How The Neo-Reformed Movement Hinders Grace
I’m thinking it had to be another divine appointment that Christians get up to attend every morning. If you are saved, those appointments await you everyday. You cannot avoid them, they are predestined; therefore, all are glorious. Admittedly, the ease of accepting that and embracing it, depends on the appointment. But I readily accept my new friendship with J.F. Strombeck with all joy. He is teaching me more about grace, and how it disciplines us in “Disciplined By Grace: Studies In Christian Conduct [published 1946].” Though his view of sanctification is a little heavy on the vertical side for my taste, so far, his smooth manner and heavy prefacing of biblical support for every point, has me enthralled and captivated. He is teaching me perspectives on law and grace that I have waited years to understand. I will be posting many times in regard to what I take away from this book.
However, for the purposes of my point in this post, I will focus on one aspect of grace that has surfaced in the front of my mind as a result of his teaching. God’s law [all scripture] has a different purpose for unbelievers as opposed to believers. I know, that’s not a very radical revelation. But the debate over what that purpose is; that’s a whole different story. But I am not even going that far, here is what I want to focus on: Sanctification is the continual impartation of grace by our Lord God. He who has begun a good work in us, will finish it [Philippians 1:6]. Peter admonished in his second letter, “Grow in grace.”
But what is also vital to understanding is the fact that grace and truth are synonymous. Therefore, as Christians, we seek to follow and apply God’s law to our life because of it’s impartation of God’s power, grace, and love. God imparts his love and grace through the truth, that’s a pretty hard-fast rule. John 10:10 says that Christ came “full of grace and truth.” Jesus prayed to the Father, “Sanctify them through your truth, your word is truth [John 17:17].” Jesus said of the Holy Spirit that indwells us, “He will guide you in all truth.” God indeed sanctifies us, but not apart from his truth. Where there is error, grace is not present…..where there is error, grace is not present. Never. This is one reason why Paul instructed Timothy to be strong in grace while committing the truth to faithful men who were able to teach others [2Timothy 2:1,2].
Dateline: Present day Christian circles. There is a “new” reformation going on. Apparently, we have been reading our Bibles “the wrong way.” The hot topic at hand is “hermeneutics,” or the method of interpretation used to understand the word of God. What is at stake? Grace is at stake; the driving force of our sanctification, it is by God’s grace that we are sanctified. Where truth is not properly understood, grace that sanctifies is not present either. It is my contention that because so much is at stake, God did not make the proper understanding of his word a complicated matter. Not only that, Christ promised us the Holy Spirit who leads us in all truth. In contrast, consider the hermeneutics propagated by the ever-growing neo-reformed movement of our day, one being the interpretive theories of Geerhardus Vos, usually associated with what’s called “Redemptive Historical hermeneutics.” I have to smile when Christians tell me it’s the interpretive method they use to understand their Bibles. Vos’s theory of interpretation is so complex that Covenant College had to convene a senior integration project in an attempt to make heads or tails out of his hermeneutics. The result was a 147 page analytical critique by Ted Black. It is available on the internet for your perusal as well. Good luck, if you can comprehend it, you missed your calling. Others, such as a local “pastor,” have websites dedicated to Vos hermeneutics with articles that make Alice In Wonderland read like a well tuned documentary. Recently, a dear friend sent me a treatise on Christocentric hermeneutics [a kissing cousin of RHH] by Dennis E. Johnson, comprised of 432 pages. One element of Christocentric hermeneutics is the so-called “Apostles Hermeneutic” that the neo-reformed crowd continually harps about. But as one blogger is asking, “where is it?”
http://expositorythoughts.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/in-search-of-the-apostles-hermeneutic-part-1/
http://expositorythoughts.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/in-search-of-the-apostles-hermeneutic-part-2/
Truly, no movement has been more guilty of confusing the interpretation of God’s word than this movement, and in the tradition of “Has God really said?” Furthermore, the playful atmosphere and attitude in which they do it is often very annoying when one considers the gravity of the issue.
I simply don’t buy it. When you consider the desire of God to unleash his grace on Christians without measure, I have to believe that complicated systems of interpreting a major vehicle of grace; truth, is not in the mix. In regard to hermeneutics, I believe God supplies his own within the word itself, and primarily for the common man. I will borrow an informal comment I made to a friend to make my point: “The Bible has it’s OWN hermeneutics, not that of others. To use YOUR own is error. My hermeneutic is God’s hermeneutic. The sermon on the mount is a classic example. Those people were the peasants and down-trodden of that region. Matthew begins his account of the sermon by saying; and this is key, “He taught them.” That is God’s hermeneutical marker for that text. When I go to a class at Sinclair, the teacher doesn’t say, “your not going to properly understand what I’m teaching today until you understand the prism I’m using.” Whenever the Bible uses symbolism, a plain sense rendering almost always follows: “The candlesticks you saw are the Churches” “The field is the world” The soil is the heart of men” The seed is the word of God,” ect,ect,ect,ect. In Daniel, you have a vision and then an explanation, a vision and explanation, a vision and explanation. The angel even says to Daniel at one point [paraphrasing] “Now Daniel, this part you can’t understand right now, this is for the future. But here is what this part means and why it’s important that you understand it.” The Bible has it’s own hermeneutical processes, that’s the only presupposition anybody should have when approaching the word of God.”
Do I believe that there are those who take away a practical access to biblical understanding by the common parishioner in this present day? Do I believe it smacks of Catholicism past? Do I believe it hinders the grace of God? Absolutely.
paul
Fort Hood, A Waitress, A Philosopher, A Pole Dancer, The Apostle Peter, James, Hope, Sigmund Freud, Chuck Adkins, And Christian Responsibility
Let’s revisit the Fort Hood situation. President Obama, and many others, called for “keeping the families in our thoughts and prayers.” On Sunday, teenagers all across this country, after hearing that on TV all week, will go to Church and hear, “keep the families in our thoughts and prayers.” What’s the difference? Neither have any answers. But you say: ”But Paul, James said,’ The prayer of the righteous man avails much.’” Yes he did. He was also provoked by those who are only able to pray for those in deep need[ James 2:15-17]. But you say: “Yes, but James was talking about physical need.” True, but the principle is the same. When you pray for a situation without doing all you can in addition to prayer, it is dead works [verse 17]. Don’t just pray about Fort Hood, be prepared to give a defense for God’s kind of hope. Likewise, keep this in mind; only pray, if you will, for situations in which there is more to do within your ability-those prayers are dead works. I didn’t say it, James did.
Let us now go back to the coffee shop. The waitress is still staring at me with big wide eyes. My answer: “Tell me what profession has the highest rate of suicide?“ Waitress: “Psychiatrist?! Me: “Do you know that Psychiatrist sin? What he did was sin, Psychiatrist have no cure for sin. But there is hope, God has the only cure for sin.” This opened the door for the conversation to go deeper, which it did. She did not readily accept all my answers, but you can be sure of this; it gave her some hope to chew on, more than she had. God will now bring something more to her attention. One plants, one waters, and God gives the increase. Also, part of our conversation was in regard to another conversation I had the day before with my mothers housekeeper, who by the way is also in the porn industry [the housekeeper, not my mother]. She is also a student of Psychology at Sinclair College. A nice looking girl, but I didn’t ask her out. I marveled as I listened to her tell me how she thought Sigmund Freud was full of…well, um, she didn’t think he knew what he was talking about. If only most Christians knew that much. Sigmund Freud and his theory of Depth Psychology is the basis of 90% of contemporary Psychology. As many of you know, the first part of the word; “psych”, means “spirit, or soul” Let me suggest that Christians, armed with the breath of God, are the experts in that field, and should attend to human problems as much as those who are clueless, but claim to be experts. But I digress, the day was not done yet. After leaving the coffee shop, I ran into a man I had witnessed to a couple of weeks prior. He is deeply entrenched in philosophy and very educated in regard to it’s history and various theories. Guess what he asked me about? The topic of Fort Hood gloved nicely into what we had talked about a couple weeks before. Sometimes, you are the one who plants and waters.
No prophet, nor Christ, nor any apostle, ever said that salvation bags and tags Christians, and then throws them on an easy-train to Heaven. We have a job to do. It is a job that concerns life and death issues. I have a vision for our Church. I would like to see it grow to the point where it is staffed forty hours a week. Why? So people who need answers to life’s deepest questions can come for hope, and not have to wait for a scheduled service. Let me share what happens when churches put out the “hope” shingle. A man came to such a church and found the pastor there. The meeting was very fruitful and the two agreed to meet again. Before the man left, he pulled out a razor knife and displayed it to the pastor. His visit to the church was his last ditch effort at finding hope. And thanks to God he did, through that pastor. I knew a Christian man who took a stand at work because excessive hours were keeping him from serving God. His boss agreed to give him Mondays off. The very first Monday he was off, he left his house in the early afternoon, and happened to run into his next door neighbor who was wondering about the apartment grounds. After a greeting and some conversation, she revealed that she was contemplating suicide at that very hour because of problems with her husband. We are in the hope business, and the landscape of hopelessness is littered with dead bodies. Christianity is not a game, and God will not accept our prayers as a pass for playing church. More members mean more ministry, and more ministry means more hope. This is often the prayer of our pastor, and rightfully so.
Last Sunday, our Sunday school class had a lively discussion concerning the role of God’s word in the serious problems of life. Our teacher, Chuck Adkins, concluded by saying every problem of life has a spiritual aspect. He’s absolutely right. But it begs the question: “Where are God’s people in regard to the spiritual part of every life circumstance?” Is Chuck right? Well, secular centers that specialize in cancer treatment say he is. You seen the commercials lately? They treat the “whole” person, not just the disease. I readily concede that they are the experts in regard to the cancer, but in regard to the spiritual, they need to butt- out, that’s our job. Our prayers will not excuse us before God for relegating the care of souls to those who do not have the Spirit of God. They either need spiritual care or they don’t; the lost say they do! What say us? Every circumstance of life; let me repeat that, every circumstance of life, needs God’s counsel in some way. Whether it be encouragement, whether it be God’s way of thinking, whether it be a call to obey the good news, whether it be instruction, whether it be correction, whether it be instruction for joy, whether it be instruction for mourning as James commanded, whether it be to glorify God; read Psalm 1:1,2 for yourself, there is only two ways in the world, “other counsel and God’s law.” Yes, in one regard, we are bagged and tagged. But Christ also came that we can have life in more abundance now! Every circumstance needs the life of Christ in more abundance. Wouldn’t you think?
The Psalm Hermeneutic
Who did God write the Bible to, and what do those individuals need to interpret it? The Bible its self answers those questions in many, many ways. We will explore a couple. Let’s begin with the sermon on the mount. Who was he talking to? Answer: They were the common people and peasants of that time. For all practical purposes, how was the teaching recorded in the Bible? Answer: The way it was presented to them. Did he intend for them to understand the plain sense of what he was saying? Well, since Matthew 5:2 say’s he opened his mouth and “taught” them, and “them” is the object receiving the action of the verb which means to teach, I would say yes with no hesitation. He was either teaching them or he wasn’t. So, when you are reading the sermon on the mount, who is Christ teaching? He is teaching you, and the same thing he taught them. What do you need to understand the teaching? The same thing they had, a brain, and an understanding of the language in which the lesson is being taught [not necessarily the original language]. Again, he was either teaching them or he wasn’t. `Matthew 5:2 doesn’t say “he said to them,” it says “he taught them *saying*.” What he said was the act of teaching which means to instruct with the goal of inflicting understanding within the mind. By the way, since Jesus was, and is God, I seriously doubt he lacked any ability to teach at their level. God is obviously the master of the communication he created.
This doesn’t mean we have no need of God ordained teachers; it does mean that we don’t have anything between us and understanding what God is saying , save unnecessary obstacles. As far as method of interpretation, remember the acrostic “psalm,” plain sense and literal meaning. For those who teach methods of interpretation that eradicate plain sense, it’s “psalms,” plain sense and literal meaning, stupid. Now, in addition, neither does this mean that God never uses symbolism as a teaching tool. But in every case, the symbolism is explained in specific terms and we are not at the mercy of confusion or fleshly interpretation. Also, there were times when Jesus taught in riddles as a judgment to some who were listening at the time, because of their motives. But in every case, he makes the plain sense of his teaching clear in other places. Examples of this in the Scriptures are massive. A good example would Matthew 13. Read the whole chapter and you will see exactly what I am saying. Another good example would be Revelation 1:20 where Christ explains keys to interpreting prior symbolism to the Apostle John. As a matter of fact, this is a pattern throughout the book of Revelation. Also, and in addition to the above, it does not mean that Scripture will not be difficult to understand at times. Peter said that Paul was sometimes hard to understand, but he didn’t say it was because of complex methods of interpretation. Peter also said that even the angels desire to understand more of God’s truth; more proof that understanding takes much effort at various times. Question. If God wanted to, could he give us understanding on a silver platter? Answer: Of course. Why doesn’t he? Because he wants us to be part of the process and is honored by those who seek him. Lastly on this point, neither am I saying that historical background or context, among other considerations, are not necessary to lend understanding. Praise God, lay people in this country have vast resources in this regard at their disposal.
paul
With All Due Respect, Your Buddy “Joe” Piper Doesn’t Know Either
Here are three bits of information to start: I can’t say enough good things about Grace Community Church, and I can’t say enough negative things about Joel Olsteen; but with that said, I don’t like hypocrisy either. One of these days, I hope to make it to a Sheppards conference held annually at John MacArthurs church [Grace Community]. Once again, my efforts fell short this year. One of the speakers at the 2009 conference was Pastor Steve Lawson of Mobile, Alabama. He brought the house down with a rendition of Joel Olsteens’ appearance on the Larry King show. Basically, Larry King asked Olsteen if non-Christian faiths were wrong about salvation because they didn’t believe in Christ. Olsteen said he didn’t know, which was bad enough, but Lawson was able to put a hilarious spin on the discourse because of the way Olsteen stuttered and stammered while answering. As I watched the video excerpt of Lawson‘s performance, I found myself somewhat offended. Why? Two reasons: I think everybody was having a little bit too much fun with it at the expense of one who is also created in God’s image. Secondly, they [Lawson, MacArthur, Mohler, et al.] seem to have a favorite buddy these days, John Piper. Lawson and MacArthur spoke with him at the Resolve conference this year. Like my grandmother use to say; “Birds of the feather flock together.” So, let me get this straight, Piper is less confused than Olsteen? Oh really? Consider the following outrageous statements he makes in his book, “Desiring God:”
“Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith.”
(John Piper, Desiring God, page 69)
“Not everybody is saved from God’s wrath just because Christ died for sinners. There is a condition we must meet in order to be saved. I want to try to show that the condition…is nothing less than the creation of a Christian Hedonist.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 61)
“We are converted when Christ becomes for us a Treasure Chest of holy joy.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 66)
“Something has happened in our hearts before the act of faith. It implies that beneath and behind the act of faith which pleases God, a new taste has been created. A taste for the glory of God and the beauty of Christ. Behold, a joy has been born!” (page 67)
“Before the decision comes delight. Before trust comes the discovery of treasure.” (page 68)
So what’s the big dif? That’s what Olsteen emphasizes, a hedonistic joy now; not only that, Olsteen is not the only one of the two that “doesn’t know.” Here is what Piper says on page 55 of the same book:
“Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“Could it be!?” What does he mean, “could it be?” Doesn’t he know? He’s talking about the gospel! So, why is it ok for Piper not to know, but not Olsteen? Oh, that’s easy. Piper is “reformed” and Olsteen isn’t. If you carry the reformed label these days, you have the Joe Biden thing working for you. You know, “Ahhhh, that’s just Joe.” Yes, what an anomaly Joe Biden is; he can say anything he wants and “Ahhhh, that’s just Joe.” Truly, John Piper has to be the Joe Biden of modern evangelicalism. It reminds me of others like him as well. While attending my former church which I left because of their acclimation to Gospel Sanctification [monergistic substitutionary sanctification, which Piper also propagates], I expressed concern to an elder over something another elder said from the pulpit to inquire as to whether or not he understood it the same way I did. The elder in question, related a counseling situation where a marriage was miraculously transformed in the first session because he merely showed them the glory of the “gospel narrative” from scripture. The other elder concurred; that’s what he said, but then replied, “Ahhhh, that’s just Dan.” Recently, I read an endorsement for a reformed book posted on Facebook. Later, my daughter informed me that the author was a Charismatic. In fact, many who hold to Charismatic doctrine are now widely accepted in reformed circles because they have the “gospel” right. Such is the environment we find ourselves in. If you are “reformed,” you can toy with God’s word anyway you see fit, even in regard to how we are sanctified. Just believe in monergistic justification, and you are now free to play with God’s word anyway you want to.
Let me finish by saying something good about Joel Olsteen. At least he doesn’t pretend to be orthodox. The guy has plainly said: “I’m not a theologian.” That’s called honesty. Something could be learned from him in regard to that.
paul
The Missing Kingdom In Our Gospel
There is something new afoot in my brain regarding biblical truth lately. Apparently, God has a physical Kingdom with a capital city; and not only that, he likes to talk about it a lot. Furthermore, he thinks enough of it that he made his Son king over his kingdom and bankrupted Heaven [temporarily] to make a way for us to dwell with him in his kingdom forever. If this is in-fact true, and it sure looks that way to me, where is all of the teaching in regard to a literal kingdom of God? Really, it makes me want to cry “foul!” At this time, I don’t know what all this means and what all the significance is, but I have a few hunches.
First of all, let’s talk about the gospel. That’s pretty significant. The gospel is the “good news.” Teachers like Michael Horton have much to say about the “good news” and how it is often distorted in contemporary church culture. He’s written, what, about 200 books on the “good news” by now? So, what is the good news? Throughout Scripture, like, almost everywhere, it’s the good news about the kingdom AND Jesus Christ. I’m not going to wear-out my keyboard citing Scriptures that state this specifically and in context, but I will cite a few. And while I’m at it, why not eliminate a bunch of nonsense by preemptively citing quotations from the *Apostle to the gentiles* at the pinnacle of his ministry:
Acts 20:25
And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again.
Acts 28:31
proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance.
Acts 28:23
When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in greater numbers. From morning till evening he expounded to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.
By the way, just as an aside, for those who teach that the New Testament interprets the Old in regard to Jesus Christ and the gospel, Paul sure didn’t have any problem convincing people about Jesus Christ from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets [Acts 28:23 cited above]. Something to think about, but my main point is the fact that the good news is not only about Christ, but also the kingdom. “And,” is a coordinating conjunction. Throughout Scripture, the “good news” is described with both of these phrases put together and sometimes with only the kingdom stated, as in Acts 20:25. Yes, yes, I know: “Christ is the gospel and the gospel is the kingdom, it’s all the same thing.” No it isn’t. That’s a stupid idea. Here is only one of the many reasons why: The resurrected Christ appeared to his disciples and here is what the Holy Spirit says about it;
Acts 1:3
He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
After it was all said and done, here is the question the disciples presented to Jesus:
Acts 1:6
So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Christ acknowledged the validity of their question with the following answer:
“He said to them: ‘It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth [Acts 1:7,8].’”
Here, in fact, is the good news: God will replace this present world order with his Kingdom of righteousness. He will wipe away every tear from our eyes and we will serve him and worship him in joy forever. His Son, and our Lord, will rule the nations in righteousness forever. We will rule with him as kings and priest in various roles, and this service to him will fulfill the desires of our heart because we will serve him and please him with all perfection. We were born into this present kingdom of darkness. The Son left his kingdom in Heaven and came to earth as a man to purchase us from the bondage of sin through his death, burial, and resurrection. He translated us from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light. We were bought with a price [like bond slaves were purchased in that day] and do not belong to ourselves. We now belong to our master and Lord, Jesus Christ. We are presently aliens and ambassadors in this dark kingdom and are to live with that reality in mind. One day, our glorious king will appear with the army of our kingdom. He will destroy this kingdom of darkness and put all of his enemies under his feet. He will eradicate the earth and Heaven from all memory of evil and his kingdom will dwell on earth in all righteousness forever. All evil and it’s abode will be destroyed forever in a lake of fire. Therefore, we exhort men everywhere, BE RECONCILED TO GOD!!!!!!
That’s the good news. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ to purchase us for the kingdom of God is not the whole gospel, and who are we to make the whole gospel whatever we want it to be for whatever reason? Especially if the reason happens to be anti-Semitism. Pray tell, why did John the Apostle weep bitterly in Heaven when there appeared to be no one worthy to open the title deed to the earth? He knew he was going to get his and he was already getting a grand tour of Heaven, so what was the big deal? Perhaps the new song that was sung when Christ was found worthy to open the scroll will lend some understanding:
“And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.’”
That’s the good news. Christ ransomed us to make us a righteous, literal kingdom on earth for God, and we will rein with him forever. It’s the good news of the kingdom and Jesus Christ, and there’s a bunch of folks that need to get over it.
So, what’s the significance? Well, it’s funny. As I write this post in a coffee shop [I confess, it’s Starbucks], a gentleman that has observed my Bible asked the following question: “What does the Bible say is going to happen?” Let me answer that with half of the good news: “Well sir, you don’t need to be concerned with what’s going to happen, you only need to be concerned with the fact that you are a sinner and Christ died for your sin.” Here is how I approached the opportunity instead: “Here is exactly what the Bible says is going to happen: ‘The Son of God is going to come down and destroy all of the kingdoms of this world and establish his own righteous kingdom that will be forever. Why do you think he would want to do that?’” Need I say more? I think you know where the conversation might have gone from there, and it did. A concept of the good news that doesn’t mirror scripture; does not offer the natural doors that God uses to approach people with the truth of his gospel, the women at the well and many other examples should come to mind. Furthermore, where is the significance of the kingdom in the Church ordinances? Christ said he would not drink of the cup again till he did it anew with us in the kingdom. When was the last time you heard that emphasized? What about baptism? We find this about Phillip in the book of Acts:
Acts 8:12
But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Baptism not only had the death, burial, and resurrection in mind, it was also significant in regard to belief in the kingdom of God. Something to think about.
I also strongly suspect the missing kingdom in our gospel has led to a vacuum filled with many over-emphasized endeavors. For some time, I have been disenchanted with the reformed counseling culture that is ever more prevalent in today’s Church, but unable to put my finger on the why. I now wonder if reformed theology has created, to some degree, the problem it now attempts to fix through it‘s counseling culture; due to allegorizing large portions of God’s counsel. I wonder how much counsel is needed in a marriage where both spouses are focused on all of the future and present ramifications of God’s kingdom. How much counsel is needed for those focused on the imminent return of Jesus Christ? I don’t know for sure, but I can tell you this: both concepts are all but vacant from Christian mentality these days. However, on the other hand, there is no shortage of campaigns such as making sure Christians know that God is a happy God, with hordes of Christians following behind fawning over the profundity of it all. Other spiritual endeavors that look like floating twigs on the ocean, next to the Queen Mary when compared to the kingdom, are in no wise in short supply as we speak.
paul
How To Respect Your “Idiot” From The Heart: Part 2 Of “Is Your Husband An Idiot?”
It was shocking. As her pastor, I sat and listened to the account of how her husband died that day. He began to vomit blood in huge amounts as they sat in their kitchen. She immediately called 911, but her next action, according to her account of the events, was to grab a broom and prevent his blood from running under any fixtures in the kitchen. She dictated this part of the unfortunate narrative as a minor fact of the event without any punctuation, as a matter of fact, relatively speaking. As you ladies well know, moving fixtures to clean under them can be a real hassle. Perhaps she is to be commended for thinking ahead. I forgot to ask if her husband was conscience before the ambulance arrived. Was the last act he saw between them the grabbing of a broom to clean up one of his messes? Maybe I didn’t want to know. Then there’s a story I heard that was part of a sermon. It’s another kitchen story. Two women who are friends are sitting at a kitchen table. The husband of the one who owns the house comes in, tracking mud through the kitchen as he went. His wife calmly stands up, grabs a broom and dust pan, cleans-up the mess without a word, and then sits down to resume their conversation. The visiting friend says the following after waiting for her expected response in vain: “Well, those boots, they sure bring in the mud don’t they?” To which her friend replied: “yes they do, but they also bring him in, and that’s what matters most to me.”
I think I know which kitchen story most Christian women want to be a part of. I also know it’s easier said than done. We are talking about true respect from the heart toward a husband that bought a brand new Ford Mustang without consulting you first. Not only that, it’s the Boss 302 model, cream yellow with black racing stripes. It has the custom interior with the straight 5 slap shift, and uh, I digress. Basically, it has no room for hauling the kids or groceries, and fitting the payments into the family budget is your problem because after all, your the woman. Besides, it’s none of your business anyway; he’s the breadwinner, you just run the household. “C’mon! Respect him! Are you kidding me? Only an Idiot would do that!” It’s true, when one looks at real life in the fast- lane, Peter’s imperative seems outrageous:
However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband [Ephesians 5:33].
