Well, I don't believe you.
No, I'm not angry with you, and I don't want to debate all the
classical arguments for the existence of God; you've probably
considered them all already and rejected them because of your own
personal thoughts.
And no, I'm not going to use the familiar line "God doesn't believe
in atheists" as a premise here.
It's just that you, as an educated person, should know the virtual
impossibility of proving a negative, especially a universal
negative. To claim to do so implies omniscience, and frankly,
neither of us have that. We haven't been everywhere in the material
universe, nor have we explored the entire world of thought.
It's as if one were to say, "There is no such thing as a leprechaun,
or a unicorn." To be sure, none of us have seen such creatures, but
one documented sighting by an otherwise credible person would be
enough to disprove such a sweeping universal negative. And one
documented encounter with Deity from an otherwise credible person is
sufficient to disprove the universal negative "There is no God."
But there have been far more than one such encounter; millions of
otherwise credible people, many of them the best people in their
community in terms of human relations, the founders of hospitals,
schools, mercy missions by the hundreds, the kind of good neighbors
all of us love to have, all have claimed such "close encounters of
the main kind." Now, a claim to have seen a unicorn from someone on
heavy narcotics wouldn't impress me a great deal, and the fact that
the Authorized Version of the Bible uses the word isn't final
evidence; checking the Hebrew results in another term ("wild ox" in
some versions, though I still like the song where God tells
Noah, "And don't forget My unicorn.") And an Irishman heavy into his
celebration of St. Pat's with the "drinkin' of the green" might not
be the most credible witness concerning the "little people." But
when you have multiplied thousands of witnesses, many of whom would
be clinchers on the stand in any court case, over all 7 continents,
over thousands of years, all with the same testimony, there is surely
a presumption in favor of their words.
Which, of course, leads to the relatively small number of self-
professed atheists, agnostics, and skeptics (a recent
national "Atheist's Convention" drew some 500, according to the
news). More cautious thinkers prefer the terms "free-thinker"
or "agnostic" and simply state, "I haven't been able to find God,"
and with Confucius may say, "We do not yet understand man; how then
can we understand God? We do not yet understand this life; how then
can we understand another?" Interestingly enough, this is precisely
what at least three writers of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures also
said.
Isaiah, in the last portion of that book (55:8-9) quotes God as
saying, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My
ways," says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your
thoughts." The writer of Psalm 139 states (in v. 6) "Such knowledge
is too wonderful for me; It is high, I cannot attain it." And Paul,
in Romans 11:33, concludes an in-depth discussion of God's character
with the doxology, "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom
and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His
ways past finding out!" Evidently these Bible writers believed that
for man to search out God on his own was not to be expected, and that
God to be known must choose to reveal Himself.
Thus the agnostic is correct in stating that he has not found God,
but the real question may be, are we willing to be found by Him? As
Augustine once said, as if it were God speaking: "Fear not, for thou
would not seek Me if I had not found thee."
My reason for writing this brief discussion is not to seek an
argument, or to try to win a debate; it is intended to help honest
doubters think their way through the most serious issue of life. If
God exists, then all else is insignificant in comparison to that
truth. If there is no God, then nothing else really matters; life is
ultimately, in the poet's words, "a tale told by an idiot, full of
sound and fury, signifying nothing." One thinker wrote that he could
not have the atheist's humility, to consider life insignificant. As
a believer in the One Creator and Sustainer of the universe, it is my
prayer for you that this brief essay will help create in your mind a
desire to enjoy that sense of meaning in life that can come in
knowing the One Who is beyond knowledge. Feel free to contact me if
you want to talk about these matters.
==
AUTHORS NOTE:
I hope most of us know someone who hides behind the label "atheist"
to keep preachers away. If you're not comfortable handing this
material to them, or forwarding it, possibly this line of reasoning
will be helpful as you witness to them. I am strongly convinced that
there are really no atheists, only skeptics and people who are so
inured in their sin that this argument scares off some witnesses,
and staves off some conviction for sin. If any of you are able to
use any of it, I would be pleased to know the results.
R. Charles Blair
pr.eprayer@ethixs.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Atheist? So you say you're an atheist?
The Church: The Who and the Why
By Justin Taylor @ http://www.newattitude.org
In a recent book, evangelical pollster George Barna describes a new type of Christian whom he (positively) calls Revolutionaries. Barna describes them as "born-again Christians who had eliminated church life from their busy schedules." He writes that the life of a Revolutionary Christian "reflects the very ideals and principles that characterized the life and purpose of Jesus Christ and that advances the Kingdom of God-despite the fact that [a Revolutionary Christian] rarely attends church services." Barna thinks this type of Revolutionary Christian "is typical of a new breed of disciples of Jesus Christ."
How should we respond to proposals like this? How important is the local church in the plan of God? And when we talk about "the church," what exactly do we mean--and why should we care?
I could give a precise theological answer to start, but in some ways that's like reading the conclusion to a book before you begin with the first chapter. The authors of Scripture often skip the dictionary-type definitions and instead prefer to paint word pictures, weaving together various images and metaphors to help us understand the nature and necessity of the church from multiple angles.Instead of taking a flyby tour of all of Scripture, let's camp in the book of Ephesians and see what it teaches us about Christ and his church.
Who Is Christ?
You cannot understand the nature and necessity of the church without understanding who Christ is in relation to the church and what he does to and through the church. Jesus Christ is the head of the church (Eph. 1:22-23; 4:15; 5:23). The "head" on one's body directs the body as to where is should go and what it should do-and so it is with Christ, who possesses all authority.
Christ is also called the chief cornerstone of the church (Eph. 2:20). Cornerstones were of utmost important in laying the foundation for a building, ensuring that they were square and therefore stable. God's people (the church) depend on God's Son (the Christ) for growth and stability.
Finally, Christ is the savior and the sanctifier of the church (Eph. 5:23, 26-27). Apart from Christ we are just a mass of people under the wrath of God. But out of sinful humanity God in Christ redeems for himself a called-out people (the "church") who will be under his mercy, will be his people and his ambassadors, will reflect his holiness, will preach the whole counsel of God (in particular the good news of the kingdom of God in Christ), will administer his sacraments (which are physical parables or word pictures to teach us more about the gospel), and will exercise his discipline.
What Does Christ Do for and through the Church?
As mentioned above, Christ is the savior and sanctifier of the church, which is because he savors the church and sacrificed himself for her (Eph. 5:25). Christ's substitution for the church is the ultimate expression of his love for her. We must never get beyond it. But we must also remember that God's love was not only expressed in a single event in the past, but that his love continues even now. Even now Christ nourishes and cherishes the church (Eph. 5:29). One of the ways in which we see his love is the fact that he gives the church ministry workers (Eph. 5:29) to edify, instruct, and serve the church. It is a privilege to serve, it is a privilege to lead, and it is a privilege to be led. Finally, Christ displays the manifest wisdom of God through the church to the angels-the rulers and authorities in heavenly places (Eph. 3:10). Think of it: the angels--the perfect, sinless beings who have always beheld the glory and the wisdom of God--get a fresh glimpse and taste of God's wisdom through you and me?! Wonder of wonders.
Who Is the Church?
If Christ is the foundational cornerstone, then the church is his temple. If Christ is the savior, then the church is the saved. If Christ is the sanctifier, then the church is the sanctified. If Christ is the head, then we are his body (Eph. 1:22-23; 3:6; 4:4, 16; 5:23, 30)
What Does the Church Do?
So what is the church-the saved, sanctified body/temple of Christ-to do? Our fundamental job description is to submit to Christ (Eph. 5:24). We are to be imitators of God (Eph. 5:1), which more specifically means following Christ's path of walking in love (Eph. 5:2). We are to submit to Christ (Eph. 5:24) and to grow in him (Eph. 2:21-22; 4:15).
