Dear Pastor Johnston

Dear Pastor Johnston (A fictitious name):


A short time back I was waiting for something, I don’t remember what, so I clicked on an I-Tunes freebie named Rise UP. It’s played and sung by a new – at least new to me – artist named Diane Burch. Her voice is clear, crisp, and seems to just draw one into listening. There aren’t many popular “stars” like that anymore. Mostly they make noise, talk dirty, and call what they scream singing.

I don’t know if she wrote the lyrics but they make for a thoughtful poetic kind of tune. Today, finding a popular song with words that have actual meaning is a treat. Much of the popular stuff we are all subjected to is nothing more than sexual innuendo with a thumping guitar rhythm driving it. I wish more of the new worship-choruses we sing were oriented more for poetic, meaningful, God-centered language rather than what appears to be words thrown together to accommodate the off-beat rhythms of a garage-band guitar.

I suppose the younger people enjoy the garage-band sound, at least they pretend they do so we cater to their whims. All of Christendom, at least in the U.S., seems to cater to what people like and not what they need. Forget that boring stuff like sin, repentance, obedience, redemption people don’t like to hear that stuff; It makes them feel bad. Instead let’s continue to lead them to believe they can choose to avoid hell if they're in the mood. Tears of sorrow for the guilt of sin(?), man it’s been a long time since I’ve seen that. But I digress.

Back to Diane Burch. One line that stands out in her tune is “…if it’s happiness you want, life is what you’ll get.” Whoever wrote that actually thinks and is a poet. There is another stanza that deserves comment as well:

Why not say it like it is
Like you know you should
Before they break your little heart
Ooh, break it good
Feelings on the inside
Never let you down
So why not say it like it is
Even if it don't make your mama proud

From our past conversation's you know I’m absolutely against the premise of this song. “Feelings on the inside never let you down,” is the kind of information recent generations of American children have been raised and on which our grandchildren are being raised. Feelings are not the means of cognition, yet we have allowed this irrational, evil concept to insinuate itself into our minds’. We have abrogated our responsibility in that we no longer seem able to make the crucial distinction between our privatized experiences and the reality of God speaking to us through the cognitive message that is the Word.

Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, who, for the most part influences much of American thinking today, made the point long ago that in changing our concepts we will change how we experience the “phenomenal” [reality]. We can see this Kantian philosophy, for example, mirrored in Oprah's push for the Zen-like nonsense of Eckhart Tolle. Little do we realize that Zen Buddhism in disguise is quickly becoming the religion of America. Many Church leaders, no longer able to differentiate God's reality from wishful thinking, preach using nothing but the language of "values" and "feelings," both of which are the mainstay of Zen Buddhism, Oprah, and Eckhart Tolle.

Personal experience is everything in the minds of most Americans. If we have a bad experience we are told all we need do is change how we think about it and we will find peace and harmony. Feelings, rather than thought, are what we use to feed our emotional experiences so as to change our consciousness of reality. We do this because we actually believe "feelings on the inside, never let you down.” So the feelings we have about our experiences is what we preach, teach, and talk about. We live, breath, think, eat, and sleep, feelings. What we fail to recognize is that by buying into this lie we have slipped into the relativistic-realm where truth becomes a matter of personal preference and not the objective absolute Truth that is embodied in Jesus Christ.

Here is the problem in all of this: My feelings about my experiences are indefinable impressions of the past with no basis in the reality of the present moment. They are nothing more than a fleeting emotional response to a moment in time which has passed by the time my autonomic nervous system sends its sensory signals. In other words, as soon as the present moment passes - the feeling passes. A Zen Buddha understands this since it is his life-pursuit to empty his consciousness of God's reality because he believes the empty mindedness of Nirvana is the only true reality.

We do, however, remember what we thought about that fleeting sensation, but as humans we are unable to remember the actual feeling. The result of this inability to remember the actual sensation leads millions of us into addictions, family breakups, crime, narcissism, all the ills of our sinful-humanity as we go on a quest for the Holy Grail of a ethereal feeling which can never be relived in exactly the same way.

Each new moment presents a different situation with a new and different feeling. Therefore, If we do not mediate our emotional response to sensory input through our mind’s we live more like instinctive animals than as creatures made in the image of God. That is why Jesus gave us this as the 1st commandment, “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment.” (Mk 12:30).

Too many, maybe most, of America’s citizenry believes feelings are the only legitimate validation for our ethical, moral, teleological, and theological choices. Even pulpit talk is generally about "feelings" and "values" with seldom a word about "character" or "virtue;" and never any about the use of the mind in relation to our physiological makeup as image bearers of the living God.

I realize character and virtue are old fashioned words which suggest living in harmonious communal unity based on shared principles as codified in Scripture: And I realize that using our mind's to actually think is hard work. But, if we continue to let our emotions (feelings) rule our lives as Christians or as a nation, we can only expect more and more evil to prevail as we slowly descend into ever more barbaric patterns of living.

Pastor’s nation-wide should be talking about this stuff. But they won’t. Too many of them were supposedly educated in Universities and Seminaries which have lost the ability to teach our young how to think. They don't know how the mind works, and don't know that they don't know.

The shame is that careful attention to the actual words in scripture taught as fact to our congregations would go a long way toward reversing this travesty. But, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

Good and Evil

In a discussion with a friend the other day - a good Christian friend - I noted a lack of understanding for the word "sovereign" as we apply it descriptively to God as one of His attributes. (Sovereign is defined as having supreme rule. Note: a synonym is autonomous).

My friend in trying to come to grips with the concept of evil (the eternal problem in the mind's of men) he is confronted with the thought that God had either given Lucifer full and autonomous thought, and power, or God had created evil. My friend cannot wrap his mind around the idea of a loving God creating evil.

The problem of evil, as anathema to a righteous god, is a man-made categorical problem which has existed as long as men have existed. Evil is not a problem for God. It is part of His overall redemptive plan for his Universe and everything in it. We are the ones who have the problem as we struggle to understand with our limited capacity for thought.

Our human problem begins with this thought: God created an entity, Lucifer, who rebelled and became evil. Because he is imortal as an angel we think he was autonomous. He isn't and never was. Is 14:13, "For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High." Clearly Lucifer's remarks are nothing more than wishful thinking because that didn't happen.  Omnipotent, autonomous, sovereign power has been reserved by the LORD God to Himself alone. (1 Ch 29:11)

I agree with Scripture and centuries of Church dogma, (Rev 19:6) God is sovereign/omnipotent therefore, Satan has only limited power and like us what he has is given him by God. He even had to ask permission to attack Job. (Job 1:11,12) Moreover, scripture tells us (Col 1:17) that it is God who keeps both Satan and his limited power in existence.

What that means at its most basic is that for reasons we may never know, God willed to create a universe in which evil would exist as part of His overall redemptive plan. Gen 3:9 tells us "And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil." Bluntly, Scripture says God created evil. Jhn 1:3 explains it this way, "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

This means God created a Universe in which His Holy plans will be carried to completion regardless of what we think about the category of evil. In the mind of God and in light of what He has revealed of His universal plan for redemption of His creation - the use to which God puts evil is good. Joseph told his brothers, "You meant it for evil but God meant it for good." (Gen 50:20)

Our problem as modern, sophisticated, "religious" people with limited abilities is that we loose sight of the universals; we can't see the forest because of all those trees. By that I mean rather than try to understand the categories -good and evil- the way Scripture tells us God uses them, we assign our own wishful thinking to them. Having done that for centuries we come up with nonsense statements such as "...a righteous loving God cannot create evil."

 

We have conscripted two attributes which belong to the universal that is God's redemptive plan and in our mind's we have separated them in such a way we view them as universals in themselves. They are not universals, they are just attributes of something else, just as bark and leaves are not the tree.