Really though, in light of Scripture, it’s not that difficult and can be a huge blessing. How would I know? I will get to that later, but I think the answer will surprise you. First, you need to know that you have everything you need and more to honestly respect your husband from the heart. To substantiate this, I want to go to Ephesians 4:21-24:
21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: 22 that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, 23 and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24 and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.
I believe this passage is a crux truth in regard to sanctification. It describes God’s role and our role in the process. First, God makes sanctification possible by recreating us as a new creature. We are recreated in righteousness and holiness. We have everything we need as a new creature to follow God’s precepts as stated [2Corinthians 5:17]. Really, most of Ephesians to this point is about God’s resources in regard to the new creature. Here begins our role; put off the old person and put on the new creature. The rest of Ephesians instructs us on how to do that. One of the passages that follows is our text at hand, Ephesians 5:33. Really, when it gets right down to it, the Bible is the wisdom that explains all the dynamics of putting on the new creature. And trust me, our Lord wants no confusion in regard to this matter. If I may be so bold; let me rephrase Matthew 24:18-20 to make a point: ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, teaching them to put on the new creature by observing all that I have commanded.’ Secondly, It’s just too much fun in our present culture. Why? Because respecting your husband is all but a totally lost concept in our Church and secular culture. The practice of respecting your husband will illicit constant and classic dear-in-the-headlight looks from both your spouse and parishioners. Imagine this scene. Your sitting in the living room watching TV with your hubby and that McDonald’s commercial comes on that we previously discussed. You say” honey, mute that commercial, it’s offensive.” His response will be “Er? why is it offensive?” You will say “because it makes husbands look like idiots and fosters disrespect for husbands.” I know you can read your husbands mind through his eyes. Most likely, he will be saying “who is this woman in my living room?” At church, when you call-out teachers and other women on their subtle ribs toward husbands, have your cellphone camera ready. Mail the expressions to pmd@inbox.com, I will pay money for them.
I hope that is some encouragement, but how do we get this done via Scripture? Well, you get it done the same way husbands have to get it done. Surprised? Look, don’t miss this biblical point; husbands are commanded to respect and submit as well, and trust me, the number of [persons] and the rascal factor is usually much higher. 1Peter 2:18-21 says the following:
18 Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. 19 For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully. 20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps.
Servants were the employees of that day. However, this particular passage speaks to another class of servants known as bond slaves of that day. But if this was to be true of Christian bond slaves of that day, how much more was it to be true of the free servants? And therefore, how true should it be of today’s Christian employees? We are to submit to our bosses with ALL RESPECT. Why is it so taboo to discuss submission in regard to wives? Because of the way God designed the family institution, the wife usually has fewer people to respect and submit to. And if you have to respect someone from the heart, why would one not prefer it to be a spouse? It doesn’t make sense! So then, I will now share how I used scripture to learn respect for bosses I initially despised. If we can learn to respect bosses from the heart, learning to respect husbands should be much easier. I will weave the two ideas together as we go.
First, I believed that the capacity to respect my boss was present in the new creature. We can “do all things through Christ who strengthens us [Philippians 4:13].” Secondly, to receive ill treatment from others [as I did from this particular boss] is our calling because that is how we suffer for Christ in the same way he suffered for us. It is truly shameful when this suffering comes from our spouse, but never-the-less, it is your calling. So, your hubby left the trash for you to carry out? Such a shame. Just remember how you scourged the Son of God and hung him on a cross, it might put things in perspective for you. While Christ hung on the cross, he petitioned the father to forgive those who wronged him, so I think the trash and other items of offense can be covered as well. All the latest rave in reformed circles is “living by the gospel.” Well, there you go, that’s living by the gospel.
So, that is the knowing part. It is the first half of Ephesians. The above is nowhere near comprehensive;
keep that in mind, I am just trying to prime here. But what about the putting off part? Well, when you work for an “idiot,” as I did, there is plenty to put off in regard to the old creature; namely, nobody else probably likes him either. When others disparage him or her in your company, put off the old creature. Many times, your silence among others will speak volumes. If somebody makes a joke about your boss, be the only one who doesn’t laugh. If you do laugh, take it to God and know you have some work to do, but you will get there. In the midst of this example, you can put on the new creature as well by speaking in defense of your boss. Be sure of this. You will never learn to respect anyone from the heart while partaking in conversation that focuses on their faults. To do so feeds the flesh and quenches the Spirit. For sure, you can include your husband in that. As far as putting on the new creature in relationships, the arsenal is vast. First, Paul says the following in Philippians 4:8;
Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.
In regard to others, we are to dwell on their positive attributes according to the truth. I made it a point to learn all I could about my boss. You might be surprised at what the Lord knows about that person as opposed to what you previously did not know. I was shocked to find out my boss served in a soup kitchen every week, something I didn’t even do. By the way, there are always better people than
you that God is not going to save. The only difference is the new coat of righteousness God gave you, so put it on. In the same way, focusing on your husbands faults will not foster respect. It’s impossible.
Nether will unforgiveness nourish respect, that’s impossible as well. Paul also said the following in Romans 12:14-21;
Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
There is one thing people often miss about this passage. The doing is curative. You will never forgive from the heart unless you do good to the offender, whether they ask for forgiveness or not. I always looked for ways to do good to my “idiot /jerk” boss. At first it was difficult, but with time, it became my joy. Putting on the new creature is not always easy. Putting on the new creature doesn’t always feel so good. But the Scriptures are clear, the blessings are “in the doing [James 1:25].” This point is further made by what Paul says in Philippians 4:9;
Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you
If the God of peace is with you, trust me, it’s all good, no matter what’s going on around you. Putting God’s truth into practice is putting on the new creature. Just as an aside to Romans 12 and Philippians 4, wives who withhold intimacy from their husbands as a weapon do themselves no favor. In addition, the refusal of “biblical” counselors to address this issue, especially in light of 1Corithians 7:1-5, because the “heart” issues must be dealt with first, lack basic understanding of how sanctification works. Whatever the heart issues might be, God’s heart in regard to any situation must be understood and pursued, that’s where the blessings are. Why withhold blessings for a time while somebody tries to figure out what’s going on in someones heart? You can’t know that anyway [Jeremiah 17:9,10, 1Kings 8:39, 1Samuel 16:7, 1Chron. 28:9, Psalms 26:2, 44:21, 51:6, 139:23,24]. Before I close, let me stuff one more point in. I love how specific the scriptures are, and this is a point I can’t parallel with the husbands perspective. Peter says the following in 1Peter 3:1;
Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands………..
“To your own husbands.” I use to be a building contractor. I wish I had a nickel for every loving wife who made fun of her husband to me over the fact that he didn’t know which end to hold a hammer. She respected me more than she did him. One time, at the end of a remodeling job, a Christian wife gazed upon the newly remodeled room and let me know that I was lucky she thought I was a happily married man. That’s not respecting your own husband. Likewise, it’s ok to respect Church leaders, but not more than your own husband. Never.
Bottom line is this, right feelings [ie, respect] follow right praying, right thinking, and right doing. Right feelings come with putting off the old creature and putting on the new created in righteousness by God. This is our role in pleasing God and enjoying his blessings. Respect. You both [husband and wife] have to do it, why not be partners? As far as Christians thinking the same principles of respect do not apply in the Church community between spouses, have we lost our minds? Of all places, the Church should be a bastion of respect for husbands. If evil bosses are to be respected, how much more then for God’s husbands?
paul
Will The Antichrist Be An Actual Person And Does It Even Matter? Part 2
In part 1, I contend that a literal interpretation of God’s word demands a particular verdict; the antichrist will indeed be an actual person. I think this excerpt from part 1 is worth repeating:
” We will use 2Thessalonians 2:1-9. This biblical text is a descriptive narrative saturated with the idea that the antichrist is an actual person. In this text, no less than eight personal pronouns are used to refer to him. In addition, these personal pronouns are used in every noun case possible: subjective, objective, and possessive. Furthermore, two appositive personal pronoun phrases are used to describe him as well. Also, in this same text; besides adjectives that are used to describe him, he is the object that receives action from three other subjective nouns, God, the Holy Spirit, and Satan.”
Allegory is never that grammatically specific, especially in Scripture. So, we answer the next question: does it matter? Well, considering the amount of press that he gets in Scripture, I would say yes with no hesitation. However, I will only focus on two primary reasons, even though there are many others. First, the Antichrist is an important sign post. Christ said the following in Matthew 16:3;
“And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.”
Christ chastised those who were not able to discern the signs of the times. This was the primary issue with the Thessalonians that Paul addressed in a major text regarding the antichrist. He had taught them about the antichrist in order to insulate them from harmful error, but they forgot [2Thess. 2:5].
“Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,[2Thessalonians 2:3].”
Not knowing the future can lead to deception. In this case, the Thessalonians were sent a bogus letter, supposedly from Paul, saying the resurrection had already passed. They should have known the letter was bogus because of what Paul had previously taught them, especially in regard to the antichrist. Likewise, for those in the tribulation period, it will be absolutely critical to know facts in regard to the antichrist. Why? Well, because the beginning of the tribulation period will be marked by many claiming to be Christ and backing up their claims by working wonders and miracles [Matthew 24:5, 23-25]. This time will also be marked by the Antichrist signing a major treaty with Israel [Daniel 9:27]. Other descriptions of him in Daniel will make his appearance on the world scene unmistakable by those who are familiar with scripture. According to what Paul also told the Thessalonians, the antichrist himself will also be performing miracles [ 2Thess.2:9]. Those not familiar with signs regarding the antichrist will be left wide open to deception, and will in-fact be deceived according to truth that leads to salvation. In many, many cases, what people believe about the antichrist will determine their eternal fate[ 2Thess. 2:10-12 Matt.24:4,5].
Secondly, knowledge concerning the antichrist is important for discerning truth in this present age. The Apostle John warned that many forerunners of the antichrist have gone out into the world in this present age [1John 2:18]. Therefore, knowledge of the antichrist that is coming will give us insight into the antichrists of this age. Furthermore, it seems possible, in regard to the age that we live in presently, that the antichrist could appear before his grand opening which will mark the beginning of the tribulation period. Though we will not know positively that it is him, it would certainly serve to jettison urgency in the lives of knowledgeable Christians, which is always a good idea [However, keep in mind that the Bible doesn’t exclude the possibility of a period of time between the rapture and the beginning of the tribulation period, though improbable]. There is also indication that Christians should expect a great “falling away” in close proximity to the appearing of antichrist, good information to be aware of.
Those who teach that antichrist will not be a literal person do no favor to Christianity; in fact, they may be contributing to satanic deception. God did not include eschatology within Holy writ for entertainment purposes or filler. The connections Christ and Paul make between eschatology and eternal consequences is evident, and understanding the time and age we live in, is in-fact critical to the interpretation of scripture in many instances.
paul
Will The Antichrist Be An Actual Person And Does It Even Matter? Part 1
I will get to that. But first, a primary question looms that must be answered first. What method of biblical interpretation will Christians use to answer these types of questions? I open discussion with another question of the compound sort; who did Jesus write the Bible to, and what do those individuals need to interpret it? The Bible its self answers those questions in many, many ways. We will explore a couple. Let’s begin with the sermon on the mount. Who was he talking to? Answer: They were the common people and peasants of that time. For all practical purposes, how was the teaching recorded in the Bible? Answer: The way it was presented to them. Did he intend for them to understand the plain sense of what he was saying? Well, since Matthew 5:2 say’s he opened his mouth and “taught” them, and “them” is the object receiving the action of the verb which means to teach, I would say yes with no hesitation. He was either teaching them or he wasn’t. So, when you are reading the sermon on the mount, who is Christ teaching? He is teaching you, and the same thing he taught them. What do you need to understand the teaching? The same thing they had, a brain, and an understanding of the language in which the lesson is being taught [not necessarily the original language]. Again, he was either teaching them or he wasn’t. `Matthew 5:2 doesn’t say “he said to them,” it says “he taught them *saying*.” What he said was the act of teaching which means to instruct with the goal of inflicting understanding within the mind. By the way, since Jesus was, and is God, I seriously doubt he lacked any ability to teach at their level. God is obviously the master of the communication he created.
This doesn’t mean we have no need of God ordained teachers; it does mean that we don’t have anything between us and understanding what God is saying , save unnecessary obstacles. As far as method of interpretation, remember the acrostic “psalm,” plain sense and literal meaning. For those who teach methods of interpretation that eradicate plain sense, it’s “psalms,” plain sense and literal meaning, stupid. Now, in addition, neither does this mean that God never uses symbolism as a teaching tool. But in every case, the symbolism is explained in specific terms and we are not at the mercy of confusion or fleshly interpretation. Also, there were times when Jesus taught in riddles as a judgment to some who were listening at the time, because of their motives. But in every case, he makes the plain sense of his teaching clear in other places. Examples of this in the Scriptures are massive. A good example would Matthew 13. Read the whole chapter and you will see exactly what I am saying. Another good example would be Revelation 1:20 where Christ explains keys to interpreting prior symbolism to the Apostle John. As a matter of fact, this is a pattern throughout the book of Revelation. Also, and in addition to the above, it does not mean that Scripture will not be difficult to understand at times. Peter said that Paul was sometimes hard to understand, but he didn’t say it was because of complex methods of interpretation. Peter also said that even the angels desire to understand more of God’s truth; more proof that understanding takes much effort at various times. Question. If God wanted to, could he give us understanding on a silver platter? Answer: Of course. Why doesn’t he? Because he wants us to be part of the process and is honored by those who seek him. Lastly on this point, neither am I saying that historical background or context, among other considerations, are not necessary to lend understanding. Praise God, lay people in this country have vast resources in this regard at their disposal.
Now with that out of the way, let’s begin to answer one of the two primary questions. We will use 2Thessalonians 2:1-9. This biblical text is a descriptive narrative saturated with the idea that the antichrist is an actual person. In this text, no less than eight personal pronouns are used to refer to him. In addition, these personal pronouns are used in every noun case possible: subjective, objective, and possessive. Furthermore, two appositive personal pronoun phrases are used to describe him as well. Also, in this same text; besides adjectives that are used to describe him, he is the object that receives action from three other subjective nouns, God, the Holy Spirit, and Satan. Any questions? Maybe one. Could it still be allegory, or referring to a spirit, or an attitudinal movement? No. In every case where the Apostle Paul uses allegory to teach, he makes it plain that allegory is being used. An excellent example of this would be Galatians 4:24 in regard to using patriarchal history to illustrate the role of the law in justification. Be not deceived. Let me say that again; be not deceived, literal forms of text in Scripture are never presented as allegory in a way to obtain some other supposed truth. And symbolism, allegory, parables, or any other teaching tool always has objective truth as its goal. If 2Thessalonians doesn’t say the antichrist is a person, then we don’t even know whether or not John 3:16 says what it says.
Listen. I have dear Christian friends who unfortunately use theology to interpret the Scriptures rather than method. Method of interpretation should always lead to theology, not the other way around. They can be my friends, but they cannot be my teachers or pastors, and they shouldn’t be yours either. But what about the second question? How important is it that the antichrist is an actual person? We will look at that in part 2.
1 Kings 8:39: Heart Theology Is Not The Real Reformation
It happened in the early 90’s. I was in the process of absorbing and applying truth from what I think was in fact a contemporary reformation. There is no doubt, Christianity had relinquished it’s faith and confidence in God’s word; specifically, in regard to solving the weightier issues of life and Godliness, deferring to the so-called “experts” of our day. Jay Adams, a reformed Presbyterian, introduced a structured biblical counseling system that radically changed lives through the power and instruction of God’s word. His thesis, after it was all said and done, and in a manner of speaking, begged this question by children; “daddy, what did Christians do about serious problems before Sigmund Freud came along?” Surprisingly, and before evangelicals barely had a chance to catch their breath, something else came along, Heart Theology. Picking up again where my opening sentence left off, the following is how I was first introduced to Heart Theology. I was an elder in a church that was a training center for what was dubbed “biblical counseling.” The elder that was primarily leading this program was also in the process of obtaining his doctorate degree from another counseling center attached to a reformed seminary. This is where he was introduced to this new counseling theology. It was added as a level 2 program, or addendum to what was already considered radical among evangelicals; namely, the concept that God’s word is sufficient for all matters of life and Godliness. I was skeptical in regard to this new twist. Let me explain the basic differences in the two approaches that fueled my skepticism.
First, in regard to the original biblical counseling movement, there are two basic characteristics of biblical counseling, as originally introduced by Adams. First, it changed preaching, which was predominately, and still is to a large degree, “about” the Bible. For instance, there may have been many sermons “about” the importance of communication from the Bible. For example, instances where men misunderstood God and gee whiz, bad things happened after that, so don’t do what they did. Biblical counseling went beyond that to a deeper and technical understanding that was applied to real life situations. An example would be biblical precepts of communication that could readily be brought to mind in everyday life and applied accordingly. It was and is, technical wisdom from the word of God and specific instruction on how to apply it to real life. Once pastors learned to do this in the privacy of their office, it transfered to the pulpit where it became preventative medicine for God’s people. Yet another example. Say a young couple in your church decides to marry. What usually happens? We rejoice and marry them!, right? The Jay Adams approach would ask three questions: Are these two young people experts on marriage? Probably not. Does God’s word have any wisdom that will prepare them for successful marriage that honors God? Of course. So should we just let them figure it out on their own? Probably not. This introduced Premarital Counseling in the church, with many pastors making it a prerequisite to that church’s participation in the wedding.
The other characteristic was an equal emphasis on justification and sanctification. Let’s be honest, the primary focus of evangelicals is getting people saved. Once there saved, we teach them the importance of church attendance, tithing, and learning about the Bible. Christ never told us to primarily get people saved, his mandate for the church is to “make disciples.” This is done by counseling with God’s word. Premarital Counseling, like many other aspects of biblical application, is “making disciples.” Preaching from the pulpit should also keep parishioners out of the counseling office as well as divorce court. The contention by Adams that pastors are to primarily counsel and not preach was indeed a shocker to many. Preaching should always contain counsel in regard to the technical application of God’s word to real life.
But in addition to these characteristics, one of the primary elements of this biblical counseling was it’s emphasis on objectivity. Jay Adams was, and I assume still is, a stickler for objective instruction rather than what was referred to as “fuzzy land.” However, I must concede this one weakness in the contemporary [about 37 years old] biblical counseling movement; there was a lack of emphasis on the monergistic resources that give us the strength to apply God’s wisdom to everyday life. But this is understandable, for Evangelicals were preaching about the forest in habitual fashion. The gargantuan task of showing the importance of the individual trees and their proper application was bound to distract. So, in regard to the biblical counseling movement, I have explained two characteristics, one element, and one fault.
Strange, In the midst of this revolution that was pouring out hope, seemingly without measure, there was another movement afoot that had a compliant against the former and the new; namely, biblical counseling wasn’t vertical enough, Adams had simply refined the emphasis on the outward and made Baptist Pharisees into super Pharisees. Yes, the new reformation was bringing about lot’s of change, but it wasn’t “lasting change.” Their answer?; they contended that Christians must abandon all emphasis on outward behavior and partake in emphasizing change at the “heart level.” That would be the two characteristics of the Heart Theology movement: change at the heart level, and real, lasting change [theoretically].
So, what does that look like [not “how,” which might imply some kind of verb to follow]? Well, the key is deciphering the “desires of the heart.” Desires reveal the idols in our heart, or anything that we love more than God. So, what does that look like? Well, we analyze desires of the heart three ways. First, by how we respond to circumstances. Second, by asking God to reveal the Idols through prayer. Thirdly, by imagining future scenarios and taking note of how it makes us feel. The second means is direct, God simply reveals it to us directly through prayer. The first and third means require the use of interpretive questions. So for instance, you are watching a football game and your wife demands that you take the trash out “right now!,” and this in fact makes you angry. The most common interpretive question is “what did you want?” The answer is the following, you wanted to be left alone to enjoy the game and you wanted to be shown more respect by your wife. There you have it, football and being respected are idol’s in your heart. If you now repent of these idols, they are emptied from your heart and God then fills that void in your heart with himself. To the extent that your heart has idols, God is not present. Depending on the presence and filling of God verses idols, obedience is a “mere natural flow” that doesn’t require effort [works] on our part.
This now brings me to the major element of Heart Theology, it’s nebulous and subjective. It also brings me to the fault of Heart Theology which is fatal. Unlike the understandable and easily adjusted error of biblical counseling, The fatal error of Heart theology is it’s conflict with 1 Kings 8:39;
“then hear in heaven your dwelling place and forgive and act and render to each whose heart you know, according to all his ways (for you, you only, know the hearts of all the children of mankind),
This verse emphatically states that only God can know the heart. The Holy Spirit makes it a point to use the subject [God] twice with no words in between [modifiers ect.]. This is clearly for the purpose of strong emphasis. We cannot evaluate the heart in regard to idols. Besides, scripture often identifies sinful desires as being located in the “flesh” to begin with.
Though we depend on God’s strength, He would have us to focus on the objective and plain sense of scripture. Following God’s wisdom and instruction is our role. Knowing and changing the heart is God’s business. Nobody ever said we change ourselves through obedience, Adams certainly never said that. We are to learn, apply, pray, obey inwardly [thinking], obey outwardly, seek wise counsel, love, encourage, instruct, rebuke, disciple, and leave the changing and knowing to God. Adams said it best in a counseling conference: “The commands in the bible are not to the Holy Spirit, they are to us” and, “Quietism will ruin peoples lives.” There is no new reformation that narrows God’s precepts and wisdom for living to “deep repentance” that requires us to know our hearts. We cannot know our hearts, only God can. If there has been any reformation in the past 30 years, it has been the ability to apply the word of God to the every issue of life and Godliness.
paul
Is Your Husband An Idiot?
During some counseling training I attended several years ago, the teacher quoted his wife in regard to marital attitudes. It was one of those quotes that really sticks with you: “Deep down inside, every wife thinks her husband is an idiot.” You may disagree, but let’s set that thought aside for now and examine the fact that the world definitely thinks your husband is an idiot. Our culture is saturated with *your husband is an idiot* messages. Almost every sitcom on TV presents the husband as an idiot. Almost every TV commercial presents the husband as an idiot as well. Point in case, the latest McDonald’s commercial; the husband jack-hammers the porch and almost all of the sidewalk when only the porch needed to be replaced. He does this to get the full rental value from the tool rental facility. Per the usual, the attractive, intelligent wife saves what’s left of the family sidewalks by enticing him away with a bag of food; the same way you would control any pet by holding up food in front of their faces. The commercial ends with the incredulous wife confiscating his paper cup because he is making noise with it as children often do. Another point in case, the latest Verizon commercial where the husband drops their children off two miles away from school to save money on gas. This presents the husband as an idiot as well as someone who cares more about money than his family, the latter being a constant theme on TV as well. Wait a minute, I see Jim Foxworthy calling in on my cell phone [uh uh, ok, ya, I got it]. Ok, I’m back. Are you entertained by the above examples rather than taking offence? Well then, you juuust might think your husband is an idiot.
It’s not just TV. I ordered some carryout at Bob Evans last night and saw a plaque for sale in their gift shop area with the following inscription: “I live with stress. I eat with him, sleep with him, and pick-up after him.” I perused the rest of the plaques to see if there was any counterpart humor to no avail; that doesn’t sell these days. As a matter of fact, it would probably offend people. Furthermore, I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard a wife denigrate her husband in public. Just this week, I heard a waitress refer to her husband as an idiot to the customers she was waiting on. Not a day later, I heard another wife referring to her family of two kids, and a husband, as “my three kids.” Do you make like references in regard to your husband? Well then, you juuuust might think your husband is an idiot.
This mentality is so saturated in our society that it is actually in vogue for men to denigrate themselves as a way to demonstrate their character traits to others. Point in case, the new Burger King commercial where Tony Stewart admits to [in jest] wearing women’s underwear. This denigration, as set against the masculine image of a race car driver is what sells today in our culture. As a man, do you want to impress the ladies? Well then, admit that you are an idiot or better yet, a pervert. Wow, see how humble you are?