Conclusion
If you love Christ, you will love his word. If you love Christ's word, you will love his church. We dare not mock or treat as dispensable that for which Christ died. As the church, we are the bride of Christ. Let us labor, therefore, to make it our own, since Christ himself has made us his own (Phil. 3:12).
Suggestions for Further Reading
I highly recommend that you read Sam Storms's evaluation of Barna's book. Storms has three posts on the book:
_(1) Revolution - Part I;
_(2)Revolution - Part II;
_(3)George Barna’s Revolution: A Follow-Up.
For further reading on the church, consider Joshua Harris's Stop Dating the Church; Mark Dever's 9 Marks of a Healthy Church and The Deliberate Church; or Edmund Clowney's The Church and R.B. Kuiper's The Glorious Body of Christ.
________________
Justin Taylor serves at Crossway Books in Wheaton, where he is the Study Bible project director and an associate publisher.
The Purpose of the Church
From Wayne @ http://acts18910.blogspot.com
In our house meeting, we've been talking about what it means to be the church. One of the things we saw is that the church exists to point people to God by pointing them to the cross. Or to say it another way, the church exists to magnify the glory of God through the gospel of Christ.One of the places where we looked at this was in Ephesians 1-3. Ephesians 3:21 says, "To him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen." The church has been called the theatre of God's glory. In other words, God's perfections are displayed in the church. In particular, the book of Ephesians highlights the glory of God's grace and of his wisdom.
Ephesians 1:6 says that God's blessings for the church are "to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves." Everything God has done for the church in Christ (Ephesians 1:3-2:10) - from choosing us before the creation of the world to seating us with him in the heavenly realms - displays and indeed trumpets the glory of his grace.
We are beneficiaries of this grace through the gospel: "And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation" (Eph. 1:13). There is nothing good in us to merit the blessings of God. We are by nature objects of wrath not blessing (Eph. 2:3). It is solely on the basis of Christ's life, death, resurrection and exaltation (the gospel) that we receive God's mercy, "in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:7).
Ephesians 3:10 further declares that God's purpose is "that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms." The wisdom of God is seen in his plan to extend his grace to all peoples, so that Jews and Gentiles - indeed all races - can be reconciled to God, united in one body, and given hope in Christ (Ephesians 2:11-18). Paul elaborates on this as “the mystery of Christ,” which is “that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 3:6).
One of the implications of connecting the gospel and the glory of God is that glorifying God and making disciples are intertwined. We also see this in the Great Commandment (Matthew 22:37-39), where love for God and love for our neighbor are interconnected. And the apostle Paul placed the two together when he said of his ministry: “All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God” (2 Corinthians 4:15). Thus: The church glorifies God by proclaiming the gospel.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Warning! :: Sesame Street 1969 is Not Suitable for Generation Z
From http://churchrelevance.com
Culture has certainly changed over the past 40 years. The New York Times reports that DVD Volumes 1 & 2 of “Sesame Street’s” original episodes come with the following warning:
These early “Sesame Street” episodes are intended for grown-ups, and may not suit the needs of today’s preschool child.
Why? According to Executive Producer Carol-Lynn Parente, Cookie Monster smokes and eats a pipe during “Monsterpiece Theater.” And other characters may seem too grouchy, depressed, slow, or drugged. The NY Times also notes:
On the very first episode, which aired on PBS Nov. 10, 1969 — a pretty, lonely girl like Sally might find herself befriended by an older male stranger who held her hand and took her home. Granted, Gordon just wanted Sally to meet his wife and have some milk and cookies, but . . . well, he could have wanted anything.
The DVD warning is a reminder that our culture has become much more politically correct over the years and our streets have become much more dangerous for children. From a ministry perspective, what worked 40 years ago certainly seems out of place today.
1969 Sesame Street Intro
Recent Sesame Street Intro
Tyranny of the Urgent - Evangelism Entropy
From http://garyrohrmayer.typepad.com
Urgent items are describe as “…those that are requiring immediate attention. It’s ‘Now!’ Urgent things act on us...urgent matters are usually visible. They press on us. They insist on action. They’re often popular with others. They are usually right in front of us. And often they are pleasant, easy, and fun to do. But so often unimportant!”
Important items are describe as “…being focused on results. If something is important, it contributes to your mission, your values, and your high priority goals. Important matters that are not urgent require more initiative, more pro-actively.”
Let's consider the four quadrants of the Covey’s urgent/important matrix as it relates to all the activities that rob us and our churches of its evangelistic energy. Take a few minutes to categorize your daily and weekly activities in the following quadrants. Download Four Quadrants Worksheet.pdf
Here are some "what, who and when" questions to consider as you work through the urgent - important matrix:
What
1) What are the important activities that you cannot delegate?
2) What are the important activities that you can delegate?
3) What are the not important activities that you cannot delegate?
4) What are the not important activities that you can delegate?
Who
1) Who assists you in navigating the not important activities of your day?
2) Who can help you in completing the important/urgent activities of your day?
3) Who assists you in scheduling time for the important/non-urgent activities of your day?
4) Who can you trust with the important/urgent activities in your ministry?
When
1) When in your weekly schedule is there time for important/urgent activities?
2) When in your weekly schedule is there time for important/non-urgent activities?
3) When in your annual calendar is there time for reflecting and planning important/urgent activities?
4) When in your annual calendar is there time for reflecting and planning important/non-urgent activities?
Leadership is simply a well applied energy burst. If a leader is going to let his energy get depleted through not important and urgent activities that distracts every ministry, then there will not be any energy left to counteract the evangelistic entropy that attacks every church and robs them of their evangelistic effectiveness.
"Freak Dancing" -- When Parents Advocate Misbehavior
Here is how The Wall Street Journal introduced its account of the controversy:
A new resolve by school officials in this booming Dallas suburb to crack down on sexually suggestive dancing -- and skimpy clothing -- has sparked a rancorous debate over what boundaries should be set for teenagers' self-expression. Argyle joins a long list of other schools around the country that have banned the hip-hop inspired dancing known as "grinding" or "freak dancing."
But in Argyle, a once-sleepy farming community strained by explosive growth from an influx of well-to-do suburbanites, the controversy has gotten vicious. Some parents blame the newly installed school superintendent, Jason Ceyanes, 35, for ruining their children's October homecoming dance by enforcing a strict dress code and making provocative dancing off-limits. Disgusted, a lot of kids left, and the dance ended early.
Mr. Ceyanes says he fears current cleavage-baring dress styles combined with sexually charged dancing could lead to an unsafe environment for students.
"This is not just shaking your booty," he said. "This is pelvis-to-pelvis physical contact in the private areas...and then moving around."
"Freak dancing" is well known throughout the nation, and it involves what can only be described as "sexually charged" physical contact and movement. But many of the kids in Argyle were "disgusted" that freak dancing was banned at the homecoming dance, so they left. That might be fairly easy to understand. After all, adolescents are expected to exhibit adolescent patterns of misbehavior. What makes this story so interesting is that so many parents responded by joining their adolescents in immature response. In fact, their protest of the superintendent's policy is shocking.
As the paper explained, "Many parents support Mr. Ceyanes's actions. But another vocal faction has been harshly critical of the new superintendent, creating a deep rift in the community. These parents defend the children of Argyle as 'good kids,' and say they should be trusted to dance and dress the way they want."
Here is one of the moral hallmarks of our confused age. Parents defy authority and propriety and justify the misbehavior of their own children while calling them "good kids." In this case, they argue that these "good kids" should be allowed "to dance and dress the way they want" -- even if that means sexually suggestive dress and sexually charged dancing.
Mr. Ceyanes held a public meeting for parents and played a video of freak dancing. "I cannot imagine that there is a father in this room who could watch this video and be all right with a young man dancing with his daughter in that fashion," he told the parents.