God's plan is good and for it too come to fruition it must have a tension or a counter-balance, that is how the universe is made. That tension is good vs. evil. Just as we cannot know light without its opposite dark, we cannot know good without evil. We loose sight of the fact that in the Garden of Eden just after God had pronounced everything "very good," evil was already present in the form of the Serpent. We like to think about the "very good" but never stop to ask how the Serpent came to be in the neighborhood.  

Do we understand why God made the universe to operate in this manner? Of course not, we are not God. We only have a limited knowledge about God's plan of good and evil because Eve disobeyed God in the Garden and ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. (Gen 2:9)

So as my friend wrestles with the idea that God has created what Christians abhor - evil, I can only suggest that we should carefully think about, examine, test, reason through, pray about, and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance as we tackle the really tough issues God has left us to deal with. Evil is one of those issues. God made it,, named it, and it exists. In God's mind and plan he has categorized it as good because it is used by Him for His good purposes. (Gen 50:20). We must learn to deal Scripturally with this tension and not with our cliches and slogans.

Jos 23:15 Therefore it shall come to pass, [that] as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things, until he have destroyed you from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.

Still the constant question is how could a Holy God allow evil to exist? Perhaps we will get to ask Him someday, but in the interim we must accept that He does what His will demands. Judges 9:23 is very explicit that if it is part of God's plan He uses evil - "Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:"

Christ has given us our hope. He died so that we might live. Thus we know that someday, regardless how much we distort the concepts in Scripture Christ will make us alive with Him as part of His Church or Bride. When that day arrives there will be no more evil. (Rev 21:4).

If we deny God's sovereignty over absolutely everything, we are in fact denying God Himself. There is no middle ground on this issue. God is either keeping me in existence, making my synapeses fire as I type, or He isn't. If He isn't there is no such thing as god.

So, although we are maudlin about the idea that a loving God can't use evil because somehow we have gotten the mistaken notion that He is like us and dislikes bad stuff it is emminently clear God created evil, told us about it via the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and uses it for His purposes when He wills it to be necessary.

In the interim some heavy-duty thinking using the brains that God gave us helps a lot. Wishful thinking and sentimental nonsense about who our God is helps no one. God is God and He is sovereign over all that He has made.

A Great Sign

Redemption is the plan

When things fell apart in Eden, God did not trash plan A only to move to plan B. He immediately enacted his plan of redemption. This plan includes the redemption of man and the resurrection of his physical body. Paul tells us in Roman 8:19-20 that God is even going to redeem the present earth. If God is not moving to plan B with man and the earth, it is very possible that God will also redeem the animals.

I'm not linking the above quote. I'm using it to pursue a thought, not to point to a particular person for any reason. As a matter of fact, I got the quote from a blog I read frequently because of the truth and wisdom I find there. The thought I'm wrestling with is this: Is God sovereign or not, and if so what does that mean and what are the ramifications.

The writer above eludes to the idea that God does not have alternate plans for His work of redemption. I agree. What I find curious, however, is in our use of language we often trap ourselves by saying inexact things. I do it all the time: I mean to make a particular point, but when I write down the words the concepts I had in mind come out twisted and garbled. We all do this. It is part of the life we live in a fallen universe. I will probably do it in this post, but I hope not.

In the quote the writer says, "...He immediately enacted his plan of redemption." My understanding of Scripture is that God has revealed to us that creation itself, the universe, me, you, dogs, cats, - everything is encompassed in the concept "plan of redemption." I believe everything that exists was made to be redeemed, in my thinking I can't accept that things "fall apart," as though by accident. Things did come "apart" in the garden but not by accident. God designed everything in that story to happen just exactly as He tells us it happened.

Moreover, I believe redemption is the plan, it is not part of something else. Creation was made to fall which makes it the beginning of the "enact(ment) of redemption." If God subsequently enacted a plan of redemption,..." the implication is that it is subsidiary to something else, or a plan "B."

If Creation wasn't made to fall God got blind-sided by Satan and His - God's - original plan was thwarted. Even sin entering the world is part of the "plan of redemption." It did not happen by accident. If any part of creation or redemption is accidental then God is not sovereign and all this time I've spent worshipping Him has been a waste and lost cause. I refuse to accept that idea.

Sin, the fall, all the stuff we humans face in life, yes, even creation itself is the master plan of a sovereign God - and this plan is good. It is very good. (Gen 1:31) God is sovereign and the implications of this fact are seldom examined by we humans.

Thinking is hard work and we don't like to work. We would rather rely on our limited knowledge which can barely deal with the idea that God would have created us for one purpose and one purpose only - redemption. Yet, that is the fact. (Eph 2:1) We, the elect, were created to be redeemed and given to God's Son to live finally with Him as His chosen. (Jhn 15:16)

In the meantime just trying to understand the concept of sovereign is a challenge we should all come to grips with. The word means absolute rule over everything - not just some things. If we accept that definition we have a lot of thinking to clarify.

Blogger Design Templates

I curse blogger for their new templates. They are so easy to use, change, manipulate and play with I can't make up my mind which to use.

For today I like this one. On my laptop it is very easy to read and easy on the eyes. I'll probably try a different one tomorrow.

Idiocracy, mindless,whatever...

I recently posted about the Christian Church, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox, which New York City is refusing to allow to be rebuilt. I named the leadership of that City the Idiocracy. There is no such word I guess, but there should be. My spell checker goes nuts every time I type it. I think we all know that those in charge on Manhattan Island today have somehow let the stuff that is supposed to be between their ears leak out: at least that appears to be what has happened.

This is not news, this kind of thing happened before. (There must be something wrong with the water on the Island). Gates of Vienna told me about it this morning:

Past as Prologue, 55 years ago? — Elegant statue of Muhammad “quietly” removed from the roof of the Appellate Division Courthouse on Madison Square, New York City in 1955, when seven feckless appellate judges, “encouraged” by the US State Department, needlessly submitted to Islamic supremacist dictates regarding “Tawsir,” or statuary.
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Mindless, craven cultural relativism — sadly pervasive in 2010 — has led NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg to capitulate to Islamic supremacism and support the odious Ground Zero mosque projectof the cultural jihadist Imam Faisal Rauf, and his coterie. The rather witless Bloomberg, of course, cynically recasts his moral and intellectual cretinism as championing bedrock American values, notably freedom of religion. However, the ultimately self-destructive Islamic correctness we are witnessing vis a vis the Ground Zero mosque, may be an endemic phenomenon amongst Manhattan elites, dating back to at least 1955.

Ecclesiastes says: (Eccl 1:9) "...and there is no new thing under the Sun." And Edmund Burke said, "those who do not know history are destined to repeat it." So, as much as I hate to see it happening the Bible and Burke both confirm we are going to watch a Mosque be built where there should be a very large, prominent, Christian Cathedral. I think we have all gone nuts!

Who said there are no prophets?

Peter Schiff was Ron Paul's economic advisor. Everyone laughed at him. I don't hear many laughing today. He said home equity would vanish. It's gone. Everyone was telling us to buy Merrill Lynch, its gone. The U,S. government owns General Motors, the Italians own Chrysler, and China owns the rest. I can understand why the talking heads laugh however, a prophet is not someone any of us like to listen to: especially when he tells us we are not doing the right things.

That's precisely why so many hate Jesus. He tells us do the right thing and we say he is nuts. Oh well, he said that's the way it would be - didn't he? As a matter of fact he was the first one to tell us to quite hanging on to things and neither a borrower nor lender be - or something like that. But, hey! Who knew? Those guys are just crazy prophets. Right?

Hitchens and his cancer

Christopher Hitchens is the famous Atheist author most people are at least a little familiar with. He has throat cancer and is being treated by the best that science has to offer. In an article about his ordeal I read, "Hitchens is badly oppressed by a gnawing sense of waste." 

