rather than how they might also contribute to the growth of the kingdom of Christ, wherever he has placed them. And there is a danger that we will become too focused on getting non-Christians into church to hear the minister rather than into the kingdom of God by hearing the word.

The Church has done its research. It has concluded that fewer and fewer people know even the basics about the claims of Jesus, and so we are encouraged to build bridges to the unchurched, to go to the fringe and beyond, told that we need to learn to speak their language. Indeed we do. But the thrust of the response is to send us out on the highways and byways, to neighbors who on the whole we don't know very well and don’t spend that much time with. Meanwhile back in the workplace, the average Christian has already built bridges and crossed them, has already developed relationships and already speaks their co-workers' language. Warm contacts. Are we encouraging people to go and fish in pools and puddles when they are often sitting on a lake full of fish? The person who knows them well doesn't live next door, they work at the next desk.

We need to put the word not only on the street but into the workplaces of nations. After all, that’s where you are and that’s where the non-Christians are. As you know, workplaces are filled with all kinds of people, with all kinds of problems - illness, fear of redundancy, adultery, grief, confusion, purposelessness, promiscuity, ethical conundrums, criminal negligence, racist hiring policies, dirty tricks and so on. People who need salvation. Oh, that we would encourage one another to see these little 'villages' and 'towns' as our mission fields. What a difference that would make to so many people - to be released into confident ministry just where they are. Nehemiah, Joseph, the Exodus midwives, Naaman's servant girl, Daniel, Ester, Lydia would have approved, I'm sure. After all, when it comes to witness in a pagan environment the Bible is very clear - leave it to the workers.

Faith and Evidence

2010-05-27T08:28:00.000-07:00

By Rachel Tulloch

"That's not faith."

There is an episode of the TV series Bones, in which the main character is buried alive with a friend and they are running out of air. She is not panicking because she is sure her partner Booth will rescue them. Her friend says, "You sure have a lot of faith in him." Her reply betrays a common assumption about the nature of faith: "Faith is an irrational belief in something that's logically impossible," she says. "Over time, I have seen what Booth can do. That's not faith."(1)

These comments reflect how many people view faith: it is an irrational leap in the dark. It is about accepting propositions without evidence or even against the available evidence. However, in the Christian sense, faith is not opposed to reason or evidence. It is simply not reducible to either one. In the book of 1 John, we read: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us" (1 John 1:1-3, emphasis mine).

John is clearly appealing to evidence and reason to try to persuade people that the story he tells is true. If it is true, then it would make sense for one to have faith in the Jesus of whom he speaks, just as it made sense for Bones to have faith in her partner since she had seen the evidence of his abilities. But only if it is true. John is obviously not asking people to believe against the evidence or even in the absence of evidence, but on the basis of a certain type of evidence—in this case, the trustworthiness of the witnesses.

Evidence can serve to instill belief or confirm belief, but it has its limits. We all interpret evidence in the light of our experience and the beliefs we already hold. Just as John offered one type of evidence, others would offer their own evidences that Jesus was not who the apostles claimed he was. Thus, it is not strictly the evidence that determines who puts their faith in Jesus and who does not because faith is about more than believing an idea. It is about commitment, a willingness to stake your life on the truth of something or the reliability of someone.

Furthermore, those who accuse faith of lacking in evidence often fail to notice that every belief system, whether it includes the supernatural or not, has foundational elements which are not proven. Even a naturalist worldview that relies on science must accept many things without direct evidence. All people have faith in their own worldviews, even naturalist scientists. They have to believe that their way of determining what is true is the best way. They have to believe others and trust the results of other scientists. If you are a complete skeptic, you will never get anywhere in science. You would have to do all the experiments yourself and even then, you cannot prove 100 percent that you are not mistaken. You have to trust that your findings will hold true in the future, that the laws that operate now will not change tomorrow. You have to trust that your mind and thoughts in some way correspond to the way the world actually is.

So, faith has evidence. But all evidence has faith too.

Whether our faith is rational or irrational depends on a number of factors: how much and what types of evidence supports it, whether it has stood up to honest scrutiny and criticism, and how much explanatory power it has to make sense of our experience. Christian faith passes each of these tests, but it will always go beyond any of these factors. Like the faith of Bones in her partner, it is also about trusting a person. Our faith determines the direction of our lives; it is where our loyalties lie; it believes that the one who made us also loves us and has spoken to us. Over time, we have seen what God can do. And that is faith.

The Real Prince of Persia

2010-05-25T10:03:00.000-07:00

By Dare2Share

Finally the moviemakers are getting it - right? We want big action big effect big-time battles in our films that take us away from our everyday lives and transport us to...

Well, name your place. Hogwarts, Sherwood Forest, Pandora, and so many other places are just plain awesome to visit for a few hours and have our imaginations captured and entertained.

And now you can go back in time to 6 th Century B.C. Persia in a movie called Aladdin ...wait, I mean Prince of Persia. It's about a street rat who gets adopted by a king and saves the day from an eeeeevil eyeliner wearing dude named Jafar...sorry, I mean Nizam.

No magic lamp in this one, but we do have Dastan ( Jake Gyllenhaal) with a heavy metal haircut and outrageously ripped biceps swashbuckling his way through danger and peril, and that adds up to a fun adventure well worth the $50 movie ticket (or whatever it's gone up to these days).

Shout out to Jake for playing a respectable acting role in the movie, but I want to introduce you to the real Prince of Persia, mentioned in one of the craziest passages in the Bible:

On the twenty-fourth day of the first month, I was standing beside the great Tigris River. While standing there, I looked up and saw a man dressed in linen clothes with a belt of fine gold wrapped around his waist. His body was like shiny yellow quartz. His face was bright like lightning, and his eyes were like fire. His arms and legs were shiny like polished bronze, and his voice sounded like the roar of a crowd. The man in the vision said to me, "Daniel, God loves you very much. Think carefully about the words I will speak to you, and stand up, because I have been sent to you." When he said this, I stood up, but I was still shaking...

Then the man said to me, "Daniel, do not be afraid. Some time ago you decided to get understanding and to humble yourself before your God. Since that time God has listened to you, and I have come because of your prayers. But the prince of Persia has been fighting against me for twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the most important angels, came to help me, because I had been left there with the king of Persia. Now I have come to explain to you what will happen to your people, because the vision is about a time in the future " (Daniel 10:4-6; 10-14).

This scene is from the life of Daniel the prophet. He had been praying for quite some time, and wondering why his requests weren't being answered.

And why wasn't he getting an answer? Because the angel talking to Daniel said that the "Prince of Persia" had been fighting against him. This isn't a physical person, rather it is a demon sent by Satan to stop the angel from answering Daniel's prayer!

In other words, there is an invisible spiritual war going on that rages just as violently today as it did back in the day. And what gets me pumped up is that I know my prayer life isn't just a daily habit of thanking God for food and help me have a great day. My prayers are the weapons of war. They call angels into action and spark colossal battles. In fact, if I was able to actually witness the spiritual combat being waged all around, I would probably hit the floor in a state of shock.

I think there's something inside all of us that wants to be heroic and save the day...and guess what? You have that potential. Every word of every prayer that is sparked in the soul and escapes your lips is a striking blow into the territory of the enemy.

So pray for victory over the Satan in your life, in your family, for your friends, and for your school. Pray for the gospel to go forth with heavenly power and punch. Remember that prayer is not some therapeutic self-talk...it is a paratrooper jump into the spiritual fray that demands your blood, sweat, and tears.

So servants of Jesus Christ...to arms! Release the barrage and ask God to bring the rain and a triumphant ending as you carry forward His Cause!

The Empty Chair

2010-05-21T18:53:00.000-07:00

By Unknown Author

A man's daughter had asked the local minister to come and pray with her father. When the minister arrived, he found the man lying in bed with his head propped up on two pillows. An empty chair sat beside his bed. The minister assumed that the old fellow had been informed of his visit.

"I guess you were expecting me," he said.

"No, I wasn't. Who are you?" said the father.

"I'm the new minister at your church," he replied. "When I saw the empty chair, I figured you knew I was coming to visit."

"Oh yeah, the chair," said the bedridden man. "Would you mind closing the door?" Puzzled, the minister closed the door.

"I have never told anyone this, not even my daughter," said the old man.

"But all of my life I have never known how to pray. At church, I used to hear the pastor talk about prayer, but it went right over my head."

The old man continued, "I abandoned any attempt at prayer until one day, about four years ago, my best friend said to me, 'Prayer is just a simple matter of having a conversation with Jesus. Here is what I suggest. Sit down in a chair, place an empty chair in front of you, and in FAITH, see Jesus sitting in the chair. It's not weird or anything because he promised, "I'll be with you always." Then just speak to Him, and listen, in the same way you're doing with me right now.'"

The father continued, "So I tried it. I've liked it so much that I do it a couple of hours every day. I'm careful though. If my daughter saw me talking to an empty chair, she'd either have a nervous breakdown or send me to off to the funny-farm."

The minister was deeply moved by the story and encouraged the old man to continue on the journey. He anointed him with oil and prayed with him. Then he left.

Two nights later, the daughter called to tell the minister that her father had passed away that afternoon. "Did he die in peace?" he asked.

"Yes. When I was leaving for the store, he called me over to his bedside, told me that he loved me, and kissed me on the cheek. When I returned an hour later, he was dead."

She continued, "But there was something strange about his death. Apparently, just before Dad died, he leaned over and rested his head on the chair next to his bed. What do you make of that?"

The minister, wiping a tear from his eye, said, "I wish we all could go like that."

You be the Judge.

2010-05-18T17:53:00.000-07:00

I've been listening to "Back To The Bible" on 660am this week. While they identify two distinctly different judgements, I submit the bible lists three according to their interpretation. The rapture has been identified by the same scholars as having numerous descriptions, as well. My friend, these are all the SAME event.
There is only one judgement! Only one! These vereses are written by three different authors: Matthew, Paul and John. They speak, interpret and prophesy differently. This is most likely what happened here. The judgement in verse may use a more narrow form to illustrate its point better. All three authors are talking about the same judgement.

I. JUDGEMENT OF THE NATIONS: Matthew 25:31-3631"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

II. JUDGEMENT SEAT OF CHRIST: 2 Corinthians 5:10

10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

III. GREAT WHITE THRONE JUDGEMENT: Revelation 20:11-15

11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

The Son of Man, Jesus, will be doing the judging!! But according to many who get it wrong, for sake of writing a book, they might have you think Jesus is also 100 different people. It's the same person fulfilling 100 different attributes. Do you see the point?

Look at how many different ways He's described. In the context of each verse, a label conveys a distinct meaning.