This is further evidence of a trend long in coming. Fashion styles for adult women now mimic those of adolescent girls. Why? So many moms want to act like teenagers and dress as provocatively as their offspring. Far too many parents want to act like their teenagers' friends and peers, not like parents. Parents, after all, are expected to act like adults, and this is a society that depreciates adulthood and valorizes adolescence.
When a story like this makes the front page of The Wall Street Journal, something significant has shifted on the moral landscape. When parents demand that their "good kids" be allowed to freak dance at school events, the real story shifts from the kids to the parents.
___________________
The Wall Street Journal also features this video coverage of the story [go here]. We discussed this issue on Tuesday's edition of The Albert Mohler Program [listen here].
Having Confidence in New Testament Manuscripts
From http://www.esv.org/blog
Justin at Buzzard Blog talks about spending time with Dan Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary:
I had the privilege of spending a good portion of my day with Dan Wallace, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, Senior New Testament Editor of the NET Bible, and connoisseur of strong, bold coffee….
Dan spent the morning preaching at CPC, delivering a message entitled, “Is What We Have Now What They Wrote Then?” Dan’s message was a tremendous, clear, and witty treatment of the reliability of our New Testament documents….
Dan is a great guy and a lot of fun to be around. Dan fielded scores of questions from us related to textual criticism, new manuscript discovery, contemporary challenges to the authority of the NT, and translation theory (when I asked Dan his opinion of modern English translations I was happy to hear his hearty, enthusiastic endorsement of the ESV).
Justin goes on to talk about the work Dr. Wallace “is doing with the Center for The Study of New Testament Manuscripts which is aggressively working to better preserve ancient manuscripts of the Greek New Testament and which has, in the last four years, discovered more biblical manuscripts than any other institute in the world.”
Listen to Dr. Wallace’s message (iTunes or direct 10MB MP3) at Central Peninsula Church. The message discusses how we can have confidence in the reliability of the New Testament despite not having access to the original manuscripts, concluding that “the Bible that you hold in your hands is the very Word of God.”
We’ve previously linked to Dr. Wallace’s Succinct History of the English Bible, a four-part series that recounts the history on English Bible translations from Wycliffe through the twenty-first century.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Witnessing - Kirk Cameron - One on Teen
Kirk Cameron with Way of the Master witnessing on the street to a teen.
As New Fads Emerge
By Phil Johnson @ http://www.sfpulpit.comThis is a continuation of our series on “The Fad-Driven Church.”
According to the cover article in November’s Christianity Today [2004], the next big fad is already on the horizon. It’s the “Emergent Church” movement—seeker-sensitivity gone to seed. It’s Saddleback for postmodernists—Willow Creek to the tenth power, for the pierced and tatooed generation. The most influential people in the Emergent Church movement are people who have consciously and deliberately abandoned the authority of Scripture.
Like all good postmodernists, Emergent Christians hate clarity and precision. They despise authority, and they detest certainty. They say they don’t want answers; they want mystery. They don’t want to be preached to; they want a conversation. They don’t want to have to judge whether something is orthodox or heretical, true or false; they want to create their own spiritual reality, and they want to be affirmed while they do it. Unfortunately, the evangelical movement has plenty of people who are willing to affirm all of those things.
At last year’s Emergent convention in San Diego, one of the speakers, Doug Pagitt, pastor of an Emergent Church known as Solomon’s Porch in Minneapolis, told Emergent church leaders he is convinced preaching is no longer a viable methodology for worship or evangelism in a postmodern world. “Preaching is broken,” he said.
Postmodern people don’t trust authority figures. They don’t want to hear someone stand up and expound the Word of God. It’s unhealthy, he says. It’s abusive. “Why do I get to speak for 30 minutes and you don’t?” he asked.
He went on: “A sermon is often a violent act. . . . It’s a violence toward the will of the people who have to sit there and take it.”
Let me say this: That epitomizes the direction all these fads are moving. The fad-driven church cannot be a church governed by the Word of God. If you get your direction by seeing which way the winds of change are blowing and following the prevailing trend, you are being disobedient to the clear command of Ephesians 4:14, which instructs us not to do that.
The way the wind is blowing these days is not good. The doctrine of justification by faith is under attack on several fronts. In England at the moment, there’s a huge controversy brewing because one of the most popular and well-known young British evangelical media figures—a man named Steve Chalke, published a book last year titled The Lost Message of Jesus. In it, he attacks the doctrine of original sin. He denounces the principle of penal substitution, suggesting that the doctrine of substitutionary atonement as evangelicals have historically understood and proclaimed it amounts to “cosmic child abuse.” He insists that God would never punish His Son for other people’s offenses. On page 182 of the book, he asks, “How have we come to believe that at the cross this God of love suddenly decides to vent His anger and wrath [against sin] on His own Son?” How have we come to believe that? I’ll tell you how I came to believe that: because the Bible says so (Isaiah 53:10): “It pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. [He made] His soul an offering for sin.”
The problem is, in the contemporary, fad-driven evangelical culture, almost no one is left who is both equipped and willing to answer a view like that. Someone decided several years ago that the word propitiation is too technical and not user-friendly enough for contemporary Christians, so preachers stopped explaining the principle of propitiation. Now that this idea is under attack, we have a generation of leaders who don’t remember what it meant or why it’s important to defend. And the overwhelming majority of British evangelicals have rushed to Steve Chalke’s defense, claiming his critics are just overweening negativists who are behind the times and out of touch with this postmodern era. The leadership of the evangelical alliance in England are busy wringing their hands about the “tone” of the debate and the “unity” of their movement—and frankly if things follow the historical pattern, ultimately very little will be done to stem the tide of heresy this book has already unleashed. (And you can be sure that the same ideas will be making the rounds of the evangelical movement in America soon. There are frankly already lots of people in American evangelicalism who are eager to challenge the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. This has been one of the main items on the Open Theists’ agenda for several years.)
Something seriously needs to change in order to rescue the idea of historic evangelicalism from the contemporary evangelical movement. And here’s what needs to change: A generation of preachers needs to rise up and be committed to preaching the Word, in season and out of season, and be willing to ignore the waves of silly fads that come and go and leave the church’s head spinning.
Scripture is better than any fad. Preaching the Word of God is more effective than any new methodology contemporary church experts have ever invented. I don’t care who thinks preaching is “broken.” If we would get back to the clear proclamation and exposition of God’s Word, everything that’s broken about contemporary preaching would be fixed.
Book Review: Slandering Jesus
The format is a simple. An opening chapter introduces the problem and the author’s rationale for addressing it. “Living as we do at the beginning of a new century, many new Jesuses are being fabricated year by year; this is the age of designer Jesuses.” “This book is about a few of the attempts that have been made to remake Jesus of Nazareth into a different kind of Jesus—a Jesus more in tune with the times, or a Jesus who will blend more nicely into the tolerance that our culture prizes so highly.” Lutzer introduces six assumptions that give scholars permission to reinvent Jesus according to their own liking:
- take a lesser aspect of His teaching and present it as the heart and soul of His ministry.
- the Jesus of history should be separated from the Christ of faith.
- history is subjective and that one historical viewpoint is really no better than another.
- antisupernaturalism, the notion that all miracles are to be summarily dismissed as impossible because of the supposed consistency of natural law.
- whatever is new is true.
- all religions of the world are essentially the same.
Lutzer than examines six views of Jesus that are common in our day, explaining each and then showing how it falls short of the truth. He does this under the headings of six lies people tell about Jesus.
- Lie #1 - Jesus’ family tomb has been discovered. This answers the ridiculous and widely-debunked claims of Simcha Jacobovici and James Cameron (in both a book and a film under the title of The Jesus Family Tomb) that archaeologists found the tomb of Jesus, his wife (Mary Magdalene, of course) and His son.
- Lie #2 - Jesus was not crucified. Here Lutzer primarily answers the claims of the Koran which says that Jesus did not actually die but that Judas was made to look like Jesus and died in His place. Of course the Koran is far from the only text to make such a claim.