For a man who has spent his career arguing for the impersonality and accidental nature of the Universe how is it, I wonder, he has a "sense of waste." If his theories of the evolved nature of everything are true how can whatever happens be wasteful.

According to the atheists the evolutionary process uses what it needs to advance its impersonal agenda regardless whether that is Chris Hitchens' cancer to kill him or the ant I just stepped on. It is not waste it is evolutionary progress to die for the furtherance of this impersonal process. To evolve is to be - isn't it?

Why Hitchens would now consider his contribution to the advancement of evolution as a waste is beyond me. What's more, I question how his evolved brain even came up with the concept of waste.

If evolution is true there is neither good nor bad nor is there accumulation nor waste. There is only the process of mindless change.

It seems to me, now that Hitchens has begun to confront his own mortality, that he may have begun to reason differently. Perhaps he might be thinking there is purpose in the universe after all. If that is so, then he will have to confront where that "purpose" comes from. It certainly cannot exist in an impersonal evolved place of gases which spontaneously coalesced from a singularity to make him.

Do you suppose he might, like Anthony Flew, at some point admit he was wrong and admit there is a God? Probably not! Hitchens has a lot of what we Christians call pride (I don't know what impersonal evolved beings call it) to overcome and I'm not sure he would do that.

It would be nice if Christ would call him to belief. That event, along with Flew's deathbed conversion, might go a long way toward changing the arrogant thought processes of the evolved elites who run our Universities in a manner which is now excluding as much Christian thought as possible.

We need to pray for Chris Hitchens - whether he likes it or not.

Cultures Collide (2)

"Precisely because the church does not exist for itself but completely and exclusively for the world, it is necessary that the church not become the world, that it retain its own countenance. If the church loses its own contours, if it lets its light be extinguished and its salt become tasteless, then it can no longer transform the rest of society. Neither missionary activity nor social engagement, no matter how strenuous, helps anymore. …"(1)

Link to Cultures Collide (1)

Runaway Slave

HT: Grouchy Old Cripple

St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church

As the Idiocracy running the city of New York debates whether to throw a party or not over the building of a monument to the religious beliefs of those who killed so many on 9/11, what about the little Christian Church that was destroyed on that day? Has any Imam or politician anywhere spoken up to question the delay in rebuilding this Church? Nine years for permission to rebuild seems to me to be slow even for the money-grubbing, thoughtless bureaucrats in New York and New Jersey. But, hey, that's just my Midwestern opinion: I'm not sophisticated like those elites.

[Photo Courtesy of New York Times]

The plans for rebuilding the World Trade Center complex include building a new St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church quite close to the original location.^[1] The church will again house a worshipping congregation. A museum will also be built for the projected large influx of visitors that will come to the site.

On July 23, 2008, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey reached a deal with the leaders of the church for the Port Authority to acquire the 1,200-square-foot (110 m²) lot that the church had occupied for $20 million. $10 million is coming from the Port Authority and $10 million is coming from JPMorgan Chase & Co. (Wikipedia)

[note: JP Morgan was given $25 billion in bailout money].

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is a tax supported government agency. So in essence the taxpayers of New York and New Jersey will pony up $10 million for the replacement of this Church and the taxpayers in the rest of the nation will pony up the other $10 million. Don't forget, JP Morgan Chase took billions in bail out tax money not long ago. And if reports are true they haven't spent any of it on rebuilding this Church.

What I would like to know is who has stopped the Saudi Government from rebuilding this Church? Oh! "There is no Saudi money for this honorable task," you say. I didn't know that. I just assumed since it was Saudi nationals who destroyed it the so-called civilized Muslims in Arabia would have the decency to chip in to rebuild it. Shows you what I know.

I need to get out more often.

Cultures Collide

In the late 19th century Sunday schools were formed in churches as a means to teach the children in the emerging industrialized world to read so as to be able to access the Christian Bible. From that humble beginning we now find ourselves locked - it seems - in a culture oriented totally around the needs, wants and desires of our young. Fathers are becoming more and more to be viewed as nothing more than superfluous and according to most TV commercials and sit-coms as idiots.

[...] developments began to coalesce to form a new understanding of the "place" of young people in leading industrial societies after the mid-nineteenth century. A period of public education was made mandatory for young people in many parts of Europe and the United States; increasingly, schooling became an expected and routine part of the life course. At roughly the same time, the field of medicine and the emerging discipline of psychology began to differentiate the stages of the human life course more precisely, determining a "normal" standard for biological and social development based on chronological age.[...] (1)

So as the world surrounding the Christian World, a World that is called to be in but not like its surroundings (1 Jhn 2:15,16), the Christian World has slowly remodeled itself on the order of its surroundings. Now the church is almost indistinguishable in its makeup from the rest of society. Far from the Biblical model of Father, Mother, children, all led in unity by Elders as members of the Kingdom of God, we too have now segregated ourselves by age believing we are doing God's work led by the Holy Spirit - as one Deacon recently told me.

The ease with which Satan has been able to bring about this transition is astonishing. There are few, if any, voices raised in protest as the church changes into just another expression of our surrounding culture.

[...]The driving force, the engine, behind youth culture is greed. It is the creation of an entertainment industry lusting after money. From the beginning, the elite controlling the media recognized that sin is profitable—that they could boost sales by creating products which chipped away at moral restraints and standards of decency. So, with purely mercenary motives, they deliberately made their products more and more offensive. The music became noisier, the speech became more insolent and vulgar, and the clothing of teen idols became more and more disreputable. Soon, the media were filled with sex, violence, and rebellion. Through its campaign against morality, the entertainment industry succeeded in opening up a gap between parents and children, the so-called generation gap. Children embraced a way of life that scorned the traditional values of the older generation. Over the years, youth culture has sunk into worse and worse decadence and has enlarged its constituency to include many adults as well as many children. (2)

A critical question facing the child of a Christian home is whether he will identify with his parents or turn against them and join youth culture.[...]

Sad to say my own church has been caught in this trap. Everything we do is now oriented toward "peer" or age group activities. Even in worship service the youth sit apart from parents or are in a segregated "children's church."

The top down family concept so prevalent throughout most of the history of Western Civilization, sustained by the model of God's Kingdom being built on earth, has been destroyed.

But, when the Church believes orienting everything around the secular model is the only way to survive it is time someone actually began thinking about what we are doing. God's Church will survive, but a particular church may not if the leadership is blind to trap it has gotten caught in. 

There is nothing I can do about this on a personal level other than what I'm doing here in pointing out that this model is unbiblical, and I believe sinful. Oh! There is one other thing I do and that is sit with my wife, our son and his wife and their children on Sunday mornings in worship service. We take up almost a whole row in the pews.

Who knows maybe our sitting together will be viewed as defying authority and our little rebellion against "peer" group segregation will catch on.

Stuff I’ve Heard

Not long ago I was listening to a sermon and the man giving it said,”I can’t give you meat, all you can handle is the milk of the word.” This was said to a congregation I presume has been churched for many years. I don’t know their individual spiritual condition but I assume the man speaking does or he would not have said what he did.

My mind immediately questioned why he would say such a thing. I thought if he has been the leader for very long something is drastically wrong somewhere. As the spiritual leader it is his job to make sure his “sheep” can handle the meat of the word. Logically, if they cannot, it is his fault and not theirs. Yet, his remarks were pointedly condemning of his audience for their lack of – what?

Mike Ratliff has posted about this in a spiritual gifts article here:

There is little doubt that there are some in leadership positions in the visible church that are there because of their natural abilities rather than the fact that God has gifted them to lead His people. If the latter were the case, they would not be leading their followers into apostasy as the passage I placed at the top of this post clearly states. Those gifted by God to be true leaders in His Church have the role and responsibility to do what? They are to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of Got, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. Why?