Here's 100 labels of the Him (who will be doing the judging in the 1 event above):

Advocate (1 John 2:1)
Almighty (Rev. 1:8; Mt. 28:18)
Alpha and Omega (Rev. 1:8; 22:13)
Amen (Rev. 3:14)
Apostle of our Profession (Heb. 3:1)
Atoning Sacrifice for our Sins (1 John 2:2)
Author of Life (Acts 3:15)
Author and Perfecter of our Faith (Heb. 12:2)
Author of Salvation (Heb. 2:10)
Beginning and End (Rev. 22:13)
Blessed and only Ruler (1 Tim. 6:15)
Bread of God (John 6:33)
Bread of Life (John 6:35; 6:48)
Bridegroom (Mt. 9:15)
Capstone (Acts 4:11; 1 Pet. 2:7)
Chief Cornerstone (Eph. 2:20)
Chief Shepherd (1 Pet. 5:4)
Christ (1 John 2:22)
Creator (John 1:3)
Deliverer (Rom. 11:26)
Eternal Life (1 John 1:2; 5:20)
Gate (John 10:9)
Faithful and True (Rev. 19:11)
Faithful Witness (Rev. 1:5)
Faithful and True Witness (Rev. 3:14)
First and Last (Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13)
Firstborn From the Dead (Rev. 1:5)
Firstborn over all creation (Col. 1:15)
Gate (John 10:9)
God (John 1:1; 20:28; Heb. 1:8; Rom. 9:5; 2 Pet. 1:1;1 John 5:20; etc.)
Good Shepherd (John 10:11,14)
Great Shepherd (Heb. 13:20)
Great High Priest (Heb. 4:14)
Head of the Church (Eph. 1:22; 4:15; 5:23)
Heir of all things (Heb. 1:2)
High Priest (Heb. 2:17)
Holy and True (Rev. 3:7)
Holy One (Acts 3:14)
Hope (1 Tim. 1:1)
Hope of Glory (Col. 1:27)
Horn of Salvation (Luke 1:69)
I Am (John 8:58)
Image of God (2 Cor. 4:4)
Immanuel (Mt. 1:23)
Judge of the living and the dead (Acts 10:42)
King Eternal (1 Tim. 1:17)
King of Israel (John 1:49)
King of the Jews (Mt. 27:11)
King of kings (1 Tim 6:15; Rev. 19:16)
King of the Ages (Rev. 15:3)
Lamb (Rev. 13:8)
Lamb of God (John 1:29)
Lamb Without Blemish (1 Pet. 1:19)
Last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45)
Life (John 14:6; Col. 3:4)
Light of the World (John 8:12)
Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5)
Living One (Rev. 1:18)
Living Stone (1 Pet. 2:4)
Lord (2 Pet. 2:20)
Lord of All (Acts 10:36)
Lord of Glory (1 Cor. 2:8)
Lord of lords (Rev. 19:16)
Man from Heaven (1 Cor. 15:48)
Mediator of the New Covenant (Heb. 9:15)
Mighty God (Isa. 9:6)
Morning Star (Rev. 22:16)
Offspring of David (Rev. 22:16)
Only Begotten Son of God (John 1:18; 1 John 4:9)
Our Great God and Savior (Titus 2:13)
Our Holiness (1 Cor. 1:30)
Our Husband (2 Cor. 11:2)
Our Protection (2 Thess. 3:3)
Our Redemption (1 Cor. 1:30)
Our Righteousness (1 Cor. 1:30)
Our Sacrificed Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7)
Power of God (1 Cor. 1:24)
Precious Cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:6)
Prophet (Acts 3:22)
Rabbi (Mt. 26:25)
Resurrection and Life (John 11:25)
Righteous Branch (Jer. 23:5)
Righteous One (Acts 7:52; 1 John 2:1)
Rock (1 Cor. 10:4)
Root of David (Rev. 5:5; 22:16)
Ruler of God's Creation (Rev. 3:14)
Ruler of the Kings of the Earth (Rev. 1:5)
Savior (Eph. 5:23; Titus 1:4; 3:6; 2 Pet. 2:20)
Son of David (Lk. 18:39)
Son of God (John 1:49; Heb. 4:14)
Son of Man (Mt. 8:20)
Son of the Most High God (Lk. 1:32)
Source of Eternal Salvation for all who obey him (Heb. 5:9)
The One Mediator (1 Tim. 2:5)
The Stone the builders rejected (Acts 4:11)
True Bread (John 6:32)
True Light (John 1:9)
True Vine (John 15:1)
Truth (John 1:14; 14:6)
Way (John 14:6)
Wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24)
Word (John 1:1)
Word of God (Rev. 19:13)

One of the more frequently asked questions is of the 'Bema Seat Judgement' of Christians. This phrase has generally come to refer to the doctrine which teaches that Christians must stand before God and be judged, not for their sins, but in order to determine the nature of the rewards for their works. The proponents of this theology call this the 'Bema Seat Judgement' to distinguish it from what they term the, 'White Throne Judgement.' The latter they believe to be the judgement which God reserves for judicial verdict against the transgressions of the wicked.

The truth, however, is a lot less complicated and convoluted. The Greek word [bema], which is translated seat, is from a root which means 'base' or the foot (and by implication, step). It is therefore used to designate a stepped seating area for judgement. Bema simply means the raised seating of a judge or a king. For example, the throne of a King is usually stepped seating. In other words, seating which is raised above the level of the surrounding area. Much the same as our courts today established for judgments. One must approach the raised judgement area called the bench. Likewise, the Bema seat is simply the raised seating of someone who is to judge.

The problem is not really one of misunderstanding the Greek, it is an exegetical problem where some theologians are reading their own presuppositions 'into' the text. These people have formulated a doctrine which teaches that their is a judgment which is specifically to judge the value of the Christian's service to the Lord, and so they attempt to make the word 'Bema' conform to fit their doctrine. While this certainly cannot be proven Biblically, many of these theologians (using secular testimony) have gone to great lengths to justify the belief, even though it contradicts the Bible text itself. They claim that this particular seat was only used to reward, and was never used to punish. However, these secular ideas are not only contrary to all other doctrines of scripture concerning God's rewarding us for our work, but they are contradictory to the way the word [bema] itself is used in the scriptures.

God's Word does not lend itself in support of such a Biblically indefensible conclusion. In fact, God clearly illustrates just the opposite. For example, Pilate sat on the judgement seat [bema] when Jesus was being accused of wrong doing. Clearly, this makes these theories about it's purpose for rewards, null and void.

That’s my perspective, at least . . .

2010-05-15T06:55:00.000-07:00

I’m curious… What do you make of the fact that we are *commanded* to love God?

The thing that bothers me most about ardent free-willers is that they go around saying, “God has given us the *choice* to love Him or reject Him,” when in fact, He has not. Are there not grave consequences for idolatry (failure to love God)? Would anyone in their right mind knowingly prefer these consequences? And isn’t He a jealous God?

“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strenth,” is not only a *commandment*, but it is the first and *greatest* commandment! Combined with, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” it sums up the *entire* Law. So, loving God is not optional.

If God were to “force” us to love Him, that would be a kindness to us, of infinite magnitude. He already “forces” us to love Him with the Law. But what I mean here, by “forcing us,” is this: if God were to find a way to awaken our hearts to a genuine love for Him, that would be a kindness of infinite magnitude toward us.

God is beautiful, not because He takes a “hands off” approach regarding man’s choice to love or reject Him, but really because He does the opposite. The God that I have seen revealed in scripture knows that we are so corrupt that we will never love Him on our own, and that we are doomed to destruction without His intervention. Therefore, in His love, He takes a “hands on,” active approach. He *seeks* and *saves* that which was lost, drawing them to Himself, taking out hearts of stone and putting in hearts of flesh, so that they walk in His ways (Exekiel 36:26-29). He searches out His bride, dying for her in order that she may be forgiven and redeemed.

God gave His only begotten Son, so that whoever *believes* in Him would have eternal life. God did NOT give His Son so that ALL people who have ever lived for all time would have eternal life. Whether you’re Arminian or Calvinist, you have to ask: why does God not save EVERYONE? The most reasonable answer is that God must be committed to something higher.

The question, then, is, what is God’s higher priority? The Arminian says it is man’s “free will” that God considers the higher priority. The Calvinist, on the other hand, generally believes it is God’s glory that is the higher priority. I challenge anyone to find Scripture to support the first claim, because I have never seen one verse that very clearly supports it. If you find one, I will look at it and consider it. As for me, I see a wealth of Scriptures that clearly show that God’s great name — that is, His everlasting glory — is His motivating factor in both saving people AND judging them.

* Isaiah 48:9-11
* Ezekiel 36:21-23
* Ezekiel 36:32
* Psalm 25:11
* Psalm 31:3
* Psalm 79:9
* Psalm 143:11
* Jeremiah 16:21
* Ezekiel 6:14
* Ezekiel 28:23,24

Pop these verses into biblegateway.com or something and pay attention to the emphasis on “God’s name.”

God can, and does, do whatever He wants (Psalm 115:3). If He chooses to save some, but not all, do we dare find fault with His governance? Are we fit to be His counselor? Were we there when He created the world? (Perhaps we should revisit the last few chapters of Job.)

I’m not so much defending Calvinism as I am simply challenging people to ask whether “free will” is the BIBLICALLY-revealed priority that God had in mind when He chose (and continues to choose) not to save EVERYONE.

Lounging or Labouring?

2010-04-27T12:57:00.000-07:00

By Richard Maffeo

I've lived in southern California so long, I forget how
bad the weather can be elsewhere. While the rest
of the world wages battle with old man winter, I
lounge on my back porch lathering sunscreen on
my arms. While other people pull their coat collars
up against driving snow, I stroll through my
neighbourhood in shorts and a T-shirt.

Similarly, I've been a Christian so long, I often
forget the struggles of people whose lives are
different. I forget they don't know how to receive
Christ's peace during their personal storms.
They don't know they can find forgiveness for
sin when they lose battles with temptation.

No one can send a package of sunshine to those
living under frigid winter skies, but every Christian
can introduce Christ's warmth to those shivering
in despair, hopelessness and guilt. Here are some
suggestions:

Before you can bring hope to the hopeless, you
must make sure you yourself have Jesus' hope.
"The church," someone said, "is always only one
generation from extinction." In other words, it is
possible to grow up in the front pew, hear the gospel
every Sunday, say the words and sing the choruses,
yet never ask Jesus to forgive your sins and change
you into His image.

Once your relationship with Christ is settled, make
sure your speech, your dress, the jokes you laugh
at and the movies you watch all reflect what you
"say" about your relationship with Christ. We can't
expect others to pay attention to what we say, if
we don't follow our own preaching.

Ask God for opportunities to share your faith – and
for boldness to do so. The biggest obstacle I face
in telling others about Christ is my fear: "What will
they think of me?" A better question is: "What will
they think of me when they stand before God's
judgement seat if I have never told them about
Christ's love and forgiveness?"

Invite a friend, neighbour or co-worker to a home
Bible study or special church service. Inviting
people we know is easier than inviting strangers.
The worst that can happen is that they will say,
"No, thanks." The best that can happen is that
they will attend the service and commit their
lives to Christ.

Lend evangelistic books and videos to friends.
Lending material is often better than giving it
because gifts sometimes collect dust on forgotten
shelves. Loans, on the other hand, are read or
watched because the recipients know they will
be asked for their opinion when the material is
returned.

Many of those we meet – at work, in locker rooms
and in lunchrooms – are battered and shivering from
their old nature. We have the privilege of offering
them safety in Christ. Admittedly, walking across
the street requires more effort than lounging around
lathering our arms with sunscreen. But do we really
need a tan as much as they need Christ's warmth,
love and hope?

(Richard Maffeo is a freelance writer from San Diego, CA.)

What has God put on your heart to do?

2010-04-26T14:21:00.000-07:00

By John Paul Jackson

Is there something you’ve been considering doing lately? Do you have a thought rolling around in your head that maybe you should be paying more attention to? What has God put on your heart to do?

You are probably familiar with Jesus’ metaphor of new wine and new wineskins (Matthew 9:17). The general explanation is that when God is doing something new, we need to be open to it. Many of us rightly equate this metaphor to moves of God that seem large and obvious, such as churchwide or citywide revival. But it can also apply to our lives on a more individual, everyday scale.

Some of us have been Christians for so long that we have become rather set in our ways. Perhaps we’ve even adopted a type of spiritual atrophy and aren’t doing anything other than what we have done in the past. However, throughout Scripture, the people of God who are known for their great faith had to bend with the Holy Spirit. They had to leave behind their normal schedules and typical behavior in order to follow the plan of God for their lives. They accepted the “new wine” when it was presented to them, and they were open to the often radical change it had on their plans and life goals.

New wine — the new thing God is doing — requires new wineskins: people who are willing to be soft and pliable in God’s hands. They change shape as God pours into them, and they listen when He speaks.