Per the usual, the Church exposes it’s self to these infections because we just don’t get it; when the Holy Spirit says we are in a war, he’s not just saying that to hear himself talk. In warfare, the enemy always seeks to take out the leader first. Lest we forget, the husband is the leader of the family and his wife is the first line of defense second only to his personal relationship with God, which she can also greatly influence as well. Satan brought down the whole human race by appealing to Adam’s wife first. So you think your family is some kind of mighty fortress and you are smarter than Eve was? Oh really? Satan wasn’t only targeting Eve’s concept of God, read the account. God informed Adam of the Holy protocol before Eve was created. More than likely, most of her information about God came from Adam or at least the critical information that Satan was targeting. In other words, Satan was also attacking Adam‘s leadership role. I suggest to you that his tactics haven’t changed that much. Trust me on this one, the world definitely wants you to think your husband is an idiot. If you believe your husband is an idiot, that obviously undermines his ability to lead. If you think your husband is an idiot, your family is at risk. If you don’t think your husband is an idiot, but really you do and just don’t know it, your family is at greater risk because the deadly infection is covert. And also be aware of the fact that this worldly attitude toward husbands is alive and well in the churches, maybe even more so than the world. I hear constantly of women’s bible studies that denigrate husbands and their roles. One woman shared with me how another Christian woman shared the fact [while at a women’s gathering] that her husband selfishly woke her up at 2am wanting sex. In many churches , women are instructed to take leadership of the family if their husband isn’t “leading the way he should.” Who sets that standard? I once overheard a “I wish my husband was as spiritual as your husband” conversation between two women in a church hallway. I am also privy to women leaders who teach other women to set the household trash bags in front of the door their husband leaves by to go to work, as a way to confront him about his slothful ways. By the way, divorce statistics in the Church are no different from that of the world. Go figure.
But continuing on, back to the original question concerning the quote by the teacher’s wife. Do all women, deep down, believe their husbands are idiots? Probably. Why do I say that? Well, because of the original curse of sin. God said the following would be the consequences:
To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you [Geneses 3:16].
According to Hebrew scholars, the above text in the Hebrew words and grammar are the exact same as Genesis 4:3, which states the following in regard to Cane:
“If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.”
The key phrase is “Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” When God said to Eve that her “desire will be for her husband,” it means that her desire will be to rule over her husband in the same way sin desires to rule over us. You can see this clearly by contrast. This passage is clearly not saying that the curse will be a natural desire by the woman to follow her husband’s leadership. To the contrary, the woman’s natural tendency will be a desire to control her husband. In addition, the husbands tendency will be to rule his wife in the same way we must all rule sin in our life , as a tenacious despot. It’s good to rule sin that way in our lives, but not our wives!!! Notice God said to Adam “you will” as opposed to what he said to Cain “you must.” The embedded enemy between a man and his wife will be a desire by the wife to rule over the husband while his tendency will be to rule over his wife as an unloving tyrant. For example, a wife who is helping with the family finances comes home after a long day at work. As soon as she walks through the door, the husband, just back from enjoying a day of fishing, says the following in jubilant fashion: “Hey honey! What’s for dinner?” Ouch. As that cartoon cat often says, “I resemble that remark.” But in any case, that’s the warfare.
Of course you believe deep down that he is an idiot, that’s why you want to rule him. But you can’t let the world, or for that matter, church folks, throw gasoline on the fire [or the curse]. Its just a really bad idea. However, its interesting. Notice how the original failures of Adam and Eve duplicate the curse like a permanent brand from a hot iron. Adam failed to lead while Eve failed to respect her husband’s leadership. How different things would have been if Eve would have said “ You know, my husband was the one who originally got all of this from God; and besides that, since you are accusing God, let’s just get both of them in on this conversation.” Today, Satan ravages lives in the same way through isolated conversations without the proper people present. Satan knew the dynamics of headship that was involved. He knew that their eyes would not be opened till Adam ate. Therefore, he used Eve to bring Adam and the whole human race to ruin as Adam relinquished his leadership role to Eve. So, in like fashion, families will be ruined if this same pattern is followed.
So what to do? Well, for starters, stop loving your husband. Thaaat’s right. You see, every wife who professes her husband to be an idiot will also profess she loves him. Every time, guaranteed. Here is what the Apostle Paul said to do:
However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband [Ephesians 5:33].
That’s the ticket. Men are to love their wives and not rule over them like a despot. They are to treat their wives as they would treat themselves. Women are to *respect* their husbands. This scriptural distinction is no accident. The one who once took your breath away is not the enemy, the curse is. Thinking your husband is an idiot is the antithesis of respect, obviously. But granted, no man is the leader he should be and many are less, so what to do? Peter says the following in 1Peter 3:1,2;
Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct.
“Respectful” *conduct.* Did you catch that? Also, you can replace “without a word” and say “without trying to rule your husband.” By the way, if you have been trying to rule over your husband, how’s it workin for ya? Frustration that leads to disrespect will certainly follow. Look, the applications for respecting your husband could fill a book and there is certainly no room to address them here , but women need to avoid any form of denigration concerning their husbands and step into their high calling from Christ our Lord. Namely, the scriptures make it clear that no man sits at the city gate without a Proverbs 31 wife. The world and churchy women may not know that, but you and the Lord do. Those who receive less recognition here will receive it several fold in the Kingdom. Those who are faithful with few things will be put in charge of many things in God’s eternal Kingdom. I am convinced that the Proverbs 31 wife will rule vast kingdoms for God in eternity.
Is your husband an idiot? Its really beside the point. Choose the glorious things, not the broken cisterns of worldly attitudes that lead to ruin.
Is Prophecy Really “Secondary” Truth?
Regardless of label or stripe, no serious Christian would deny that God’s word is the primary instrument of the Holy Spirit in the sanctification process. Christ himself said: “ Sanctify them by the truth; Your word is truth [John 17:17].” Furthermore, no serious Christian would deny that the closed cannon as superintended by God is His truth in totality. Now consider the following facts in regard to the above backdrop:
[1] Only 4 books in the Bible [Ruth, Song of Solomon, Philemon, 3John] do not contain predictive information.
[2] There are 31,124 verses of scripture in the Bible; 8,352 Bible verses are predictive.
[3] 28.5% of the Old Testament is predictive; 21.5% of the New Testament is predictive.
[4] The book of Matthew, one of the four accounts of the gospel, has more predictive information than
the book of Revelation [Matt.-278 verses, Rev.- 256 verses].
[5] The book of Zephaniah is 89% predictive; The book of Hebrews is 45% predictive.
It would seem that God wants us to know the future. And since we are sanctified by his truth, predictive truth must play a major role in the sanctification process. To say that’s not where we are at today in our thinking would be a gargantuan understatement. Among evangelicals, end times study[eschatology] is deemed as entertainment and a nice break from the serious teachings that rule our life. In fact, the vast majority of evangelicals heartily agree that eschatology is a “secondary issue.” In the present day biblical counseling culture, eschatology is dead on arrival. Among all biblical counseling programs such as NANC and CCEF, eschatology is seen as completely irrelevant to change. I was even surprised to find that BCF, considered to be more of an in-depth discipleship approach, was also completely void of any end times teaching. The bottom line is really this, if God’s truth sanctifies [and it does] and 25% of it is deemed as “secondary” or irrelevant to change, we have a serious problem on our hands.
Let me drive this point further. The Apostles saw eschatology as extremely important. About half of what Peter taught was predictive. The Apostle Paul became entangled in serious warfare over end-time issues [ 2 Thess. 2:1-15, 1Tim. 1:17-20, 2Tim. 2:15-18]. In his counsel to the Corinthians, a sanctification nightmare, Paul sites future events at least 12 times as an incentive for Godly living [1Cor. 3:12-15, 4:5, 4:8, 6:3, 6:9, 9:24-27, 10:11, 11:23-33, 13:8-13, 15:12-28, 2Cor. 4:14, 5:10-11].
We often bemoan how evangelicals are so worldly focused and unfaithful to the furthering of God’s kingdom. But could it be lack of focus? Do we reflect the same emphasis on prophecy that scripture does? For example, when was the last time you observed a Lord’s Table that had an eschatological perspective? But yet, the ordinance has all kinds of future significance [Luke 22:15-20, Matt. 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, 1Cor. 11:23-26]. If you read the biblical accounts of this ordinance, it’s not about the gospel alone, but also a reminder that Christ will return for his assembly.
Think about it, compare the ho-hum attitude toward prophesy that is prevalent today with that of our Lord. “Weeeell brother, Jesus is coming back, that’s all we need to know.” Oh really? According to Matthew 24:1-3, Jesus uses the disciples enamoration with the temple to incite them to ask about end time prophesy. The major teaching that followed spans 2 chapters. But it is very striking how Jesus includes kingdom living in this discourse. 24:4-36 is what is going to happen. Verses 37-42 is a transition into how the truth of 24:4-36 should effect how we live as kingdom citizens. 24:43-25:46 is the overall description of how the consummation of the ages should effect how we live. Take note of how Jesus describes a final assessment of our lives that we should strive for according to the parable of the talents [verses 14-30]. Also in this same teaching, Jesus emphasizes being ready for his imminent return with the parable of the 10 virgins. Let me ask you a question: Is it important what we believe about the rapture of the Church? What you believe about the rapture of the Church interprets the parable of the 10 virgins as being imminent or non-imminent. Is the imminent aspect of this parable critical to what Jesus is teaching? I think it is.
Many ministries today pride themselves on a strong practical walk that focuses on the finer points of living from the scriptures, while avoiding “controversial and secondary” issues like biblical prophesy. While this may be deemed as wise by many, I don’t buy it. The importance of defined future hope, who we are as kingdom citizens, how we will be evaluated by God in the end, and many other subjects associated with prophecy are critical to present day living. Real hope always depends on a defined future, not something nebulous. Uncertainty is the ally of complacency and fear. If it is in the Scriptures, we need it. If it is in the Scriptures, we can understand it. If it is in the Scriptures, we need to use it.
paul
Horton: Show Forth Christ Instead Of Our Behavior?
On pages 117-119 in “Christless Christianity,” Michael Horton puts forth a rather unique argument in regard to the gospel. According to Horton, the power of the gospel is sapped because we emphasize our testimony rather than “Christ.” I emphasize Christ in quotations because that is the constant mantra among many teachers today; we, you, us, or whoever is emphasizing or doing this, that, or the other instead of emphasizing [the name of] Christ. Read his argument carefully:
“The question for us all is whether we believe the church is the place where the gospel is regularly proclaimed and ratified to Christians as well as non-Christians. Like many Emergent Church leaders, Kimball invokes a famous line from Francis of Assisi that I also heard growing up in conservative evangelicalism: “Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.” Kimball goes on to say, “Our lives will preach better than anything we can say. (We encountered a nearly identical statement from Osteen in the previous chapter.) If so, then this is just more bad news, not only because of the statistics we have already seen, which evidence no real difference between Christians and non- Christians, but because despite my best intentions, I am not an exemplary creature. The best examples and instructions—even the best doctrines—will not relieve me of the battle with indwelling sin until I draw my last breath. Find me on my best day— especially if you have access to my hidden motives, thoughts, and attitudes—and I will always provide fodder for the hypocrisy charge and will let down those who would become Christians because they think I and my fellow Christians are the gospel. I am a Christian not because I think that I can walk in Jesus’s footsteps but because he is the only one who can carry me. I am not the gospel; Jesus Christ alone is the gospel. His story saves me, not only by bringing me justification but by baptizing me into his resurrection life.
Conformity to Christ’s image (sanctification) is the process of dying to self (mortification) and living to God (vivification) that results from being regularly immersed in the gospel’s story of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. Another way of putting it is dislocation (from Adam and the reign of sin and death) and relocation (in Christ). That my life is not the gospel is good news both for me and for my neighbors. Because Christ is the Good News, Christians as well as non-Christians can be saved after all. For those who know that they too fall short of the glory that God’s law requires—even as Christians who now have a new heart that loves God’s law—the Good News is not only enough to create faith but to get us back on our feet, assured of our standing in Christ, ready for another day of successes and failures in our discipleship.
We do not preach ourselves but Christ. The good news—not only for ourselves, but for a world (and church) in desperate need of good news—is that what we say preaches better than our lives, at least if what we are saying is Christ’s person and work rather than our own. The more we talk about Christ as the Bible’s unfolding mystery and less about our own transformation, the more likely we are actually to be transformed rather than either self-righteous or despairing. As much as it goes against our grain, the gospel is the power of God unto salvation for justification and sanctification. The fruit of faith is real; it’s just not the same as the fruit of works-righteousness.
Yes, there is hypocrisy, and because Christians will always be simultaneously saint and sinner, there will always be hypocrisy in every Christian and in every church. The good news is that Christ saves us from hypocrisy too. But hypocrisy is especially generated when the church points to itself and to our own “changed lives” in the promotional materials. Maybe non-Christians would have less relish in pointing out our failures if we testified in word and deed to our need and God’s gift for sinners like us. If we identified the visibility of the church with the scene of sinners gathered by grace to confess their sins and their faith in Christ, receiving him with open hands, instead of with our busy efforts to be the gospel, we would at least beat non-Christian critics to the punch. We know that we are sinners. We know that we fall short of God’s glory. That’s exactly why we need Christ. I know that many of these brothers and sisters would affirm that we are still sinners and that we still need Christ, but it sure seems to be drowned out by a human-centered focus on our character and actions.
Kimball writes that the “ultimate goal of discipleship .. . should be measured by what Jesus taught in Matthew 22:37-40: `Love the Lord with all your heart, mind, and soul.’ Are we loving him more? Love others as yourself. Are we loving people more?” I was raised in conservative evangelicalism on this same diet of sermons that ended with a question like this one. A truly radical change in our approach would be to proclaim Christ as the one who fulfilled this law in our place, bore its sentence, and now freely gives us his absolution. Only then, ironically, are we truly liberated to love again. For all of the Emergent Church movement’s incisive critiques of the megachurch model, the emphasis still falls on measuring the level of our zeal and activity rather than on immersing people in the greatest story ever told. It may be more earnest, more authentic, and less consumeristic, but how different is this basic message from that of Joel Osteen, for example? Across the board in contemporary American Christianity, that basic message seems to be some form of law [do this] without the gospel [this is what has been done]. “
I have to admit the argument is very attractive. It definitely takes the pressure off of us. Hey, there is no way we are going to be perfect anyway, so why not emphasize the works of Christ rather than our own? Get people focused on Christ rather than us; why would you want Christ and the gospel represented by our best efforts?!!! However, before I continue, I will take exception to being compared to Joel Olsteen because I believe in an effort on our part to represent Christ by our good behavior. I think a little more than that separates me and others from the likes of Joel Olsteen. But let’s be honest here, in light of what Horton says above, “what saith the Scriptures?”
“Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives– when they see your respectful and pure conduct [1Peter3:1,2].”
Can I be honest here? I am a laymen and I have an appointment to go to shortly; will the above scripture reference suffice? I mean really, it blatantly contradicts everything Horton says in the above excerpt. Also, didn’t Christ say something about letting “your” light shine before men that God would be glorified? Furthermore, in regard to our efforts at good behavior according to the scriptures, is that really some kind of effort to “be the gospel” rather than “adorning” the gospel as Peter also talked about? As an addition and quick aside, notice Horton’s Gospel Sanctification like protocol for our role in the sanctification process: “Conformity to Christ’s image (sanctification) is the process of dying to self (mortification) and living to God (vivification) that results from being regularly immersed in the gospel’s story of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.” In other words, in my estimation, he is saying we are changed by the passivity of looking [reading] upon the gospel as presented in a multi-faceted way from the Scriptures. At the very least, in regard to strict word interpretation, this is what he is saying. Only one single action [immersing ourselves in a story] is named that “results” in sanctification and mortification.
Here is my concern as I have stated in other articles [ http://paulspassingthoughts.wordpress.com/2009/08/22/matthew-2410-13-love-has-a-soul-mate-the-law/] [http://paulspassingthoughts.wordpress.com/2009/06/24/an-apostolic-call-to-discernment-in-the-%e2%80%9clast-days%e2%80%9d/], the Apostles made it clear that the last days would be marked by shrewd attempts to undermine God’s law. Frankly, I am leery of any teaching that seems to diss the upholding of God’s law by our Christian walk. I also recommend caution towards those that claim to uphold God’s law by saying he does all the obeying for us, but that is another post.
paul
How To Sell Prenuptial Agreements To Reformed Couples
I use to sell life insurance; In fact, I was the number one seller of term life in the company I worked for. I had my pitch down pat. If I could get a young married couple together at the kitchen table, it was my sale. Nobody likes to deal with or think about death. But I had a pretty good pitch to get the appointment. Once there, I would start with statistics and concede that it was unlikely that the husband would die; but on the other hand, it’s also unlikely you would be in an auto crash, but you prepare by fastening your seat belts don’t you? And I would also add my favorite line: “If it happens to you, the chances are a 100%.” In other words it could happen. Well, in order to be prepared, I would ask the husband what he would want for his wife and children financially. The list was usually pretty impressive, that’s why I loved the newly weds. In the same way, even among unbelieving newlyweds, they don’t want to think about divorce. But if you were trying to sell them on the need for a prenuptial agreement, unlike death, the statistics are in your favor to begin your pitch, no positive objection is needed. There is only a 50% chance the marriage will make it, so why not make the process less painful by planning ahead of time? After all, divorce is less painful than death and people prepare for that don’t they? However, it would be a tuff sell among evangelical believers; better to target the reformed crowd in this hypothetical situation.
Why? Well, first of all, the Christian Hedonism movement is growing in reformed circles. This teaches that duty is a four letter word and obedience is only valid when accompanied by joy. So hey, if your not happy in the marriage you can’t be expected to obey God out of some joyless duty because that’s not legitimate obedience anyway. Granted, most reformed counselors are not going to give you a pass solely on this point [I think, anyway]; but in regard to reformed marriages overall, the nose of the camel is already in the tent because of this growing doctrine.
But not withstanding, there is a growing trend that gets around this pesky obstacle; namely, Redemptive Church Discipline. If you are a reformed wife, you can have your husband put into this process which can include “any” sin that is making you unhappy in the marriage. Other “longstanding patterns of sin” can also be added to the process. If sufficient progress is not made, he will then be “declared” an unbeliever. This is key because the situation is now opened up to a broad interpretation of 1Corithians chapter 7 that will give “biblical” permission for the wife to file divorce. You ever heard the one about the widow and her daughter standing beside a grave with the young daughter asking the following?: “mommy, why do men always die first? The mother then answers: “women don’t know honey, but we think it’s a pretty good system.” Likewise, reformed women think the growing trend of bringing their husbands up on RCD and having them declared unbelievers is a pretty good system as well. They will either be obedient husbands or the door of nebuli will be opened-up to interpret the husbands heart in regard to whether or not he is really “pleased” as an unbeliever to live with the believing wife. Has he ever said he’s sorry he married you? Bingo, you go girl! After all, “from the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” But hey, couldn’t the husband in turn bring the wife up on Church Discipline? No no. You see, another counseling staple of reformed theology is that you work on the husband first because he is the leader. Get the husband straightened out and the rest will follow. Wives are only bad wives because of the husband’s poor leadership. Therefore, It’s the same as selling life insurance, you deal primarily with the husband because he dies first; but in this case, he’s the one paying the money while he lives [it's called alimony], not the insurance company! A huuuuuuge selling point.
But it gets better. Whether husband or wife, there is a shortcut to having your spouse declared an unbeliever in reformed circles. “Gospel Sanctification,” which is the theology that possesses the above tenets is thought to be the only true gospel by those who propagate it in reformed circles. There you go, if your spouse doesn’t understand or hold to GS, they aren’t saved. Obviously. How can you be saved if you don’t understand or hold to the only true gospel? Like I said, once you get that spouse in the “unbeliever” realm, all bets are off. It is truly strange in regard to the scriptures that are used to interpret 1 Corinthians 7 for this purpose as opposed to biblical concepts of loving even your enemies; but I digress, we are selling prenumpt here. Besides, it gets even better. When you get that young reformed couple at the kitchen table, find out whether or not they even know what GS is! This now puts their marriage in the precarious with a capital P! The sale is now at hand.
We live in tough economic times and one must think out of the box to gain employment. Why not subcontract with an attorney to sell prenuptial agreements? If you do, think reformed. I predict a divorce epidemic in their circles as these exciting new doctrines grow and flourish.
paul
Lost Books Of The Bible Hinder The Sanctification Process: Part 1
“Those who exclude eschatology from the auspices of biblical counseling are operating without the full counsel of God.”
Ok, I don’t want to loose you, so I will tell you up front, there are no lost books of the bible; in other words, God superintended the closed canon as we have it today. However, you wouldn’t know it in regard to the press eschatology gets these days, especially in reformed churches. Some estimate that eschatology is 25% of the Bible, so where did all that scripture run off to? Well, of course it didn’t run off, but it’s ignored as if it did. But why?, and does it really make any difference whether we teach it or not?
Here are some of the whys: First, the contemporary Church has been swallowed up in a well meaning counseling culture that doesn’t see eschatology as relevant to the finer points of pleasing God with our lives. Granted, future streets of gold and great signs in the sky seem a bit distant from godly communication with our wives and like issues. Secondly, eschatology has a penchant for controversy and mortals don’t need any help in that category whether saved or not. Thirdly, teaching on eschatology has been abused in the past. Fourthly, eschatology takes a lot of hard study, it’s truly a deep subject.
Now, let me quickly eliminate three of the four and focus on the first reason. The third reason is just an excuse. Two and Four are the result of the American Church being fraught with leaders who are lazy cowards. The prosperity and fiber of our culture creates this reality. In China, for instance, men are not waiting in line to be leaders in the church because they come for the leaders first; and when they do, it’s not pretty. Furthermore, why would they be concerned with controversial teaching?, to be a Christian in many countries today is to coexist with controversy and harassment to boot. Truth is the measure, not controversy. Strange. The one question you never hear at ordination hearings is: “are you a coward?” It’s a good question for American pastor wanna-bees.
But what of those who honestly focus on fine tuning the Christian walk and just don’t see the relevance of eschatology in regard to that? “We can’t miss by focusing on a walk that pleases God while staying clear of debate that doesn’t contribute accordingly; besides, a lot of eschatology cannot be known anyway. Look, everybody agrees that Jesus is coming back, so what else matters?” A formable argument indeed. But regardless, I think there wrong, and only because of what I see in scripture. First, the Apostle Paul said he did not fail in the following:
“ Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27 For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God [Acts 20:26-28].”
Here, Paul speaks of God’s counsel in the same way the Psalmist made counsel synonymous with God’s law:
1 Blessed is the man
Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
Nor stands in the path of sinners,
Nor sits in the seat of the scornful;
2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
Psalm 1:1,2
“But,” in verse 2 is a coordinating conjunction, but the word “counsel” has been replaced with “law,” or God’s word. God’s word is his counsel. When you read your Bible, it’s a counseling session between you and God. When teachers teach, they are counseling. Eschatology is in the Bible; therefore, it is counseling, and has no less to do with the sanctification process than anything else in Holy writ. Period. Those who exclude eschatology from the auspices of biblical counseling are operating without the full counsel of God. We see hints of this in the Bible. Christ said those who study the book of revelation will be blessed. Hmmmm, ok. The Apostle John said those who have the hope of end-time promises “purify themselves.” Wow, sounds kinda like the sanctification process. The Apostle Peter ask this rhetorical question in regard to his end-time teaching: “…what manner of people ought we to be?” Get this. Paul taught the Corinthians eschatology amidst an antithetical cesspool to godly sanctification. Uh!? Regardless of what Paul taught the Thessalonians about eschatology, the enemy still tried to upset the their faith through a bogus letter; supposedly sent by Paul, that contradicted what he taught them about the end times and he corrected them accordingly. Paul also turned two teachers over to Satan that were teaching erroneous doctrines concerning the end times and said it was upsetting the faith of many. Get this as well, he called their erroneous teaching, in regard to eschatology, blasphemy.
So, to coin a phrase from my Gospel Sanctification buddies, and in regard to putting feet on all of this; specifically, in regard to incorporating eschatology into counseling or at least an aid to preventing counseling other than self-counseling, “what’s that look like?” I don’t know exactly, but somebody should get on the case. I am going to do additional research for part 2, but for crying-out-loud, what are all of the guy’s doing who get paid?
Lastly, beware of cheap imitations; namely, reformed groups who claim to be answering this emerging concern by teaching lot’s of eschatology [so-called] through the Gospel Centered hermeneutic. Eschatology is not solely about the gospel. The Apostle Paul regarded erroneous teaching in regard to the mere timing of the resurrection as blasphemy. Eschatology was not written for the sole purpose of “gazing upon the glory of the gospel” and thereby being automatically changed from glory to glory. That approach to sanctification or any element of it is a lie and nothing short of it.