 

I teach a class on the gifts in my church and one of the things I stress is for the class to always insure that what they think they have as a gift is not just natural ability. It is one thing to be able to have the natural ability to play Cello but it is quite another to play as does Yo Yo Ma. A good player has talent, Ma is gifted. The evidence speaks for itself. So it is with preachers and teachers.

So, when I hear anyone say something derogatory about someone else’s ability, be it musical or spiritual, I can only ask what is the reason – or as Mike asks, “why” is the situation as it is. Teachers are responsible for the education of those in their charge and preachers are responsible for the spiritual lives of their congregations.

The man who scolded his congregation for their lack of maturity in the Word should be very cautious about what he is saying. Someday he will give account for the accusation and he would be well advised to make sure he has done all within his power to insure he has taught them well. If he thinks he has been called to preach but has not been gifted for the task, my opinion is has made a mistake that has eternal implications.

Cheap Imitation

Here it is Sunday and I'm at home. Health concerns have me at only about 1/2 operational efficiency. That's fancy talk for I'm not feeling well. That's OK! I will get over it; or I won't. Whatever.

Anyway, because I'm home I was wandering around the "web" looking at some of the Churches around the country. (Who said the internet is not useful?) I visited the Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Idaho Falls, Idaho. On their web site I read this about their sabbath day worship service:

Substantial, reverent worship:

The apex for every Christian week is Sabbath worship.

It is the duty of all Christians to present themselves with all of the family in the assembly of the saints to render praise to God, submit to the life changing discipline of the Word preached and the Word made visible in the sacraments of baptism and holy communion, sing the songs and Psalms of the Kingdom, confess doctrine, and give of our earthly goods for the support of the church.

We are called out of the world for these few moments to live in a world fragrant with the air of the coming Kingdom of God. Thus, we seek to provide the true laborers of worship (you, the saints) with all of the ordained elements of worship so that we might provide the true audience of worship (not you, but God) with worship that will be pleasing to Him.[emphasis mine]

I have never read a more beautiful description of what worship should be. "...a world fragrant with the air of the coming Kingdom of God." "We are called out of a world...!" How is it that we have come to believe that in the name of pride - we call it relevance - we think our choruses about what we are doing for God, the mind-numbing "modern" hymns we sing, the pointless shallowness of sermons about...about what?, we think are viewed by God as Worship?

The Sabbath should be the day when our entire focus should be on the God who is our savior and the Kingdom he is preparing for us, but what do we do? We drag our secularized desires into this sphere - rock bands and all - call it worship and wonder why we don't attract the unsaved. We don't attract them because the schmaltz passed off as a sermon, the garage-band sounds, and the constant harping about money is what they see on TV every day. Why would they want to spend their day off with a cheap imitation of what they live now?

Why can't we just show them the "fragrance" that is coming and allow God to do what He is going to do?

Post Modern Catechism Q-7

The Post Modern catechism can be found here. Question 7 and its answer may be of service to some.

Q7: How doth God execute His decrees?

A: God executeth His decrees in the work of watching us exercise our free will.

For those whose religion is a series of cliches i.e., "God didn't make a bunch of little robots, of course we have free will," you may want to add this to your collection.

Newt on Sharia Law

I don't particularly like Newt Gingrich. Some of the the things he has done in his private life go against what I believe as a Christian. But, then, we are all guilty of doing stuff we don't like from time to time. It's called sin and every human is touched by it.

Gingrich is not stupid, however, and he understands and fights against what he knows to be the real battle confronting those on the planet who desire to live free.

Here is a portion of a speech he gave recently at the American Enterprise Institute. Like him or not he gets my vote for President in 2012.



(HT Gates of Vienna)

The Lord's Supper

As a Baptist I don't often get the opportunity to participate in more formal kinds of worship services. By that, I mean those services which serve the Lord's supper on a weekly basis. The most familiar of these formats of service to me are Catholic and Anglican. I've always just accepted my church's tradition of approximately every six weeks for this most solemn service as perfectly acceptable since the Bible is not specific concerning how often we should participate.

Lately however, I've been wondering if a more frequent serving of the Lord's Supper might be a means of strengthening the unity of our congregation. Following is a quote from an article that I found most interesting. Perhaps this is something those of who infrequently follow our Lord's command to "do this in remembrance" of Him might want to rethink.

[...]The apostle Paul [...] tells us that the Lord’s Supper signifies the oneness of the body of Christ (1 Cor. 10:17). According to Paul, “We, being many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.” When Christians gather to partake of the same bread and wine, there is no Jew or Gentile, there is no rich or poor, there is no male or female. All are one because all partake of the one body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper. If the faithful teaching of this truth accompanies the frequent observance of the Lord’s Supper, it inhibits division because it repeatedly and forcefully emphasizes the sinfulness of worshipping with an unforgiving heart (cf. Matt. 5:23-24). In fact, it is not beyond possibility that the infrequent observance and corresponding devaluing of this sacrament has contributed to the ongoing division and strife in the modern church. Again, we have to ask why any Christian would not want such a sign of Christian unity to be a part of the regular worship of the church.

Jesus Christ commands that the Lord’s Supper be observed in remembrance of him (Luke 22:19; cf 1 Cor. 11:24). This does not mean that the Lord’s Supper is merely a time for subjective mental recollection. It is a memorial of the saving acts of Jesus Christ by which he inaugurated the new covenant. In the Lord’s Supper, we do not merely recollect these great acts of redemption. We unite ourselves with the new covenant community for which they were accomplished. If the Lord’s Supper is truly to be observed in remembrance of Christ’s mighty saving acts, why would any Christian not want this remembrance to be a part of every Christian worship service?[...]

The entire article can be found here.

Do We Believe What We Say We Believe?

Sunday our Pastor mentioned in his morning sermon that our church subscribes to a statement of faith generally accepted by most Baptist churches in America. That statement is the 1833 New Hampshire Baptist Statement of Faith.

I have issues with what we actually teach and do and what we say we believe as codified in this statement. I won't get these issues resolved any time soon because there are many among us who say they believe one thing but their actions don't align with what they say.

For instance: This Statement of Faith says, in part, (the full section quote is below) "...the new creation is brought about in a manner above our comprehension, not by culture, not by character, nor by the will of man, but wholly and solely by the power of the Holy Spirit in connection with divine truth...."  [emphasis mine]. To my mind that seems plain, clear and simple enough for a literate person to understand. The Holy Spirit changes a person internally - the person is unable to comprehend what happened - but he knows he is different. He has been "born again." Yet, we insist that a person must "choose" of his own "free will" to "accept" Jesus as his savior. My question is this, if the new creation is brought about in a manner above our comprehension how is it that the sinner can be expected to comprehend he must "choose" to "accept" Jesus as "his personal savior" solely on the basis of his "free will?" He has been born again - past tense - there is nothing for him to "choose." (Jhn 15:16)

If that is the actual situation, we are saved by means beyond our comprehension, why do we waste so much time trying to ramp-up emotional responses with the "altar call?" Perhaps we really don't believe what we say we believe.

 

(I) OF GRACE IN THE NEW CREATION. We believe that in order to be saved, sinners must be born again; that the new birth is a new creation in Christ Jesus; that it is instantaneous and not a process; that in the new birth the one dead in trespasses and in sins is made a partaker of the divine nature and receives eternal life, the free gift of God; that the new creation is brought about in a manner above our comprehension, not by culture, not by character, nor by the will of man, but wholly and solely by the power of the Holy Spirit in connection with divine truth, so as to secure our voluntary obedience to the gospel; that its proper evidence appears in the holy fruits of repentance and faith and newness of life. (John 1:12-13, 3:3, 3:6-7; II Corinthians 5:17 & 5:19; Luke 5:27; I John 5:1; Acts 2:41; II Peter 1:4; Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:1 & 5:9; Colossians 2:13; Galatians 5:22)

Concern for the Church

I visited Australia a couple of years ago. Other than the obvious difference in landscape one of the major differences I noticed was the apparent lack of churches. I didn't survey for numbers, but here in the states we seem to have as many churches as we do gas stations. It feels like there is one on every corner, not so in Australia. In fact, I noticed the difference in church numbers more readily there because there appeared to be so few in comparison.