What is God asking you to do that may require a bit of bending on your part? What have you been considering doing that maybe you should just go ahead and do? Is it getting up earlier to spend time with Him? Is it exercising regularly? Is it being kind to someone? Is it writing the book you’ve been thinking about writing or applying for a different job? Perhaps this recurring thought you’ve been having is something you should listen to.

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:10, “God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.” The Holy Spirit is the Great Communicator who searches the very deepest parts of God and then reveals them to us. The Spirit of the Living God dwells in, empowers, prepares and equips us so that we can get where we need to go and do what God has called us to do — so we reach the purpose for which He created us. Our next step could be as simple as paying attention to the idea that keeps coming up, the thought that keeps returning to us.

What is God telling your heart to do? Are you doing it? Whatever it is, it is sure to be a grand adventure, and it is sure to produce change.

Responding to Jennifer Knapp's "Coming Out"

2010-04-20T17:09:00.000-07:00

by Randy Thomas, Exodus' Executive Vice President

As you all are probably aware, Jennifer Knapp stated last week that she has embraced her same sex attraction and is now identifying as gay. She has done a number of interviews including this one with Christian Today.

Now, the finished product (her new album), titled Letting Go, is slated for a May 11 release and will be the first test of her fans' loyalty given confirmation of her sexuality.

While the decision to "come out" one month before her new album's release is a risky one, The Advocate said Knapp chose to do so partly because she didn't want people to love her music and then discover that their own values won't let them sing along full-throated.

"I think it's going to be shocking and feel like a betrayal to some people who live their spiritual lives through the music they listen to," Knapp told the LGBT publication.

Furthermore, the move provides Knapp a chance to be "wholly myself".

Over the past week or so I have fielded a lot of questions and one interview concerning Jennifer's decision to "come out." There has been a lot of conversation with a lot of various viewpoints. Whether you agree fully with the following quote from this post or not, I thought this was a very interesting insight:

In all this, Jennifer Knapp-the singer and songwriter-will likely be forgotten. Her status as a person, a person with sinful inclinations that obscure the radiant, recalcitrant image of God, will be pushed to the background as we focus on the only salient fact for us: that instead of simply being a minor Christian celebrity, she's now a gay minor Christian celebrity.

Jennifer Knapp, object lesson. For whatever we want to say. Objectification happens in many forms-and turning someone into a flash card for our broader spiritual lessons is only one of them.

Of course, such objectification is probably inevitable. After all, Jennifer Knapp isn't in your church. I'm going to guess she's not reading our blogs. And she's probably not your friend. She exists for most of us only as an icon of that funny phenomenon we call "Christian culture." And so because she has lent herself and her music-as all successful musicians must-to the objectifying press-machine that is Nashville, it's tempting to say that she deserves whatever she gets.

But that doesn't mean it's good, or that it justifies our own objectification of her. Especially when in every interview I've read, she's expressed reluctance and dismay that her sexuality will be used as a political football. And she seems, if nothing else, to be properly respectful of her differences with the Christian community. In other words, she seems to be want to left alone, even if her status as minor gay Christian celebrity doesn't allow it.

And so maybe, just maybe, we should respect her subjectivity, not turn her into an object lesson, and move on.

Jennifer has made a lot of money and fame in the contemporary Christian music scene. Just as she rightfully earned her recognition as an amazing artist, she has also earned the scrutiny that comes along with all of that celebrity. At the same time, we as Christians are called to see beyond the hype and to the real principles being played out on the national stage in front of us. With the Spirit's help we can consider Jesus' sacrifice for us corporately and for us individually. The Spirit will also help us consider Jesus' sacrifice for Jennifer as well.

One example of the objectification of Jennifer came when someone who was obviously very angry with her decision asked me:

So when do we come to the point of just flat out telling her that her "loving relationship" with this woman isn't love at all? ... that she is offending a Holy God?

I told this person that we need to step back and realize that God is fully aware of Jennifer's love for her partner. He understands the legitimate needs seeking to be expressed in both of their hearts and He also, fully understands the reasons why both have turned to sinful behavior to try and meet those needs. The truth is, Jennifer probably really does love her partner. We don't need to minimize or dismiss that. The beautiful and sometimes tragic nature of love is that we have free will on where and whom to invest it. Jennifer is investing hers into her partner. This ability to steward love is why God is so jealous for our love, it's a huge investment of our entire being. He entrusted that to us with free will so that it would be authentic. Rightly or wrongly, when one invests love in another ... that's an investment of the heart, soul and sometimes body of the person.

A very big deal indeed.

I have a feeling Jennifer isn't clueless that most Christians believe homosexual behavior is sin. I just wonder if anyone ever offered to share with her a redemptive view of sexuality instead of being heavy handed on condemning the behavior. To ask Jennifer to "repent" is to ask her to give up her hard fought battle to reconcile her life to herself. It's to ask her to sacrifice two of the biggest investments in her life (her partner and identity.) That is no small thing and should not be treated lightly.

Temptations, if they are of any worth as temptations, usually latch on to a legitimate need and point to sinful behavior as a way to meet those needs. However, in Christ, temptations are also an opportunity to recognize legitimate needs and pursue meeting those needs in biblically appropriate ways. Jesus was tempted in every way but never sinned. His Spirit can empower us to discover, learn and implement ways to meet our needs and turn away from sin. Right now, and not knowing her personally, it would seem that Jennifer is seeking to meet her needs in the only way she knows how or feels is an option. God understands this and I have no doubt is working in her life to provide His redemptive perspective.

Later I thought about this person saying Jennifer was offending a Holy God. That irritated me at the time and didn't quite know what to say without getting upset. So I was silent in the conversation but I wished I had said that instead of God manifesting in all His glowing glory and declaring how offended He is, He manifested as Jesus Christ. He didn't cross His golden robed arms, roll His heavenly focused eyes and snarkily guffaw a lightning bolt out of His mouth to express his offense. A tortured, grieving Jesus willingly outstretched His arms and was nailed to a cross. As He died, He didn't lament how badly His Bride, His Church, was treating Him. He asked the Father to forgive us for we know not what we have done.

If anyone had a right to abandon everyone who offended him, Jesus was that person. But He didn't. Instead He paid the highest price possible to forgive us in spite of us.

Jennifer says she knows the Lord. I assume that is true. And if it is true, He never lets go. He wants her and her partner (all of us) to know that He offers a greater love than we could ever imagine or think. His love outshines any human love and can satiate any soul.

Lord, empower us to invest our love wisely ... starting with You. Amen.

What Is Baptism and To Whom Is It To Be Administered?

2010-04-16T18:28:00.000-07:00

WSC 94 What is baptism? A. Baptism is a sacrament, wherein the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, doth signify and seal our ingrafting into Christ, and partaking of the benefits of the covenant of grace, and our engagement to be the Lord's.

WSC 95 To whom is baptism to be administered? A. Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him; but the infants of such as are members of the visible church are to be baptized.

(Westminster Shorter Catechism　1:94-96　WCS)

Notice above that baptism is similar to an "engagement." In other words, it is a sign and seal of a vow we make to the Lord. A covenant is similar to the marriage covenant where there is a relationship and there are responsibilities and obligations on the part of both parties. The difference in the covenant of grace, however, is that the covenant of grace is made only with the elect who are truly born again by the Holy Spirit. For God's part He never breaks His promises to us as His children and God always keeps covenant with us, despite our failures and sins. He gives the elect His benefits unconditionally and will insure that we keep covenant with Him by putting into our hearts the desire to do what He commands us to do. The covenant of grace and membership in a visible congregation are not necessarily the same thing since the visible congregation might contain unregenerate members who eventually fall away into apostasy.

Regarding the administration of baptism we should be careful not to give a false security to unbelievers by baptizing their infants if they are not active members of a local and visible congregation where the Gospel is rightly preached and the two sacraments are rightly administered. It is a great temptation to try missionary baptisms and weddings to bring in new members or to gain financial income for a congregation. However, our focus should be on eternity and getting folks to understand that there is no salvation outside of Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:11-13) and that a true and lively faith requires a covenant commitment to the Lord through a true and lively local church as defined in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion:

Article XIX
Of the Church
The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached and the sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred: so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.

..........................Posted by Charlie J. Ray

Comments:

Believer said...

Am I understanding that it is OK for infants to be baptized? I've heard it said many times that baptism should be done when the person is capable of making their own decision.
Also, can a person be baptized more than once - say as an infant, where the church family helps to grow that child in an understanding of Jesus and when the child is old enough to make a decision about choosing to follow Christ?

Charlie J. Ray said...

Believer, in answer to your first question, "Should infants be baptized?" The answer is yes. Why? Well, first of all, baptism does not regenerate, save or justify anyone! I would include believers' baptism in that. Simply getting baptized does nothing except make you wet UNLESS you have first been born again. In the case of baptized infants the regeneration would happen at some point after baptism when the child owns the Christian faith for himself or herself.

So why do we baptize infants? Because it is a "sign" or "mark" that they are members of the covenant of grace (with the elect) just as circumcision was a mark of the covenant with Abraham. Remember that Abraham had faith prior to being circumcised. However, the "sign" without the reality of regeneration and true faith is merely an "empty sign." That would apply to both circumcision and baptism. The same can be said of believers who are baptized. If there is no true faith the sign is simply an "empty sign."

We do not believe that baptism is an empty sign for believers, though. The sign signifies the reality of Christ's sacrifice for us and our faith that Christ will indeed save us. And the promises are for our children (Acts 2:38-39) unless they prove otherwise by going into permanent unbelief and apostasy. If our children are called by the Lord they will indeed come to Him because they are His sheep and hear His voice.

When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers." (John 10:4-5 ESV)
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. (John 10:14-15 ESV)

In answer to your second question the answer is a resounding, "No!" Why not? Well, because it is faith that justifies, not baptism. There is no need to be baptized more than once. Faith is the sign of a true believer. Baptism is merely the outward mark that identifies us as Christians. When the infant is baptized he or she is marked as belonging to Christ before the entire congregation and there is a vocal commitment on the part of the parents and the church to raise this child in the Christian faith, to teach him or her the Bible, the shorter catechism and/or the 1662 Book of Common Prayer's catechism. I prefer both the WSC and the 1662 catechism to be taught.

Again, baptism does not regenerate or save. So the question for Baptists is why then should someone be baptized more than once???

I have been wrongly baptized three times. Twice as a Pentecostal and once as a Southern Baptist. The Baptists insisted that I be baptized again before joining their congregation. The implication is clearly somehow that baptism saves in some way. Either that or the Baptists are saying that I did not have genuine faith and conversion as a Pentecostal. The implications are clear.

No, all that is necessary to salvation is a true and lively faith in Jesus Christ. Baptism does not regenerate or save anyone. Is Baptism therefore optional? No. We are to follow the example of Jesus Christ by going to the waters of baptism as a sign of our true repentance and faith. Christ did it to show us the way even though He Himself had no need for repentance or faith since He was sinless and the Savior of the whole world.

I hope this helps to clarify things.

May the peace of God be with you!

Charlie

Charlie J. Ray said...

I might add that confirmation is not a sacrament. However, when a baptized infant is older and has been catechized then I think there is a place for having a formal service of confirmation into full membership of the church. After that point the child is given the Lord's supper, also an outward sign of true faith which is in the heart of the believer.

Charlie

Charlie J. Ray said...

There is one problem with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. In the service for the baptism of infants it says, "EEING now, dearly beloved brethren, that this Child is regenerate, and grafted into the body of Christ's Church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits; and with one accord make our prayers unto him, that this Child may lead the rest of his life according to this beginning." Publick Baptism of Infants

Notice that there is an emphasis on following through with praying "that this Child may lead the rest of his life according to this beginning."

In other words, baptism without the leading of "the rest of his life according to this beginning" means that he or she is not actually regenerate without the followup evidence of the rest of his or her life.