- Lie #3 - Judas did Jesus a favor. This section deals with The Gospel of Judas, which claims that Judas handed over Jesus only because that is what Jesus wanted. Hence Judas has been misunderstood and should actually be regarded more as a hero than a villain.
- Lie #4 - Jesus was only a man. Though multitudes have made this claim, Lutzer turns here mostly to the Jesus Seminar and to their constant attempts to discredit Jesus and to remake Him into someone who was merely human.
- Lie #5 - Jesus has a dark secret. Here the author deals with the claims that Jesus was not born of a virgin but was conceived entirely naturally (and, as many claim, by a Roman soldier named Panthera).
- Lie #6 - Jesus is one way among many. This final lie is the one that is most prevalent in our society and one whose leading advocate may be Oprah Winfrey. Lutzer looks at what Oprah teaches and in that context discusses Jesus’ uniqueness.
After discussing those six lies, Lutzer presents a final chapter entitled “Finding a Jesus You Can Trust.” Here he tidies up a few loose ends and shows that the historical evidence for Jesus is strong—that He did exist and that He did die. And here he shows that only Jesus claims exclusive right to present us before the Father. This is a Jesus worth trusting and a Jesus who we must learn to know just as He is. In this chapter and in this book Lutzer shows that those who follows Jesus—the traditional Jesus—have nothing to fear about all of these lies that are being told in His name. Jesus is as controversial today as when He walked this earth. And He is still God.
This book aptly answers many of the claims that slander Jesus’ name. He does so in a way that is easy to read and easy to understand. Anyone can read and enjoy this book. I hope many do.
Notable Quotes
“The cross is the hub that holds the spokes of God’s eternal purposes.”
“Christians do not measure sin by comparing one person with another, or by how good we might feel about ourselves. Christians measure the seriousness of sin by the suffering needed to atone for it.”
“Our greatest temptation is to create a God just like us: forgiving, inclusive, and endlessly tolerant. We are tempted to think that because we are quick to excuse ourselves, that God is also very forgiving, no matter what we do or believe.”
“All other religions fall short in their understanding of God and therefore cannot understand the seriousness of sin.”
“The only holiness God accepts is His own.”
“The reason we think there are many ways to God is that we have lost our capacity to despise our sin.”
“Whenever we try to add to Christianity, we subtract from it. … Those who surrender the uniqueness of Christ do not simply surrender a part of the Christian message, they surrender it entirely.”
Never in the Closet . . . The New Face of Homosexuality
This is especially true when it comes to the issues related to sexuality in general and homosexuality in particular. The pace of moral change is now accelerated to the point that it is clearly visible and undeniable.
Evidence for this is found in a recent article published in The Boston Globe Magazine. Entitled, "Easy Out," the article makes the case that today's gay teenagers in Massachusetts find leaving the "closet" very easy -- because they never thought themselves to be closeted as homosexual in the first place.
Reporter Alison Lobron introduces her article with the account of Russell Peck, who declared his homosexuality as a high school freshman at camp:
One day Peck heard several female friends giggling over an attractive older boy, and the next thing he knew, he had joined the conversation. "The girls were talking about how cute he was. I said something like 'Yeah, he is so cute,'" Peck remembers. "It just kind of came out, and I was really startled by it." But his friends were neither startled nor uncomfortable. "They didn't miss a beat," says Peck, now 19 and a freshman at New York University. "They totally accepted me."
Emboldened by his friends' casual reaction, Peck, a slim young man with curly brown hair, told his parents that he was gay. He was only 15. Their response was equally positive and accepting. His mother, Nancy Peck, who lives in Concord, says her only concern was making sure that Russell was "safe, happy, and healthy." Her son shared his news with friends at Concord-Carlisle that fall, joined Spectrum - a school-based discussion club about gay and lesbian issues - and continued, he says, to feel "very comfortable" during his remaining three years of high school.
Lobron explains that a massive shift in the culture's understanding of homosexuality has produced what gay advocates have been promoting for years -- the virtual normalization of homosexuality. Friends, teachers, and even parents respond to declarations of homosexual interest, romance, and more with simple acceptance. Russell Peck's mom just wants him "safe, happy, and healthy." This assumes, of course, that homosexuality is perfectly consistent with "safe, happy, and healthy."
And that is precisely the point, of course. The elites have decided that this is what all the rest of us are missing -- that homosexuality is normal (even among teenagers) and our concern should thus be to make sure that gay teenagers are safe, happy, and healthy.
Lobron extends the argument:
In the relative ease of his coming out, Russell Peck represents what one educator calls the "next wave" of gay and lesbian teenagers: adolescents who have grown up with openly gay teachers, television characters, neighbors, politicians, and even parents and who take for granted the acceptance that earlier generations struggled to achieve. After all, this year's high school freshmen were in elementary school when gays began to marry in Massachusetts; for them, gay marriage is more status quo than radical. Most of today's high school students weren't even born in 1989, the year the US Department of Health and Human Services reported that gay and lesbian teens were two to three times more likely to attempt suicide than straight teens, sparking a wave of activism that has made many schools more tolerant places - and taught parents how to support gay children.
As a result of these cultural shifts, gay and lesbian teens are acknowledging same-sex attraction at ever-younger ages and questioning the concept of both "coming out" and "the closet." Increasingly, their challenges look less like the public health crisis of the 1980s and more like the ones their straight peers have always faced: How do you know when a boy likes you (versus just liking you)? How do you ask a girl out? And what do you do when your mom hears about your new boyfriend from one of her friends at the supermarket?
Everyone must be concerned about the problem of teenage suicides, whatever the cause of the teenager's crisis. The reduction in suicides among Massachusetts young people is truly good news. But the logic that the right way to reduce teenage suicides among those struggling with sexual identity is simply to normalize that identity is a moral revolution in itself -- and a revolution with obvious limits. Are any and all sexual orientations and identities to be normalized? Do we even have a concept of normal that means anything?
Lobron makes the significant observation that the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts has meant that this generation of Massachusetts teenagers simply assumes that homosexual unions are normal. This should come as no surprise, for some leading homosexual activists have long argued that this is indeed the main point behind the push for same-sex marriage.
One of the most troubling aspects of Lobron's article is the fact that children as young as 13 are welcomed to groups like the Boston Alliance for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth, where they are assured that their same-sex interests are just normal. Just imagine for a moment what that means as a cultural upheaval in itself.
USA Today also produces evidence of this moral shift in an article by Gary Gates on how these changes might play out as a factor in the 2008 presidential race:
Since 1990, the Census Bureau has tracked the presence of same-sex "unmarried partners," commonly understood to be lesbian and gay couples. From an initial count of about 145,000 same-sex couples in 1990, the 2006 data show that this population has increased fivefold to nearly 780,000 couples. The number of same-sex couples grew more than 21 times faster than the U.S. population did. So either gay recruitment efforts have succeeded, or lots more lesbian and gay couples are "coming out" on government surveys.
As a demographer, I say it's the latter. In a 1992 survey by the University of Chicago, 2.8% of men and 1.4% women identified themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual. Ten years later, a National Center for Health Statistics study pegged that figure at 4.1% -- almost one-and-a-half times more men and three times more women.
More:
Meanwhile, support for gay people grows. In the late 1980s, Gallup polls found about 30% of Americans thought "homosexual relations between consenting adults" should be legal. A May 2007 poll finds this figure has risen to 59%.
If it's no surprise that Americans are becoming more comfortable living among openly gay men and lesbians, the Census data do pack a wallop that politicians ignore at their peril. Since 1990, the number of self-identified same-sex couples in Mountain, Midwest and Southern states has averaged a sixfold increase. Compare that with the more liberal East and West Coasts, where increases have been less than fourfold.
All this calls for a new awareness among evangelical Christians of how much has changed around us. Our challenge as a people committed to biblical truth has never been greater or clearer. The normalization of homosexuality is just taken as a fact by so many in our society today -- especially among those in younger ages.