Pastor, teacher, Rowland Croucher who is Australian, has written a good article (here) about the apparent demise of churches in Australia by beginning with some statistics from the states.

According to the latest set of figures for Baptists in the Garden State, not everything is rosy:

* Two thirds of our churches are plateaued
* Just nineteen churches accounted for more than half the baptisms last year “Six churches accounted for just on one third of the total baptisms
* More than 40% of our churches baptised no one
* We are more adept at roll revisions than roll additions

My own church seems to be in a unique situation considering the numbers above. We baptize new believers regularly, but our actual growth seems to be stagnating. For each new believer we loose one or two for various reasons. Part of this is due to economic conditions as folks must move for employment reasons, but I sense a larger part of the stagnation is due to "church-hopping." I know of several young families who have moved to nearby churches for no other reason than someone hurt their feelings. When that happens I wonder why it is we seem unable to bring these folks to Christian maturity. Life happens, people are people, feelings get hurt - get over it.

I'm beginning to wonder if there are not a lot more "goats" among the "sheep" than we care to admit. We don't like to think along these lines because we have so much invested in convincing new converts and older members as well, that all they have to do is believe without teaching them that that belief carries with it certain obligations to the One we believe in.

Croucher's article does not have the sense I have just given but I think in the back of his mind he might agree. He goes on to say;

What is even more concerning is the growing trend reported in many churches: as much as one third of the regulars will be absent on any given Sunday making communication difficult and continuity in preaching and teaching almost impossible. The point is that the local congregation is not seen as the place to be. Worship simply does not belong as a priority activity.

If "worship is not a priority" among a given congregation there is obviously something drastically wrong with our labeling as saved those who are really just looking for temporary relief from some immediate personal problem.

Perhaps we need to seriously consider actually reading what Scripture says about salvation and forget all the gimmicks that have been passed down to us the way "to win the lost."

Something to think about

The answer to the question of why Jesus underwent John’s baptism is not to deny the fact that it was a baptism of repentance; the answer is to embrace the awesome reality that Jesus’ baptism was precisely a baptism of repentance, as an integral aspect of his fulfilling all righteousness. Here, at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, we see that from first to last ”the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28). Christ’s life no less than his death was to serve, in that ‘form of a servant’ in which he performed for our sakes and on our behalf the perfect obedience of the law, even unto death on the cross (Phil 2:5-11). Jesus’ righteousness doesn’t just cover our sins — it covers our repentance, too. [emphasis mine]

When was the last time you thought about Jesus being Baptized as a covering for our repentance? We hear about Christ's death on the Cross and the atonement provided by HIs shed blood, but we don't hear much about our inability to repent as we should thus the need for Him to be Baptized for us as well

You can read this excellent post here.

The Sabbath? Whatever!

Children’s Catechism, week 28

July 12, 2010

Q. 86. What is the fourth commandment?
A. The fourth commandment is, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.
Q. 87. What does the fourth commandment teach us?
A. To keep the Sabbath holy.

Yesterday our church had "strangers within its' gates." We required them, a manservant, his wife, and their sons and daughters to entertain us. They did a robust job. They, sang and played on their instruments and we were entertained. We sat like royalty clapping when appropriate, laughing when we were supposed to, joining in with them in their singing as required. A jolly good time was had by all. At the end we attended to the money changers table in the lobby and either wheedled discount or paid full price for the proffered CD's, t-Shirts and other assorted paraphernalia. As an aside, it wasn't long ago we were collectively chewed out for arguing doctrine in that same lobby.

The Sabbath appears to be a tricky day to observe in our modern world, but I can't find anywhere in Scripture where its observance has been rescinded. I think what has been rescinded is our reverence toward it and the God Who gave us that fourth suggestion commandment.

We seem to believe that if we can sit still, be quiet and solemn for 1 hour that should pretty much cover all the Sabbath bases for the coming week. In general the only thing we really ask in return is that we get out by noon or shortly thereafter so we can make the heathen wait on us at Bob Evans without our being inconvenienced by waiting in line for very long.

I think we really should consider a return to teaching our children the catechism. At least they, then, should be able to remind us what the Sabbath is supposed to be about. But, of course, that would require the kiddies sit with Mom and Dad leaving their Blackberries and i-Pods in the off position: Without monitoring the kids tend to text - always. I can't envision that happening anytime soon because as I glance around I notice Mom and Dad aren't really there either: They are on their Blackberries. I thought the Stock Market was closed on Sunday. I guess not. Maybe Mom and Dad are reading the on-line Blue Letter Bible. 

A Carson Quote

In the beginning was Diversity. And the Diversity was with God, and the Diversity was God. Without Diversity was nothing made that was made. And it came to pass that nasty old ‘orthodox’ people narrowed down diversity and finally squeezed it out, dismissing it as heresy. But in the fullness of time (which is of course our time), Diversity rose up and smote orthodoxy hip and thigh. Now, praise be, the only heresy is orthodox.

As widely and as unthinkingly accepted as this reconstruction is, it is historical nonsense: the emperor has no clothes.

D. A. Carson, Research Professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

Gotta' love Carson! The man can think and write. The above is from a blurb he wrote for a new book. You can read more about it here.

Christian Music?

I listen to Darius Rucker, when he's on TV, because my nephew "Q" is his lead guitarist. The First Baptist Church from somewhere in Texas has a lead guitartist who sounds pretty good as well, although not as good as "Q.". The difference in them is that "Q" and Darius do not try to pass off what they do as "Christian" music. Both are Christians but they do not try to use the music they entertain the world with as a front for some kind of "Christian" outreach. They are entertainers and that's what they do - entertain.

Lenny Kravitz' music (I don't listen to him so this is the only song of his I know about) is a not very Christ like - IMHO. Here in the Detroit area this sounds like Em&Em's rap music blaring from some car. Where do we draw the line or do we? Should a church Choir sound just like the latest rap-group to mumble its' way through questionable lyrics? Is this what you want your kids to emulate?

I thought as Christians we were supposed to somehow attempt to be just a little bit different from those in the world around us. (Rev 18:3,4,5) But hey: What do I know?

Some "Christians" just don't believe

The book of Revelation is the only book in the bible which tells the reader he is blessed if he reads it. Rev. 1:3 says: "Blessed [is] he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keeps those things which are written therein: for the time [is] at hand."

We just completed a study of Revelation in our Wednesday night service at church. One member, an older member, vehemently objects to the parts in which God describes how He will cast many into the lake of everlasting fire at the end of time. She is very vocal about not getting a "blessing" from this passage. (Rev 20:15)

I'm sure she has never thought of the philosophical implications of her position, since most Christians do not think along these lines. However, by stating she is not blessed when she reads Revelation, she is in fact taking a position diametrically opposed to that of God. Her position is, essentially, "I don't like some portions of scripture, therefore I do not believe all of it in contradiction to my stated beliefs in the Holiness, Truthfulness, and Sovereignty of God." Psychologically she suffers from cognitive dissonance, a diagnosable mental illness. 

Her problem arises from the fact we are told "blessed" is he that reads the prophecy, hears the word, and keeps the commands in it.  Her autonomous pride asserts itself against God and His Sovereignty by her statement that she is "not blessed." 