Again, the emphasis here is on true repentance, true faith, and a life of faith in Christ and through the local church/congregation as the visible body of Christ on earth.

Sincerely in Christ,

Charlie

Life Mastery Moments

2010-04-16T18:01:00.000-07:00

By Jimmy Miller Ministries

Life is an art - be an artist

"Its easier to prevent a mess than clean one up."

As the young boy jumped up from the table his mother reached, as if instinctively, to secure the glass of milk before her son knocked it over. Sure enough he whacked the table with his leg and would have surely caused the glass to tip over. The mother expressed her pleasure at having saved herself the trouble of cleaning up the mess that certainly would have been. She sat the glass down on the table and turned back to the kitchen counter, before she could react to his return the young boy jumped back up to his chair and knocked the table again this time her reaction was not quick enough and the milk ran across the table, between the slates and unto the floor. It had taken mom a portion of a second to prevent a mess and almost twenty minutes to clean one up.

Its easier to prevent a mess than clean one up.

For years I suffered from the disease called haste. I was always in a hurry, seldom taking the time to "count the cost" of any action. I got excited and ran off to conquer the world without the information or resources I needed. I ran off to confront problems without all the facts. I never thought I had time to prepare. Gotta go get it done! I was forever cleaning up messes.

Then one day I learned a valueable lesson - "Its easier (always easier) to prevent a mess than clean one up.

Once I discovered this Life Mastery Truth I created less messes and naturally had less messes to clean up. I learned to value prevention.

Don't be hasty - learn the facts - gather your resources and count the cost before you run off to conquer whatever it is you are seeking to conquer. It will save you time, money and very often relationships. Trust me I know!

............(other side of the coin)...........

Greetings! And thanks for the "share".

This is all true! But do you think the message of patience would stick to us or be valued as much without our having been hasty during a certain period in our lives?

Man's total depravity renders him the inability to gather or even want to gather Truth (valuable resources) apart from God's sovereignty. And too, grace and mercy are realized at their heights & depths through undeserved merit. Sometimes, the sinner humbles himself because he has a clearer (not relative) perception as to the scope of his sinful nature (lacking righteousness).

What we mean for evil, God sometimes means for good . . .

Just a thought. The lesson is true; but many times there is another, new, and different lesson to be learned altogether.

Blessings to your ministry!!

LighthousePrayerLine.org
Luke 7:41-43

Barfield: Back From Haiti

2010-04-02T19:27:00.000-07:00

I am safely back home with my family after a whirlwind trip to Haiti.

I spent three days in Haiti with Food for the Hungry learning about the immense need there and how I can better help FH meet that need. The goal was to see the work of FH with my own eyes so I could communicate with my audience and inspire them to partner with FH and me.

I prayerfully prepared for this trip asking God to give me the wisdom to see how I could help these people. I return from my trip asking God to give me the courage and fortitude to act on what I have seen and now know I must do.

First we cannot begin to quantify the devastation in Haiti. It is overwhelming. What were communities of homes, stores, banks, and offices are now rubble. Imagine your neighborhood leveled. Imagine your grocery store, school, work place, church, and your home all gone. Is there a park near you? Across from my house is a common area where the families in my neighborhood walk their dogs or jog around. The children will play catch or fly a kite. I’m looking out my window as I type this imagining if my me, my wife and our fifteen month old little boy, along with all of the families in my neighborhood, had to put up make shift tents of bed sheets and plastic and live in that common area while our homes lay in ruin around us. This is what I saw in Haiti. I saw an entire city of families sleeping on the ground with little to no protection from the intense heat or the rainy season that starts this week. Jesus said we were to love our neighbors as ourselves. I am to love those families in those tents in Haiti as if they were mine, to love those children as if they were my children. As a dad and husband it is bringing tears to my eyes now as I imagine my wife Megan and my son Montgomery living like that.

With all due respect I fear Americans can not grasp what has happened there. God forbid if a disaster like this actually happened in Nashville, and I lost everything, I could take my family to another state and start over. I have family in other states that could take us in during the few months it would take for the front-end loaders, backhoes, wrecking balls and dump trucks to haul off the remains so we could rebuild. In Haiti they have nowhere to go. They are on an island.

Haiti is about the size of Maryland. Next door is the Dominican Republic, which is not much larger, and a different culture and language altogether. It is unlike any disaster we in the States have every experienced. In Haiti I watched as men with sledgehammers hacked away at buildings half brought down by the quake, endangering their lives and those that walk the streets around them. In Haiti I saw men moving mountains of rubble from the collapse of a four-story school building with shovels and wheelbarrows. This will take years. How long will they have to sleep on the ground? Where will they work? What will the children do? No homes, no offices, no stores, no schools. How can we as spoiled Americans who can find something to complain about in every luxury we have begin to grasp what has happened in Haiti. How can we as Christians who spend more money on our church buildings than we do on helping the poor love the Haitians as we love ourselves?

I spent one of my afternoons in Bellevue La Montagne, Haiti. FH has recognized this mountain community as a place that will not receive the needed attention because of their distance from the city. They are doing what they can to help the least of these. I stood in a tent with about thirty children as we took turns singing songs to one another. Outside of that tent their parents were trying to rebuild their lives. Their church was four walls of sheet metal leaning against a frame of sticks with a plastic tarp for a roof. Their homes were walls of bed sheets and plastic held up by twigs. They were finishing up a stick frame wrapped in plastic around a hole in the ground to replace their bathroom that was destroyed in the quake.

We were asked if we wanted to visit their water source and help bring some water back. We walked for about thirty minutes down a rocky narrow path to a place where about twenty people were trying to fill their buckets from a pipe sticking out of the mountain five feet from the ground. I watched for twenty minutes or so as the water, the amount that would come out of your outdoor water spigot, slowly filled their buckets. They pushed and shoved vying for position to obtain their share of the water produced by this “spigot” that was shared by a community of 600 families.

I had passed a little boy on the way down to the water source. He was five years old at the most. I noticed him down at the water source again just sitting off to the side picking up rocks. The realization that he could not compete with the adults pushing and shoving for water broke my heart. He sat there for an hour waiting for a chance to complete his chore. I took his jug to the spigot and filled it for him as well as my bucket. I handed him his water and started my walk back to the children’s school tent.

The long walk down the rocky path to the water source was now a longer walk up the mountain in nearly 100-degree weather carrying a four to five gallon bucket of water. As the sweat poured and my legs and arms ached, I starting to cry for that little boy who has to do this everyday. I have five sinks in my house. There, six hundred families share one spigot of contaminated water.

When we got back to the school I sat in the shade next to my bucket of water and tried to catch my breath while processing my experience. After about fifteen minutes the little boy I had helped made his way by me carrying his jug of water. I pointed him out to an FH worker and was told he had another hour to walk before reaching his home. That five-year-old little boy spent four hours that day doing work that would exhaust any adult I know, to fetch less water than we use when we flush our toilets.

FH is committed to change the future of this little boy and thousands of others like him. I am committed as well. I plan to increase my efforts to find sponsors for children in these areas. In the last two months I have been able to find sponsors for 350 children in Haiti and other parts of the world. Those 350 children are my sons and daughters. Love your neighbor as yourself. I have thousands more who need help. Love your neighbor as yourself. If it was Montgomery who needed help and had no voice to ask for it himself I pray someone would speak up on his behalf. Love your neighbor as yourself. I can’t physically hand a jug of water to every child who needs it, but I have a voice and an audience, and I will speak up for those who can’t speak to you themselves and say, “Love them as much as you love yourself”.

There are families who have lost everything and are sleeping on the ground tonight. There is a little boy who is unable to go to school today and learn a way to change his future. He is five-years-old and labors all day in the sun for a little water. If this was your family and your son would you fight for them? Love your neighbor as yourself.

Warren Barfield

Prayer Requests:

2010-04-02T13:15:00.000-07:00

Guatemala

Please pray for Mama Carmen and everyone at the orphanage as they mourn the loss of Marco Antonio (at right). He suffered from seizures and other health issues throughout his short life. Marco received much love and care at Mama Carmen's and was very precious to her.

Praise God the children at Good Shepherd Christian Academy are finishing their first trimester of school with joy and excitement. The children are on Spring Break this week.

Please keep Luis Hernandez, one of our faithful translators, and his family in your prayers as his father has tragically passed away. Pray that God will comfort Luis and his family as they grieve this loss and endure through other family struggles.

Orphan Outreach is now partnering with an orphanage called Casa Hogar mi Pequeno Refugio in Ceracaif, near Xela. Pray for this new partnership and the relationships being built with the staff, children and community. Also, pray for the need for two more teachers.

Honduras

Pray for the team of five individuals who will be traveling to Tegucigalpa from April 10 to 18. They will be providing eye care and treatment to all the students and staff at AFE and other sites. Pray that Christ would be known through their ministry.

India

Pray for the licensing for the Elwin Parekh Home in Anand that will expand their services, including adoptions. Pray for the work God is doing and will continue to do at the home and in the lives of these girls.

Russia

Pray for the teens who will be graduating this May and leaving the orphanages. Pray for the case management staff as they prepare and help transition graduates.

Pray for the girls at Orphanage #14 as they hear the word of the Lord; pray they may respond and surrender their lives to Christ. Pray specifically for Nadya, who is 15 and just arrived into the orphanage. She was abused as a child and is now going through many issues. Pray that Nadya would see her true beauty and value in the Lord and not in men. Also pray for Raisa, the assistant director, as she guides the fifty children at #14.

Mission Trips

Begin praying for the summer internship program and all the mission trips as they are quickly approaching. Pray for wisdom and direction for Orphan Outreach staff as many details, planning and preparations are made.

Does Revelation 3:10 Teach an "Any Moment" Rapture?

2010-04-02T05:45:00.000-07:00

By Rev. Roger Best

"Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell upon the earth." (Revelation 3:10)

This is a crucial verse for dispensationalists, and they repeat it often to prove their pretribulation rapture position. The majority of pretribulationalists will place their hope of an "any moment rapture" on this verse when, in fact, one of the leading proponents of the pretrib position, Dr. John Walvoord (former president of Dallas Theological Seminary) states in his book "The Rapture Question" on pages 70-71 that "it may be debatable to what extent this (verse, Rev. 3:10) constitutes absolute proof for pretribulationism." Obviously there is some confusion! In this brief study let us take a look at this verse of Scripture and examine it to see what it really is teaching.

Examine the Context

First, let us look at the context of this important passage. It is found within the sixth letter (of seven written to the churches) and is addressed to the church at Philadelphia. By examining the content of these letters, one can easily see that they fall into three major categories. First there is the dead church, Sardis, whose only word from the Lord is to "Wake up." Because of the influence of unbiblical doctrine five of the seven-Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, and Laodicea-are compromising churches; the major exhortation to these churches is to "Repent." When you realize that in the scheme of end-time events these seven church represent conditions as they will be at the time of the coming of Christ, one can readily see where the church is today. Finally there is a faithful church, Philadelphia, to which no negative warning is given, only praise and the promise of a reward. Notice it is because these dear believers "have kept the word of My perseverance." As a result, Christ will "keep them from the hour of testing."