Bottom line is this: Eschatology is an intrinsic part of God’s counsel and deserves to be recognized and interpreted as such. I pray accordingly.
paul
Warning To A Friend: Sin According To Paul David Tripp
The following was my comments to a friend on Facebook regarding an excerpt she posted from a Paul David Tripp interview. His comments on the video regarded the essence of sin according to him.
Her name has been changed to “Jane.”
Jane,
Thanks for posting this and the other one about the snake. Both are good discussion pieces. I really admire how much you love the Lord and there is no intent to offend here, and I also realize that Paul Tripp says many true things, but the crux of what he teaches is the exact same antinomian Quietism that JC Ryle contended against in the 19th century. In simplistic terms, it is the idea that the indwelling Christ does all of the obeying for us and through us. We are[present tense] “dead” and “can do nothing” [How People Change page 64]. Christ must do it all, we can’t do anything. On page 28 of HPC, he says Scripture calls us to “rest and feed on the living Christ,” ie, the only thing in us that is alive is Christ and He therefore is the only one in us that can do anything, we can’t do anything because we are still dead. JC Ryle reluctantly called it the “Christ in us” error because it is true that Christ indwells us but not that he obeys scripture for us while we do nothing. Furthermore, the concepts of “deep repentance” and “new obedience” are contemporary inventions of Powlison and Tripp and have no historical precedent in regard to Christian theology. As I said, this is all but the exact error that prompted Ryle to write his 20 letters on “Holiness.” A copy of the letters can be found here: http://www.gracegems.org/Ryle/holiness.htm The introduction is an excellent summary to his contentions that prompted the letters .
Also, note in the clip that you posted: Tripp says that the essence of all sin is anti-social[ism]. Or as Dr. Larry Crabb puts it and also Powlison and Tripp at other times and in other publications; “sin against relationship.” It’s a brilliant argument that takes the law and obedience out of the equation because it uses the half-truth of selfism. We are so self-focused that we only like people who like us as much as we like ourselves. “BUT WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES?” The Apostle John clearly says in 1John3:4 that the essence of sin is “lawlessness.” “Sin *is* lawlessness.” The King James version puts it this way:
“Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.”
John states this in a compound sentence with the pronoun and the noun switched as subjects to make the point irrefutable. It’s like saying, “ I get in my car to move it and the car moves when I get in it and move it.” Whoever breaks the law sins and sin is breaking the law. Sin is synonymous with breaking the Law. If the more important point was relationships, I’m sure John could have handled that. Tripp has to make something else the essence of sin because this verse implodes his antinomian theology.
The concept of the essence of sin being “sin against relationships” was first introduced by Dr. Larry Crabb in his book “Inside Out” while he had a close relationship with CCEF. But they have since disassociated themselves with him because he was sent packing by evangelicals in the early 80’s. Crabb had even set up shop at MacArthur’s church and was shown the door. Crabb’s theory in the book explored how disappointments driven by desires was at the root of all sin which is sin against relationships and admitted that it was a theory that combined Freudian Depth Psychology and the Bible. Freud believed that desire was at the root of all behavior. I have great respect for Larry Crabb because he openly admits this reality as opposed to CCEF’s crafty claim of merely “Spoiling the Egyptians” for the glory of God because all truth is God’s truth and it’s not right to only utilize part of God’s truth. Buyer beware. I would only hope that CCEF at least sends the poor guy holiday cards after kicking him under the bus. CCEF is extremely sensitive to anything that would suggest a relationship with Crabb but their early love affair with him is well documented and HPC by Tripp is a re-packaged version of “Inside Out,” at least in theory.
Hope you will consider this.
paul
Viewing Reformed Arrogance Through The Lens Of Church Discipline
The contemporary reformed movement is indeed arrogant [not all, but in large part ]. This can be seen through some of it’s doctrines [some of which I agree with]. But no doctrine offers a better lens to view this arrogance than so-called “church discipline.” It is an excellent example of how bad interpretation leads to folly, arrogance and trashed lives. This post will give witness testimony to the arrogance, what I believe leads to the arrogance, and the result of the arrogance.
I came from a typical reformed church and now go to a Southern Baptist church in Germantown, Ohio.
This is back to my roots as I was saved in a SBC church and received much of my early christian development there. A member from my former church [the reformed one] attended one of our men’s fellowships that we have on the last Saturday morning of every month. After leaving the fellowship and on the way back to Dayton, the reformed member made the following comment about a discussion our men had during breakfast: “Dude, they don’t even know what church discipline is, what a joke!”
Let’s be honest thou reformed ones, your attitude is no different towards any church that does not practice church discipline.
I admit, I wasn’t initially impressed either, but the Lord has since taught me some things. Do you know why our church does not practice church discipline? BECAUSE IT’S NOT IN THE BIBLE! Throughout the Bible, we either discipline ourselves or the Lord does the discipline [Heb. 12:7-11, Rev.3:19, 2Tim.1:7, 1Cor. 9:27, Col. 2:5]. In a matter of fact, one pamphlet published by a highly respected church has the heading of “What Does The Bible Say About Church Discipline?,” and then proceeds to quote Hebrews 5:5-11 which either implies or says specifically that it is the Lord that does the discipline, 12 times! The assembly nor the leaders do the discipline or correction, the Lord does. Do you think I am splitting hairs? Hardly. This lack of attention to scriptural detail has led to all kinds of mayhem. One example would be the sloppy assertion that church leaders have the authority to declare a disciplined member an “unbeliever.” I even saw where Martha Peace, usually pretty solid in her teaching, referred to husbands who have been declared unbelievers by church elders and proceeded to teach that wives can therefore consider them as such if the elders do:
“It is only the church through the elders that can officially declare him to be “as an unbeliever” through the church discipline process in Matthew 18:15-18”[ note: church discipline is a “process” by the church that can declare a person unbelieving. None of these components are mentioned by Christ in this text. Therefore, how in the world can this be derived from Matthew 18? By the way, Gentiles and tax collectors were considered second class citizens among the Jew's, not necessarily unbelievers ].
Why not? If the leaders are the ones taking the Lord’s place in the execution of the discipline, why would they not also be able to judge the heart? But yet, the Apostle Paul says twice that the EXACT OPPOSITE is true or assumed concerning a shunned [not disciplined] person in 1Cor.5:5 and 1Cor.11:31,32. I know, I know, this doesn’t fit into your overall theological system. Well, get over it. Even as a believer, you well be judged [a form of discipline?] by Christ in heaven and you will “suffer loss” and will be saved “by fire[ 1Cor.3:10-15 2Cor.5:9,10].”
Let’s revisit my church for a moment. If one member sinned against another, they would take you to Matthew 18. If we had an idle brother in the church, they would take you to 2 Thess. 3:6. If there was gross immorality, they would take you to 2Cor. 5. If there was false teaching going on, they would take you to 1Tim.3:6. But among the reformed, we are dorks because we don’t have a church discipline policy that slaps a grid over every circumstance? I disagree. And quite frankly, I am pleased that the leaders of my church are unaware of concepts contrived by mere men who live in theological libraries. This grid and supposed “mark” of a reformed church leads to all kinds of error. Just as a quick aside, It is interesting to me how this grid works for sinning elders in 99.99 percent of reformed churches as well. When elders sin, they simply step down and the whole thing is kept private. “But of course, they repented in the first or second step, right?” In my estimation, this blatantly contradicts 1Tim. 5:19,20, especially when studied in context and is just another problem with the whole Matthew 18 grid approach. But to make a point in keeping with my subject, it is one thing to be wrong and quite another thing to be arrogant while doing so.
Where does such error come from? Well, like a lot of erroneous doctrines, and in keeping with my subject, arrogance. Let me testify as one who was in reformed groups for almost 30 years. Listen to a quote from a fairly well known reformed teacher in regard to a doctrine that his church was introducing to the members via a Sunday school class: “This is what makes our church unique.” I was there and heard the quote he made during the introduction first hand. It immediately raised a question in my mind: “Why is it the goal of this church leadership to be unique?” When I shared this with another pastor, it just killed him that I didn’t ask the teacher out-loud because he was dieing to know. I believe this is at the core of a lot of error and the haughtiness that goes with it, a desire to be different for the sake of being different. Even in one church that I have much respect for, they have a pamphlet with the following title: Name Of Church “Distinctives.” The whole “what makes us different from the rest” is a pervasive mentality among reformed groups. In my book, it’s arrogant, and leads to developing doctrines for marketing purposes. Who is any Christian to make the judgment that they are that much different from any other and for the better? I think it best to let the persecutors decide that.
Yet, here is another thing that I have witnesses first hand: regardless of the chaos and controversy surrounding the revival of church discipline in reformed circles, getting it right is not the highest priority. Any sacred doctrine that makes reformed a part of what it is, demands the higher priority. Trashed lives and crushed spirits are the unfortunate collateral damage in this all important practice of church discipline and it’s reformed accreditation. Point in case: the pastor who is a hero among the reformed for excommunicating 256 members for non-attendance. But of course, this impressive number of m.i.a’s developed in one week and had nothing to do with church leadership being asleep at the switch! If you are looking for any reformed leaders who took pause with this event, don’t waste your time, the important fact here is the major flag raising of reformed doctrine in the name of church discipline.
Once a doctrinal premise is wrong, who knows where it will go, as I am seeing. Doctrinal mutations of church discipline get creepier with each passing year. “Redemptive” church discipline, and the incorporation of church discipline into counseling is among many examples. Some time ago, I sarcastically ask in a post if reformed churches were going to start bringing depressed persons up on church discipline. In preparation for this post, I indeed read an article that implied just that. I was recently told by a parishioner that his weekly breakfast meetings with a reformed pastor for fellowship, accountability, and encouragement were actually considered to be counseling sessions under the auspices of church discipline by the elders of his church and without his knowledge.
It’s no surprise then. The one thing I have noticed as well as others, is very few church discipline situations turn out well like the one Paul writes to the Corinthians about. And no wonder if arrogance and biblical error rule the day. Besides, I would contest that there is no such thing to begin with.
paul
The Grand Crux Of Christian Hedonism Is Monergistic Sanctification
Glory, glory, hallelujah! You wouldn’t believe what I found this morning while doing research for another post. I found a pdf media book [http://www.desiringgod.org/media/pdf/books_bd3/bd3.pdf] authored by John Piper on Christian Hedonism. “So what?,” you say, “the guy has 20,000 publications on CH everywhere.” So what? This puppy is the Cliff Notes of CH, a rare jewel that has filled me with joy that a Christian hedonist could only dream of! It starts out with an argument for historical precedent, moves to the core “biblical” theory of CH, and then get this: It concludes with a practical application of CH to real life!!!! [this is where the point of the main topic will be made] One moment please, I now pause here for song and maybe even dance:
- “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord: He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored; He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword: His truth is marching on. Glory, glory, hallelujah! Glory, glory, hallelujah! Glory, glory, hallelujah! His truth is marching on.”
Ok, I’m back. The booklet is 3 chapters and 23 pages of concise exposition in regard to CH and offers an excellent opportunity for biblical evaluation. For any newbies to the subject, CH teaches that a pursuit of joy in the Christian life is our highest goal and primary duty to God in order to worship him effectively. A normal hedonist seeks anything that gives him or her pleasure and this is the primary driving force of their life, but a Christian hedonist primarily seeks pleasure in God. So you say, “oh yes, this makes sense and is very important, he is only using that term to get our attention.” Well, that will suffice for now.
In Chapter one, Piper gets no argument from me that Christians should strive to have joy in the Christian life. He cites those who supposedly say joy is not important in the Christian life, only obedience or making the right decision. I would disagree with such a position though I have never met any Christians who hold that position. Certainly anyone would agree, a joyless and purely dutiful life would not represent God well. Piper quotes many biblical references that command joy, but he is preaching to the choir, anyone who does not have joy in their Christian life needs to seek wise counsel and evaluate the situation. I agree with Piper: a concern, yes even an objective goal to have joy, has historical precedent dating back to Moses. Amen.
However, we begin to get a hint in the first chapter regarding his biblical theory of joy’s relationship to truth and obedience. From an anthropological standpoint, he quotes Blaise Pascal:
“all men seek happiness. This is without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end…. The will never takes the least step but to this object. This is the motive of every action of every man, even of those who hang themselves.”
So, since desire for pleasure and happiness is at the very core of what drives us from the human soul, this is what needs to be dealt with. This was also Sigmund Freud’s theory as well, real change deals with the desires that drive our behavior. So if our ultimate desire is God, all must end well. Makes sense, does it not? Piper does not really park on this angle long, but the Christian Counseling and Education Foundation [CCEF] has a thoroughly developed theory on how “biblical” change can be brought about by addressing desires.
Piper begins to move toward his core theory in regard to the relationship of joy and obedience:
“So if Christian Hedonism is old-fashioned, why is it so controversial? One reason is that it insists that joy is not just the spin-off of obedience to God, but part of obedience. It seems as though people are willing to let joy be a by-product of our relationship to God, but not an essential part of it. People are uncomfortable saying that we are duty-bound to pursue joy.
They say things like, “Don’t pursue joy; pursue obedience.” But Christian Hedonism responds, “That’s like saying, ‘Don’t eat apples; eat fruit.’” Because joy is an act of obedience. We are commanded to rejoice in God. If obedience is doing what God commands, then joy is not merely the spin-off of obedience, it is obedience.”
This is a good summary and clarification statement. Again, I agree with Piper to this point: Joy should be more than a mere spin-off of obedience. However, Piper starts this statement by saying joy is an intricate part of obedience but ends the statement by saying they are synonymous [ “That’s like saying, ‘Don’t eat apples; eat fruit.’”] [....”then joy is not merely the spin-off of obedience, it is obedience.”]. So joy and obedience are one and the same and without joy, obedience is really not present, it is an illegitimate obedience. Piper goes on to clarify this by demonstrating that true obedience with pure motives is ALWAYS accompanied by joy:
“One wise Christian described the relationship between duty and delight this way:
Suppose a husband asks his wife if he must kiss her good night. Her answer is, “You must, but not that kind of a must.” What she means is this: “Unless a spontaneous affection for my person motivates you, your overtures are stripped of all moral value.”
In other words, if there is no pleasure in the kiss, the duty of kissing has not been done. Delight in her person, expressed in the kiss, is part of the duty, not a by-product of it.”
That’s the crux[not the grand], Do not miss it. ALL obedience that is not accompanied by joy is striped of “moral value.” Not surprising because in many other writings by Piper, he makes true saving faith synonymous with joy as well. Piper knows this to be controversial and also has something to say to any newbies reading here:
“You can see why this starts to get controversial. It’s the seriousness of it all. “You really mean this?” someone says. “You really mean that hedonism is not just a trick word to get our attention. It actually says something utterly, devastatingly true about the way we should live. The pursuit of pleasure really is a necessary part of being a good person.” That’s right. I mean it. The Bible means it. God means it. It is very serious. We are not playing word games.”
I will pause here with my first disagreement. I believe joy in the Christian life is a primary concern but not our primary pursuit. In a matter of fact, the Bible names many things that we are to “pursue” and joy is not named among them and is certainly not named among them as the chief pursuit, even if it was on that list. Also, we are commanded to obey in many ways and joy is on that list, but is nowhere named as the chief concern in obedience. This is probably why Piper has to find a way to make joy and obedience one and the same. Piper clearly makes joy our primary pursuit in the sanctification process and must torture scripture to do it. This is serious error because we are dealing with the engine parts of sanctification and I think God is very serious about the whole sanctification issue. When you begin to redefine obedience, a major component of sanctification, you are dealing with an issue of severe import as Piper himself recognizes in the above quote. I realize this is a complex issue but hang on, in chapter 3, and in very un-Piper like fashion, he articulates his position on the tension between joy and practical obedience while opening up the door to what the Bible specifically says about the issue of obedience and it’s relationship to joy.
But beforehand in chapter 2, Piper addresses the issue of our primary pursuit being the glory of God rather than our own joy. Again, he must now make them one and the same to prove his thesis. He begins chapter 3 by quoting an anticipated objection:
“But wait a minute,” someone says, “what about the glory of God? Didn’t God create us for His glory? But here you are saying that He created us to pursue our joy!” Which is it? Are we created for His glory or our joy?”
Piper then answers the inquisition:
“Oh how passionately I agree that God created us for His glory! Yes! Yes! God is the most God-centered person in the universe. This is the heartbeat of everything I preach and write. This is what Christian Hedonism is designed to preserve and pursue! God’s chief end is to glorify God. This is written all over the Bible. It is the aim of all God does.”
I don’t want to park here too long because the above in chapter 2 is not among the glaring and brazen contradictions to scripture that I want to discuss from chapter 3. The above error is merely assumptive rather than contradictory to plain biblical truth. But suffice to say, not only does scripture NEVER say that the chief end of man is to enjoy God forever [ see Ecc. 11:13, even a child can see what the “whole” duty of man is, at least while we are here on Earth], neither does it ever say that the chief end of God is to glorify Himself. Indeed, the glory of God is of supreme importance and certainly one of our primary goals, but to make the proclamation that this is God’s chief end and the single “aim” of everything he does seems a little lofty to me. I am not sure sure that we can know such things about God! The scriptures state many of God’s purposes, but where does it say that his own glory is chief among them and that his own glory is the chief end of his existence? I protest. The Bible makes it clear that God demands the glory due him, but where does it say that it is his chief end and the single aim of all he does?
This part of the booklet is a little harder to define, but again, Piper answers the opening question by making joy synonymous with God’s glory. Perhaps the following excerpt from chapter 2 will help to clarify:
“This is the essence of Christian Hedonism. God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.
Perhaps you see now what drives me to be radical about this. If it is true, that God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him, then look at what is at stake in our pursuit of joy. The glory of God is at stake! If I say that pursuing joy is not essential, I am saying that glorifying God is not essential. But if glorifying God is ultimately important, then pursuing the satisfaction that displays His glory is ultimately important.
Christian Hedonism is not a game. It is what the whole universe is about.
The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling. It is essential to all virtue and all reverence.”
Bottom line: If we don’t primarily pursue joy, God is not glorified. Our SINGLE AND SOLE endeavor must be to ACTIVELY PERSUE PLEASURE IN GOD. Let me reiterate the above quotations. Christian Hedonism, the primary pursuit of pleasure in God [as opposed to obedience, peace with others, ect.] is “what the whole universe is about” and “our highest calling” and “essential to all virtue and all reverence.”
A lofty, lofty proclamation, especially when you consider where he derived this epiphany:
“Before I saw these things in the Bible, C. S. Lewis snagged me when I wasn’t looking. I was standing in Vroman’s Bookstore on Colorado Avenue in Pasadena, California, in the fall of 1968. I picked up a thin blue copy of Lewis’s book The Weight of Glory. The first page changed my life:
‘If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are halfhearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.’
Never in my life had I heard anyone say that the problem with the world was not the intensity of our pursuit of happiness, but the weakness of it. Everything in me shouted, Yes! That’s it! There it was in black and white, and to my mind it was totally compelling: The great problem with human beings is that we are far too easily pleased. We don’t seek pleasure with nearly the resolve and passion that we should. And so we settle for mud pies of appetite instead of infinite delight.”
There was a time among evangelicals when an admission that someone got an idea while browsing in a bookstore and then went to the Bible to establish the idea would send good men running for the tar and feathers, but no more. Not only that, Piper made the same type of claim concerning another theory of his on page 17 of “The Pleasures Of God.” This time the idea was from Henry Scougal instead of Lewis. Both are considered to be Christian Philosophers. Piper took a four day sabbatical with a concordance to confirm what Scougal said and you guessed it, there it was. One would wonder why he needed a four day study to determine the biblical veracity of Scougal’s theory if Scougal made his case from the Bible to begin with, but I think I know the answer to that.
In chapter 3, Piper does something that he usually does not do in my estimation, he goes out on a limb to explain how all of his theory meets with real Christian life in the trenches. In doing this, he exposes himself to the blatant error of Christian Hedonism. He begins chapter 3 with the following:
“Perhaps you can see why it is astonishing to me that so many people try to define true Christianity in terms of decisions and not affections. Not that decisions are unessential. The problem is that they require so little trans formation. Mere decisions are no sure evidence of a true work of grace in the heart. People can make ‘decisions” about the truth of God while their hearts are far from Him. We have moved far away from the biblical Christianity of Jonathan Edwards. He pointed to 1 Peter 1:8 and argued that ‘true religion, in great part, consists in the affections.”
Only problem is, among many, is the eleventh chapter of Hebrews contradicts everything in Piper’s statement above. Hebrews 11 is one of the more extensive statements on saving faith in Holy writ. The Hebrew writer defines the faith of at least 20 believers in regard to the decisions they made and obedience. Joy or pleasure, even pleasure in God, is not named once as being an attribute of their faith. The only semblance of feelings or emotions mentioned, is that of strife and fear of God more than man. The truth of Hebrews 11, as well as many other scriptures, makes a mockery of Piper’s theory of Christian Hedonism.
Secondly, Piper says the following in chapter 3:
“People are often troubled by the teaching of Christian Hedonism that emotions are part of our duty—that they are commanded. This seems strange partly because emotions are not under our immediate control like acts of willpower seem to be.”
This is a slight digression, but I might add that this is obviously how God designed us and may well be a better anthropological answer to obedience in regard to joy than Pascal or CCEF has to offer. When emotions and feelings are not in accordance with God’s will, is proper thinking, proper doing, and proper praying, the gateway to bringing emotions back into the realm of God’s will? I think so, and believe this is exactly what Philippians 4:4-9 is stating.
Thirdly, Piper concedes the following in chapter 3:
“It is true that our hearts are often sluggish. We do not feel the depth or intensity of affections that are appropriate for God or His cause. It is true that at those times we must exert our wills and make decisions that we hope will rekindle our joy. Even though joyless love is not our aim (“God loves a cheerful giver!” 2 Corinthians 9:7; “[Show] mercy with cheerfulness,” Romans 12:8), nevertheless it is better to do a joyless duty than not to do it, provided that there is a spirit of repentance that we have not done all of our duty because of the sluggishness of our hearts.”
This is an interesting concession by Piper, but pay close attention, we are now closer to further clarifying the crux [still not the grand] of this matter. The key thoughts are now the question of HOPE and the process of elimination in regard to the prominence of pleasure or joy. Interpreting Pipers own statement above, he concludes that it is better to obey when joy is not present, but then “hope” that a decision / obedience will “rekindle” our joy. What a minute here!, is that the biblical prescription or not? But here is the real question: Is it a biblical promise that obedience will lead to joy? If it is, then that is the biblical prescription for joy. If that isn’t the biblical prescription or dynamic, then Piper is unwittingly admitting that joy does not hold the prominence that Christian Hedonism says it does, for if we should partially obey and hope for the best, joy must not be the point! Piper further clarifies his position on this in chapter 3:
“I am often asked what a Christian should do if the cheerfulness of obedience is not there. It’s a good question. My answer is not to simply get on with your duty because feelings don’t matter. They do! “
This is somewhat of a straw man. I have never known any Christian leader or teacher that would tell another Christian to get on with obedience because “feelings don’t matter.” But I do know plenty of them that would tell you that obedience without biblical thinking can and will lead to joyless duty, especially when God calls on us to do something that is not our usual preference. Piper continues with more clarification:
“My answer has three steps. First, confess the sin of joylessness. (“My heart is faint; lead me to the rock that is higher than I,” Psalm 61:2.) Acknowledge the coldness of your heart. Don’t say that it doesn’t matter how you feel. Second, pray earnestly that God would restore the joy of obedience. (“I delight to do Your will, O my God; Your Law is within my heart,” Psalm 40:8.) Third, go ahead and do the outward dimension of your duty in the hope that the doing will rekindle the delight.”
Note: Piper stops short of saying there is anything we can do other than pray for forgiveness, ask God to restore our joy, and then hope for the best. Basically, he refuses to say that obedience leads to joy. He does not even compel the reader to search his heart in regard to biblical attitudes that go along with obedience, regardless of the fact that the scriptures have much to say about that. His counsel seems to be: “Go ahead and sin and then ask God to forgive you, and also call on God to change your heart. No. Christians need to obey with the right attitude and pray for God’s help and enablement. Attitude is linked to biblical thinking. It all works together and peace is the promised result.