She, like too many Christians today, has taken a position which is antipodal to what God has ordained and revealed to us. Scripture tells us our purpose for existence is to worship the Holy God, but this lady has twisted her belief into the opposite which is a total concern for man's feelings and not what God declares. She, unintentionally, I think, believes that the God who has revealed Himself in Scripture is not fair. (Is 55:8)

Fairness is a man-made concept which has nothing to do with God. God is God and does many things humans cannot understand so in our rebellion we say they are "unfair." Is it "fair" that you and I are sinners because we inherited that status from Adam and Eve. On the human level, of course it isn't fair. But, then, we aren't God are we? So what has fairness to do with anything? (Eze 18:25)

This lady is more concerned with her sentimental human belief concerning the agony of creatures held in an eternal torture chamber than she is in attempting to understand God's purposes for the chamber.  Scripture explains we can't know all of God's purposes, but it does demand that we Worship Him and accept everything He has done or is going to do simply because He is God. As his created beings we are to bow and conform our minds' to His for no other reason than He said so. 

We will never know His mind fully, therefore when we tell Him "I'm not blessed, even though You said I would be,"  we might as well tell him "buzz-off, you don't know what your talking about."

When God says to us, "blessed is he that readeth...," and we say "I am not blessed," does it take a rocket scientist to figure out this lady has serious issues with God's authority? Revelation is the book which explains that our time being stuck in bodies that are conflicted with sin and goodness - knowing good and evil - is just about over. That thought should make every human jump up and down, sing and dance, in praise to God. But, no, there are some who say "I'm not blessed" all because they never really believed in the first place.

Worship

“… our audience in corporate worship is not people. Corporate worship is not about pleasing people, whether ourselves, the congregation, or unbelieving seekers. . Worship in the corporate gathering is about renewing our covenant with God by meeting with Him and relating to Him in ways that He has prescribed. We do this specifically by hearing and heeding His Word, confessing our own sinfulness and our dependence on Him, thanking Him for his goodness to us, bringing our requests before Him, confessing His truth, and lifting our voices and instruments to Him in response to and in accord with the way that He has revealed Himself in His Word.”  ~ Mark Dever, The Deliberate Church (HT Gairney Bridge)

When I play one or the other of the keyboard instruments at church, I always try to take a few minutes as people are filling the sanctuary to Worship with music that I think God would like to hear. I play in the "classical"  style, which to the untrained is usually more solemn and slow, with a steady pace, or perhaps with a minimum of my own interpretation of tempo and tone. Most people call my playing old-fashioned and too solemn. Some, however, are thankful to be able to sit quietly, prayerfully, thinking about the God who made us and the Grace bestowed on us by His Son. 

Music "ministers" or Pastors sometimes tell me to play more upbeat and "happy" kinds of things so that the people will be in a more "happy" mood for "worship." That says it all: We have gotten in the habit of structuring our services for the entertainment value of the congregation and not to pay homage to our loving Creator whose death and resurrection paid for our sin.

I wonder how it is we have allowed ourselves to drift into the idea that our worship audience is people and not God? Shouldn't our worship model be more along the lines of the Cherubim who surround God's Throne crying Holy, Holy, Holy? 

I'm just sayin'....!

The sense of Scripture

"[...]There is a wide-spread desire to appear charitable and liberal-minded: many seem half ashamed of saying that anybody can be in the wrong. There is a quantity of half-truth
taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense.[...]"

"[...]True faith is not a mere “mental assent” to certain theological propositions—but a living, burning, active principle—which works by love, purifies the heart, overcomes the world, and brings forth much fruit of holiness and good works. Let us live as if we really believed every jot and tittle of Scripture—and as if a dying, risen, interceding, and coming Christ, were continually before our eyes![...]"

- J.C. Ryle

1816 – 1900  [These quotes were taken from Defending Contending.]

Although these words were written over 100 years ago they sound as though they could have been written yesterday. So much of what we hear and say in church and out, seems to be specifically chosen to somehow resonate with the lost from a human perspective. I don't believe this is intentional all the time, I just believe it is a result of folks repeating what they think sounds religious and profound.

The older I get the more I believe our words to the unsaved (and saved as well) should be either God's Words quoted or at least we should give them the contextual sense of His meaning. As fallen creatures we are capable of so little understanding about our Triune God and His Truth we place ourselves on dangerous ground when we attempt to interpret what we think He meant from our own limited understanding. "Half-truths," are not helpful.

Somewhere this morning I read a church sign which quotes Luke 4:7 as though these words were a positive benefit for mankind. The sign reads: (Luke 4:7) "If thou wilt therefore worship me, all shall be thine."

The problem of course, is that the quote is Satan tempting Christ in the wilderness. Christ answered with a rebuke in the form of "It is written...." I believe that should be the model for all Christians: But then to respond as Jesus did we have to actually read our Bibles and I'm sure, as the church sign quote makes clear, even some of our teachers are lacking in that department.

Ryle's statement still rings true today. "[...]There is a quantity of half-truth taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense."

The challenge for the Christian is to know his Bible so that when the "half-truths" are taught those that teach them can be made aware of their error. I wonder what the American Church would be like today if Christians had been doing that all along?

Application of Scripture

"[T]he Bible is primarily about God, not you. The essential subject matter is the triune Redeemer Lord, culminating in Jesus Christ. When Jesus “opened their minds to understand the Scriptures” (Luke 24:45), he showed how everything written—creation, promises, commands, history, sacrificial system, psalms, proverbs—reveals him. We are reading someone else’s biography. Yet that very story demonstrates how he includes us within his story. Jesus is the Word of God applied, all-wisdom embodied. As his disciples, we learn to similarly apply the Bible, growing up into his image. Application today experiences how the Spirit “rescripts” our lives by teaching us who God is and what he is doing."

I came across the above while reading the blog Creed or Chaos. A chord was struck with me as I read because of certain conversations and events in my life recently. Just this morning I responded to a letter from a friend in which I commented that I am slowly learning (Yes! I still am capable of learning.) to simply tell others what God has said and then just sit back and enjoy watching His Spirit do what He is going to do.

However, that's hard for me to do. My pride wants to have me stick my nose in whatever is going on and "make things happen." But, then I guess that's the American way isn't it? We plan, set agendas, think up programs, set goals, achieve, seek success in everything we do. Then what? As near as I can tell the only way to convince ourselves or anyone else that we have achieved any of this is by doing what Americans do: Consume. We buy new cars, second homes, boats, stuff and things. When we have purchased all our credit cards or cash will allow we begin telling ourselves and others how God has blessed us, that is until reality or bankruptcy sets in.

God's biography, which as stated in the quote above does include you and I personally, but in a much different way than Americanized Christianity has taught so many of us. Little by little I'm learning to accept the Holy Spirits' rescripting of my life. I ain't easy, and often it ain't fun. But, I've never been more at ease or at home in my Christianity than I am when I simply accept the fact that He is the Potter and I am the clay.

Finney's Aftermath

I recently posted two papers on the legacy of Charles Grandison Finney written by Pastor Tom Chantry. (The link to them is at the top of this blog). Most Christians today haven't a clue who Finney was, or what he was about, let alone the legacy he left us. Not knowing his history has been a costly mistake.

These articles are two of the finest distillations of Finney's disastrous theology I have ever read. If you haven't read them yet you should take the time to do so. Chantry is a Reformed Baptist pastor in Milwaukee.

Pastor Chantry has now written a third article about Finney. You can find it here. Chantry says this:

The one thing Charles Finney thought he knew was the majesty of God. After all, Finney's god was "the moral governor," a severe adherent of absolute standards who demanded absolute obedience of all his creatures. This, to Finney's unconverted eyes, was the majesty of the creator.

The Christian ought to know better.[emphasis mine]  The glorious majesty of God is seen most plainly in His remarkable grace. He is a Judge - and a perfectly righteous Judge whose standards are unimaginably pure. Nevertheless, He is no distant tyrant sending random thunderbolts upon the earth. He is rather a true King, One who rules over and defends His people. That defense of His people extended to their salvation, even when that salvation meant the painful and shameful death of His own Son.