Evangelical Christians must meet this challenge with both biblical truth and a keen eye on the cultural shifts around us. Our current challenge is not only to tell the truth about homosexuality, but to recover any notion of a moral norm when it comes to sexuality. That will take more intellectual energy than the evangelical movement has yet devoted to this task.
Stem Cell Breakthrough
From http://theologica.blogspot.com
It's being hailed as "an extraordinary scientific discovery" and likely "the most important development in stem cell science since the first derivation of human embryonic stem cells in 1998."More info and response here.
Wesley Smith: ". . . we now have the very real potential of developing thriving and robust stem-cell medicine and scientific research sectors that will bridge, rather than exacerbate, our moral differences over the importance and meaning of human life."
The Ideal Christian Woman: Part 3
In Her Body and Life, She Seeks to Reflect the Image of God
We've established that the Ideal Christian Woman is honest about her sin and finds her identity in Jesus Christ. She understands that His punishment on the cross bought her peace, healing, and restoration, and she meditates regularly on the benefits His death has purchased for her. As the prophet Isaiah said, "By His wounds, we are healed." Christ's death on the cross and the forgiveness and cleansing we have through Him enable us on to part 3 of this series: we restore and reflect the image of God in our body and life.
The first woman was created to reflect the image of God. In particular, she was created to be a helper (Hebrew ezer, Genesis 2:18). In Hebrew, this word means to help, nourish, sustain, or strengthen and is used most often in the Old Testament of God Himself. Consider its use in Deuteronomy 33:29:
Blessed are you, O Israel! Who is like you, a people saved by the LORD? He is your shield and helper and your glorious sword…
Here, God Himself is called our helper, our ezer, the same word used of the first woman in Gen. 2:18. In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is also called our Helper, Counselor, and Comforter (depending on which translation of the Bible you use--these are all translations of the Holy Spirit's role of paraklete, or one who comes alongside in aid.) God is our Help. The Holy Spirit is our Helper. And we were created to reflect this awesome attribute of God. When we understand God's role on this issue, it puts this in perspective. God, Almighty Sovereign Lord of the Universe, is our helper and we, as women, are created in His image.
So let's consider God's example on this issue of Help. Do you see yourself exhibiting God's characteristics or the contrasting ones? In Exodus 18:4, God our help defends (in contrast to attacking or ignoring the fight altogether). In Psalm 10:14 God our help sees and cares for the oppressed (rather than being indifferent and unconcerned). In Psalm 20:2 and 33:20, God our Help supports, shields and protects (rather than leaving unprotected and defenseless). In Psalms 70:5, God our Help delivers from distress (rather than causing distress). In Psalm 72:12-14, God our Help rescues the poor, weak, and needy (rather than ignoring the poor and needy). And in Psalm 86:17, God our Help comforts (rather than causing discomfort or avoiding altogether). God's example reveals a high and worthy calling for women as helpers suitable to their male counterparts. We are called to show compassion, to support, defend and protect those in our care, to deliver from distress and to comfort. We are called to be conduits of God's grace in our families and churches. We are called to be like God Himself – see Matthew 10:25 (KJV):
It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord…
Peterson on Free Will
From Justin Taylor @ http://theologica.blogspot.com
I recently received a copy of Robert Peterson's new book, Election and Free Will: God's Gracious choice and Our Responsibility . It is the first book P&R's new series, Explorations in Biblical Theology, edited by Peterson, who is professor of systematic theology at Covenant Theological Seminary.The book looks excellent--a combination of exegetically grounded and pastorally sensitive theology.
I thought it might be helpful to provide an outline of Peterson's chapter on "free will." John Piper always used to say that the first task of a good theologian is to make distinctions, and Peterson makes a number of helpful ones in this chapter:
Free Will and the Bible's Story
1. Human beings as created had true freedom and freedom of choice.
2. Human being as fallen lost true freedom and retained freedom of choice.
3. Human beings as redeemed have regained a measure of true freedom and retained freedom of choice.
4. Human beings as glorified will be perfected in true freedom and will retain freedom of choice.
True freedom = "the ability to love and serve God unhindered by sin" (p. 131)
Freedom of choice or spontaneity = "the ability of human beings to do as they wish" (p. 126)
Free Will and Reasons Why People Are Saved and Condemned
1. Reasons why people are saved
a. People are saved because they trust Christ as Lord and Savior.
b. People are saved because the Holy Spirit opens their hearts to the Gospel.
c. People are saved because Christ died and rose to save them.
d. People are saved because the Father chose them for salvation before creation.
2. Reasons why people are condemned
a. People are condemned because of their actual sin.
b. People are condemned because of Adam's original sin.
c. People are condemned because God passed over them (reprobation).
Free Will and Its Relation to God's Sovereignty
1. The Bible affirms both divine sovereignty and genuine human responsibility.
a. The Bible affirms divine sovereignty.
b. The Bible affirms genuine human responsibility.
c. The Bible affirms divine sovereignty and human responsibility together.
2. Parameters for sovereignty and responsibility.
a. Fatalism must be rejected as an error.
b. Absolute power to the contrary must be rejected as an error.
3. To emphasize either sovereignty or responsibility at the expense of the other is to fall into the error of rationalism.
a. Hyper-Calvinism is an error.
b. Arminianism is an error.
Of course, to see these defended, explained, and synthesized, you'll have to read the whole thing!
Caring for the Poor
One of the sections of Scripture most quoted when speaking about caring for the poor is the story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37.
This is a powerful passage to meditate on and to examine our own lives with. An expert in the law asks Jesus a question of great magnitude: "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus points him to the two greatest commandments that sum up the entire law: "Love the Lord your God will all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." But then the text says that the expert "wanted to justify himself." He wanted to narrow the commandment so that it would fit with his lifestyle and practice. He wanted a loophole. He wanted to confine salvation to a rule to follow instead of to the dependence on God which overflows with love for God and others. So he asks, "who is my neighbor?"
The expert in the law was probably not a Pharisee because Luke doesn’t use that specific word; though the Pharisees had a zeal for the law and studied it. Either way, it appears that the expert sought to narrow the law to justify himself—like the Pharisees did by not helping the unclean and making up traditions that superseded God’s law.
Jesus then tells the story and shames the expert by using a Samaritan as the hero in the story, since the Jews hated Samaritans. Jesus was showing the expert that a loving Samaritan was closer to the Kingdom than an uncharitable Jew, though the Jews had been given God’s law!
Many people propose that this parable is ultimately about Jesus redefining what "neighbor" means. The word ‘neighbor’ is a covenantal term. To be a neighbor was to be a brother, or a member, or someone who lived under the covenantal rule. For example, Jeremiah 31:33-34 shows that these are covenantal terms by equating "neighbor" with "brother." God says through Jeremiah,
"I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest," declares the Lord.
Another example of this can be found in Leviticus 19:18. Here "neighbor" parallels "God’s people." God commands, "Do no seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord."
So although there may have been some minor disputes about what "neighbor" meant, all of Jesus’ first hearers would have known it was being used in connection to those who were in the covenant community—Israel.
By using a Samaritan, Jesus shattered the idea that the Jews, as individuals, were only to help other Jews. They were to help anyone in need. Though the parable did not remove the prioritization that should be given to those inside the covenant community, it does show that the kindness of the covenant community (of Christians) must not be limited to other members of the community (to other Christians).
Interestingly, Jesus never specifically answered the expert’s question of "who is my neighbor?" Instead, he turned the tables back on the expert (and on us) about whether he (and we) behave neighborly to others. Are we characterized as those who help others? Do we go out of our way for others? Do we love others sacrificially? Such sacrificial love is indicative of someone who has inherited eternal life, which was the first question the expert posed and what Jesus seems to be answering in the parable.