Examine the Greek

The word "perseverance" in the Greek is HPOMONES which has the basic meaning of hiding under, of patient enduring and fortitude, or remaining behind. In the context of this passage you will notice that the "perseverance" is closely related to the "hour of testing," which is the translation of the Greek word, PEIRASMOS which means to examine or prove. Peirasmos is frequently translated, "to tempt" and that is important because the Bible teaches that it is Satan who tempts. "For this reason, when I could endure it no longer, I also sent to find out about your faith, for fear that the tempter (Satan) might have tempted you, and our labor should be in vain" (1 Thessalonians 3:5, emphasis added). James 1:2 and 12 tell us "Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials (peirasmois). Blessed is the man that perseveres (hpomenei) under trial (peirasmon)." James is quick to add in the next verse (1:13) that God "does not tempt anyone." From the endnote on page 469 of The Sign, Mr. Van Kampen adds this thought, "It is interesting to note how the 'hour of testing' that is referred to in Revelation 3:10 is also referred to by Peter, using the identical Greek word: 'The end of all things is at hand; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer. . . Beloved, do not be suprised at the fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your testing (peirasmos), as though some strange thing were happening to you; but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing; so that also at the revelation of His glory, you my rejoice with exultation' (1 Peter 4:7, 12, 13, emphasis added). And then again the second epistle of Peter states, 'then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation (peirasmos), and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment.' (2 Peter 2:9). In both cases the believer is present during the peirasmos, the great tribulation of Antichrist, rather than being protected away from it."

But now let us take a close look at the important words that the pretribulationist hang their hat on; "keep you from." In the English translations it would appear that we, the believers, are kept from entering the "hour of testing." But is that what it is really saying? There seems to be a volume of Scripture such as Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2 that would clearly indicate that believers are going to experience the testing during the Great Tribulation of Antichrist. In the Greek "will keep you from" is TEREO EK. TEREO means to "watch over protectively, guard" and with the preposition EK it carries the idea of being guarded or protected and rescued out from the midst of danger. If the idea of keeping one from entering were intended the preposition APO would have been used. So it is the idea of deliverance out from within rather than an external deliverance.

Other Resources

Let's take a look at what some others have to say:

Goodspeed translates 3:10- "Because you have kept in mind the message of what I endured. I will also keep you safe in the time of testing that is going to come upon the whole world, to test the inhabitants of the earth."

Moffatt- "Because you have kept the word of my patient endurance, I will keep you safe through the hour of trial which is coming upon the whole world to test the dwellers on earth."

Fausett- "so as to deliver thee out of, not to exempt from temptation."

Swete- "to the Philadelphia Church the promise was an assurance of safe keeping in any trial that might supervene."

Zahn- "Testimony is borne once more to the Bishop of Philadelphia's proved faithfulness up till now, and he is assured that Jesus will requite him for this, when He preserves him at the time of the great temptation that is to come and test the inhabitants of the earth, and will rescue him out of the danger that will exist even for Christians found in it."

Beckwith- "The Philadelphians and those who show the same Christian steadfastness are promised that they shall be carried in safety through the great trial, they shall not fall."

Trench- "The promise does not imply that the Philadelphia Church should be exempted from the persecutions which should come on all other portions of the Church; that by any special privilege they should be excused from fiery trials through which others should be called to pass. It is a better promise than this; and one which, of course, they share with all who are faithful as they are - to be kept in temptation, not to be exempted from temptation."

Alexander Reese- "The use of EK in Revelation 3:10 distinctly implies that the Overseer would be in the hour of tribulation; the promise refers, either to the removal out of the midst of it, or preservation through it."

Robert Gundry- "to keep or protect in a sphere of danger, and that because ek means emergence out from within, the combination of the two Greek words (TEREO EK) means to protect believers in a sphere of danger (the tribulation period), with a final emergence out from within this sphere."

The Meaning Is Clear

The clear and obvious meaning concerns protection within the sphere of danger and not protection from danger. Christ has promised the faithful believers that He will deliver them at the revelation of His Glory at His Coming. To make this verse of Scripture mean "deliverance before the testing begins" is manipulating the Scripture to support a false position rather than accepting what the Scripture really says.

Is the rapture seen in Revelation 3:10? Absolutely! Right where Christ says it will occur when He cuts the persecution of Antichrist short and comes in Glory to deliver the saints out of Great Tribulation.

Leading Others to the Lord One-on-One

2010-03-28T07:59:00.000-07:00

By Living Stream Ministries
John 1:41

"He first found his own brother Simon and said to him, We have found the Messiah (which translated means Christ)" [John 1:41]. (42) He led him to Jesus... (43) The next day He wanted to go forth into Galilee, and He found Philip. And Jesus said to him, Follow Me. (45) Philip found Nathanael and said to him, We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, wrote, Jesus, the son of Joseph, from Nazareth.

The moment Andrew believed in the Lord, he led his brother Peter to the Lord. Although Peter later became more gifted than Andrew, Andrew was the one who led Peter to the Lord. Philip and Nathanael were friends; Philip first believed in the Lord and later led his friend to receive the Lord. Andrew led his brother to the Lord,and Philip sought out his friend. Both are examples ofleading men to the Lord one on one.

About a hundred years ago, there was a believer named Harvey Page. Although he did not have any special gift and did not know how to lead many people to the Lord, the Lord was gracious to him and opened his eyes to realize that he could lead at least one person to the Lord. He could not do many great works, but he could concentrate on one person. He could only say, "I am saved. You also need to be saved." Once he laid hold of one, he would not let go. He would pray and talk to his friend until he was saved. Through this practice he solidly gained more than one hundred persons for the Lord by the time he died.

Commercialism and Faith Pt 3: Rituals and Evangelical Voodoo

2010-03-25T12:46:00.000-07:00

By Donald Miller

I want to focus for a moment on rituals and how both religious people and marketers play on the human need for ritual in order to bring security and comfort. In his breakthrough book Buyology, Martin Lindstrom talks about how marketers package their products within rituals, even going so far as to create rituals within which their products can be used. He notes there is no cultural tradition that would have us put a lime in a bottle of Corona, for instance, and how that ritual came about when a marketer placed a bet with a friend at a bar that he could make the masses put a lime in a bottle of beer. By introducing a ritual, Corona beat out Heineken the following year, and has beaten them every year since. And there are many rituals that marketers have invented. Whether it’s taking a family vacation, or cleansing your face before you go to bed or getting together for coffee, marketers have been creating rituals for years, selling their products within behaviors they’ve announced that help bring security and stability to our lives.

Of rituals, Lindstrom says this: “Rituals and superstitions are defined as not entirely rational actions and the belief that one can somehow manipulate the future by engaging in certain behaviors, in spite of the fact there’s no discernible casual relationship between that behavior and its outcome.”

As stresses in life increase, people turn to rituals and magical thinking. Lindstrom tells of the study done at Tel Aviv University in which 174 Israeli soldiers were questioned after being attacked by Iraqi Scud Missiles, each of them showing an increase in ritualistic behavior (only entering a room right-foot first and so on) connecting their behavior to good fortune.

But rituals don’t exist because of marketers. Rituals exist because of a need in the human spirit for magical beliefs that their repeated actions are tied to good luck, fortune and security. To find the most ritualistic of people, one need look no further than the religious community. Some denominations take communion every week, some believe that unless you are baptized you cannot go to heaven, and wars have been fought over how these rituals should be acted out. And so the rituals that advertisers sell us, whether it’s putting on makeup, using aftershave lotion, renting a tux for a wedding or being buried in a wooden coffin, are plays upon an innate human and even religious need. Some might even say consumer rituals have replaced religious rituals for many. Our culture would then, in effect, subscribe to a kind of consumer voodoo. This will no doubt offend many, but perhaps this is offensive because this revelation threatens the very rituals from which so many find their security?

One need look no further than Christmas to see how marketers have created rituals to sell products, and how those rituals have replaced religious rituals for a feeling of security and comfort, and even spirituality.

But are rituals bad? Not from a Biblical perspective. Christ asked us to remember Him through the breaking of bread and drinking of wine. This took place around a table not unlike a dinner table, but it was not to be partaken for reasons like hunger, and it’s safe to say the Biblical ritual initiated at the Lords table looks nothing like what we see in any church today. The informal, relational gathering of those who are to remember Christ has been turned into a ceremony that would not be recognized by those disciples who partook on that first night. Communion was a ritual designed to bring comfort through the remembrance of Christ, but the power was in the remembrance, not the ritual.

Christ also asked that we be baptized, though it is theologically debatable whether this was symbolism for the true baptism we have in the likeness with Him and association with His death. We are also asked to pray and to fast, both rituals. That said, from nearly any perspective, we would agree some religious cultures take ritual too far. (Who could argue that the handling of snakes by some churches is ritual taken too far?) And yet there is no power in ritual at all, save psychological power. Rituals do nothing magical for us. Perhaps it could be said the more insecure a persons faith, the more he might turn to religious ritual for security? But then if a person with a sincere faith connects with God through ritual, the same could be said of the devout. The truth is in the motives, I suspect, and in the understanding that the rituals themselves have no magical powers.

Attending church on Sunday morning is a ritual, having worship before a teaching is ritual, having a teaching is a ritual, attending Sunday School is a ritual, studying the Bible in the morning is a ritual and so forth and so forth. Most of these rituals have a very loose affiliation with a behavior in scripture, but to us they feel entirely sacred. Tell a southern evangelical you don’t attend church but a few Sundays a year, and their reaction will be as though you have tempted the god’s with a failure to sacrifice. We have come to have faith in ourselves, in our rituals, rather than having a relationship with a living God. We are practicers of evangelical voodoo.

What if the power is not in the ritual, but what the ritual points to? Just as a wedding is a ritual, it’s power is not in the ritual, but the decision to be committed one to the other, and the ritual is a tool in aiding that commitment. The wedding does not make us married, the marriage makes us married, the commitment, the agreement that God sees us now as one. The ceremony is simply symbolism. If a couple wanted to be legally married, they would simply sign a document in the presence of a legal witness and so forth. What if even the few rituals given to us in scripture were supposed to be reminders of a relationship, and that relationship were to be the power that redeems and guides us? And what if that relationship were being neglected because of the false, pacifying power of both religious and consumer rituals?

As said, however, rituals are not all bad. And God does give us some rituals in scripture.

On the benefit of rituals, Lindstrom says this:

“But are superstitions and rituals necessarily bad for us? Interestingly, some rituals have actually been shown to be beneficial to our mental and physical well-being. According to a study published in the Journal of Family Psychology “in families with predictable routines, children had fewer respiratory illnesses and better overall health, and they performed better in elementary school.” The article added that rituals have a greater effect on emotional health, and that in families with strong rituals adolescents reported a stronger sense of self, couples reported happier marriages and children had greater interaction with their grandparents.”

Commercialism and Faith (Part 2): Paradise Lost

2010-03-19T05:29:00.000-07:00

By Donald Miller

This is the second post in a series called Commercialism and Faith, in which I will explore the relationship between the language of our culture (commercialism) and how we view and relate to God.

Advertisers often play on something psychologists call Loss Aversion. Loss Aversion is an aspect of Prospect Theory, a theory that seeks to determine why people make certain decisions. Loss Aversion suggests people are more motivated to avoid losing something than they are to acquire something new. For instance, in a study done on a street in Las Vegas, passers by were given a twenty-dollar bill and then given the opportunity to double their money by betting on a single card. They could walk away with the twenty, or double their money. Most participants chose to walk away from the game, keeping the twenty-dollar bill they had just been given. But when the game was changed and the participants were given forty dollars, only to have twenty taken back a moment later and then given a chance to win back the twenty taken from them, nearly all participants decided to take the same risk and get back what they had lost. In other words, when they had something and lost it, they were more inclined to try to get it back.

It isn’t only advertisers who play on this psychological phenomenon, it’s politicians and talk-show hosts and nearly anybody trying to convince anybody of anything. How many times have you heard the phrase “take back our country” or, within the church “take a stand for Biblical theology” or this kind of language. The idea is to convince a group of people they are losing ground. This creates a powerful response in whatever demographic feels like they are losing something.

Environmentalist motivate us by emphasizing the loss of physical paradise, and the conservative right motivates us by emphasizing a loss of freedom. Regardless of where you stand, we can all agree these are powerful motivating forces.