Nowhere in all creation is the true majesty of God more in evidence than in His superintendence of the great plan of salvation! Christian people ought to stand in awe of the gospel as the highest revelation of the greatness of God.[emphasis mine].

"The Christian ought to know better," is such a striking statement coming from a Pastor it should give pause to everyone of us to reflect on what we are doing in the name of God.  Chantry goes on:

First, he devised all of his cunning methodology in order to produce the "decision" which earlier evangelists had attributed to the moving of God's Spirit. Then, whenever he saw that his hearers had made such decisions, he shamelessly took credit for them. He published statistics of how many had been saved through his ministry and he wrote his Lectures on Revival as a way of telling others how they could save as many people as he had. In other words, the part which the Spirit had played in the ministries of both Wesley and Whitefield was a part which Finney endeavored to fill!

The nefarious effect of this crass substitution of the evangelist for the Spirit has all but killed Christian witness in our day. Whereas Christians once proclaimed a Triune, saving God, today's evangelicals become confused as to why the Trinity matters. Once Christians understood that salvation is all about the Father who ordains redemption, the Son who accomplishes it, and the Spirit who applies. Today we say instead that Jesus saves, so long as the preacher can talk you (or trick you) into letting Him do it. If therefore we would have revival, we must have preachers who, like Finney, can produce extraordinary conversion counts.

We no longer evaluate preachers upon how clearly they express the gospel of Christ and how urgently they call on men to turn to Him. Instead we look at the numbers. If an evangelist can get a good percentage of any congregation to come forward, he is a good evangelist. If a preacher can grow a church (something no preacher should imagine himself doing!) then he is a successful preacher. Of course if a seminary president can double the enrollment of his school, then he is an extraordinary president. What other criteria could possibly matter?

And if his methods are not biblical? If, in fact, he must sin in order to produce such extraordinary results? Who dares condemn him! He is (quite literally) doing the work of God. Paul once said he could wish himself accursed in order to save his countrymen, but he understood that he could save no one. Should we be surprised that when evangelists think they can bring about salvation they do not quibble at a little deceit?

What the church so desperately needs is to remember who God is and who preachers are. God saves; we only glorify Him for His salvation.

There is so much more that I can only hope that everyone who reads this blog will read Pastor Chantry's article. When I read it I thought "my God what have we done?"

History: Islam

"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." This quote attributed to Edmund Burke, British Statesman and Philosopher (1729-1797), is a part of American culture. We repeat the quote in an offhand manner often without real concern for what we are saying.

The recent incident in which Christians were arrested at the Arab Festival in Dearborn, Michigan, points out the need for all Americans to become better informed of the history of Islam.

All of us should at least have a working knowledge of the centuries of  conflict between this "Religion of Peace," the rest of the world, and its actual practices when in power.

For this reason, and in the hopes of enlightening those who read this blog, I have been granted permission to post the following short history. The author Baron Bodissey maintains the blog Gates of Vienna which is dedicated to following the incursion of Islam around the world. 

The Newest Phase of a Very Old War

by Baron Bodissey


Some people refer to the current war as the GWoT (Global War on Terror). Others call it WWIV (Norman Podhoretz). We at Gates of Vienna prefer to call it GIJ3W: The Great Islamic Jihad, Third Wave.


This conflict of cultures has endured for more than a millenium. The first wave began with the conquest of Mecca by Mohammed in 630 CE. It crested in Al Andalus (Moorish Spain) in 711, only receding in 1492 whenLos Reyes Católicos entered Granada.


The second wave began when Osman raided Western Byzantium in 1299and founded the Ottoman Empire. It crested during the reign of Süleyman I in the 16th century, and receded after the failure of the second siege of Vienna under Kara Mustafa in 1683.


From our perspective at the dawn of the 21st century it is hard to realize that a little more than three centuries ago the whole of Christian civilization was threatened. When the Turks stood at the Gates of Vienna it seemed that all of Europe would be overrun by the legions of the Prophet.


This war never ended. While many individual treaties were made between various states over the centuries, no truce was ever declared between Islam and the infidels, and no permanent peace was established (as General Gordon discovered at Khartoum in 1885).


So when did the Third Wave begin?

• Was it with the establishment of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna?
• Was it the Iranian Hostage Crisis in 1979?
• Or was it on September 11th, 2001?

When will the Third Wave crest? And when will it begin to recede?
The thesis of this blog is that, like it or not, we are in a religious war. We do not define the terms but we should take careful note of them. We are mistaken if we think the Enemy wants merely to kill us. Once again, Jihad offers two choices to the West: conversion or death. Jihad exists in order to annihilate unbelief. Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, or Wiccans, it is all the same to him.

Once again, our survival depends on our capacity to unite in a common cause against physical and cultural destruction.

Full disclosure: the authors are practicing (non-evangelical) Christians, staunch supporters of Israel and the Jews, and tolerant of all. Even those who don't agree with us or with one another.
We invite comments and discussion on GIJ3W and related topics.

Caner Fired: Finney to Blame

In my recent post on Finney (Finney's Legacy) I posted two papers by Tom Chantry Pastor of Christ Reformed Baptist Church in Milwaukee. In these papers Chantry exposes Finney for the fraud that he was. Chantry says:

By no stretch of the imagination could Finney's Systematic Theology be considered a Christian book, for Christ is as absent from its pages as is God. Finney's christ is the son of god who became man to show us the way to heaven. There is no actual lecture on christ, so the reader might be understandably confused as to exactly what Finney taught about his nature. There are, however, two lectures on the atonement. Most of the material there is a refutation of the Christian doctrine of atonement, which Finney mischaracterizes as a "commercial transaction."

Finney left us with a legacy of deceit and deception. At the end of his manipulative career "...[he] had to acknowledge two facts. One was that the people in the region of western New York where he mainly preached were exhausted with revival and that converts could no longer be generated. The second and grimmer realization was that for all the excitement, the religious character of the region had noticeably deteriorated during [his] day. This area of frontier America became know as the "burned over district." An apt description for the damage Finney did.
Finney's popularity was such that through the years the truth of what Finney had done has beeb softened and morphed to hide that fact that man cannot "choose" to save himself no matter how emotional he becomes nor how many verses of Just As I Am are sung, while "heads are bowed and every eye is closed."
The larger problem, however, is that exageration, emotionalism, hype, and manipulation have become almost standard fare in too many American churches. Billy Graham popularized much of Finney's man-made religious nonsense which has permeated American churches, but now that chicken has come home to roost.
Ergun Caner former Dean of Liberty Baptist University in Lynchburg, Virginia has been fired. Seems he like Finney, embellished, exaggerated, lied, and generally mislead too many people and could not validate his Resume with facts. His lies caught up with him.
Fundamentally Reformed, a blog I read, has now weighed in on the subject. His analysis is well worth the time needed to read it. You can read his post here. In the article he says:

Without Finney, there could have been no Caner. The reason is that Finney’s influence has created an atmosphere within the Evangelical church in which Caner’s style of preaching, and indeed his multiple deceptions, might flourish.

I have argued that the Caner scandal belongs to all evangelicals. His behavior is a reflection on the state of the evangelical church at large, and we must all take ownership of what has happened.
Finney’s manipulation consisted of the “artful, unfair, and insidious” control of the emotional state of his hearers in order to bring about a “decision” which was anything but. We make decisions when we decide to take a certain course of action, generally after thoughtful consideration. Finney’s “decision” had nothing to do with thought. His hearers were whipped into a terror over the thought of hell. This sudden emotional state was a work of Finney’s art, and he knew how to mold it into a decision to follow God. He utilized every form of pressure to bring about the desired end.