In case you think that my above assessment is unfair, here is what Piper goes on to say:
“Yes, it becomes increasingly evident that the experience of joy in God is beyond what the sinful heart can do. It goes against our nature. We are enslaved to pleasure in other things (Romans 6:17). We can’t just decide to be glad about something we find boring or uninteresting or offensive-like God. Christian Hedonist is a miracle of sovereign grace. This is why Paul said that becoming a Christian is the same as being raised from the dead (“even when we were dead in our transgressions, [God] made us alive together with Christ,” Ephesians 2:5). It’s why Jesus said it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to stop loving his money and start loving God (Mark 10:25). Camels can’t go through needles’ eyes—just as dead men can’t wake themselves from the dead. So Jesus adds, “With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God” (Mark 10:27). So Christian Hedonism breeds an utter dependence on the sovereignty of God. It teaches us to hear the command, “Delight yourself in the LORD,” and then to pray with Saint Augustine, “Command what you wish, but give what you command.”
This is now the grand crux of the issue, but first, let me address something in the above conclusion of his 3 chapter pdf booklet:
“We can’t just decide to be glad about something we find boring or uninteresting or offensive-like God.”
First of all, if you find God offensive, your not saved. Secondly, if you find yourself bored with God or indifferent, and your a Christian, the Bible has much to say about what causes that and what to do about it. Now that another straw man is out of the way, here is the grand crux of the matter if you already haven’t figured it out from his above close to chapter 3: Christian Hedonism is grounded in a monergistic sanctification. Put another way; “let go and let God.” Just like the thesis of “How People Change” by Paul David Tripp, born again Christians are still “ensalved” to “pleasure” in other things. Piper cites Romans 6:17 to make a point about experiencing joy in God, an obvious sanctification issue. However, Romans 6:17 is clearly in the past tense and speaks of how we were enslaved to sin as unbelievers. Piper clearly cites this passage in regard to the present tense to make his point, read it for yourself. Paul Tripp does the exact same thing on page 64 of HPC, using Colossians 2:1-15 to make the same point and in the same way, using a past tense passage to teach about the present realities of the sanctification process. Both points are the same in both books, Christians cannot participate in the sanctification process. Paul Tripp, in outrageous fashion, even uses Col. 2:1-15 in the past tense at the top of page 64 and then switches to the present tense at the bottom of the page to make the same point, as if his readers are all but brain dead. No comment. All that I am saying should be very evident by the closing comments written by Piper above.
That’s the grand crux of Christian Hedonism. It’s monergistic sanctification or “let go and let God theology” or Quietism, whatever you want to call it, that’s what it is.
paul
What To Do About Anna
I will begin by sharing what inspired this post. I have always been enamored by Jesus clearing out the Temple. What’s more, if discovering this event as a new Christian wasn’t shocking enough, I later found out that he performed this task on two occasions, not just once. The first time, as recorded in John chapter 2, he first perceives the problem and then takes action by making a tool for the task, a whip. As the disciples are following along, Jesus walks into the Temple, sees what is going on, obtains materials to fashion a “scourge[KJV],” which was usually a whip with extra stuff attached to the cords for better effectiveness. Where he purchased or obtained the necessary materials and how long it took him to make the whip is not revealed. Neither is any conversation with the disciples during the process such as maybe, “what are you so angry about and what’s going on with making the whip?”
It’s safe to assume that Jesus hit the perpetrators with the whip. It’s also safe to assume it was a well made whip for the purpose. It’s also safe to assume people suffered bodily injury. He drove out all of the sellers, all of the buyers, all of the people taking a short cut through the temple, all of the living merchandise, kicked over their tables, and poured out all of their coins on the floor, leaving the mess for others to clean up. Not a pretty picture.
Here is what really hit me between the eyes last week as I was reading about this: Other than Christ’ zeal for his Father’s house, there is only one other reason given; “…And my house shall be a house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of robbers [Luke 19:46 Mark 11:12-18].” Foremost in the mind of Christ in regard to this defilement of the Temple was the hindrance of prayer in his Father’s house.
Then my mind went immediately to Anna and the Temple. What a contrast in the Temple, Anna and robbers! Did Christ have thoughts of her while he was making that whip? Perhaps. Yes, Anna, what to do with her. She was married for seven years and somehow lost her husband. She did not remarry but instead devoted her life to fasting and prayer at the temple, and this is the kicker: “day and night.” She was there to witness the ceremonial presentation of Jesus at the Temple [Luke, chapter 2]. She was 84 years old. I know enough about scripture to know a lot about the Annas of the world, few that there are. Such are little known by anybody but slay kings and bring down nations in the privacy of their prayer closets. Frail and alone, content with God’s presence and fearless. There reward is not here, but they will rule great cities for God in his kingdom. I once saw one. My job for one year was life safety inspection in nursing homes and critical care facilities. As I passed her room, I thought I saw a typical sad case of a curled up, senile person murmuring to herself. I passed her room again later, still murmuring. Then a nurse approached her bed and ask her a question. Her face immediately arose and cheerfully answered the nurse in concise order. I then noticed the large tattered Bible by her bedside. The Anna in that bed pierced my heart with a sword of fear and shame no less than the Anna of Luke chapter 2.
How many sermons have you ever heard about Anna? How many times have you stopped in Luke 2 to ponder the work of God in such a person? Why not? Too painful? Probably. So what should we do about Anna? First, let’s stop pretending that she isn’t there. I mean really, just chill out, God does not expect all of us to be Anna’s.
Now with that out of the way and secondly, can we therefore aspire to have Anna’s attitude about prayer? Wouldn’t that be kind of a good idea? The Holy Spirit didn’t talk about her to demand that we all be like her, but certainly he spoke of her as an example. Let’s not try to eat the whole elephant, but let’s consciously take steps to make prayer a priority in our lives.
Thirdly, notice that the Holy Spirit says this is the way Anna “served” God. Prayer is service to God. When you pray, you are serving God. By the way, the Bible has a whole bunch to say about “how” to pray. I believe many Christians don’t pray like they should because they don’t know how. Also, I believe many Christians don’t pray because they do not know the the impact and power of prayer, but that is another post. But you can be sure of this, Anna knew how to pray and knew the power of prayer. Take note: Not long after Jesus cleansed his house of prayer, he taught the disciples on how to pray and the power of prayer [Mark 11:15-26].
Fourthly, Anna had patience in prayer. She knew God always answered her prayer, but left the dramatic, visible manifestations of answered prayer in God’s hands. Point in case: The privilege and reward of seeing the Christ presented at the Temple came some 60 years later and was a constant subject of her prayers.
Fifthly, Anna valued public prayer with others. You can bet your life that she prayed in private as much as she did in public, but yet, she obviously valued prayer with others to a great degree. This can also be seen in the book of Acts, especially 3:1, 4:23-31 and 12:5-17. Does your church have an appointed prayer time for members to gather and pray together? If you are struggling in your prayer life, and you want to be like Anna, show up for that. Why not be like Anna to the degree that God gives grace and see what he will do?
Lastly, and a little off subject, I am convinced that Anna would not be pleased with the way we give “shut-ins” a pass. I have done a lot of visiting over the years and can’t imagine what the 84 year old Anna would have said to some of them. Young people get way too much credit for what God is doing through them because of their able bodies while God’s power is perfected in weakness. Perhaps this was Anna’s second greatest asset.
What to do about Anna? Give her more press.
paul
A City Built By God: Revelation 21 And 22
In Hebrews 11:8-10, we read the following:
“By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise.
For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God.”
Abraham knew the promised land was just a pre-fillment of a better promise from God, so he lived there “as” an alien would. As Christians, what are we ultimately looking for in God’s plan for the end times? This may surprise you, but it’s not the rapture. We read the following in 1Peter 3:13;
“But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.”
Both Peter and Abraham pointed to a singular promise. Abraham called it a city, Peter called it a “new heavens and new earth.” Peter also said to live in this present age as “sojourners and pilgrims [1Peter 2:11].”
Now we read the following in Revelation 21:1,2;
“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.”
There it is. Two men who lived 4000 years apart looking for the same city, a city built by God. People ask, “what will Heaven be like?” Really, it’s the wrong question. The right question that can be answered within the confines of God’s revelation to us is “what will God’s city be like?” Revelation 21continues in verse 3:
“And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God.”
Furthermore, Revelation 21: 22 says the following;
“And I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb.”
“Noooooowwwwww wait a minute here Paul, that’s clearly all allegory!” Oh really? You sure about that? Let me give my literal understanding of this passage and then we will consider an allegorical approach:
1] There is going to be a “new” heavens [plural] and “new” earth [singular]. This city built by God comes down from Heaven and is on earth. Weird, but that’s what it says.
2] This is when all sin and all suffering is forever eliminated: “He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away[vs 4].” This is opposed to the previous age of the Millennial Kingdom that will be bliss compared to this age, but will be occupied with mortals. That is why Christ will have to rule it with a “rod of iron.” The second coming of Christ at the end of the Tribulation Period [which precedes the Millennial Kingdom] and the putting down of the rebellion at the end of the earthly, 1000 year rein of Christ from David’s throne [the Millennial Kingdom] are clearly two separate events [compare 20:7-1 and 19:11-16].
3] Verses 10-14 of chapter 21 give an overview of the city and then 21:15-22:1-5 give the specific details, a strange grammatical structure for an allegorical approach. It is called the holy city of Jerusalem and comes “down” to earth “out” of Heaven “from” God. So in other words, it’s already up there and the Holy Spirit goes out of his way to make it clear that God is coming down from Heaven to dwell with mankind. The Holy Spirit states it three different ways: Down to earth, out of Heaven, and from God. It’s deliberately redundant so nobody misses the point.
The angel takes the author, the Apostle John, on a great high mountain to get a big picture of the city coming down from heaven. It has the glory of God and the brilliance of many jewels, a great high wall, and 12 gates guarded by angels. The gates also have the names of the 12 tribes of Israel. John also specifies that there are 3 gates on each of the 4 sides. So far, the city is named “holy Jerusalem” and we have 12 gates named after the 12 tribes of Israel, not a pretty picture for reformed theologians.
Also, apart from the wall being very high, it has 12 foundations underneath it and each one has the name of either one, or all twelve Apostles.
Starting in verse 15, we begin to get some of the details from an angel who’s doing the measurements.
4] The city is 1,380 miles high, 1,380 miles wide, and 1,380 miles long.
5] The wall is measured in cubits, an ancient measurement from a man’s elbow to the tip of his middle finger. John mentions that it is the same for angels as it is for man, indicating a strong resemblance in build between the two and clarification concerning the fact that the cubit would be the same. Again, why would that be important in regard to allegory? But I digress, 144 cubits is about 2,500 feet or about the same height as a 250 story building. Ever been to the Sears building in Chicago? More than twice that high. Any questions? This is probably not including the 12 foundations underneath the walls.
6] The wall and foundations are built with several kinds of rare stones which are named specifically. The wall is of one kind of jewel but the foundation is of various sorts of brilliant, colorful stones.
7] The street [singular as well as interesting] and buildings of the city are built of pure gold which is also transparent like glass. Nothing in that city needs to be covered up. One will be able to see all of the activity from one end of the city to the other.
8] Each gate is cut from a solid pearl and the gates remain open at all times.
9] There is no temple in the city. The temple is God and Christ. Neither is there any night. The light of the new heavens and new earth is supplied by the glory of God and the Lamb.
10] There will be kings and nations that will bring honor and glory into the city. All subjects are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.
11] Moving into chapter 22, there is a river of life flowing from God’s throne through the middle of the one street and it is some pretty good look’in water.
12] Somehow, the tree of life is on both sides of the river that flows through the middle of the one street in this 2 million square miles of city. The tree has 12 different types of fruit.
Seriously, if that’s all allegory, what would it mean? The theologians of our day cannot even articulate
what our role is in the sanctification process and how it’s experienced, much less all of that. Besides, what are you going to do with the tree of life spoken of in 22:2,3? If that’s not allegory, why would the rest, being in the same context, ie, the city, be allegory? If the tree here is allegory, what about the tree in the garden?, is that allegory? Why would a tree in a garden be any more or less allegorical than a tree in a city? And if it is, then what was the real sin that Adam and Eve committed? And if it wasn’t as stated, ie, eating from the tree, why wouldn’t God plainly state what the sin was?, especially since he specifically ask Adam later if that’s what he did! Did God ask Adam an allegorical question concerning his allegorical sin?
In our present day, I sense a great disconnect in the understanding of how end times truth empowers us for sanctified living. The Scriptures allude to this often, and I must confess, I am seeking for God to open my eyes more to the understanding of it. If ALL scripture is “profitable” to equip for every good work, then there must be a vital connection between end times knowledge and sanctification that pleases God. Some estimate that eschatology is 25% of scripture. Is today’s church only utilizing three fourths of the Bible to equip the saints? Paul said he did not fail to teach the “whole counsel of God.”
Where is our earnest expectation of a sudden and unexpected return of Christ? The Apostles and Christ
seem to emphasize such a mentality. Is our focus on a city built by God, or a house built by Drees in the suburbs?
The other night, I was watching a cable network show called “Gangland.” As I watched, the show seemed to glorify gangs while presenting a hopeless picture in regard to controlling them. As the show continued to delve deeper and deeper into their evil and proud exploits, I thought about that city where evil will be vanguished. Perhaps gang members need to hear more about that glorious city lit by the glory of the Lamb as compared to the city they live in and the difference in fate regarding the dwellers thereof.
Jesus also says there will be no more suffering in that city. Are these some pieces that may lead to understanding? Is the answer our focus and a willingness to confront evil and embrace suffering? Does that enhance our earnest expectation for the city built by God? I think that’s some of it. I also believe this: How the story of redemptive history ends is objective and not open to nebulous endeavors, for our wonderful lord spoke these words to John in regard to the truth about his city: “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.” [Revelation 21:5]
paul
The Role Of Counseling In The Church
This is a sermon I preached at Clearcreek Chapel of Dayton, Ohio in or about 1996. I was sorting through old files and actually threw it away, but decided to read it again out of curiosity. Much to my surprise, I still agree with most of it and think it is a message that a lot of Churches need to hear. My apologies, the manuscript is in caps because I read all of my sermons straight from the script and caps are easier for me to read.
This message is about the fact that the word of God, among other things, is a counseling book. In a matter of fact, it is “thee” counseling book. As Chuck and I go out visiting tonight, I am encouraged that we go with God’s wisdom and the opportunity that proceeds because of this fact.
If you are thinking about implementing a structured counseling [really, I prefer " in-depth discipleship"] program in your church, I highly recommend the Biblical Counseling Foundation’s “Self Confrontation” program. I like the sub title of the program better: “A Manual for In-Depth Biblical Discipleship.” I DO NOT recommend NANC or CCEF. NANC has an over emphasis on professionalism and CCEF integrates other disciplines that are clearly not biblical.
THE ROLE OF COUNSELING IN THE CHURCH
I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN TONIGHT BY SHARING WITH YOU ABOUT A GUY WHO WE WILL CALL JAKE. HIS NAME HAS BEEN CHANGED TO PROTECT THE GUILTY. BEFORE I START, I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT JAKE HAS GIVEN FULL PERMISSION TO USE HIS LIFE AS AN ILLUSTRATION FOR TONIGHT’S MESSAGE AS IT WILL BE PRESENTED.
JAKE IS IN HIS CAR ON THE WAY TO A COUNSELING APPOINTMENT. NOT WITH A PSYCHOLOGIST. NO, NO, PERISH THE THOUGHT. JAKE IS OF REFORMED THEOLOGY AND HAS READ ALMOST ALL OF DAVE HUNTS BOOKS. JAKE IS ON THE WAY TO SEE A BIBLICAL COUNSELOR.
WHILE JAKE IS ON THE WAY, LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HIM. JAKE IS WELL STUDIED IN THE SCRIPTURES. NOT ONLY DOES HE SPEND A LOT OF PERSONAL TIME IN THE WORD, HE HAS ROUGHLY 3 YEARS OF SEMINARY AND BIBLE COLLEGE COMBINED. ANOTHER THING I WILL TELL YOU IS JAKE’S LIFE IS IN A LOT OF TROUBLE. JAKE IS IN TROUBLE AT WORK. JAKE IS IN TROUBLE AT HOME. JAKE IS IN TROUBLE AT CHURCH. JAKE IS IN WHAT SOME CALL “CLINICAL DEPRESSION” AND CAN BARELY FUNCTION DAY TO DAY. ANY QUESTIONS? JAKE IS IN TROUBLE.
NOW BACK TO JAKE. ORDINARILY JAKE WOULD BE SCARED TO DEATH TO GET IN HIS CAR AND DRIVE ANYWHERE BECAUSE OF HIS EXCESSIVE PHOBIAS, BUT THE REASON JAKE IS ENTHUSIASTICALLY DRIVING TO THIS APPOINTMENT IS BECAUSE HE IS SURE THIS COUNSELOR CAN SHOW HIM THE SECRET BIBLE VERSE THAT WILL END ALL OF HIS TROUBLES IN 15 MINUTES. HOPE BUILDS STRONGER AND STRONGER AS HE DRAWS CLOSER TO HIS APPOINTMENT.
JAKE FINALLY ENTERS THE ROOM. HI!, THE COUNSELOR SAYS CHEERFULLY. THE COUNSELORS CHEERFUL DEMEANOR BUILDS EVEN MORE HOPE IN JAKE. AFTER SOME RELEVANT CONVERSATION, THE COUNSELOR TELLS JAKE WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO START. THIS IS THE MOMENT JAKE HAS BEEN WAITING FOR! “I HAVE A NEW GOAL FOR YOU JAKE,” SAID THE COUNSELOR. “YOUR NEW GOAL IS TO PLEASE GOD”. JAKE IS SO SHOCKED HE CANNOT SPEAK, BUT SCREAMS OUT THESE THOUGHTS IN HIS MIND: “PLEASE GOD! WHAT GOOD IS THAT GOING TO DO ME”!!!!!
AFTER THE COUNSELOR ASSIGNED SOME HOMEWORK, JAKE SCRAPES HIMSELF OFF THE FLOOR AND LEAVES. NOW JAKE IS DRIVING HOME AFTER THE APPOINTMENT, TALKING TO HIMSELF ON THE WAY. “HOW COULD HE GIVE ME SUCH A SIMPLISTIC SOLUTION TO MY PROBLEMS? THERE IS NO WAY THIS GUY UNDERSTANDS WHAT I AM GOING THROUGH. NOW WHAT AM I GOING TO DO?, GO TO A PSYCHOLOGIST? NO WAY. MY MOM WENT TO THEM FOR YEARS, THEY NEVER DID HER ANY GOOD. BESIDES, THE LAST ONE I WENT TO SEE BEFORE I WAS A CHRISTIAN CHARGED ME 85 DOLLARS AN HOUR AND ASK ME WHAT I THOUGHT THE ANSWERS TO MY PROBLEMS WHERE. IF I KNEW THAT, WHAT DID I NEED HER FOR? HOW ABOUT ANOTHER PASTOR OR COUNSELOR? THEY WILL JUST SEND ME TO A PSYCHOLOGIST. SUICIDE? HMMM, BETTER NOT. I’M NOT FOR SURE THAT I’M A CHRISTIAN. GEE GADS, I’M STUCK WITH THIS GUY!!!”
LITTLE DID JAKE KNOW, WHEN WORD GOT TO HEAVEN THAT THE COUNSELOR WAS STUCK WITH HIM THE FLAGS OF HEAVEN FLEW AT HALF STAFF AND ELIJAH WEPT. JAKE CONTINUES DOWN THE ROAD AND LOOKS DOWN AT THE HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT LAYING BESIDE HIM ON THE CAR SEAT “WHATS THIS HOMEWORK STUFF? I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF SUCH A THING IN CHURCH. HEY I KNOW, HE KNOWS MORE THAN HE’S LETTING ON. I BET THERE’S SOME ANSWERS IN THAT HOMEWORK.”
WELL, JAKE GOES HOME AND DOES HIS HOMEWORK AND HE’S RIGHT, THERE ARE ANSWERS IN THE HOMEWORK. JAKE LEARNS THAT THE BIBLE IS NOT A BOOK THAT TELLS US HOW TO GET RID OF OUR PROBLEMS BUT RATHER TELLS US HOW TO BE GOD’S KIND OF PERSON IN THE MIDST OF THE PROBLEMS. THIS ACTUALLY SOMEWHAT ENCOURAGES JAKE SINCE HE HASN’T HAD ANY SUCCESS GETTING RID OF HIS PROBLEMS ANYWAY.
JAKE ALSO LEARNS THAT GOD IS IN COMPLETE CONTROL OVER HIS PROBLEMS. HE WANTS TO USE THE PROBLEMS JAKE BROUGHT ON HIMSELF TO LEAD HIM TO REPENTANCE AND TEACH HIM HOW TO BE MORE LIKE CHRIST. THE OTHER PROBLEMS WHERE GOD’S SOVEREIGN WILL FOR HIS LIFE AND DECREED FOR THE SAME PURPOSE.
” OHHHHHHHHHH, JAKE SAYS TO HIMSELF, GOD IS NOT ONLY SOVEREIGN OVER SALVATION, HE’S ALSO SOVEREIGN OVER EVERY DETAIL OF OUR LIFE!”
THE HOMEWORK SMASHED JAKE’S FALSE HOPES LIKE A DIXIE CUP, BUT REAL HOPE FROM THE WORD OF GOD THAT THE COUNSELOR IS POINTING TO IS NOW BEGINNING TO SPROUT IN JAKE’S MIND.
AT HIS NEXT APPOINTMENT, JAKE UTTERS THESE PROFOUND WORDS: “WELL, I GUESS IT’S JUST NOT GOD’S WILL THAT EVERYTHING TURNS OUT THE WAY WE THINK IT SHOULD”. “OH, THAT’S GOOD JAKE”, REPLIES THE COUNSELOR. “I’M GLAD YOU SAID THAT, IN A MATTER OF FACT, I’M GOING TO WRITE IT DOWN IN YOUR FILE. LET’S SEE, JAKE SAID…….
TILL THIS DAY JAKE ISN’T SURE WHETHER THE COUNSELOR WAS INCREDIBLY PATIENT OR FINALLY SEIZED THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME FUN. NEVERTHELESS, JAKE WAS FLATTERED BY THE COUNSELOR’S RESPONSE AND ASSUMED HE FINALLY HIT ON SOME OF THAT BIBLICAL THINKING THE COUNSELOR KEPT TALKING ABOUT.
WELL, JAKE KEPT LEARNING AND TODAY SEES HIS LIFE AS RADICALLY CHANGED. WHAT I JUST SHARED IS OF COURSE A CONDENSED VERSION OF ACTUAL EVENTS. YOU CAN ADD MUCH INFORMAL ENCOURAGEMENT AND PHONE CALLS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT. THAT’S NOT SIMPLISTIC.
I SHARED JAKE’S STORY TO HELP US DEVELOP OUR FIRST POINT TONIGHT. WHAT IS THE CONTEMPORARY PICTURE OF COUNSELING IN TODAY’S CHURCH?
I KNOW YOU PROBABLY THINK JAKE WAS A SPIRITUAL AIR HEAD. BUT I WILL HASTEN TO ADD THAT EVEN IN HIS WORST STATE HE WAS FAR AHEAD OF A LOT OF CHRISTIANS. WHY? BECAUSE HE BELIEVED THE BIBLE ALONE HAD THE ANSWERS TO HIS PROBLEMS. MOST CHRISTIANS TODAY DO NOT EVEN BELIEVE THAT. YES, THE TRUTH JAKE DISCOVERED ABOUT HIS OWN SIN AND GOD’S WAY OF DEALING WITH IT WAS LIKE SWALLOWING A BIG HORSE PILL, BUT LIKE PETER HE SAID, “NEVERTHELESS LORD,AT YOUR WORD”.
UNDER OUR FIRST POINT IN YOUR NOTES, PLEASE DRAW A PIE AND SPLIT IT UP INTO TWO LARGE PIECES, TWO SMALL PIECES, AND A SLIVER. OF THE TWO SMALL PIECES, ONE SHOULD BE HALF THE SIZE OF THE OTHER. NOW LETS LABEL THE PIECES. YOUR LABELS CAN BE OUTSIDE BY WAY OF ARROWS. LABEL ONE OF THE BIG PIECES “WORD OF GOD NOT SUFFICIENT FOR COUNSELING, OTHER SOURCES NEEDED.” I DON’T THINK THIS NEEDS MUCH EXPLANATION.
LABEL THE SECOND BIG PIECE “WORD OF GOD NOT FULLY SUFFICIENT.” THIS REPRESENTS THOSE WHO THINK THE BIBLE IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE EVERYDAY MINOR PROBLEMS OF LIFE BUT SOMETHING MORE IS NEEDED FOR THE SERIOUS OR “DEEP” PROBLEMS OF LIFE.