So how should Christians care for non-Christians? More particularly, what role does evangelism play in providing relief to the poor? Does relief of the poor have a priority over evangelism? Or does evangelism have a priority over relief of the poor? Or are they of equal importance? Should there be a distinction made at all?
Contact Evangelism
It is often difficult to practice acts of mercy and evangelism at the same time. Practically, we must assess each situation and relationship first before unwisely blurting out the gospel message. For example, if a fire destroys a neighbor’s home, it would not be wise to speak the gospel to them first. We must first help them find shelter and care for their immediate needs. This is a caution to what is known as "contact evangelism," which we will define as telling a stranger the gospel in a brief, initial, and forced encounter with the individual.
There are many Christians—perhaps you—who first heard the gospel and came to belief in Christ through contact evangelism. We can praise God for this. He is a sovereign God and can use anything to bring his elect to himself. That said, we should think carefully about the practice of contact evangelism.
While boldly proclaiming the gospel is a good thing, contact evangelism can also be insensitive and reflect poorly on Christ. It can be unhealthy because it involves witnessing to those whom we don’t know and who don’t know us. It’s also unlikely that they would ever become a part of our lives. How much better is it to take time to understand someone and endear yourself to him or her while humbly speaking the truth of the gospel? Paul exampled this for us well when he wrote,
We were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children. We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us. Surely you remember, brothers, our toil and hardship; we worked night and day in order not to be a burden to anyone while we preached the gospel of God to you. (1 Thes 2:7-9)
We are not saying that one should avoid opportunities that present themselves with strangers. In fact, we should always be mindful of proactively seeking to share the gospel with anyone. Conversations on an airplane or with a hairdresser are good and glorify God. These are done in a natural setting rather than in a forced, interrupted context. What we want to warn against is sharing the gospel callously as so much of contact evangelism does. A good book to read on evangelism is Will Metzger’s Tell the Truth. It reminds us that our whole lives and speech should be marked by and rich with the gospel.
Conclusion
So while evangelism needs to be primary, caring for the poor is an evident outpouring of the gospel message. The fact that the gospel alone brings sinners to repentance does not negate our need to care for a fallen world and for those made in God’s image.
Read full article here by Steve Boyer and the Capitol Hill Baptist Elders.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Bizarre Religions and Cults around the World
From http://www.oddee.com
The Church of Euthanasia
"Save the Planet, Kill Yourself"
According to the church's website, the one commandment is "Thou shalt not procreate". The CoE further asserts four principle pillars: suicide, abortion, cannibalism ("strictly limited to consumption of the already dead"), and sodomy ("any sexual act not intended for procreation"). The church stresses population reduction by voluntary means only. Therefore murder, rape and involuntary sterilization are strictly forbidden by church doctrine.
Slogans employed by the group include "Save the Planet, Kill Yourself", "Six Billion Humans Can't Be Wrong", and "Eat a Queer Fetus for Jesus", all of which are intended to mix inflammatory issues to unnerve those who oppose abortion and homosexuality.
The Church gained early attention in 1995 because of its affiliation with paranoia.com which hosted many sites that were controversial or skirted illegality. Members later appeared on an episode of The Jerry Springer Show titled "I Want to Join a Suicide Cult".
Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the CoE posted to its website a four-minute music video titled I Like to Watch, combining hardcore pornographic video with footage of the World Trade Center collapse. The montage featured an electronic soundtrack recorded by Korda and the lyrics, "People dive into the street/ While I play with my meat." Korda described the project as reflecting his "contempt for and frustration with the profound ugliness of the modern industrial world."
The church's website previously had instructions on "how to kill yourself" by asphyxiation using helium. These pages were removed in 2003 after a 52-year-old woman used them to commit suicide in St. Louis County, Missouri, resulting in legal threats against the church.
Nation of Yahweh:
"Black people are the true Jews"
Nation of Yahweh is a predominately African American religious group that is an offshoot of the Black Hebrew Israelites line of thought. They were formed in the late 1970s in Miami-Dade county. While the Nation of Yahweh falls under the umbrella of Black Hebrew Israelites, their beliefs are unique and distinct from that of other known Black Hebrew Israelite groups. The founder and creator of the religion is Yahweh ben Yahweh. The group has engendered controversy due to legal issues of its founder. It also faced accusations of being a black supremacist cult by the Southern Poverty Law Center and The Miami Herald.The SPLC criticized the beliefs of the Nation of Yahweh as racist for the following reason. They state the group believed blacks are "the true Jews" and that whites were "white devils." In addition to this they claim the group believed Yahweh ben Yahweh had a Messianic mission to vanquish whites and that they held views similar to the Christian Identity movement. They quote Tom Metzger of White Aryan Resistance as saying groups like theirs are "the black counterpart of us."
Despite the recent death of their leader (see Yahweh ben Yahweh), the Nation of Yahweh is still active. Its members also claim to have abandoned their past racism; the leader's daughter has apparently stated that all people are children of God. An attorney and member of the group, Wendelyn Rush, insists their current war with the U.S. government is a non-violent verbal battle. The group is currently spread throughout the US and is no longer concentrated in one location (formerly Miami-Dade county). Their present literature downplays and has nearly erased all past racism.
Despite some of these present changes, much of the same rhetoric and codes of behavior have remained essentially the same as when the group began. Most still insist that Yahweh ben Yahweh is "Grand Master of All, the God of the Universe, the Grand Potentate, the Everlasting Father and the persecuted Messiah." A few elderly members consider 9-11 to have been a punishment from God for his imprisonment. Pledges of devotion to him and war against infidels allegedly still exist.
Raëlism
"Scientifically advanced humanoid extraterrestrials created humans"
According to Raël, a message explaining our origins and future was dictated to him in December 1973, during personal meetings with a 25,000-year-old extraterrestrial named Yahweh who came in a UFO. The story goes that after terraforming the Earth, human beings from another planet — the "Elohim" (Hebrew for the word "God" as found in the Hebrew Old Testament, which the extraterrestrial himself translated as meaning those who came from the sky in ancient Hebrew) — created humans and all life on earth using DNA manipulation and genetic engineering. The message dictated to Raël during his encounter with the Elohim states that the Elohim contacted about forty people to act as their prophets on Earth, among which are those who founded the world's major religions (Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, etc.)
The Raëlians believe, furthermore, that the Elohim will visit the earth officially when enough of its population is peaceful and come to know about them. They believe this is foretold in all religious texts - the predicted "Age of Apocalypse" or "Revelation" (unveiling of the truth).
Heaven's Gate:
Committed suicide to take their souls to a spaceship behind Comet Hale-Bopp
The cult's end coincided with the appearance of Comet Hale-Bopp in 1997. In 2007, Applewhite convinced thirty-eight followers to commit suicide so that their souls could take a ride on a spaceship that they believed was hiding behind the comet carrying Jesus. All 39 were dressed in identical black shirts and sweat pants, brand new black-and-white Nike tennis shoes, and armband patches reading "Heaven's gate away team".
Aum Shinrikyo
Aum Shinrikyo was a Japanese religious group created by Shoko Asahara. In 1995 the group was reported as having 9,000 members in Japan, and as many as 40,000 worldwide. The core of Aum doctrine are Buddhist scriptures included in the Pali Canon of Theravada Buddhism.The cult started attracting controversy in the late 1980's with accusations of deception of recruits, and of holding cult members against their will and forcing members to donate money. A murder of a cult member who tried to leave is now known to have taken place in February 1989. The cult is known to have considered assassinations of several individuals critical of the cult.
On the morning of 20th March 1995, Aum members released sarin in a co-ordinated attack on five trains in the Tokyo subway system, killing 12 commuters, seriously harming 54 and affecting 980 more. Prosecutors allege that Asahara was tipped off about planned police raids on cult facilities by an insider, and ordered an attack in central Tokyo to divert attention away from the group. At the cult's headquarters in Kamikuishiki on the foot of Mount Fuji, police found explosives, chemical weapons and biological warfare agents, such as anthrax and Ebola cultures, and a Russian MIL Mi-17 military helicopter. There were stockpiles of chemicals which could be used for producing enough sarin to kill four million people. After Asahara's arrest and trial, the cult re-grouped under the new name of Aleph in February 2000.