So in typical situational ethical fashion, the ends justify the means if the one doing the manipulating is able to further his own prideful ends. Whether it is the "altar call" used to increase the numerical membership count of a church, or the elevation of a nobody into the status of importance of a University Dean, or even a Revivalist like Finney, these men think whatever seems to work for the moment must be right. 
Read what ever you can find about Finney, Caner, revivalism, altar call, etc. It is not a pretty picture.

The Shifts in The Moral World

In Colossians 2:8, the apostle Paul writes: “Beware lest anyone capture you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.” In this verse the apostle warns his readers against being taken captive by false philosophies. Rather, he says that they should adopt a philosophy “according to Christ.” This verse does not teach, as some have said, that philosophy itself is unworthy of Christian study. In fact, the verse teaches precisely the opposite.

David Wells, in his book "No Place for Truth," points out the breakdown in our moral world has indicators. He pointed to four major sign-posts, indicating changes that hasten people out of the moral world that the West long inhabited. Thinking has shifted from the objective and/or transcendent, to the subjective and culturally relative. The sign-post shifts are:

    * from thinking about virtue, to thinking about values

    * from thinking about character, to thinking about personality

    * from thinking about nature, to thinking about self; and

    * from thinking about guilt, to thinking about shame.

Follow these, Wells observed, and you’ve exited a moral world. The Cross then becomes simply incomprehensible.

Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is, no longer have the categories to understand it, no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories in their non-moral universe — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty.

Chantry on Finney

I was raised in churches which always had altar calls. Like most American Christians I took the word of the preachers and teachers that this is the way Christ had decided to build his church. I didn't question my leaders, I just went along with them as they plied their emotional trade trying my best to "feel good" about my life.

Then something happened. I got into a jam in my life in the midst of which I told God, "I give up. If you don't do it, it doesn't happen." From that point on my life has not been the same. I had admitted to God and to myself - for the first time in my life - that I was not in control of anything. I was at my wits end.

I had to start over and re-think everything about me, particularly my relationship with Christ. I learned the hard way that anything I thought I was doing that might have value to God was viewed by him as "filthy rags."  So I began a journey to understand how it was that I thought just by doing certain things, acting in a certain manner, showing up at the church building each time it was open, being polite, and talking religiously had not protected me from what I had done to myself. After all, I was a Christian, and the churches I attended never talked about Christian suffering: they only talked about doing good, tithing and faith-promise giving and that God would bless everything I did.

I was born, bred, and raised a Pelagian and didn't know it. Everything I had been taught told me I was in charge and that if bad things happened then I had done something wrong. So, I began a journey of self-education to learn if what I had been brain-washed with was actually true. To my profound sadness I learned that most of it was Paganism dressed up as Christianity designed to perpetuate the little empires of the preachers and teachers I had learned from.

Eventually my reading and studies led me to investigate the Reformation. I was stunned by the concepts of Scripture alone and Grace  alone. How could these thing be? I learned that God's Holy Spirit does everything through the "hearing" of His word. I wasn't told I had to do anything. In fact the exact opposite is the message of the Reformation. Inevitably, as I progressed in my search for truth, I came across a guy named Charles Grandison Finney. I learned from his writings that he withheld full disclosure when he was ordained and that was enough for me. He saw no ethical problem with telling a half-truth but I did. So I decided then and there anything he was associated with had to be corrupt. As I read more about him, dug more into his tactics and beliefs, I have no choice but to stay with my conclusions about him. The guy was a fraud and probably not a Christian. But, his legacy as a fraud lives on in most of American Christianity in the "altar call." He invented it, and Billy Graham via television made it famous to modern Americans. Who hasn't heard "every eye closed, every head bowed..."  "your friends will wait for you," followed by "come down the aisle now." Those words are ingrained in Americanized Christianity just as much as "apple pie," and "baseball."

When I have tried to talk to preachers about their use of emotional manipulation begging people to get saved, among other shady tactics, I'm generally blown off as a grouch and trouble-maker. Therefore, I have quietly lived my life - for the most part - putting up with this stuff in the hopes of reaching a friend or two with the truth here and there.

Now comes Pastor Chantry who has written two very good posts about Finney and the legacy he left Christianity in America. Without asking permission, I don't think Pastor Chantry would mind, I have posted his papers under the "Pages" heading at the top of this page as "Finney's Legacy."

I highly recommend everyone read Chantry's papers and finally make an honest "decision." For many it will take a lot of prayer and thinking about things never thought of before, but my prayer is that you will be "quickened" and the truly "narrow way" will be opened to you, as it was for me.

Gun Control

Well, well. It seems the Supreme Court has learned how to read. They ruled that what the Constitution actually restricts is the liberal nut-jobs who pass laws restricting the ownership of guns for self-protection. The city of Chicago was the impetuous for the ruling. Someone sued it because of its refusal to relax its gun ownership laws.

For whatever reason liberals have always had myopic vision when it comes to guns. They impose bans and restrictions only to have law-abiding citizens be the ones unarmed and in grave danger. Chicago, the city which does not allow guns, murder rate by shooting deaths is out of control. "Citywide, gunshot deaths also were recorded in Hermosa, South Lawndale, West Englewood, West Garfield Park and Woodlawn in the last week...Meanwhile, the city's homicide toll for 2010 surpassed 200 homicides last week,"

Now, I'm not a prophet or anything like that, but I would guess less than .01% of these murders were committed by fully licensed gun owners. But I don't know for certain I'm just guessing.

I do know this - the statistics are overwhelming - where guns are readily available to law abiding citizens the crime rates have precipitous drops. Switzerland, which gives its men between the ages of 21 and 32 an automatic rifle, has such a low gun violence rate it does not bother to keep statistics.

Anyway, I should have my "jump through the hoops" CCW permit soon, and the Mizzus will have hers shortly after that. So, if any screwballs are thinking about harming two old people in Michigan they better reconsider. Here's what they will encounter:

:

His

Hers

Each of these is loaded with "wad cutters." These are unusual bullets in that they appear to have had their noses shoved in. I've heard what they do to the human body is not pretty. Anyway, we have another surprise for anyone wanting to do us harm and it is one of these.

Ours

So I'm glad to know I am now legal and that any moron dumb enough to try to shoot, rob, steal from, break into my home, hi-jack our cars, or just generally be stupid is in for quite a shock.

It will be interesting to see how fast Chicago's gun crime rate drops once honest people begin arming themselves.

It Matters What You Tolerate

I know I am not supposed to "covet" (envy might be a better word choice) things I do not have, but sometimes, darn it, I just can't help it. I envy and covet the kind of intellectual prowess of some of the men I read frequently. One of these men is Pastor Doug Wilson, somewhere off in the hinterland called Moscow, Idaho.

He wrote an article about tolerance recently which touches on areas I had never considered. Here is one quick quote:

[...] tolerance cannot be a free-floating virtue. This is because no virtue (or vice either) can be found in a transitive verb. It is not a matter of whether you tolerate, for everyone does, but rather a matter of what you tolerate.

What matters is "what you tolerate." I personally do not tolerate those among us who bask in the freedom given them by Christianity as they work their evil to destroy that freedom and Christianity. (See my recent posts on Sharia Law in Dearborn). Pastor Wilson says this in his article:

Christians invented the most open and tolerant society in the history of the world. Tolerance, as we have known it historically, is a Christian virtue.

Then he says:

Unbelief does not generate free societies. Out of all the explicitly atheistic societies that formed over the course of the last century, how many of them were open and free societies? Ah . . .

For secularists to treat believing Christians as the principle threat to their freedoms would be, were it not so serious, not very serious.

Pastor Wilson has written what I believe is a very important comment on the tolerance of tolerance that now seems to be such a "valued" counterfeit virtue among too many Christians. It is a sin to tolerate the repression of freedom on the streets of  Dearborn, Michigan under the guise of toleration. That is irrational, illogical, and one small step from police-state tactics and policies. 

I wish I had the brain power to write like Doug Wilson does.