I THINK THESE TWO PIECES OF THE PIE REPRESENTS THE THINKING OF MOST PEOPLE IN THE CHURCH TODAY.
NOW LETS LABEL ONE OF THE SMALL PIECES, THE LARGER OF THE TWO. JAKE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS PIECE. LABEL IT “ABSTRACT THEOLOGY”. SIMPLY PUT, ABSTRACT THEOLOGY IS A KNOWLEDGE OF THEOLOGICAL FACTS WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF HOW TO APPLY IT TO THE SPECIFICS OF LIFE. JAKE KNEW OF GOD’S SOVEREIGN GRACE, THAT’S GOOD THEOLOGY. BUT HE WAS OBLIVIOUS TO THE FACT THAT GOD WAS IN COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE PROBLEMS IN HIS LIFE AS WELL. THAT’S WHEN PANIC BEGAN TO START. JAKE THOUGHT HIS LIFE WAS SPINNING OUT OF CONTROL.
NOW LET’S LABEL THE OTHER SMALL PIECE. THESE ARE CHRISTIANS WHO UNDERSTAND THE CONNECTION OF THEOLOGY TO LIFE TO SOME POINT, BUT THEY LACK EXPERIENCE IN HELPING OTHERS TO DO IT. THIS ALSO HINDERS A FURTHER ABILITY TO DO IT IN THEIR OWN LIFE, WHICH THEY DO WELL TO A POINT. SOME WOULD SAY THEY ARE NOT “CASE WISE”. IF YOU HANDED THEM A BOOK OF ACTUAL CASE STUDIES WITHOUT THE BIBLICAL ANSWERS, THEY WOULD BE SURPRISED AT THEIR TRUE INABILITY TO HELP OTHERS WITH THE WORD OF GOD.
NOW LET’S LABEL THE SLIVER. THESE ARE CHRISTIANS WHO HAVE A GOOD WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF THEOLOGY AND HOW TO APPLY IT TO THEIR OWN LIFE AND THE LIVES OF OTHERS, AND ACTIVELY DO SO. THEY ARE TOO FEW IN THE BODY OF CHRIST. THE BIBLE CALLS THEM “MATURE” IN HEB 5;14 AND “SPIRITUAL” IN GAL 6:1.
THE TWO LARGE PIECES REPRESENT CONFUSION. THE TWO SMALL PIECES REPRESENT FAILURE OR LIMITED GLORY FOR GOD. THE SLIVER NEEDS TO BE A MUCH BIGGER PIECE OF THE PIE. SUCH IS THE PICTURE OF COUNSELING IN TODAY’S CHURCH. WHICH PIECE OF THE PIE DO YOU PRESENTLY RESIDE IN?
NOW IMAGINE FOR A MOMENT THAT ALL THE PIECES OF THE PIE EXCEPT FOR THE SLIVER ARE ONE PIECE. THOUGH THEY DIFFER, THEY COMMONLY BELIEVE THREE THINGS ABOUT BIBLICAL COUNSELING:
FIRST, COUNSELING IS ONLY FOR THOSE CHRISTIANS WHO HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS FROM A HUMAN PERSPECTIVE.
SECONDLY, THE TROUBLED CHRISTIAN ALWAYS INITIATES THE COUNSELING.
THIRDLY, IT MUST BE DONE BY THE SENIOR PASTOR OR A “TRAINED PROFESSIONAL”
THATS A PICTURE OF THE CONDITION AND SCOPE OF COUNSELING IN TODAY’S TYPICAL CHURCH. BUT IT’S NOT THE SAME PICTURE THE BIBLE PRESENTS.
FIRST OF ALL, OUR GOD IS NOT A GOD OF CONFUSION. THERE ARE NOT MULTIPLE SOURCES FOR GOD’S GUIDANCE AND COUNSEL. THE WORD OF GOD IS TOTALLY SUFFICIENT.
PSALM 1:1 AND 119:105 SAY THAT GOD’S WORD GIVES US DIRECTION. 2PETER 1:3 SAYS THAT THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD SUPPLIES US WITH EVERYTHING WE NEED FOR LIFE AND GODLINESS. THEN PETER SAYS IN VERSES 16-21 THAT THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD IN HIS WORD IS EVEN BETTER AND MORE CERTAIN THAN THE EVENTS AND MIRACLES THE APOSTLES WITNESSED WITH THEIR OWN EYES. HEBREWS 4:12,13 SAYS THE WORD OF GOD IS LIVING AND ACTIVE AND CAN LAY OPEN THE SOUL AND SPIRIT LIKE A DOUBLE EDGE SWORD CAN LAY OPEN A BODY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BONE MARROW. IT DISCERNS AND JUDGES THE ATTITUDES AND THOUGHTS OF THE MIND AND PREPARES MAN TO GIVE AN ACCOUNT TO GOD.
I ASK ANYONE WHO SAYS THE WORD IS NOT SUFFICIENT: CAN YOUR TRUTH DO THAT?
LASTLY ON THIS POINT, BUT NOT LEAST, PSALM 138:2 SAYS GOD HAS EXALTED HIS WORD EVEN ABOVE HIS OWN NAME!
THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED FOR CONFUSION AMONG GOD’S PEOPLE, AS JESUS SAID, “THY WORD IS TRUTH.” ALL COUNSEL CONCERNING THE ISSUES OF LIFE MUST BE FROM THE WORD OF GOD. THERE IS NO OTHER VIABLE SOURCE.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE NEED FOR COUNSELING ACTIVITY? SURELY COUNSELING TAKES A BACK SEAT IN A BIG WAY TO TEACHING AND PREACHING, RIGHT? LETS TAKE A WALK THROUGH THE SCRIPTURES AND FIND OUT.
FIRST OF ALL, WE FIND OUT A VERY IMPORTANT TRUTH ABOUT COUNSELING IN THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE BIBLE. IN GENESIS 1:27-2:25, WE FIND OUT MAN WAS CREATED TO BE COUNSELED. GOD BUILT IN THE NEED. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CREATION, MOST OF CHAPTER 1 AND ALL OF CHAPTER 2 DESCRIBES GOD’S COUNSEL TO ADAM AND EVE.
IMMEDIATELYAFTER THE FALL, WE FIND ADAM, EVE AND SATAN IN A COUNSELING SESSION WITH GOD. LATER, WE FIND GOD COUNSELING CAIN AFTER HE MURDERED HIS BROTHER ABLE. WE ALSO FIND SEVERAL COUNSELING SESSIONS BETWEEN GOD, ABRAHAM AND LOT. HAGAR IS COUNSELED IN THE WILDERNESS AND JOSEPH COUNSELS HIS BROTHERS. IN EXODUS THROUGH DEUTERONOMY, GOD AND MOSES COUNSEL THE ISRAELITES. IN NUMBERS 18, JETHRO AND MOSES SET UP A COUNSELING SYSTEM WHERE MOSES TOOK THE MOST DIFFICULT CASES AND THE REST WHERE SPLIT UP AMONG OTHER COUNSELORS. IN THE HISTORICAL AND PROPHETIC BOOKS, GOD COUNSELS HIS PEOPLE THROUGH THE PROPHETS. NATHAN COUNSELS DAVID. THE BOOK OF JOB IS ONE WHOLE COUNSELING CASE ALTHOUGH JOB’S THREE FRIENDS ARE A STUDY ON HOW NOT TO COUNSEL. THE BOOK OF PROVERBS IS A COUNSELING MANUAL. THE BOOK OF JONAH IS YET ANOTHER COUNSELING CASE. IN A MATTER OF FACT, THE BOOK OF JONAH GIVES GREAT INSIGHT INTO THE PROBLEM OF DEPRESSION.
SO FAR, THERE IS BARELY MORE THAN TWO NOTABLE SERMONS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, BUT MANY MORE COUNSELING EXAMPLES COULD BE CITED IF TIME PERMITTED.
IN THE GOSPELS, ONE SERMON BY JESUS IS RECORDED, THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT, BUT HIS COUNSEL TO OTHERS CONSUMES THE BOOKS. NICODEMUS, THE WOMAN AT THE WELL, THE RICH YOUNG RULER, THE APOSTLES AND OF COURSE PETER. THE EPISTLES ARE ALMOST ALL CORRECTIVE. EPHESIANS SIMULATES PROVERBS AS A COUNSELING MANUAL. PRISCILLA AND AQUILA COUNSEL APOLLOS AND JESUS COUNSELS THE SEVEN CHURCHES IN REVELATION. BUT YET, ONLY A FEW NOTABLE SERMONS BY PETER AND PAUL ARE RECORDED.
ONE MORE POINT NEEDS TO BE MADE HERE. NOT ONLY DOES COUNSELING CONSUME A VERY LARGE PORTION OF SCRIPTURE, BUT MOST OF IT IS PROACTIVE ON THE PART OF THE COUNSELORS. IN A MATTER OF FACT, HEB 10:24-25 SAYS ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS WE MEET TOGETHER IS FOR PROACTIVE COUNSEL.
WE SEE THAT COUNSELING IS VERY PREVALENT IN THE SCRIPTURES, BUT WHO COUNSELS AND WHO IS SUPPOSED TO DO COUNSELING?
WELL, WE HAVE SEEN THAT GOD HAS DONE COUNSELING FACE TO FACE WITH MAN. CHRIST IS CALLED THE “MIGHTY COUNSELOR.” THE HOLY SPIRIT IS WITHOUT A DOUBT THE MOST ACTIVE COUNSELOR EVER AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ANGELS HAVE ALSO BEEN VERY ACTIVE COUNSELORS. AN ANGEL COUNSELED MARTHA AND MARY AT THE TOMB. AN ANGEL COUNSELED THE APOSTLES AT CHRIST’ ASCENSION. AN ANGEL COUNSELED JOSEPH AND THERE ARE MANY MORE EXAMPLES.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THOSE OF US IN THE CHURCH ON EARTH?
FIRST OF ALL, PASTORS ARE TO COUNSEL. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT A PASTOR CAN TAKE THE WORD OF GOD AND GUIDE THE SAINTS IN EXEGETING HEARTS, MOTIVES AND ATTITUDES. UNDER THE INSPIRATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, PETER COMMANDS ALL ELDERS TO”SHEPHERD THE FLOCK OF GOD THAT IS AMONG YOU”. SHEPHERDS GUIDE, TEACH AND PROTECT AND MUST GIVE ACCOUNT OF YOUR LIFE FACE TO FACE WITH THE LORD JESUS CHRIST ACCORDING TO HEB 13:17. NOTICE THAT THIS VERSE ASSUMES THAT ELDERS “KEEP WATCH” OVER YOU.
ALSO, THE SCRIPTURES MAKE IT CLEAR WHAT THE PASTORS TOOLS ARE FOR DOING THIS, PRAYER AND THE WORD OF GOD.
IN ACTS 6:2-4. NOTICE THE TERM “MINISTRY OF THE WORD” IN THESE VERSES. THE MINISTRY OF THE WORD IS MORE THAN PREACHING. IT IS TEACHING, REBUKING, CORRECTING AND TRAINING IN RIGHTEOUSNESS ACCORDING TO 2TIM 3:16. PREACHING AND TEACHING ALONE CANNOT NOT ACCOMPLISH THIS, THAT IS OBVIOUS. VERSE 17 ADDS THAT THE WORD OF GOD FULLY EQUIPS THE MAN OF GOD FOR THIS TASK.
BEFORE WE MOVE ON, LET ME SAY THIS; THERE IS BARELY ANYTHING MORE SHAMEFUL THAN MEN WHO CALL THEMSELVES PASTORS THAT SEND HURTING PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE CHURCH TO THOSE WHO REJECT GOD’S WORD AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY FOR ALL COUNSELING.
OTHER THAN PASTORS, PARENTS ARE TO COUNSEL THEIR CHILDREN [ DUE 11;19, EPH 6:4]. GRANDPARENTS ARE TO COUNSEL THEIR GRANDCHILDREN [ DUE 6:9]. OLDER WOMEN ARE TO COUNSEL YOUNGER WOMEN [TITUS 2;1-5] HUSBANDS ARE TO COUNSEL THEIR WIVES [EPH 5;25,26]. THOSE WHO HAVE ENDURED TRIALS GOD’S WAY ARE TO COUNSEL
[2COR 1;3,4].
AND FINALLY,COUNSELING IS TO BE ONGOING BETWEEN CHRISTIANS. ALL CHRISTIANS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR COUNSELING EACH OTHER AND BEING SKILLED AT DOING SO THROUGH TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE [COL 3:16 ROM 15:14 AND ITHESS 514]. ALSO, APPARENTLY COUNSELING WILL CONTINUE AFTER THE COMING OF CHRIST. PAUL SAYS IN ICOR 6:3 THAT WE WILL COUNSEL ANGELS.
BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT POINT, LET’S DRAW ANOTHER PIE. MAKE ONE BIG PIECE THAT CIRCLES ALMOST ALL THE WAY AROUND. LABEL IT COUNSELING. NOW MAKE A SMALL PIECE. LABEL IT PREACHING,SACRAMENTS,WORSHIP SERVICES. I HOPE THAT DOESN’T OFFEND YOU. BUT I THINK IT IS A FAIR BIBLICAL PICTURE OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THE ROLE COUNSELING SHOULD PLAY IN THE CHURCH. OBVIOUSLY, COUNSELING DOES NOT PLAY THIS LARGE OF A ROLE IN TODAY’S CHURCH, BUT AT ONE TIME IT DID.
AT SOME POINT IN AMERICAN CHURCH HISTORY, THE CHURCH BEGAN TO FOCUS ON AND EMPHASIZE WHOLESALE, ONE TIME PROFESSIONS OF FAITH AT THE END OF FORMAL PREACHING AND FOCUSED AWAY FROM THE EVERYDAY SANCTIFICATION PROCESS.
TO MAKE THIS POINT QUICKLY, LET’S DRAW TWO PICTURES IN OUR MIND. ON THE ONE HAND YOU HAVE CHRISTIANS EXHORTING EACH OTHER, ADMONISHING EACH OTHER, COMFORTING EACH OTHER, TRAINING EACH OTHER,TEACHING EACH OTHER, ENCOURAGING EACH OTHER, PRAYING FOR EACH OTHER, ALL IN THE MILIEU OF LIFE. THEY SEE THEIR REMAINING MORTALITY AS A POWERFUL TYRANT THAT MUST BE BEATEN DOWN AND BROUGHT UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE WORD OF GOD WITH THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, STRINGENT DISCIPLINE AND THE AID OF OTHER BELIEVERS. THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, JUST THINK OF A BILLY GRAHAM CRUSADE. OR BETTER YET, A STADIUM FULL OF 350,000 TOUCHY FEELY MEN.
I’M NOT SAYING THAT NOTHING GOOD COMES OUT OF THOSE EVENTS. WHAT I’M SAYING IS THAT IT’S THE TRADE OFF IN FOCUS AND EMPHASIS THAT THE CHURCH HAS MADE AND PRECIOUS FEW PEOPLE WOULD DENY THAT.
THE CHURCHES FOCUS AWAY FROM THE RIGORS OF EVERYDAY SANCTIFICATION NATURALLY LED IT’S PASTORS AND LAITY AWAY FROM COUNSELING BECAUSE COUNSELING PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN THE SANCTIFICATION PROCESS. THIS LED TO A PROBLEM THAT MOSTLY EFFECTED THE PASTOR’S ABILITY TO MINISTER TO PEOPLE. KNOWING WHO PEOPLE ARE AND WHAT MAKES THEM TIC IS ESSENTIAL TO OUR ABILITY TO HELP THEM. PASTORS DO NOT LEARN ABOUT PEOPLE BY PREACHING THEOLOGY FROM THE PULPIT. THEY LEARN ABOUT PEOPLE BY INTERACTING WITH THEM AND THEIR PROBLEMS ON A CONTINUAL BASIS. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED FOR WHATEVER REASON: PASTORS TURNED THEIR BACKS ON COUNSELING PEOPLE AND BEGAN TO FOCUS SOLELY ON PREACHING AND THE EFFECT ON THE CHURCH HAS BEEN PROFOUND.
FIRST, IN REGARD TO PREACHING, AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, PREACHING BECAME SERMONS OF ABSTRACT THEOLOGY. WHEN PASTORS STOPPED LEARNING ABOUT PEOPLE BY COUNSELING EXPERIENCE AND THE WORD OF GOD, THEY LOST THEIR ABILITY TO ENJECT PRACTICAL APPLICATION INTO THEIR SERMONS AND PREACHING BECAME REDUCED TO THEOLOGICAL FACTS. JAKE SAT UNDER A LOT OF THIS KIND OF PREACHING / TEACHING AND WHEN THE TRIALS OF LIFE CAME, HIS HOUSE CAME CRASHING DOWN!
SECONDLY, THE CHURCHES TESTIMONY TO THE WORLD HAS BEEN PROFOUNDLY EFFECTED. THE INABILITY TO APPLY THEOLOGY TO LIFE HAS GREATLY HINDERED SANCTIFICATION IN THE CHURCH AND THEREFORE HAS CRIPPLED OUR IMPACT ON SOCIETY AND THE WORLD.
THIRDLY, ABSTRACT THEOLOGY HAS CAUSED A MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS IN TODAY’S CHURCH TO DOUBT THAT GOD’S WORD IS TOTALLY SUFFICIENT BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN TAUGHT, NOR HAVE WITNESSED IT’S TRANSFORMING POWER THAT RESULTS FROM IT’S PRACTICAL APPLICATION.
FOURTHLY, THIS HAS ALSO LED TO A GREAT DECLINE IN EVANGELISM. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO GET CHRISTIANS EXCITED ABOUT EVANGELISM WHEN THEY DO NOT SEE THE AWESOME POWER OF GOD BEING DEMONSTRATED IN THEIR OWN LIVES AND THE LIVES OF OTHERS. HAVE YOU NOTICED HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO GET CHRISTIANS EXCITED ABOUT EVANGELISM? ANYMORE, TO GET CHRISTIANS TO EVANGELIZE YOU HAVE TD PACKAGE IT WITH A TRIP OR A VACATION. BUT EVEN THEN EVANGELISM HAS LOST IT’S EFFECTIVENESS BECAUSE WHEN PASTORS STOPPED LEARNING ABOUT PEOPLE AND CHRISTIANS STOPPED LEARNING ABOUT EACH OTHER, GOSPEL PRESENTATIONS BECAME CANNED. THE ROMANS ROAD, THE FOUR SPIRITUAL LAWS, TRACKS, EVANGELISM EXPLOSION, PEOPLE RUNNING UP AND DOWN ISLES, ENDLESS RE-DEDICATION AND ENDLESS CLICHES.
THE APOSTLE PAUL KNEW PEOPLE AND THAT’S WHY HIS GOSPEL PRESENTATIONS WERE FITTED TO THE PERSON AND THE SITUATION WITHOUT COMPROMISE. DID NOT CHRIST PRESENT THE GOSPEL TO THE WOMAN AT THE WELL IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN NICODEMUS AND THE RICH YOUNG RULER? NOT TO MENTION MANY OTHERS.
LET ME READ PHILEMON 4-7 BECAUSE I THINK IT TIES ALL OF MY POINTS TOGETHER [READ]. BY ACTIVELY REFRESHING THE HEARTS OF THE SAINTS, PAUL SAID PHILEMON WOULD GAIN A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF EVERY GOOD THING WE HAVE IN CHRIST, AND SO IT IS WITH US ALSO.
UNDER POINT FOUR, LET’S NOW DISCUSS THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE CHURCH NEEDS A COUNSELING SYSTEM. IN OTHER WORDS, DOES THE CHURCH NEED METHODOLOGY IN ORDER TO COUNSEL EFFECTIVELY?
MANY PASTORS WOULD SAY NO, AND HERE’S HOW THE ARGUMENT GOES: THIS IS ALMOST A WORD FOR WORD QUOTE FROM A PASTOR FRIEND OF MINE; “PAUL, IF THE PEOPLE WOULD JUST COME TO THE SERMONS AND STUDY THE WORD OF GOD ON THEIR OWN, THEY WOULDN’T NEED COUNSELING. I CAN’T TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES SOMEBODY HAS CALLED ME FOR COUNSEL ON AN ISSUE THAT I PREACHED ON JUST THE WEEK BEFORE”
THERE ARE MANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS REASONING BUT I WILL ONLY COVER THE MAJOR ONES. THIS REASONING ASSUMES PEOPLE ALWAYS KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEIR PROBLEM IS AND CAN THEREFORE ALWAYS APPLY THE RIGHT SERMON. NOT SO. JERE 17:9 SAYS WE CANNOT KNOW OUR OWN HEARTS APART FROM THE WORD OF GOD
PROVERBS 20:5 SAYS THAT IT TAKES A WISE MAN TO DRAW OUT THE ISSUES OF THE HEART. GAL 6:1 DOES NOT SAY TO SEND A FALLEN BROTHER OR SISTER TO A PREACHING SERVICE, IT SAYS TO SEND “THOSE WHO ARE SPIRITUAL”. ALSO, THIS LINE OF REASONING ASSUMES GOD GAUGES THE TRIALS OF LIFE ACCORDING TO SERMON SCHEDULES. CERTAINLY WE SHOULD ALL KNOW BETTER THAN THAT.
ANOTHER ARGUMENT IS THAT THE PRESENT DAY BIBLICAL COUNSELING
MOVEMENT MAKES A STRONG DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT IS CALLED COUNSELORS AND COUNSELEES, CREATING A SORT OF HAVE AND HAVE NOT ENVIRONMENT THAT SMACKS OF PROFESSIONALISM. ACTUALLY, THE BIBLE MAKES THAT DISTINCTION BUT IT’S NOT PROFESSIONALISM. IT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE WHO DILIGENTLY STUDY THE SCRIPTURES AND APPLY THEM TO THERE OWN LIFE AND HAVE EXPERIENCE HELPING OTHERS TO DO THE SAME. THE BIBLE CALLS THEM “MATURE” [HEB 5:14], AND “SPIRITUAL” [GAL 6:1] AND PEOPLE OF “FAITH AND LOVE” [PHILEMON 4-6].
HERE IS ANOTHER THOUGHT: WHEN YOUR A NEW CHRISTIAN, YOUR PURELY A COUNSELEE FOR THE MOST PART. AS YOU GROW, YOU LEARN HOW TO COUNSEL YOURSELF AND OTHERS AND BECOME MORE OF A COUNSELOR AND LESS OF A COUNSELEE. ONCE YOU START TO GROW AND MATURE, THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOMEBODY WHO KNOWS LESS THAN YOU DO. THEY ARE CANDIDATES TO BE HELPED BY YOU.
BUT IT SHOULD BE OUR GOAL TO BEAR OUR OWN BURDENS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE SO WE ARE FREE TO HELP OTHERS THAT MUCH MORE. WELL THEN, YOU ASK, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MOST OF YOUR PEOPLE ARE MATURE AND COUNSELEES GET SCARCE. YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS THEN? THE WALLS OF THE CHURCH CAN’T CONTAIN IT. THE PEOPLE GOTTA COUNSEL SOMEWHERE EVEN IF IT’S THE PRE-COUNSELING OF EVANGELISM. YOUR PEOPLE MOVE OUT AND BECOME AN AWESOME LIGHT IN THEIR COMMUNITY FOR THE GLORY OF GOD!
I THINK AS THE PEOPLE DILIGENTLY APPLY THE WORD OF GOD TO THEIR OWN LIVES AND HELP OTHERS TO DO THE SAME, THEY BEGIN TO SEE GOD’S TRANSFORMING POWER AND CANNOT RESTRAIN THEMSELVES FROM SHARING IT WITH OTHERS.
OUR FINAL POINT TONIGHT IS ARGUMENTS FOR A COUNSELING SYSTEM.
1. BECAUSE GOD HIMSELF IS A GOD OF SYSTEMS AND METHODS. THIS IS CLEAR FROM CREATION. THE SOLAR SYSTEM. THE NATURAL SYSTEM OF HYDROLOGY ECT. GOD USED METHODS AND SYSTEMS TO WRITE HIS WORD. WHEN GOD COUNSELED ADAM AND EVE AFTER THE FALL, HE BEGAN WITH ADAM FIRST. THEN EVE. THEN THE SERPENT. AFTER HEARING THEIR EXPLANATIONS, HE DEALT WITH THEM IN THE SAME ORDER CONCERNING THE CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT THEY HAD DONE. GOD ALWAYS USES SYSTEMS AND METHODS.