Loss Aversion is the reason we keep the gym membership even though we don’t use it, it’s probably the reason you voted the way you did in the last election, it’s the reason people hoard material possessions and stay in bad relationships. The idea is that losing something costs you more happiness than gaining something gives you.

What I am curious about, though, is where the psychological phenomenon comes from in the first place.

What if Loss Aversion comes from actual events in human history? What if there was once a paradise where man and woman, who were designed to interact with God, actually did interact with God, and that paradise has been lost. What if intuitively every human knows, not only that life isn’t what it is supposed to be, but that it was actually once something completely different and great? What if this is where the psychological phenomenon of Loss Aversion comes from?

So this begs certain questions. What are we really missing in life? And can politicians deliver that something to us? Are political ideas causing us to lose paradise? Are goods and services actually going to return us to paradise? What is it that will bring us internal paradise?

If you think my answer is Jesus, you’ll be surprised to know it isn’t. Not really, anyway. I’ll get to my answer on Wednesday. Wednesday’s topic will discuss how we think of Jesus as a product, rather than a living being.

But for now, I’m hoping to show how our theology actually explains why it is that advertising is so effective. By that I mean, Christian theology helps make sense of why we think and feel the way we do, and why we are all longing for something different and better, and why it is that a suggestion we are losing or have lost paradise, and must get back to it, is a powerful human sentiment that advertisers as well as leaders use, to sell products and ideas.

Commercialism and Faith (Part 1):

2010-03-12T14:09:00.000-08:00

By Donald Miller

This is the first post in a series called Commercialism and Faith, in which I will explore the relationship between the language of our culture (commercialism) and how we view and relate to God.

This series is not a knock against commercialism as much as it is an exploration of the effects of the cultural language on how we think about the world and specifically how we think about God. Commercials are simply an exchange of information about the availability of products and services. The idea of a commercial is, in my opinion, morally neutral. That said, I think you will be surprised at how much your thinking, and even your emotional well-being, is affected by advertising.

The average American encounters 3000 commercial messages each day. Whether this is a radio commercial, a magazine ad, a logo on the side of a coffee cup or a billboard we pass on the highway, these images and messages are designed to cause to you think of your life as incomplete, and desire the product they are selling to make your life complete again.

A standard formula used in many commercials is twofold: 1. To illicit a thought in the viewer that theirlife is not satisfactory and then 2. To convince the viewer their life could be made satisfactory with the introduction of said product. If you hear theses messages 3000 times per day, your brain becomes programmed to think in this pattern. Rather than being satisfied, a person begins to believe their life is lacking, whether it is actually lacking or not.

The idea is to convince you that you aren’t going to be happy unless you purchase something. And make no mistake, this is a powerful manipulative tool. Some experts have referred to advertising as the “relentless propaganda on behalf of goods in general.” R. Crisp argued in an article in the Journal of Business Ethics that advertising overrides a consumer’s autonomy of decision making in the creation of desires, correlating an unbreakable link between products and the fulfillment of stimulated desires.” In other words, advertising is designed to hijack your brain by dictating what you desire.

As I launch this series, I want to ask that you become aware of how much advertising you encounter in a day. At first, you’ll notice only some of it, but as you practice, you will quickly realize how 3000 encounters is certainly realistic.

What if part of your emotional well-being is affected by the messages of advertising? And while you certainly can’t get away from it, what if you could come to a theological understanding that would mitigate the affect of these messages? This is the point of this series.

Before my next post, try doing two things:

1. Pay attention to as many commercial messages as you can. Have a mental clicker (not really a counter, because you’ll lose count and quit) running at all times, and just say to yourself, that’s a commercial message, there’s a billboard, a logo, a magazine ad, a radio commercial, or a television spot. I think you’ll agree you are constantly being sold something.

2. Pay specific attention to how many times you hear “Are you tired of?” and “You deserve” kinds of messages. Some will be blatant, and some will not come out and say this, but will certainly make you feel it. An image of the shiny new car makes you tired of your old car. This is powerful conditioning. This is the kind of message that is making you feel like something is wrong with your life.

Now, don’t try to actually change the way you think or react. Psychologists have found awareness is more powerful than resistance. What that means is if you try to fight something, your brain resists change and fights against you. Instead, place no judgment on your findings. Simply note whether or not the commercial contains a manipulative message. Does it make you feel incomplete or inadequate? If so, make a mental note and move on.

Slowly, what will begin to happen is you will stop believing the commercials, and you will begin to be happier. No kidding, it works.

In my next post, I’ll talk a little more about what commercials are doing to your brain, and throughout this series, I’ll be talking about how they affect your view of God, and cause you to misunderstand what He is doing in your life. The next post in this series will launch on Monday, and each new piece will launch on M/W/F, though there may be other blog entries in between. Thanks for your interest.

WHAT ABOUT MIRACLES TODAY?

2010-03-06T14:56:00.000-08:00

By Pat Gibbons

There are many men and women who claim to be working miracles today. These so-called miracle workers may be well known and be seen on TV, while others are less well-known and may be seen in many small towns and cities.

Are these people really working miracles? Is what they are doing divine healing?

My answer to these question is simply, "NO!"
--

Before I state what I think is being done, let me give a comparison of modern day healings(?) and the miracles of Jesus. There are at least thirteen differences.

1. Jesus did not heal for money: most today do their thing for money.

2. Jesus did not heal for notoriety. He often said: "tell no man." So-called miracle workers today spend much in advertizing and use "horn tooters."

3. Jesus healed every kind of known affliction: no case was too hard. Modern divine(?) healers form healing lines and will never attempt to heal those physical ailments that are obvious.

4. Jesus never indicated that healing was to be universal. Only four times were large groups healed while one time Jesus healed ten lepers. All the rest were individuals or two at a time.

5. Jesus did not discourage the use of physicians or medical remedies.

6. There were never any questions about his healings. Even His enemies admitted that He was healing people. There are many questions about so-called divine healing today.

7. Jesus performed no partial healing with the healed one to be well on down the road. Faith healers today claim this often.

8. Jesus did not make faith a uniform condition of healing. Only one time: Matt 9:28, did Jesus ask about faith. In 3 cases he commended faith, but in 15 cases faith is not required, and in 4 cases faith was impossible. Modern faith(?) healers require faith, and if they fail in their healing attempt, the reason given for their failure is the faith of the person seeking healing.

9. There were no failures in the miracles of the Lord: none! There are many today.

10. There were never any relapses when Jesus healed: today there are many.

11. Jesus was never guilty of fraud or trickery.

12. Jesus never failed to heal all in a group when he proposed to do so. And

13. Jesus did not use hypnotic influences or auto-suggestionism.--

In 1973 William E. Nolan, M. D. began a study of miracle workers, and entitled a book "In Search of A Miracle." Dr. Nolan concentrated his efforts on a nationally known faith healer known as Kathryn Kuhlman. She was an ordained minister who had been "healing" about 30 years at that time, and claimed to have treated app. one and one half million patients. Dr. Nolan interviewed Miss Kuhlman, and secured permission to follow up on the people who attended her services at Minneapolis in June 1973. He used two legal secretaries to secure names, addresses, phone numbers and diagnosis of everyone who was willing to cooperate. In July of 1973 letters were sent by Dr. Nolan requesting those who claimed a "cure" to come to Minneapolis. Twenty three responded.

In every case examined by Dr. Nolan there was not found one case of a miraculous cure. Note this quote: "Kathryn Kuhlman's lack of medical sophistication is a critical point. I don't believe she is a liar or a charlatan or that she is, consciously, dishonest. I think that she believes the Holy Spirit works through her to perform miraculous cures. I think that she sincerely believes that the thousands of sick people who come to her services and claim cures are, through her ministrations being cured of organic diseases. I also think--and my investigation confirms this--that she is wrong." (Quotes and facts are from an article in McCall's 9/74). I also have another article from McCall's, dated February 1957. In this article entitled "The Truth About Faith Healers" John Kobler has some interesting things to say. His work concerned such faith healers at A. A. Allen, Oral Roberts, Jack Coe and other lesser known lights. Mr. Kobler also followed up on several cases of "healing". He too found no evidence of real organic healing. Note this quote: "One of the most searching studies of American faith healers has been undertaken by Reverend Carroll Stengall, Jr., pastor of the Pryor Street Presbyterian Church in Atlanta, Georgia.

For six years Reverend Stegall has attended healing campaigns and interviewed scores of invalids before and after they were admitted to the healing line. ‘All healers,' he says, ‘use a certain psychological phenomenon called the "ready-made frame of desire." A great desire tends to produce results--in facsimile if not in reality. The more intense, the more easily one accepts a substitute satisfaction.' The testimonials of healings which Stegall examined fall, he feels, into four categories: genuine relief from psychological disturbances through suggestion, momentary fancied relief which the sufferer in his rapture endorses but later repudiates, staged fakes, and stories invented by editors for magazine publication." From that same article this quote: "The Miami Council of Churches denounced Coe as a religious quack. Three ministers of the Churches of Christ, a Protestant sect which maintains a standing offer of $1,000 to Oral Roberts for proof of a single cure acceptable to a committee of three doctors, issued the same challenge to Coe, raising the purse to $2,500. Like Roberts, he ignored it."

Then this quote from the 1957 article: "In the town of Evansville, Indiana, some relatives of Mrs. Mary Vonderscher, age forty-three, who had moved to Burbank, California, were watching her give testimony on one of Oral Roberts' televised programs. She had, she stated, been cured of cancer of the spine, though doctors considered her condition hopeless. Three days later Mrs. Vonderscher's Hoosier relatives were en route to her funeral."

--

I know personally of a young man in high school when I was who developed cancer at an early age. For some time he testified that Miss Kuhlman had cured him of cancer, but he died of that disease. He thought he had been healed, but he had not. I also personally know William Bryson, a gospel preacher, who was born with only one arm. He attended many "healing services", including Kathryn Kuhlman's in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. He has been threatened with jail and with ejection from the meeting by force. He was rejected on the charge that "you do not have faith" as well as being "a trouble maker." It was evident from his condition that no one could heal him, so he was rejected as an infidel or a trouble maker. In fact, one becomes a trouble maker when he challenges the claims of these religious frauds. And in my judgment, that is what they are.

--

Several years ago I read of a man who walked with crutches, and was caught in an open field with a wild boar. When the boar charged the man he threw down his crutches, ran to the fence and jumped over. In another case a man who was confined to a wheel chair is known to have walked out of a burning house, saving himself and some children. These two examples help explain what so many see as a miracle. Many illnesses or diseases are the product of the human mind. Symptoms, real or imagined, are found without any known cause, but through the process of "auto-suggestionism" they are healed. The truth of the matter is, there never was any real organic illness: it was psychosomatic. That big word is defined by Webster: "a physical disorder of the body originating in or aggravated by the psychic or emotional processes of the individual." So-called faith healers do not heal by the Holy Spirit today. They only seem to cure when in reality there was no real physical problem: it was psychosomatic, and the "cure" was due to auto-suggestionism.

The Authority of Scripture in a Culture of Compromise

2010-03-05T19:46:00.000-08:00

Compromise of any sort begins with an assault on the truth. Relativism is but one weapon that pounds away, day after day, on the notion of absolutes. As America's new religion has been dubbed by some as "Moralistic Therapeutic Deism" one understands that for most people, God is a nice idea but He's not someone they want to be bothered with on a regular basis. Of course, when there is no God, or when we can't be bothered with God, there is no truth; when there is no truth, there is no authority - but oneself. Perhaps the single most destructive source of compromise in our culture is the marginalization and/or rejection of the authority of Scripture - not by unbelievers but by professing Christians.

Yet, all is not lost. The church still has her calling, message, and Lord who is in fact building that church. Three affirmations come to mind here.