Creativity Movement
"Inferior colored races are our deadly enemies"
The Creativity Movement is a racialist, and White-supremacist organization that advocates a "White Religion" called Creativity. Though "Anti-Christian" in a contemporary sense, the Creativity Movement is a surrogate of Positive Christianity, and is guided by elements of a pseudo-Christian racial Manichaeanism. The group also denies the Holocaust, embraces racial neo-eugenics with a religious mission that is dedicated to the "survival, expansion and advancement of the White Race exclusively."The organization was initially founded as the Church of the Creator by Ben Klassen in early 1973. In the summer of 1993, Klassen committed suicide. It was later led by Matthew F. Hale until his incarceration on January 8, 2003 for plotting with FBI informant Anthony Evola to murder a federal judge. On July 22, 2002, two members of the organization were found guilty in federal court of plotting to blow up Jewish and Black landmarks around Boston, in what prosecutors said was a scheme to spark a "racial holy war."
The Body of Christ is a small authoritarian group that relies on "direct revelation" and not the Bible for its direction. This small cult has been in the news because it is believed that two children have died unnecessarily. Samuel Robidoux, the ten month old son of the cult founder's son, Jacques, died of malnutrition. He was not fed because they were waiting for a sign from God to feed him. Rebecca Corneau's child, Jeremiah, died shortly after childbirth reportedly due to the lack of basic medical care. Corneau is now eight and one half months pregnant (as of September, 15th, 2000) and the courts have intervened to try to protect it. The American Civil Liberties Union and other Pro-Choice Advocates worry that this case might set a dangerous legal precedent by showing more concern for an unborn child than the wishes of the mother. |
The Body of Christ
The Church of Maradona
Book Review—Promise Unfulfilled | A Summary
Andrew David Naselli @http://www.sharperiron.org reviewed: McCune, Rolland D. Promise Unfulfilled: The Failed Strategy of Modern Evangelicalism. Greenville, S.C.: Ambassador International, 2004. Hardcover, xvii + 398 pp. $24.99.ISBNs: 1932307311 / 9781932307313
Andy noted:
Part 1. “Historical Antecedents” (pp. 1–26)
Part 2. “The Formation of the New Evangelicalism” (pp. 27–63) begins with “four crucial issues”:
- (1) Unity/separation: The National Association of Evangelicals began in 1942 and declined to merge with Carl McIntire’s American Council of Christian Churches.
- (2) Social concern: Carl Henry’s The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism (1947) decried “the lack of social concern in the fundamentalist movement of which he considered himself a part” (p. 34).
- (3) Scholarship/intellectualism: Fuller Theological Seminary began in 1947, partly as a reaction to fundamentalists who “simply were not up to par intellectually” (p. 38).
- (4) Evangelism: Billy Graham’s evangelistic crusades from 1949 to 1957 came to a head at the 1957 New York Crusade, which “finally made the two camps irreconcilable” (p. 45) because of Graham’s new and compromising policies on both sponsorship and convert referrals. “Graham brought an end to evangelical unity” (p. 55).
Eight other factors contributed to Evangelicalism’s formation:
- (1) Vernon Grounds’ “The Nature of Evangelicalism” in Eternity (Feb. 1956);
- (2) Christianity Today, created in 1956;
- (3) “Is Evangelical Theology Changing?”, a symposium in Christian Life (March 1956);
- (4) Harold Ockenga’s news release announcing Evangelicalism’s change of strategy from separation to infiltration (Dec. 8, 1957);
- (5) Robert O. Ferm’s 100-page Cooperative Evangelism: Is Billy Graham Right or Wrong? (1958);
- (6) Edward Carnell’s The Case for Orthodox Theology (1959);
- (7) Donald Grey Barnhouse’s support of Evangelicalism from 1953 until his death in 1960; and
- (8) articles by evangelicals published in the liberal Christian Century.
Part 3. “Ecumenism” (pp. 65–123)
Part 4. “Ecclesiastical Separation” (pp. 125–54) explains arguments for non-separatism (pragmatism, infiltration, apostasy, and the impossibility of a pure church), refutes them, and explains four “categories of separation”:
- (1) Christians must separate from heresy, which denies what is essential to Christianity (Acts 20:28–30; Rom. 16:17–18; 2 Cor. 11:4; Gal. 1:8–9; Phil. 1:15–18; 1 Tim. 6:3–5; Titus 1:3; 2 John 9–11; Rev. 2:14–15).
- (2) Christians must avoid unequal alliances by separating from non-Christians in spheres such as worship, marriage, and ministry (2 Cor. 6:14–7:1).
- (3) Christians must separate from organized apostasy, which includes belonging to apostate denominations or associations, giving them money, speaking for them, and sponsoring them (Rev. 18:4; cf. Isa. 52:11; Jer. 50:8; 51:6, 9, 45; 2 Cor. 6:17).
- (4) Christians must separate from disobedient Christians (2 Thess. 3:6–15; cf. Matt. 18:17; 1 Tim. 1:20; 5:22). This fourth category is unique to Fundamentalism and is known as “secondary separation,” which “is the refusal to cooperate with erring and disobedient Christians who do not adhere to primary separation and other vital doctrines” (p. 146). “Ecclesiastical separation does not really admit of ‘degrees.’ [n. 26: “Bob Jones, “Scriptural Separation: ‘First and Second Degree.’”] Separation is directed to the other person because of his deviations from Scripture in whatever ways he may express them. If the erring brother runs with the wrong crowd, separation at this point is from him as well as from the unbiblical company he is keeping. The reason for separating may well involve someone’s unscriptural involvements, but in reality this is no more ‘secondary’ than a ‘primary’ separation from apostasy” (p. 147).
Part 5. “The Bible and Authority” (pp. 155–94)
Part 6. “Apologetics” (pp. 195–228)
Part 7. “Social Involvement” (pp. 229–74)
Part 8. “Doctrinal Storms” (pp. 275–308)
Part 9. The “Conclusion” (pp. 309–60)
Reflections on Parenting
From http://acts18910.blogspot.com
Several years ago I shared ten lessons I had learned about being a father with the church family that I was pastoring at the time:1. Have clear biblical convictions. This doesn't mean you smother your children with rules and regulations. But don't be a passive parent. You can't shove your faith on your children, but you can instruct them and encourage them and point them to the truth that is in Christ.
2. Be consistent and firm in your discipline. I shudder when parents "threaten" punishment over and over again, yet don't do anything. The expression "or else..." should be banished from a parent's vocabulary. Make known the consequences for wrong behavior and then follow through with it gently and compassionately.
3. Love your wife. I heard it said early in my walk with God that loving my wife was the most important thing I could do for my children. So I've tried to practice it - first, because it's a great joy to love her, and second, because it's good for my children.
4. Have supper together as a family. Or breakfast. Or lunch. The actual mealtime is not as important as the time for everyone to be together. It's also a good opportunity to read the Bible together, or have family "devotions."
5. Be affectionate. Not all men are good at hugs and kisses and "I love you's." It's one thing I said I wanted to do with my kids even before they were born. It's also something that I could have practiced more.
6. Try to say "yes" as much as possible. There have been many times when my wife and I have had to say "no" to our children. But we also let them know that we were going to trust them with more and more responsibility as they grew older and gained our trust. So we had to learn to say "yes" to them, to give them the opportunity to learn responsibility.
7. Laugh together. Some of my fondest memories are of gut-busting, milk-out-your-nose, uncontrollable laughter at the dinner table. The times that happened were too few and far between, but were they ever fun.
8. Make it a priority to gather with the church. The Bible calls Sunday "the Lord's Day." We made it a point for our family to meet with God's family to praise him on his day.