2. IF WE SEE A NEED FOR SYSTEMATIZED THEOLOGY, SYSTEMATIC BIBLE STUDY AND A CHRISTIAN SCHOOL SYSTEM, WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT A SYSTEM FOR TARGETED DISCIPLESHIP? THAT’S REALLY WHAT COUNSELING IS, TARGETED DISCIPLESHIP. THOSE WHO APPOSE A SYSTEM OF COUNSELING WOULD NOT DENY THE NEED FOR SYSTEMS IN THESE OTHER AREAS.
3. IF THE ISSUES AND PURPOSES OF MAN ARE DEEP AND COMPLICATED AS PROVERBS 20:5 SAYS, THEN WE NEED A SYSTEM TO HELP US IN OUR UNDERSTANDING JUST AS SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY HELPS US UNDERSTAND THEOLOGY.
4. HISTORY TEACHES US THAT THE CHURCH TENDS TO LOOSE WHAT IT DOES NOT PUT INTO A SYSTEM. FUTURE GENERATIONS SHOULD ALWAYS CONTINUE TO BUILD UPON WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED IN THE PAST AND IMPROVE IT’S EFFECTIVENESS. SYSTEMS AND METHODS GIVE US A WAY TO CAN WHAT. WE HAVE LEARNED AND PASS IT ON TO THE NEXT GENERATION.
5. SYSTEMS AND METHODS ARE CRITICAL TO HOLDING COUNSELORS ACCOUNTABLE AND CONSISTENT.
6. IT OBVIOUSLY TAKES TRAINING TO BE PREPARED TO COUNSEL PEOPLE WITH SERIOUS PROBLEMS. SYSTEMS AND METHODS ARE ESSENTIAL TO GOOD TRAINING.
TODAY’S CHURCH NEEDS A NEW SELF-IMAGE. WE NEED TO SEE OURSELVES AS AN INTIMATE FAMILY HELPING EACH OTHER DOWN THE ROAD OF SANCTIFICATION TOWARD THE PERFECT DAY. WE NEED TO SEE THE TRIP TOGETHER DOWN THAT ROAD AS A STRUGGLE AGAINST THE FLESH THAT WILL REQUIRE US TO BE SOLDIERS AND OLYMPIANS. ANY LESSER VIEW OF THE SIN THAT IS IN US IS TO GREATLY UNDER-ESTIMATE THE ENEMY.
WE MUST ESTEEM OTHERS BETTER THAN OURSELVES, ADMONISH EACH OTHER, EXHORT EACH OTHER, TEACH EACH OTHER, CORRECT EACH OTHER, TRAIN EACH OTHER, ENCOURAGE EACH OTHER, WARN EACH OTHER, PROTECT EACH OTHER, GREET EACH OTHER, BE KIND TO EACHO1HER, SUBMIT TO EACH OTHER, PRAY FOR EACH OTHER AND KNOW EACH OTHER.
THERE IS NO TIME FOR GOSSIP SLANDER, COMPETITION AND A HOST OF OTHER THINGS THAT DO NOT EDIFY AND STRENGHTEN THE FAMILY.
THE CHURCH NEEDS TEACHING AND PREACHING THAT CAN IDENTIFY THE REAL ISSUES OF LIFE, THE TOOLS NEEDED TO DEAL WITH THEM AND HOW TO USE THOSE TOOLS. THEY MUST BE MEN WHO ARE IN THE PROCESS OF KNOWING GOD’S WORD, KNOWING GOD’S WORLD AND KNOWING GOD’S PEOPLE THROUGH DILIGENT INTERACTION. THESE MEN WILL BE KNOWN BY THE AMOUNT OF PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF THEOLOGY TO LIFE THAT ACCOMPANIES THEIR MESSAGES.
IF WE ARE TO BE A HEALING COMMUNITY THAI GLORIFIES GOD, COUNSELING FROM THE SCRIPTURES MUST BE RETURNED TO IT’S LOFTY POSITION IN THE CHURCH FOR IT PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN SANCTIFICATION AND DISCIPLESHIP
The Gatekeepers of God’s Self-Esteem Are Also Party Poopers
![6015_1149854598353_1587266178_368676_516836_t[1]](http://paulspassingthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/6015_1149854598353_1587266178_368676_516836_t1.jpg?w=75&h=85 "6015_1149854598353_1587266178_368676_516836_t[1]")
For the most part, I don’t know why God does what he does or why he does it. I just pick up the Bible and read it with the intention of learning all I can about him. I assume for the most part that God wrote his word to the common man [mankind] and intends to be clear about important matters of life and godliness. Granted, there are many things in the Bible that are hard to understand and I think God is honored when we strive to understand accordingly. God gave us a brain more complex than any computer that will ever be built and yes, we should therefore use it, especially in his honor.
However, in regard to matters of great import that he wants to make clear we sometimes miss the simplicity because we are looking for something deeper, making it way harder than it is. Though God is honored by inquisitions, I think it’s obvious that he doesn’t want us spending all of our time figuring things out either.
Now to my point. The contemporary Reformed Church and especially the so-called “New Reformation” is beginning to really annoy me. “No, no, no. God is not concerned with making a fuss over some plot of land in the Middle East, that would ‘eclipse the majesty of Christ.’” I could use many other examples of how the spiritual brainiacs of our time are out to save God from devaluing his own majestic glory. They are the self proclaimed gatekeepers of God’s self-esteem. Yes, they have God all figured out and thanks to them we now have to figure out why an axe head floating down a brook is teaching about the gospel.
Furthermore, they are out to save dumb hillbillies like me from all of God’s party favors: “A rapture?! Nonsense!, that’s just escapism. You shameful, dumb hillbilly, you don’t want to suffer for Christ like the great reformers before us!” [Oh that Christ would bring this suffering and do it quickly]. Also, shame on me for getting the idea from scripture that I will be rewarded by God for my performance down here: “Rewards!!!! You think you can earn something from God and that your works will be any subject at all before the majestic Christ in all his glory!!!”[well excuuuuuuuse me]. I also get this strange idea from scripture that God is concerned with a literal earthly kingdom and that his Son will rule it from a literal throne in Jerusalem. I also believe in a literal city built by God that is 1500 miles high and 1500 miles wide and can’t wait to see it. Silly me. Again, such bafoonery on my part to think Christ would create anything that would distract from him for one moment [ of course it goes without saying that all God creates ultimatley glorifies Him] It is no wonder their hero, Gerhardus Vos, thought dispensationalist should be psychologically evaluated.
In all seriousness, and again, I don’t know why God orchestrates as he does. That’s his business, I just take what he says at face value when the plain sense is apparent. It’s like I heard one pastor say:”You can’t stuff God into a theological system, you will soon be trying to answer questions you cannot answer.” Amen.
However, I do know this: God warns throughout Scripture about twisting, adding, or taking away from his word and the consequences don’t sound like very much fun. If God means something to be literal and you say it’s allegory and assign another meaning to it, that’s twisting God’s word. If God says there are multiple judgments and you say there is only one, that is taking away from God’s word. If God teaches more resurrections than you do, that is also taking away from his word.
Also, please note how reformed organizations like CCEF never teach on eschatology which is about 25% of the Bible. But you say: “Now wait a minute here, they are concerned with counseling issues and spiritual development.” Oh, so they are not held to the same standard as the Apostle Paul?, who said that he did not fail to “teach the whole counsel of God.” Also, you are saying that eschatology has no connection at all to happiness or the sanctification process. Do you really want to say that? I hope not. Listen, it is a fact, many reformed Churches are guilty of not teaching last things and it is directly related to their theology. This is clearly taking away from the word of God, 25% of it. I hope to post soon on this whole idea that the truth of last things has no place in the sanctification process or spiritual growth.
Meanwhile, nobodies going to crash my party, I’m in hillbilly bliss.
paul
John Piper’s “Joy” Thesis Demolished By One Little Preposition
One of the dominate themes of John Piper’s teachings is the thesis that portrays the following: Todays Christians primarily worship God out of joyless duty. “Would you take your wife flowers and say, ‘here honey, I’m bringing you these flowers out of duty?’” So goes the often used and supposedly profound exemplification designed to show forth one of the many horrors of contemporary evangelicalism.
Where does John Piper get his information? Did he take a survey? Has he observed every evangelical church in the country? Probably not, but I’m sure his thesis is assumed because of the long standing belief among evangelicals that you should obey God whether you feel like it or not. This cuts against the grain of Piper’s thinking which holds to the idea that actions are legitimized by the presence of joy and well placed desire.
I’m no prophet, but I assure you the following song will never be sung in Piper’s church: “Trust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey [John H. Sammis, Daniel B. Towner].” Piper is a strong advocate of a passive “beholding as a way of becoming [Pleasures Of God page 15]” form of sanctification. As we gaze at the awesome glory of God in the Scriptures, He uses this beholding of His glory to transform our desires which results in joyful obedience. According to Piper, this joy is the evidence that God has transformed our desires, even in regard to salvation. Piper’s passive approach as stated above can be seen in a mass of his writings, but I will cite the following in regard to his beliefs on the proper use of God’s law:
“What Then Shall Those Who Are Justified Do with the Law of Moses?
Read it and meditate on it as those who are dead to it as the ground of your justification and the power of your sanctification. Read it and meditate on it as those for whom Christ is your righteousness and Christ is your sanctification. Which means read and mediate on it to know Christ better and to treasure him more. Christ and the Father are one (John 10:30; 14:9). So to know the God of the Old Testament is to know Christ. The more you see his glory and treasure his worth, the more you will be changed into his likeness (2 Corinthians 3:17-18), and love the way he loved – which is the fulfilling of the law (Romans 13:10) [“How To Use The Law Of God Lawfully To Bear Fruit For God”].”
In other words, we are in no way transformed by reading and applying God’s word to our life whether we feel like it or not. That’s just mere duty and is not curative to our condition and will certainly not produce joy in our life. Piper makes this clear in “When I Don’t Desire God,” page 43. This is the only place in this 233 page book where he addresses the question, “well then, what to do when I don’t want to obey?” He grudgingly concedes that it is better to obey anyway, but only as a way of fighting for joy while we wait on the Lord to give it to us as a gift. He goes out of his way in this one paragraph to emphasize the “fact” that it will not be a result of anything we do.
In the last chapter of this same book, I concede that he has good observations in regard to the depressed, but again robs them of hope that God is a rewarder of those who seek him and commit themselves to doing good. Piper clearly disregards our efforts as having any place in the sanctification process.
As I wrestled with this issue a couple of weeks ago, I found myself complaining to God that he did not make this very important issue more clear to us in his word. No doubt, grump buckets are no fine testimony to the Christian faith and I wanted some answers. But some days later when I was reading in God’s word, I came across this passage in James 1:25;
“But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.”
It’s not a complicated issue like I made it out to be and I really don’t know where I got it
that scripture was not clear on the issue. This couldn’t be more simple. In every English translation, the preposition “in” is present. God’s blessings come “in” the doing. If you want to be blessed [happy], you do. Really, this truth can be seen throughout scripture, but I would throw in Philippians 4: 9 and Geneses 4:5-7 for further reference here. Furthermore, this is not naked pragmatism by any stretch of the imagination, it takes faith. You have to believe what the word says about applying God’s truth to life.
Scripture rarely emphasizes how people feel before they do anything for God and for sure never says to wait on God for feelings. Blessings “in” the doing are promises from God throughout Scripture. Piper has it wrong, but the song has it right: “Trust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey.”
paul
Why New Covenant Theology And It’s Elements Are Dead On Arrival
Really, the more I study, the more I see the absolute continuity of the Old and New Testament. Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for not having an understanding of the new birth from the Old Testament. Paul told Timothy that “ALL” Scripture was profitable for equipping God’s people for “every good work.” Simeon lifted up the baby Jesus and proclaimed: “my eyes have seen your salvation.” The Apostle Paul and the Hebrew writer point to the Old Testament saints as an example of saving faith. The Apostle also quotes the Old Testament when he says: ”the just shall live by faith.”
To the contrary, NCT teaches that Christ came to usher in a “higher law of Christ” and the New Covenant which abrogates the Old Testament Law. Proponents of NCT use the Sermon on the Mount to bolster this view. I couldn’t help but to recognize this error while reading John MacArthur’s new book, “The Jesus You Can’t Ignore”- pages 134 through 140. While expounding on this sermon by Christ, he mentions those who believe that Christ came to modify the Old Testament Law and shows how the Law always addressed issues of the heart. Nothing has changed, it’s a myth.
Also, keep in mind that the major elements of Gospel Sanctification- Heart Theology, Christocentric Hermeneutics, and Christian Hedonism, all depend on the foundation of New Covenant Theology. Though Mac is clearly not addressing my concerns, what he has to say speaks to it accordingly and why NCT is simply DOA.
The following is his excerpt:
After the Beatitudes, Jesus goes straight into an extended discourse on the true meaning of Old Testament law.’ The rest of Matthew 5 is a systematic, point-by-point critique of the Pharisees’ interpretation of Moses’ law. Jesus is correcting some of their representative errors.
Some commentators have suggested that Jesus is altering or expanding the moral requirements of Moses’ law for a new dispensation. Jesus Himself emphatically said otherwise: “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled” (vv. 17-18).
Furthermore, every principle Jesus used to refute the Pharisees’ interpretation of the law was already either stated or plainly implied in the Old Testament. We’ll see that very clearly in our survey of this section.
But what is most important to notice here is that Jesus deliberately sets His description of authentic righteousness against the religion of the Pharisees. The brunt of the sermon is aimed squarely at them. The Sermon on the Mount is in essence a jeremiad against their unique brand of hypocrisy. That is the singular theme that ties the whole sermon together.
Furthermore, when He singled out these specific misunderstandings of Moses’ law, Jesus was clearly impugning the Pharisees’ pet doctrines. He was publicly denouncing what they taught. Everyone in the crowd understood that. It was impossible to ignore. Jesus made no effort to make the dichotomy subtle or to outline His differences with them in a delicate fashion. He went for the jugular against their most closely held beliefs. He even mentioned the Pharisees by name and expressly stated that their righteousness was inadequate—lest there be any ambiguity about whose doctrine He was refuting.
Immediately after saying, “Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven” (v. 20), he began dismantling their whole system. He attacked their method of interpreting Scripture, their means of applying the law, their notions of guilt and merit, their infatuation with ceremonial minutiae, and their love for moral and doctrinal casuistry.
The major arguments in this section of the sermon are structured in a way that contrasts the Pharisees’ interpretation of the law with the law’s real meaning, as expounded by Christ: “You have heard that it was said to those of old. . . . But /say to you . . .” Six times in the second half of Matthew 5, Jesus used that formula or a variation of it (vv. 21-22, 26-28, 31-32, 33-34, 38-39, 43-44). When He spoke of what “you have heard,” He was describing the Pharisees’ teaching. And in each case, He refuted it.
Again, He was not changing or expanding the law’s moral requirements; He was simply reaffirming what the law always meant. “Your commandment is exceedingly broad,” David said, as he meditated on the law (Psalm 119:96). The meaning of the Ten Commandments is not exhausted by the wooden literal sense of the words. Jesus says, for example, that the sixth commandment forbids not only literal acts of murder, but murderous attitudes as well— including undue anger, abusive speech, and an unforgiving spirit (vv. 22-25). The seventh commandment forbids not merely acts of adultery, but even an adulterous heart (v. 28). The command to love your neighbor applies not only to friendly neighbors, but also to those who are our enemies (v. 44).
Superficial readers are sometimes inclined to think Jesus was modifying or raising the bar on the standard of Moses’ law. After all, He quoted directly from the sixth and seventh commandments (vv. 21, 27), and He cited the Old Testament principle known as lex talionis (“an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”—v. 38; cf. Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, and Deuteronomy 19:21)—then He followed those quotations with “But I say to you . . .” To a casual listener, it might actually sound as if He were changing the law itself, or making a new law that stood in contrast to what the Old Testament had always taught. But remember: Jesus Himself unequivocally denied that notion in verses 17-18.
Instead, what Jesus is doing in this portion of the sermon is unpacking the true and full meaning of the law as it was originally intended—especially in contrast to the limited, narrow, and woodenly literal approach of the Pharisees. Their hermeneutic (the method by which they interpreted Scripture) was laden with sophistry. They could expound for hours on the law’s invisible fine points while inventing technical twists and turns to make exceptions to some of the law’s most important moral precepts.
For example, the fifth commandment is clear enough: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12). But the Pharisees had a custom whereby “if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban’—(that is, a gift to God), then [the Pharisees] no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother” (Mark 7:11-12). In fact, if someone had thus pledged his inheritance to God and then used any of his resources to care for his parents in their old age, the Pharisees would deem that act of charity a sacrilege, because it was a violation of the Corban vow. Jesus told them, “[You have made] the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do” (v. 13, emphasis added).
That was precisely the kind of hermeneutical tomfoolery Jesus was correcting in the Sermon on the Mount. The Pharisees interpreted the seventh commandment strictly as a narrow prohibition against full-fledged adultery. Of course, by defining adultery only in terms of the outward act, they had left their hearts totally unguarded. Like many today who wrongly think fantasies are harmless if not acted upon, they felt free to arouse and indulge in sinful appetites in the privacy of their own imaginations—as if their hearts were somehow exempt from the law’s standards. Indeed, that very misconception lay at the root of all the Pharisees’ errors. It was how they justified all their hypocrisy.
The Pharisees also had a very liberal standard for divorce, in effect allowing a kind of legalized serial adultery. Jesus corrects that error in verses 31-32.
They likewise applied the sixth commandment as narrowly as possible, believing it forbade only actual crimes of homicide. Meanwhile, they actively encouraged hatred for one’s enemies (Matthew 5:43), which in effect nurtured murderous attitudes. Verses 39-47 are an extended refutation of that fallacy.
In fact, it is at this point where Jesus raises the issue of the Old Testament’s eye-for-an-eye rule. The context of Exodus 21:24-25, where that standard was given, shows that it was a principle designed to limit penalties assessed in civil and criminal court cases. It was never supposed to authorize private retaliation for petty insults and personal infractions. It was a principle that kept the legal system in check (cf. Exodus 21:1), not a rule designed to unleash neighbor against neighbor in a back-and-forth war of attacks and counter attacks. But the Pharisees had basically turned it into that. Personal vengeance poisoned the social atmosphere of Israel, and the religious leaders justified it by an appeal to Moses. Jesus said that was a total misuse and abuse of Moses’ law.
Further proof that Jesus was not altering the law’s legal standard is seen in the fact that every principle He gave in rebuttal to the Pharisees’ teaching could already be found in the Old Testament. Psalm 37:8-9, for example, plainly states the same principle Jesus said is implied in the law’s ban on murder. It even echoes the language of the Beatitudes regarding meekness: “Cease from anger, and forsake wrath; do not fret—it only causes harm. For evildoers shall be cut off; but those who wait on the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.”
Likewise, when Jesus said lust is a violation of the moral principle underlying the seventh commandment, he wasn’t adding anything to the law. Lust was expressly forbidden by the tenth commandment, and it was identified with the sin of adultery in Proverbs 6:25. Of course, the heart is the most important battlefield in the struggle for moral purity (Proverbs 4:23). And since God sees the heart (1 Samuel 16:7; Psalm 139:2; Proverbs 15:11; Jeremiah 17:10), all the sins that take place in a person’s imagination are real sins committed before the very face of God (Psalm 90:8). The Pharisees clearly ought to have known that.
Malachi 2:14-16 condemns divorce in language similar to that of the Sermon on the Mount: “The LORD God of Israel says that He hates divorce, for it covers one’s garment with violence”(v. 16). Deuteronomy 23:21-23 forbade casual oaths. Lamentations 3:30 spoke of the virtue of turning the other cheek. The duty of loving one’s enemy was very clearly spelled out in Exodus 23:4-5: “If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again. If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden, and you would refrain from helping it, you shall surely help him with it.” Proverbs 25:21 likewise taught the same principle: “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.” Those commandments should have also made it perfectly clear that the eye-for-an-eye principle was not intended to be a recipe for personal retribution. God Himself said, “Vengeance is Mine, and recompense” (Deuteronomy 32:35; cf. Psalm 94:1).
Clearly, Jesus was in no way expressing disagreement with Moses’ law or amending its moral content. Every principle in the Sermon on the Mount was either plainly stated or clearly implied in the Old Testament. The Sermon on the Mount therefore must be understood as Jesus’ exposition of Old Testament law, not a different moral standard altogether. He was simply refuting the Pharisees’ misconstrued teaching about the law’s moral precepts.
Matthew 5 ends with a brief passage aimed at the Pharisees’ self- righteous style of separatism. It is part of the section where Jesus is expounding on the duty to love one’s neighbors. The Pharisees, in their passion for ceremonial displays of piety, would even cross the road to avoid contact with their enemies lest they be defiled (cf. Luke 10:31-32). That same way of thinking was also behind their frequent complaints about Jesus’ close contacts with sinners (Matthew 9:11; Luke 15:2; 19:7). Jesus pointed out that they had set such a pathetically low standard for the second great commandment (“Love your neighbor as yourself”—Matthew 22:39) that even the rankest sinner would have no trouble obeying: “For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?” (Matthew 5:46-47). In effect He was teaching that the Pharisees’ standard of behavior was no better than the morality of any publican.
Jesus then clearly identified the true standard, and it is infinitely higher than that: “You are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (v. 48 NASB).
Obviously, divine perfection is impossible for fallen sinners. That was a major part of the point Jesus was making. The law itself demands absolute perfection (Leviticus 19:2; 20:26; Deuteronomy 18:13; 27:26; cf. James 2:10). No sinner can possibly live up to that standard, which is why we are dependent on grace for salvation. Our own righteousness can never be good enough (Philippians 3:4-9); we desperately need the perfect righteousness that God imputes to those who believe (Romans 4:1-8).
But the Pharisees epitomized the central fallacy of all human religion. “They being ignorant of God’s righteousness, [were] seeking to establish their own righteousness” (Romans 10:3). They believed their best would be good enough for God—especially if they adorned their religion with as many carefully crafted ceremonies and rituals as possible. That’s where all their trust and all their hope for heaven lay. They of course formally recognized that they, too, were imperfect, but they minimized their own imperfections and covered them with public exhibitions of piety. They were convinced that would be good enough for God, mainly because it made them seem so much better than everyone else.
Naturally, any Pharisee who may have been in the audience for the Sermon on the Mount would have understood Jesus’ message plainly enough: Their righteousness, with all its stress on pomp and circumcision, simply did not meet the divine standard. They weren’t really any better than the tax collectors. And God would not accept their imperfect righteousness. Jesus was as direct as possible about that……….
Grievous Error Of Gospel Sanctification Hinges On The Preposition, “By”
Regardless of what you think of Hal Lindsey, I still think he coined one of the most profound sound bites on biblical error of all time: “Satan will use a lake of truth to hide a pint of poison.”
Granted, the Bible clearly teaches us to live ACCORDING to the gospel. We are to love the way God loved us, sacrificially [John 3:16]. We are to forgive the way God forgave us, unconditionally in regard to degree [Col. 3:13]. We are to serve those who God serves, everybody [Mark 10:44-46]. We repented when we were saved, we should repent daily [1John1:9, though it is not the exact same repentance as the repentance of salvation; John 13:8-10].
But there is a big difference between living in accordance [a verb that means to agree with or harmonize] with the gospel and the constant mantra of “living ‘by’ the gospel.” The first implies that we do something that brings our lives into agreement with the gospel. The latter implies that the “gospel” does it all. “By” is a preposition that means “through.” The difference between “I walked to the store” and, “I arrived at the store ‘by’ automobile.” That is why Gospel Sanctification is also called “Gospel ‘Driven’ Sanctification.” The gospel DRIVES the sanctification, not us [though we take part, the Holy Spirit is our helper: John 14:16,17,26,27. It should be apparent that we would not need a “helper” if we have no part in our sanctification].
But what’s the big deal? What makes one the norm and the other grievous error?
1] Obedience, a theme that saturates scripture from Genesis to Revelation, is redefined as a mere result rather than an exercise of the will to love God. The implication of the preposition used in the mantra is no accident. One example would be John Piper’s concept of “beholding as a way of becoming [Pleasures Of God pg. 15].” In other words, we don’t do anything but gaze at the glory of the gospel and are changed by it accordingly [advocates of GS like to cite 2Cor. 3:18 for this] which leads to a joyful, effortless, obedience. This is also the strong theme of “How People Change” by Paul Tripp, an associate of John Piper. In Tripp’s book, he propagates a “resting and feeding” which leads to “new and surprising” fruit as observed in the Bible’s “fruit catalogue.”