First, in a culture of compromise, it is the authority of Scripture that is rejected by evil men who are deceived. We must never forget that one's commitment to the authority of Scripture for his life is a spiritual issue. The true believer is one who is increasingly committed to God's will as given through the Scriptures while the unbeliever is one who increasingly rejects the truth and its authority. Paul says to Timothy, "But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived (2 Tim. 3:13)." The issue is not intellectual or rational. People without Christ are deceived. They cannot understand the things of God apart from the work of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14). No one can be forced, enticed, or even manipulated into embracing the Bible's authority. The issue is spiritual and God alone can cause submission. Of course, when we believers reject Scriptural authority from time to time, and we do, we are mimicking those who are deceived. We must be confronted with this staggering reality often.

Second, in a culture of compromise, it is the authority of Scripture that is our only rule for faith and practice. In other words, what we are to believe and what we are to do in any circumstance is revealed to us in God's Word. With reference to what we believe, Paul declares that it is the Scriptures that are "are able to make [us] wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus (2 Tim. 3:15)." It is from the Scriptures we get our doctrine (2 Tim. 3:16). This principle relates to what we believe about ultimate reality, politics, ethics, relationships, and so forth. In terms of what we do, Paul asserts that it is the Scriptures that are "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17)." This principle relates to what we do in terms of our attitudes, actions, vocation, the way we treat others, our worship, or even the way we carry out the work of the church in ministry or evangelism for example. We must search the Scriptures daily to get our doctrine. We must be reproved, corrected, and instructed constantly by the Scriptures. Only then will the Scriptures be our practical authority. Otherwise, all we will be doing is paying lip service; and that is hypocrisy.

Third, in a culture of compromise, because it is the authority of Scripture that is rejected by evil men who are deceived; while at the same time, it is the authority of Scripture that is our only rule for faith and practice; it is the authority of Scripture that is underneath the Lord's solemn charge to us. That charge is straightforward: "Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching (2 Tim. 4:2)." We are to preach the Word whether it is popular or not; whether it is received or not; whether people like it or not. It is authoritative. And, it is the Word that God uses to change the hearts and minds of guilty sinners. We must not ourselves reject the authority of Scripture when it comes to our method of evangelism. Sinners cannot and will not be saved by fleshly means. Further, our culture cannot and will not be changed by fleshly means. We are in a spiritual battle and the weapons of are warfare are not carnal (2 Cor. 10:4). God Himself commands: "'And he who has my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat?' says the LORD. ‘Is not my word like a fire? says the LORD, ‘And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?'" This command affirms both that which we are supposed to do (preach the Word) and why we are to do so (it is the Word that breaks the rock in pieces). The Lord Himself says we must preach the Word.

Every now and then someone asks me what the vision of our church is. I usually say, "What do you mean," when I know exactly what they mean. They want to know how we are going to go about building the church. Because the Scripture is my authority, I simply say, "Preach the Word; no compromise." If the church doesn't get hold of this reality, we will continue to lose our savor and be trampled upon by men in this culture (Matt. 5:13). On the other hand, if we do get hold of it, the fortresses of this culture will crumble before our God.

The Opposite of Self-Conscious

2010-03-05T11:14:00.000-08:00

By Jill Carattini

I remember the first time I learned that legal proceedings are not always exact pictures of justice. I think my mom was trying to get me to clean my room. Trying a new tactic, she told me that if a burglar happened to break in that night, trip over the junk on my floor and break his leg, I would be the one responsible for his injuries. In such a scenario, the thief could actually take legal action against the very person he was trying to rob. I found this disturbing (though probably not enough to clean my room).

A similarly troubling picture of justice arises when a person is trying to help a victim, but ends up becoming the victim herself—such as when a passerby stops to administer CPR and winds up, for whatever reason, with a lawsuit on her hands. A newspaper column by Abigail Van Buren, known to her readers as "Dear Abby," lamented the increasing need for Good Samaritans to stop and consider the risk before providing assistance. While Abby herself noted there was no excuse to withhold help, one reader was insistent. In places without a "Good Samaritan law," which removes the liability of the one providing assistance, "people who offer a helping hand place themselves potentially at financial and emotional risk." She continued, "I only hope that I have the presence of mind in the future to withhold assistance in a state that has no Good Samaritan law." While the law of human nature seems to assure the majority of people will pass by an accident assuming that someone else will help out, the laws of litigation seem to warn Good Samaritans to watch their backs altogether. Consequently, in many cases, no one does anything. The victim remains the victim; the Samaritan remains unscathed.

I suppose it should not come as a surprise that we have hyper-individualized one of the most non-individualistic characters in all of storytelling. The very point of the parable of the Good Samaritan is to teach that we cannot hold these hierarchical distinctions, whether thinking in terms of race, religion, or personal liability. By the very definition Jesus offered, the Samaritan's presence of mind is the exact opposite of self-conscious. He places himself in the center of harm's way (not knowing if the thieves are still nearby), not to mention the epicenter of disdain for showing disregard to cultural norms (he was a Samaritan who should have been keeping to himself). The assurance of coming out unscathed could hardly be the Samaritan's motive for reaching out. On the contrary, the Samaritan places himself in a position where he is certain to bear the cost.

While it is indeed lamentable that the current state of the world seems to necessitate self-consciousness in dealing with our neighbors, it is both lamentable and unreasonable that we assume this was not the same scenario for the crowd who first heard the story. We seem to reason that the Good Samaritan only helped because it was not a liability for him, giving ourselves a rational exemption: "If it weren't for the law, I would be more than willing to see that person as my neighbor." In fact, the one who first asked the question that merited Jesus's telling of the parable was thinking quite similarly. His very question, "Who is my neighbor?" betrays his philosophy that the world can be classified in terms of commodities: "There are those I am responsible to help, and there are those I am not responsible to help." And he bases these distinctions on his reading of the law. Albeit a different kind of law than the laws that discourage us from helping today, it is a similar use of legalism all the same.

Yet Jesus calls the questioner away from his legalistic mindset with a story that turns these categories into smoke and mirrors. Instead of the stance of self-consciousness that asks "What will happen to me if I stop and help this man?" a far better question is posed on the lips of one who has much to lose: "What will happen to this man if I don't stop?" Setting aside the categories that could easily hold him back, the Good Samaritan has room to hold the very commandment on which all the law and the prophets hang: You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, and your neighbor as yourself. With this wisdom in hand, the Good Samaritan, and every soul that carries his presence of mind thereafter, is not far from the kingdom of God.

Don’t Try to Tame the Holy Ghost

2010-03-03T13:02:00.000-08:00

By J.Lee Grady

Too often the American church has tried to put the Third Person of the Trinity in a box.

Hundreds of years before the Holy Spirit was poured out on the early church on the day of Pentecost, the Old Testament prophet Ezekiel, newly anointed as a priest, got a free preview of how God would send the Holy Spirit to empower His people. The preview came in the form of a Technicolor vision that included a stormy wind, a cloud that glowed with fire, flashes of lightning and strange, four-faced cherubim that were empowered by God's divine energy.

Ezekiel wrote of these heavenly creatures: "In the midst of the living beings there was something that looked like burning coals of fire, like torches darting back and forth among the living beings. The fire was bright, and lightning was flashing from the fire. And the living beings ran to and fro like bolts of lightning" (Ezekiel 1:13-14, NASB).

"Let's not become so trendy and culturally relevant that we lock the Holy Spirit in a cage ... so that He doesn't mess up our scripted show"

Ezekiel also got a close-up view of these angelic creatures. They each had four faces and four wings. Their feet, which looked like calves' hooves, seemed to glow like bronze (v. 7). And the fantastical creatures had the faces of a bull, a lion, an eagle and a man. Sounds like something we might see on the Syfy channel, or read about in a J.R.R. Tolkien novel, but this is in the Bible. It is a pre-Pentecost look at Pentecost.

I used to dismiss Ezekiel's amazing vision as nothing more than a description of strange looking angels in heaven. But now I realize more is implied in the prophet's vision. The four-faced creatures are described in detail to remind us that anyone who is anointed by the Holy Spirit will be transformed into something wild! These animals represent qualities of God's nature that He shares with us.

The "living creature" Ezekiel saw had the face of man. This symbolizes human nature. All of us are frail vessels of clay, and we will always deal with flaws, temptations and weaknesses. But the creature also had the faces of three wild animals. This signifies to us that when we are filled with God's Holy Spirit, He shares with us His supernatural attributes. Our very nature is infused with a raw, holy zeal.

The bull speaks of apostolic strength. It is what the psalmist had in mind when he wrote: "You have exalted my horn like that of the wild ox; I have been anointed with fresh oil" (Psalm 92:10). When the oil of the Spirit touches us afresh we receive rare, unexplainable power to accomplish what we could not do before. We are able to advance in the Spirit and take territory for the Lord.

The lion speaks of evangelistic courage. As Proverbs 28:1 says, "The wicked flee when no one is pursuing, but the righteous are as bold as a lion." This animal fears nothing and no one. His roar is the loudest sound in the jungle. Truly Spirit-empowered Christians cannot stop talking about Jesus.

The eagle speaks of missionary speed as well as spiritual strength and keen prophetic insight. The prophet Isaiah understood this when he said that those who wait for the Lord "will gain new strength; they will mount up with wings like eagles, they will run and not get tired, they will walk and not become weary" (Isaiah 40:31).

What God was sharing with Ezekiel was the miracle of Pentecost, when God would clothe His people with power from on high. Not only would the early disciples hear the sound of a rushing wind and see flames of fire descend on every believer's head. Those believers would be infused with untamable qualities—supernatural strength, fierce courage, uncanny boldness and an unusual ability to see into the invisible realm of God's mysteries.

When I say that the Holy Spirit is wild, I am not suggesting that He brings disorder or chaos. God is not the author of confusion, and He certainly cannot be blamed for any of the foolish "charismatic chaos" we have manufactured in recent years. But too often the American church has tried to put the Third Person of the Trinity in a box. We want to confine Him, muzzle Him, constrain Him or shoot Him with a tranquilizer gun so we can maintain control.

Many of our trendy churches are doing this today. We've built an impressive evangelical culture with great music, hip lighting and stage design, and cool videos and Power Point presentations. We even have smoke machines and rock star pastors. I have nothing against any of those things if they help make the gospel relevant to the younger generation.

But I just want to remind everybody: None of those things can replace the Holy Ghost. Let's not become so trendy and culturally relevant that we lock Him in a cage ... so that He doesn't mess up our scripted show.

Tiger Woods, True Repentance?

2010-02-24T11:17:00.000-08:00

[The following is from The Heidelblog by R. Scott Clark: Crouching Tiger, True Repentance].

There is an argument that Tiger's sexual immorality is private and none of our business. Fine. His very public apology, however, gives us an opportunity to think about the nature of repentance and faith. During his apology Tiger made reference to his wandering from his childhood faith, Buddhism. He apologized to all those people, including his fans, whom he offended and whom he disappointed. He pledged to do better, to return to the laws of Buddhism, including, one imagines, its requirement for various forms of self-denial. There is one, however, to whom Tiger did not apologize and there is a law to which he did not pledge obedience.That law is God's law: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything which is written in the book of the law (Gal 3:10; Deut 27:26). The law of God requires "perfect and personal obedience" (WCF 7.2). The one to whom Tiger did not apologize, of course, is the thrice-holy God. However much Tiger may fear losing his wife, his family, or his endorsements, he has much more to fear from God who is a "consuming fire" (Deut 4:24).

Scripture does not know anything about apologies to God. Scripture only knows about perfect righteousness as the way to acceptance with God. As has been said often enough, God does not grade on a curve. Indeed, he does not.