9. Teach and model the ways of God from the very beginning. I suspect that much of the deep parental molding is done by the time a child gets to the early teen years, although it's better to start late than not at all. The first nine chapters of Proverbs have great wisdom to teach children.
10. Commit your child to God. "Unless the Lord builds the house its builders labor in vain" (Psalm 127:1). This is not only a warning but also an encouragement. It is good to know that we are not alone in the task of parenting, but that God himself is the builder of our home. Ultimately my most important role as a father is to pray for my children, a role that goes on even after they "leave the nest."
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Worship: What Really Matters
 |
| By Bob Kauflin @ http://www.boundless.org |
| "What did you think of the worship this morning?" "It was OK. Seemed like Steve was a little off his game. I think I heard his voice crack on a couple notes, and he totally blanked out on the lyrics to the second song. But I really liked the new screen background behind the lyrics. And that drummer that started playing last week rocks. I hope he's going to be a regular." Ever wonder what really matters when we meet together to worship God? We all seem to have an opinion about how things could be better. But are we evaluating the right things? Worshiping God together is a lot like a wedding. Weddings come in all shapes and sizes, with an endless variety of tastes, locations, and styles. Some couples take a year to plan their wedding. Some go from "I will" to "I do" in a few weeks. Others just elope. Couples are pronounced husband and wife in living rooms, vast cathedrals, and in sunlit fields. There are simple, economical weddings and there are Memorable Epic Weddings, complete with lighting director, sound man, multiple coordinators, and a 20-page gilt-edged program. You might critique certain aspects of the ceremony or reception, but every wedding, from the invitations to the time the newlyweds drive away, focuses on one thing: two people being joined as husband and wife. Because at a wedding, what really matters is a marriage. We know what really matters in a wedding. But what really matters in worship? Knowing the right answer to that question is more important than most of realize. It spells the difference between biblical worship and idolatry. So here are three elements of God-honoring worship we find in Scripture. They're not the only elements, but hopefully they'll provide a foundation to build on in our understanding of worship. Biblical worship is focused on God This is so obvious, it bears repeating frequently. Which is exactly what God does throughout Scripture. "I am the Lord Your God.... You shall have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:2-3). "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might" (Dt. 6:5). While being tempted in the desert, Jesus told Satan, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve" (Lk. 4:8). Worship means seeking to make much of God with everything we are. Broadly speaking, worship is our response to whatever we value the most. And for worship to please God, we have to be valuing Him above everything. When we hear the word "worship," most of us think "music." But the biblical words we translate "worship" never refer to music alone. They're connected with things like reverence, awe, submission, bowing down and service. Worship describes the attitudes and actions that spring from a heart consumed with exalting and honoring God. But how often do we connect "worship" with a sound, a style of music, an artist, an event, or a feeling? It's revealed in the way we use the word.
It's easy for us to forget that worship is a transitive verb. If you didn't pay attention in English class, a transitive verb is an action word that needs a word after it to make sense. If I say, "I'm going to throw," you don't know what I mean. I might be saying, "I'm going to throw a ball." Or maybe, "I'm going to throw you outside." Or even, "I'm going to throw up." The word that follows a transitive verb makes all the difference. When we say we're going to "worship," we need to define the object of our attention and affections. It has to be more than the sound of the band, an emotional high, being with people we enjoy, or any of the other things we tend to associate with "worship." Focusing on God means we worship God for who He really is, not who we imagine Him to be. Scripture reveals that God is triune, that is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each person eternally, equally, and fully God. Our songs and prayers should reflect an awareness of the distinct roles and relationships of each person of the Trinity, along with the fact that they make up the one true God. God is holy as well as merciful, righteous as well as kind, transcendent as well as imminent. Focusing on God also means that we don't allow things like music, video, lighting, or other technological effects to draw attention away from the One we're there to exalt. I've been at conferences where the moving background to the lyrics was so distracting that I had trouble paying attention to what we were singing. When I focus on God as I worship him, He always becomes bigger in my eyes. I walk away more in awe of Jesus Christ than the experience I just had or didn't have. Biblical worship is fueled by faith Hebrews 11:6 says, "Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek him." Worshiping God without faith isn't just unwise, or unhelpful. It's impossible. We approach God with faith, or we don't approach Him at all. That's why Jesus rebuked those who honored God with their lips but whose hearts were far from Him (Mt. 15:8). No external form, liturgy, or action ensures that genuine worship is taking place. Playing beautiful music, jumping up and down, or even being part of a church that teaches on worship, doesn't mean we're worshiping either. We need faith. Faith in God's promises, faith in the finished work of Christ, and faith in the words we're singing. When someone says, "Susie is a real worshiper," what they usually mean is that Susie is exuberantly expressive when she sings. But we don't know if Susie is actually worshiping God unless we know what's going on in her heart. I can't count the times I've looked "worshipful" from the outside — hands raised, eyes closed, singing loudly — and been thinking about what I'm going to have for lunch or how much I don't like a new arrangement of a song. The only thing I'm worshiping at those moments is my stomach and my opinion. Ultimately, worshiping with faith means that as I seek to exalt God, I'm not relying on my own efforts, enthusiasm, talents, intelligence, background, repentance, or desire to make my worship acceptable. My confidence lies in the faithful character of God, the perfect sacrifice of Jesus on my behalf, and the trustworthiness of God's promises. That's what breathes life into a song I've sung 50 times before and helps me know that God accepts my offering, even though I may not "feel" very godly at the moment. Biblical worship is fulfilled in life Growing up I had the impression that the time I spent in church was God's and the rest of the week was mine. Even now I can tend to divide life into "sacred" and "secular" pursuits. Praying is sacred. Watching football is secular. Evangelizing non-Christians is sacred. Going to a movie is secular. God doesn't look at it that way. In both Old and New Testaments He makes it clear that all of life is to be lived for his glory, as an act of worship. The Israelites were commanded to "fear the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments and statutes of the LORD" (Dt. 10:12-13). The New Testament provides even clearer indicators that God intends all of our lives to be an act of worship, designed to direct people's attention to his glory in Jesus Christ. When the Samaritan woman asked Jesus a question about the best location for worship, He replied that the Father was seeking worshipers who worshiped Him in spirit and truth, a reference to our need for his mediating role and the Holy Spirit's empowering. Paul tells us that we are to eat, drink, and do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31). It's especially revealing that the New Testament writers took Old Testament concepts like altar, sacrifice, priest, and temple, and applied them to life in general. Paul spoke of how he served (worshiped) God "with my whole heart in preaching the gospel of his Son" (Romans 1:9). The writer of Hebrews told us to do good and share with others, "for with such sacrifices God is pleased" (Hebrews 13:16). Romans 12:1 is probably the most familiar passage that connects worship to all of life: "Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship." The sacrifices that please God are no longer bulls, rams, and sheep, but our very lives, indicated by Paul's intentional use of the word "bodies." So what does it look like to worship God all the time? While it includes the things we do on Sunday morning, it doesn't end there. It's doing everything to draw attention to God's greatness and goodness. It's obeying God and avoiding the things he's forbidden, with a desire to please and reflect the Savior whose sacrifice rescued us from eternal damnation. It's serving others joyfully, spending our money wisely, helping the poor, driving our car responsibly, studying diligently, and working in ways that show we're sinners who have been saved by a great Savior. Biblically speaking, there's no sacred/secular distinction in our lives. Every moment is an opportunity to worship God. Church buildings aren't sacred and family rooms aren't secular; both are places where God can be worshiped in spirit and truth. Have you ever thought heaven would be one worship meeting after another for all eternity? I have. But the Bible suggests that heaven will be life lived at a new level, where every thought, emotion, word, and action is a grateful response of praise to the true God, our Creator/Redeemer, the one from whom, through whom, and to whom are all things. May God give us grace to worship Him that way now. |