Consider the wholly horizontal orientation of Tiger's apology and the rather more, if you will, vertical orientation of David's confession of sin in Ps 32. Discovered for the adulterer (and murderer) he was, David did not hold a press conference. Convicted by God's Spirit of his sin against God (and Bathsheba and Uriah) he turned his face to God his judge. "Blessed is the man against whom Yahweh counts no iniquity" (Ps 32:2). The God-wardness of David's repentance is perhaps even more pointed in Ps 51: "Have mercy upon me, O God…blot out my transgressions (Ps 51:1). "Against you only have I sinned" (Ps 51:4). In these moments David understood that sin is lawlessness (1 John 3:4) and "the day you eat thereof you shall surely die" (Gen 2:17). "The wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23).

True repentance, as distinct from mere apologies, begins with a recognition of reality, of who and what God is and of who and what we are. It begins with the knowledge of the greatness of our sin and misery. True repentance reckons with the law as the perfect expression of God's perfect and unyielding righteousness. True repentance drives one to Christ, the only righteous man, the only man who ever actually kept the law, and true faith trusts in that one righteous man and in his "one act" of righteousness (Rom 5:18; i.e., his whole, perfect obedience) for his elect.

True repentance, i.e., genuine sorrow for sin against God and heartfelt desire to turn away from it, is born of true faith. Unbelievers don't repent. Believers do. They know the greatness of their sin and misery. Tiger does not yet appear to know that yet. He seems to think that if he just focuses a little harder, is more disciplined, if he denies himself the pleasures of this world (his language), he can get everything back on track. Perhaps he can—as far as we can see. At the last day, however, it will not matter that Tiger recovered his public image, that he built more schools, that he regained the trust of his family and followers. At the last day it will only matter if he has satisfied the righteousness of God and I guarantee you that, as remarkable as Tiger is, he cannot do it. No sinner can.

The great good news for Tiger and for you is that Jesus has already done it and everyone who trusts in him and in his obedience for sinners is reckoned as if he himself had done all that Jesus did. God accepted Jesus' righteousness. Jesus was vindicated by his resurrection (1 Tim 3:16). As certainly as Jesus was raised from the dead, so certainly will God and accept Tiger and you and whoever turns to Christ in true faith, i.e., a certain knowledge and a hearty trust that Jesus obeyed and died "for me."

From that true faith, a believer begins daily to die to his own desires and to live to Christ. He continues to sin for the rest of his life but now we know what sin is and we know what grace is. We know that in God's free acceptance of sinners for Christ's sake there is power and new life and real hope for real change; not perfection in this life but free acceptance with God (grace) and mercy and the work of the Spirit in our hearts, minds, and wills. By his grace the same Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead unites us to Christ, through faith, and is at work in us making us slowly, imperceptibly like Jesus.

Tiger pledged to do better. That won't be good enough. Pray that Tiger and everyone else who heard his apology realizes the difference between "doing better" and doing "everything written in the book of the law" and that Christians understand the difference between an apology and true repentance.

Time to Refuel?

2010-02-23T09:50:00.000-08:00

My boss and I were driving back from a neighboring town late one night when our car rolled to a stop. “We’re out of gas,” she said. There was a gas station about a quarter of a mile away, so we shrugged into our coats, shoved the doors open, and started walking.

If you’ve ever been low on fuel, you know it’s impossible to keep moving for very long. You might be able to coast for a while, but you can’t run on empty forever.

Jesus recognized the disciples’ need to refuel when He suggested, “Let’s go off by ourselves . . . and rest awhile” (Mark 6:31). His band of do-gooders had just come back from a ministry tour, but things were so hectic that Jesus and His apostles didn’t even have time to grab lunch before a crowd formed. Jesus decided to hold an impromptu seminar, teaching them “many things.”

After a while, the disciples said, “It’s getting late. Send the people away so they can get something to eat.” Jesus’ response? “You feed them” (v.37). He knew His crew was tired and hungry, that it was late, and that they were broke. The disciples sassed back, “With what?”

Maybe you’re wondering the same thing. Fortunately, Jesus wasn’t setting the disciples up to fail—and like them, He won’t ask us to help people in His name without enabling us to follow through. Jesus “knows how weak we are; He remembers that we are only dust” (Psalm 103:14).

Sometimes though, He allows us to run on empty for a while, until we recognize that He is the ultimate fuel source for our ministry. Without Him, we can’t keep going, but with Him we “can do everything through Christ who gives [us] strength” (Philippians 4:13).

So Many Choices

2010-02-21T13:40:00.000-08:00

By Jill Carattini

Comedian Steve Martin once joked, "It's so hard to believe in anything anymore. If it weren't for my lucky astrology mood watch, I wouldn't believe in anything."

Martin's words at once communicate the comedy to be found in nonsensical beliefs. But if Shakespeare's quip holds any truth--that jesters oft do prove our prophets--then Martin's words also say something alarming of what may now be our nonsensical approach to belief itself. In a world where we are given a spiritual cafeteria full of choices, it is no wonder that many find it hard to believe and express belief, and harder still to decide even what to believe in the first place.

The discipline of apologetics attempts to speak into the modern difficulties surrounding belief with words of hope, transparency, and clarity. In the introduction to Jesus Among Other Gods, Ravi Zacharias writes, "We are living in a time when sensitivities are at the surface, often vented with cutting words. Philosophically, you can believe anything, so long as you do not claim it to be true. Morally you can practice anything, so long as you do not claim that it is a'better' way. Religiously, you can hold to anything, so long as you do not bring Jesus Christ into it."(1) This is the mood of the century, notes Zacharias, and a mood can be a dangerous state of mind. For moods are far too often given the authority under the marching orders of feeling to trample anything that gets in the way of "whim."

In fact, a recent article reports that over a quarter of American adults have left the faith of their childhoods for other religions.(2) The report, which was titled "U.S. Religious Landscape Survey," did not find a decline in religious interest, but a certain fluidity among religious options. In the endless options of the spiritual cafeteria we are urged to make our choices based on whatever spiritual provision for which we might be in the mood. Hence, whether it is comfort we seek, or mysticism, the right choice is seen as somewhere out there, ready to suit our changing dispositions.

C.S. Lewis did not speak out of our postmodern era, but he knew it was coming and scholars unquestionably agree his mind was ahead of its time. In an essay called "Modern Man and His Categories of Thought," Lewis complains that humanity is "becoming as narrowly 'practical' as the irrational animals." He writes, "In lecturing to popular audiences I have repeatedly found it almost impossible to make them understand that I recommend Christianity because I think its affirmations to be objectively true. They are simply not interested in the question of truth or falsehood. They only want to know if it will be comforting, or 'inspiring,' or socially useful."(3)

The world has changed since Lewis penned those words, but the truth he diligently pointed to has not. Lewis reminds us that if a religion is to be treated with intellectual respect, then it must stand the tests of truth, hope, and integrity, regardless of the shifting moods of history. The remarkable hope of the Christian is that there is a religion that is able to stand the test of time, the swaying of appetite, and the scrutiny of reason. There are indeed countless choices among us; might we arrive at our verdict by means of the unchanging road of truth and light that will not fade away.

The Apologist's First Question

2010-01-31T10:39:00.000-08:00

By Ravi Zacharias

I have little doubt that the single greatest obstacle to the impact of the Gospel has not been its inability to provide answers, but the failure on our part to live it out. I remember well in the early days of my Christian faith talking to a close Hindu friend. He was questioning the experience of conversion as being supernatural. He absolutely insisted that conversion was nothing more than a decision to lead a more ethical life and that, in most cases, it was not any different from other ethical religions. I had heard his argument before. But then he said something I have never forgotten: "If this conversion is truly supernatural, why is it not more evident in the lives of so many Christians I know?" His question is a troublesome one. In fact,it is so deeply disturbing a question that I think of all the challenges to belief, this is the most difficult question of all.

I have never struggled with my own personal faith as far as intellectual challenges to the Gospel are concerned. But I have often had struggles of the soul in trying to figure out why the Christian faith is not more visible. After lecturing at a major American university, I was driven to the airport by the organizer of the event. I was quite jolted by what he told me. He said, "My wife brought our neighbor last night. She is a medical doctor and had not been to anything like this before. On their way home, my wife asked her what she thought of it all." He paused and then continued,"Do you know what she said?" Rather reluctantly, I shook my head. "She said, 'That was a very powerful evening. The arguments were very persuasive. I wonder what he is like in his private life.'"

Because my Hindu friend had not witnessed spiritual transformation in the life of Christians, whatever answer she received were nullified. In the doctor's case, the answers were intellectually and existentially satisfying, but she still needed to know, did they really make a difference in the life of the one proclaiming them? The Irish evangelist Gypsy Smith once said, "There are five Gospels. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the Christian, and some people will never read the first four." In otherwords, the message is seen before it is heard.

For both the Hindu questioner and the American doctor, the answers to their questions were not enough; they depended upon the visible transformation of the one offering them. 1 Peter 3:15 gives us the gives us the defining statement: "But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer(apologia) to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect." Notice that before the answer is given, the one giving the answer is called to a certain prerequisite. The lordship of Christ over the life of the apologist is foundational to all answers given. Peter, of all the disciples, knew well how to ask questions and also how fickle the human heartis. He knew the seductive power of the spectacular in momentary enthrallment.

He knew what it was to betray someone and to fail. He knew what it was to try to explain the Gospel--as he did at Pentecost. Peter's strong reminder of the heart of the apologistis the basis of all apologetic attempts. With character in mind, there follow two immediate imperatives: the quality of life lived and the clarity of answers given. The way the Christian's life is lived will determine the impact upon believers and skeptics alike. This is a defining line because the claim by the believer is unique. The claim is that of a "new birth." After all, no Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim claims his or her life of devotion to be supernatural, yet they often live amore consistent life. And how often does the so-called Christian, even while teaching some of the loftiest truths one could ever teach, live a life bereft of that beauty and character.

In apologetics the question is often asked, "If there is only one way, how is it that there are few in all of creation who qualify?" That question is actually more potent than the questioner realizes. It should further be raised, "Out of the few who actually qualify, why are even fewer living it out?" The spiritual condition and character of the apologistare of immense importance.

This call to a life reflecting the person of Christ is the ultimate call of everyone who wishes to do apologetics. When Jesus spoke to the woman at the well(John 4:1–26) she raised one question after another as if that were really her problem. It would have been very easy for the Lord to call her bluff with some castigating words.

Instead, like a gentle and nimble-handed goldsmith, he rubbed away the markings of sin and pain in her life until she was amazed at how much true gold he brought out in her. He gave her hope, knowing all along who she was on the inside. Likewise, we cannot simply vanquish the person in an attempt to rescue the message. The value of the person is an essential part of the message. This means the apologist's task begins with a godly walk. One ought to take time to reflect seriously upon the question, 'Has God truly wrought a miracle in mylife'

Is my own heart proof of the supernatural intervention of God?

That is the apologist's first question.

* SPECIAL ALERT *

2010-01-25T11:26:00.000-08:00

Dear Prayer Partners:

I want to introduce you to our *NEW* website.

The Lighthouse Prayerline will form part of a
larger network called "The Lord's Lighthouse".

Please visit our new site at
http://lighthouseministries.webs.com and sign-in.

We have a Photo Album, Blog, and a Guestbook to be
used as you desire.

You can also access the Lighthouse Prayer Line
from the new site by clicking the link that says
"PRAYER LINE".

The current site, Lighthouse Prayer Line, will only
be used for Prayer Requests & Praise Reports. Testamonies,
Devotions, and Photos will be moved to our new site at
lighthouseministries.webs.com.

The URL www.lighthouseprayerline.org will also be changed
so that it will be directed to our new site.

Please visit http://lighthouseministries.webs.com (new site)
and send us your feedback. We're interested in hearing your
thoughts and ideas.

You can contact me at francois.putter@vodamail.co.za .
Mobile Phone: +27 79 465 5880
Snail Mail:

9 Sarel Cilliers Street
Hilton
Bloemfontein
9301
South Africa

Thanks & May God Bless You.

Francois Putter

.