Another constant theme is the prescribed avoidance of “obeying God in ‘our own efforts.’” Again, no accident here, we are not to employ effort in the sanctification process.
2] I take exception to the term “Living ‘by’ the gospel” because the scriptures teach that we are sanctified “by” the Holy Spirit. Does Gospel Sanctification therefore diminish the role of the Holy Spirit in Sanctification?, yes, definitely. The Bible clearly states that we are changed “by” the Holy Spirit, not “the gospel [Rom.8:14, Gal. 6:8, Rom.8:4, Rom. 15:16, 1Cor. 6:11, 2Th 2:13, 1Pet. 1:2,].”
3] Gospel Sanctification also diminishes the role of Scripture in the sanctification process via the preposition “by” in regard to the gospel. Again, with Holy writ being scarce in the area of specifically saying that we are changed “by” the gospel, we to the contrary have ample evidence that the Holy Spirit uses scripture to change us[1Pet. 2;1 John 14:25]. Amplifying this reality is the Redemptive Historical hermeneutic [the resident hermeneutic of Gospel Sanctification] which makes ALL scripture synonymous with the gospel and SOLEY FOR THE PURPOSE of “showing forth the gospel.” Therefore, the term “living ‘by’ the gospel” is now removed two fold from being biblically accurate by diminishing the role of the Holy Spirit and Scripture as well.
4] The term and it’s implied and applied meaning confuses God’s truth and necessitates additional error to rectify original error. If all Scripture is about the gospel instead of who God is and what he is like, well then, “God Is The Gospel [John Piper],” right? If ALL Scripture is about the gospel instead of specific instruction concerning kingdom living, then you need a “Gospel Centered” hermeneutic, right? If living by the gospel abrogates living by obedience to the Law than we need something like “Christian Hedonism,” right?
So what makes the supposed norm correct and the above thesis disastrous error? Let’s examine that question from Ephesians 4:20-24:
20 But that is not the way you learned Christ!— 21assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, 22 to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, 24 and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.
First of all, we can now participate in the sanctification / salvation process because God has made us new creatures, we are “created after the likeness of God.” There is no glory for us, he is the one who recreated us. Without that, we can do nothing. Our role in this sanctification process is abundantly obvious: We are to “put of the old self” and “put on the new self” which God has prepared for us and is fully equipped with all the resources in Christ described in the first 3 chapters prior to this text.
The following verses begin with “therefore” in verse v25 and explain the specifics of how this is done. The specifics of our role in the sanctification process is one of the major themes of scripture. Scripture not only explains the wisdom involved in sanctification and how to apply it, but also what the experience will be like.
Gospel Sanctification is a nightmare because it misrepresents our role in the sanctification process and how we experience sanctification as well. It not only narrows our spiritual repertoire into a subjective concept to the detriment of many, it creates additional false tenets that attempt to make “living ’by’ the gospel” fit into erroneous dogma. It only takes a little preposition to do that.
paul.
Matthew 24:10-13: Love Has A Soul Mate; The Law
I am so, so happy concerning the emphasis that our church has on daily Bible reading. It is so powerful, this concept of disciplining yourself to read through the scriptures daily with the illuminating presence of the Holy Spirit within. It is also an important safeguard in this age of deception we live in. You are taught by somebody to believe a certain thing and then as you are reading, some verse hits you right between the eyes with the hammer of contradiction. Other times, you are just struck by the implications of what you just read and incited to dig deeper. Such was my experience a couple of weeks ago as I read the following in Matthew 24:
10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. 12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved.
Astounding. The love grows cold “because” of lawlessness. You would think it would be just the opposite. You would think a lack of love would lead to lawlessness as a natural result thereof. This would mean that there is no intimate relationship between law and love, lawlessness is just a natural result of a lack of love. But here in Matthew 24:11-13, a close relationship is shown.
Some translations have it “wickedness” or “iniquity” rather than lawlessness. This is a big deal. According to Vines Expository Dictionary, there are other Greek words for wickedness [poneros] and iniquity[adikia]. The latter can imply a general disfavor from mankind or various standards, not necessarily pronounced by God. The word used here and translated correctly by the ESV and many other translations is anomia which is a form of nomos or “law.” Again, according to Vines and others, the word comes from anomos and primarily means “without the law.”
So what is this law? Basically, it is ALL OF scripture. Here is what Jesus is saying specifically and in context: In the last day’s there will be a falling away from following scripture among professing believers and this will lead to lovelessness and persecution of true believers by false Christians. I will develop this as we go. But first, let me establish the fact that “law” is all of scripture and lawlessness is a turning away from following the word of God.
In Matthew 5:17-20, Christ says the following:
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
The “Law [with the definite article preceding]” included the Decalogue and the writings of Moses. The “Prophets” are the remainder of the whole Old Testament. It was a common term referring to the totality of the Old Testament [Neh. 9:14,26 Dan. 9:2,11 Luke 24:27]. In verse 18, Christ then refers to both as “the Law.” Then in verse 19, Christ refers to scripture as “these commandments” which encompasses any revelation by divine causation and approved accordingly. This can be seen by what the Apostle Paul writes to the Cirinthians in 14:37:
37 If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.
The mandate of Christ to the Church in regard to discipleship is “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded [Matthew 28:20].”
In reference to Matthew 5:17-20,Take note: The error of the Pharisees was not primarily an attempt to be justified by law keeping, it was a replacement of the Law’s true meaning with their traditions. After warning against the inaccurate application and teaching of the Law in verse 19, Christ begins verse 20 by saying “For I tell you.” The indictment of the Pharisees was an unrighteousness that resulted from the breaking [KJV], annulment [NASB], relaxation [ESV], of the commandments that make up the Law of God [verse 19].
In verse 10 of Matthew 24:10-13, the subject of this post, “then” is the last day’s. The ones who hate and betray one another are those who “fall away.” You have to be on something before you can fall from it. These are professing believers though false. What got them to verse 12, the centerpiece of this post, is verse 11: “And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray.” The subjects that fall away and hate true believers were led astray by people who deal in supposed truth, false prophets. Whatever they were peddling, it did not conform with God’s law. It was “without law,” literally. The result will be a fall from love as well.
In first John, especially in regard to the “last days” and the spirit of Antichrist, I think we have further clarification regarding the association of law and love:
1 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
3 We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. 4 The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.
7 Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard. 8 Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining
[1John chapter 2].
Note: God’s love is only made “complete” in an ACCURATE following of Jesus found in the Law of God which is all of scripture. Also note: If we fail in that, Christ is our advocate as we pray for forgiveness. Our failure to follow the Law of God is “sin.” 1 John 3:4 says:
4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.
In both places within this verse, it is the same Greek word that means “without law” as found in Matthew 24:12. In a matter of fact, all of the Greek commentaries I sought out in regard to this verse such as Vines and Wuest, interpret this verse the same as the Amplified Bible:
4 Everyone who commits (practices) sin is guilty of lawlessness; for [that is what] sin is, lawlessness (the breaking, violating of God’s law by transgression or neglect–being unrestrained and unregulated by His commands and His will).
Now observe the hard turn John takes right after saying what he said in 1John 2:1-8 as referenced above:
9 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. 10 Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble. 11 But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him.
Furthermore, in regard to the latter verse quoted in 1John 3:4 that defines sin as lawlessness, John moves on to the righteous walk and then love in keeping with the biblical pattern, especially in 1John [1John 3:4-24 as one example]. The intimate relationship between Law and love is intertwined throughout 1John and many other places in scripture. It only stands to reason therefore from a defensive standpoint that we read this in 1John 2:18:
18 Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.
John is writing to New Testament believers. Therefore, we are in the last segment of redemptive history. Indicative of our time will be an expectation of a grand antichrist to come, but with many forerunners of him running about presently. Do you know what is synonymous with antichrist? We have the answer in 2Thess. Chapter 2:
1 Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
The Apostle Paul refers to the antichrist as the man of “lawlessness” four times in this passage. Anti-law [nomian] will be the spirit of this age. Matthew 24:10-13 is a thumbnail of what will come to a full picture of lawlessness in the tribulation period. False teachers will devalue the Law [Scripture] among God’s people which will lead to an eradication of true love in the Church. This will culminate into a full blown persecution of true believers by the world and the false church during the tribulation period. They will suffer persecution from within and without. This spirit is presently at work today via the many antichrist roaming about as a mark of this age.
But here is the first lesson for us: The way of true love is the learning and application of God’s objective word to our lives. This is how we love God and others. Love and Law are soul mates. This is the exact point of what Jesus said in Matthew 22:37-40:
37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”
This is not saying that God’s law has been replaced by a subjective higher law of love. Those who teach this and devalue the rest of God’s law unwittingly do the bidding of antichrist. The rest of scripture defines the love that all of the Law hangs on. Love is the sum but is obviously defined by the rest of scripture. In a matter of fact, when Jesus taught the above to one individual, this individual sought to justify himself by questioning the definition of who a “neighbor” is. The single word “love” did not define that, Jesus did:
27And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 28And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”
29But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”
Jesus said: “If you Love me, keep my commandments.”
- John 15:10
If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love.
- John 14:21
Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”
- John 14:15
“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
This isn’t rocket science and I am not going to make it any more complicated than Jesus did. If you want to love God and others, pick up a Bible, study it, and then apply it to your life. This is the way of love. Talk is cheap. The sin of the Pharisees was not primarily an attempt to justify themselves by Law keeping, it was the exact opposite. They redefined scripture according to their man-made traditions and failed to apply the remainder that happened to be truth, thereby becoming lawless and loveless:
42 “But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.” [Luke 11]
1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you—but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice.” [Matthew 23]
The way of lovelessness begins with being dragged away from the objective truth of God’s word and it’s practical application. And remember, ALL of scripture is “the Law.” The book of love written by the Holy Spirit also contains instruction for protecting love. We are warned that a devaluation of the true law will be the juggernaut of darkness in this last age. Let us be on guard accordingly while applying the way of love.
paul
Some Reformed Churches Now Offer Obedience Program For Husbands
The question posted by a friend on my blog awakened a reality I am familiar with concerning some reformed churches. The friend was participating in a women’s Bible study and became surprised when the discussion turned to wives involving church elders in disputes with disobedient husbands. The hypothetical scenario presented in the question concerned a husband going to ball games instead of church and poo pooing the wife’s concerns accordingly. Could she then go to the church elders and have her husband brought up on church discipline? This wasn’t my friends question to me, this is the question she listened to at the study and wanted to know my thoughts.
Let me set the table here. More and more reformed churches are practicing what is known as “redemptive church discipline.” It goes along with making everything in the church and church life “redemptive.” In other words, EVERYTHING is about the gospel and redemption. We must read everything in the Bible with a redemptive theme and interpret it accordingly. All sermons must have a redemptive theme. Our life must be ordered by the gospel instead of biblical precepts [whatever that means and unfortunately I do know], ect. ect.
Here is how it works: A naughty husband is going to Cincinnati football games instead of church. Granted, not a good idea, especially when it’s the Bengals we are talking about. The wife confronts her husband about it [first step of Matthew 18, if your brother offends you, go to him alone]. He does not repent. The wife then goes to the elders about the situation. The elders[probably two of them] then go and talk to the husband about the situation. This is not confrontational or instructive, the elders are there to determine the facts of the situation. If the elders confront the husband, he may only conform outwardly because the elders are involved and that wouldn’t be true “heart change” and we wouldn’t want that. Also remember, we are talking Bengals here, repentance in regard to them may not be true heart change as well. Now if it’s the Pittsburgh Steelers, we are now talking deep repentance that could only be from above. All of these things must be taken into consideration.
The two elders then go to the other elders to decide whether the errant husband needs “redemptive church discipline.” If he does, a meeting is then set up with the husband. In the meeting, he is informed that he is now “under church discipline.” Tag, your it! In most cases, the husband is going to be bewildered because most reformed parishioners don’t understand how this form of church discipline works and the reason for that is easy, if potential members had a complete understanding of how it works, there wouldn’t be any members there.
But I digress. Here is how the “process” works: The husband is now under the first step of church discipline. If he verbally repents when meeting with the elders, that doesn’t cut it, he is only repenting to get out of the situation. What we are after here is “real heart change.” Amen. The elders will now observe the errant husband over a period of time to determine true repentance. If he tries to take his family and leave during this time, he will be excommunicated from the fellowship and declared an unbeliever. Lack of progress during the process will result in the elders moving the husband to the next step of discipline, which can also lead to excommunication if he reaches the third and final step. An example would be if the husband started to watch too much football on TV instead of helping around the house or leading the family in devotionals. This would be merely replacing one idol for another idol and again, what we are after here is true “redemption.” The gospel not only saves us, it must redeem us from the remnant of sin as well. Hence, “redemptive church discipline.” In many cases, the husband will be expected to repent from a traditional view of sanctification and embrace “Gospel Sanctification” to be eligible for release.
As a former elder who has experienced the frustration of husbands who just don’t get it, including myself, this is a very attractive scenario. Husbands either shape up, or you can ship them out. ANY sin is game for “redemptive church discipline.” It is a sure fire way of fine tuning the church body while keeping people in line and looking like a church that means serious business in regard to the gospel. If you have any sin issues in your church, it aint gunna be an issue for long, the elders have a license to clean house.
Furthermore, the word gets out to frustrated wives via “Bible studies” that there are churches out there that will deal with your rascally husband one way or the other, unlike those looser dispensational churches that turn a blind eye to sin. Amen. Though I have no direct knowledge of the following unlike the above, I strongly suspect that some wives talk their husbands into going to certain churches for this reason and the husband follows suit as a dumb ox being led to the slaughter. These days, husbands had better get on top of theology issues and pay attention. I have had the wonderful opportunity to answer the following comment by Christian husbands of late: “Hey, I’m not much of a theology guy like my wife, she’s in-to all of those 50 cent theology words.” My response is usually something like the following: “ So, these lunches you have been having with Satan, Applebees’s or Friday’s? I hear Applebees’s has an awesome 2 for twenty goin on.”
There is only one problem with all of this, It’s not biblical. If you are in a reformed church, you need to get on top of what kind of church discipline is being practiced.
http://paulspassingthoughts.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/the-church-discipline-buffet/
The bottom line is this: church discipline is for sins of the baser sort, not silly husbands. Look at the qualifications for elders. The Holy Spirit assumes that some men in the church will struggle with anger, not ruling their home well, and even hangin out around the juice longer than they should. Do you know what that means? It means they can’t be elders, it doesn’t mean you put them under church discipline, especially unscriptural church discipline.
Let me close with this. My friend ended her inquisition with this comment: “It has always been my approach to guard my husbands honor.” This was my response :”LOL! it’s such a lost concept that it stinking dazes you when you hear it. It reminds me of when some guy rabbit punched me from behind after drafting class in high school.”
Sad but true. Have we really come to the point where that is not the first inclination among reformed women but rather to find a way to have their husbands brought up on church discipline?
I certainly hope not.
paul
Beware Of The Love Bomb
I think everybody likes to be loved unconditionally. In any relationship we would like to believe that performance is not what really keeps a friendship together. In many ways this is what makes the gospel so appealing, God loves us regardless of our performance. Besides, we could never earn his love by performance anyway.
However, in many churches today this “unconditional” love can be earned. The formula is simple, always follow the agenda at hand and don’t ask questions. There is only one problem: like the guy in the old AAMCO commercial said about transmission tune-ups; “pay me now or pay me later.” Truth is the same way. The consummation of not following the truth of God’s word never turns out well [Psalm 1:1-6]. Romans 15:5 says the following:
May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus,
True unity and love is always the result of “following” Christ and not men. In every cult known to man the initial and primary attraction is unconditional love at the expense of truth and biblically accurate doctrine. Besides that, I have witnessed first hand the destruction that comes into people’s lives via supposed lesser evils such as Charismatic doctrines.
Not long ago as I was searching for a new church, a church with a reformed contemporary flavor in Centerville, Ohio caught my attention. I emailed the Pastor with a list of theological questions. His reply was the slightly paraphrased following: “Come and see what the Lord is doing here and how much everybody loves each other. Then if you still want to talk about doctrine, I would be more than happy to address your questions.” My response was the paraphrased following: “ Pastor, thanks for your reply but you will not be addressing anything in my life now or ever, you only need to imagine how far and fast I am running away from you and your ministry.”
That should be your response as well. Love is a good thing but when it is a constant mantra that drowns out a concern for the truth you are in imminent spiritual danger, it’s the love bomb. The scriptures are clear, a deep and true unity of love is built on sound doctrine. Not only that, churches that are built on this kind of love don’t have to drop love bomb verbiage all the time, there love is evident in action. Listen carefully, churches built on true love cannot talk to you about doctrine fast enough and their answers will be swift, clear, and without hesitation.
Don’t compromise. A love for the truth is the mark of a true Christian:
and with all deceit of unrighteousness for them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved [2 Thess. 2:10].
True Christians are uncomfortable in situations where scripture is not being followed because the Holy Spirit who indwells them is not comfortable with error by any stretch of the imagination.
Beware of the love bomb.
paul
Some Thoughts About Martyrdom
It seems there has been some interest lately among the Facebook crowd concerning testimonies from around the world in regard to those who refuse to deny Christ to save their lives. Underlining the posted videos and articles are passing comments of this sort: “I hope I would be willing to die for Christ if it came to that and what would I do if it did come to that?” Truly, a combination of things come together to challenge our thoughts on this. The testimonies themselves and the words of Christ:
“But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven [Matthew 10:33].”
It struck me the other day when I was doing some study on eschatology. In Matthew 24 and 25, Luke 17 and 21, I believe Jesus is speaking directly to those who will be living during the tribulation period when he says: “ Whoever seeks to preserve his life will loose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it.” Though the tribulation period will be a time of unprecedented slaughter in regard to Christians, we obviously face some of that in this age as well.
So, the question is indeed worth our time to ponder. I only offer some thoughts from scripture that have caught my attention concerning this subject.
First, 1 Corinthians 10:13 says the following:
No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.
If I remember correctly, I believe I heard a Greek scholar say the phrase “way of escape” actually means “victory through the middle” in the Greek. This obviously makes sense because the following words speak of endurance and “bearing” up. So then, if we find ourselves in that situation, we know that God would not have allowed it unless he supplied a way to “bear up under it” as Kenneth Wuest also translates it. This verse also shows the very close correlation between trials and temptation with the words often being used interchangeably in the New Testament. Obviously, facing death in opposition to denying Christ presents a possible temptation in that regard, especially if they threaten to kill our family in front of us first. It’s by faith, we know Christ has supplied us with all of his strength and courage to bear up under it.
Secondly, I think it is important to know that in the midst of such a trial that there may be a significant struggle. In any trial, there may be a “bearing up” on our part, while it is God who makes the way of escape. This is a beautiful picture of how we dependently co-labor with God. Indeed, Christ told Peter that in his day of death for the sake of the gospel, others would take him to where “you do not want to go [John 21:18,19].” It is also interesting to note that immediately after telling Peter that he would endure the same death, he said “follow me.” I fear that many today could possibly walk into such situations perplexed as to why they are not full of joy and happiness. This would be a really bad time to be confused concerning reality.
However, and thirdly, scripture would indicate a focus on the joy set ahead and the rewards to follow. Christ says this in his letter to Smyrna:
“Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to cast some of you into prison, so that you will be tested, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.”
Hebrews 12:2 says:
looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
Fourthly, and in conjunction with number one, God is in sovereign control of all circumstances and he will not allow circumstances that he has not prepared us for. So if we are in that circumstance, he will most definitely enable us to glorify him in it. Point in case, when Jesus was arrested, he knew the disciples were not ready to be arrested with him. If they were arrested with him, it would have crushed their faith:
Then Jesus, knowing all that would happen to him, came forward and said to them, “Whom do you seek?” 5They answered him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am he.” Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. 6 When Jesus said to them, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground. 7So he asked them again, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Jesus of Nazareth.” 8Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he. So, if you seek me, let these men go.” 9 This was to fulfill the word that he had spoken: “Of those whom you gave me I have lost not one.”
By the way, this is also in spite of all our stupidity. After all that Christ did to keep them from being arrested, Peter draws his sword and cuts some guy’s ear off. Jesus rebukes him and miraculously sticks the guy’s ear back on his head. No matter how silly you are, you are still not in that circumstance if God doesn’t want you in it. Obviously, Peter wasn’t ready to be arrested with Jesus, he later denied him when it wasn’t even a matter of life and death and did so to some harmless teenage girl. God is in control.
Fifthly, I also believe in “God gives grace for the moment.” There is no doubt that we often look at a possible situation of facing death in opposition to denying Christ without the grace that we will have at that time. This creates fear and doubt, understandingly. We see a hint of this in Hebrews where the writer says to go to God in a “time of need”
Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need [Hebrews 4:16].
Sixthly, Christ told the church at Smyrna to be “faithful” unto death. Christ also said if we are not faithful in the little things, neither will we be faithful in the larger issues of faith [Luke 16:10]. If we won’t suffer for Christ in regard to our testimony at work, it’s a sure bet we ain’t gunna die for him either. American culture is not a healthy environment in regard to cultivating a spirit of self sacrifice. I once knew a guy who was always getting into trouble at work because of his testimony for Christ. Finally, after loosing several jobs, he sought out a “biblical counselor.” The counselor told him that the problem wasn’t the people at work, the problem was his “heart.” Conflict equals sin on our part, according to this particular counselor and much to the delight of the man’s wife who wanted financial security. Never mind “those who live Godly in Christ WILL suffer persecution [2 Timothy 3;12]. The American church has a serious problem with the god of comfort. Precious few will even trade unity for truth at any level.
Therefore, and seventh, it is worthy to note that America is different from countries where persecution is rampant. If you take a stand, you will likely be persecuted by the world and shunned by the church. In countries like China, the church is closely knit together because of the severe persecution from the world. One should not discount all together that persecution of Christians does not exist in America, it’s just a different kind.
I close with a confession for what it’s worth. It may not even tie in that well. I greatly admire Dietrich Bonhoeffer and often quote him. I often hear his theology was unorthodox and that’s probably true. I am usually a real stickler about proper doctrine. What so strongly attracts me to him is his fearful testimony. During World War II, he left a promising ministry in the comfort of America to go back to his homeland in Germany. There, he was one of the few clergy who took a stand against the Nazi regime. He was hung naked with piano wire. Thought provoking indeed.
paul
Why I’m Pre-Tribulation: 2 Times, 2 Expectations, 2 Resurrections
After many years of in-depth study, I still hold to a pre-tribulation view. I believe God will come for his children unexpectedly before a time period of great tribulation that will precede his visible second coming. I believe this because there are two time periods and two expectations which can be seen in Matthew 24.
If you want to know the scoop on the return of Christ, sit in on the teaching that he gave the disciples in response to a question:
3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
Note that Jesus did not have the same attitude toward last things like many teachers today. The response to this one question is a massive teaching. Not only that, he follows up with three parables in chapter 25 that show an important relationship between sanctification and eschatology. Some estimate that last things are 25% of all scripture, but you wouldn’t know it today.
Jesus begins by explaining one of the time periods in Matthew 24:4-8:
4Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains.
This time will begin and will be marked with people being alarmed by quickly changing events. Jesus says the end is not yet, these are like birth pangs that gradually intensify into a major tribulation:
9″Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake.
21For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved.
Jesus then says the following in regard to the signs he explained:
32″From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates.
Whatever time this is, it precedes His visible coming to the earth. If those days are not cut short, no flesh will survive [verse 21]. Also, when these signs all come together, His arrival is at the “very gates.” In other words, his arrival is to be expected in the very short term when these signs are present.
Now Christ moves on to explain a different time period:
36″No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.
42″Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 43But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. 44So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.
This is obviously a time period of business as usual as opposed to the other time period. They are drastically different. It is also a time when Christ is not expected to come but will. One expectation has no sign, it is imminent, we are to be ready at all times. The other expectation intensifies and increases as the severe elements of tribulation also increase. Two times, two expectations.
But what is expected? If it is a return of Christ, it is glorification or for all practical purposes, a resurrection. Let’s read 2Thessalonians 2:1-5;
1Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, 2not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. 3Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for (that day will not come) until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 5Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?
Please not that in regard to what Paul had taught them in the past, The Thessalonians believed that there was a resurrection that they could miss and still be alive. Therefore, there are 2 resurrections in the mix.
Unless that’s true, this passage makes no sense if you read it carefully. The phony letter was probably sent in regard to some persecution they were suffering at the time. Paul writes them and says the present time does not match what he specifically taught them, especially in regard to the antichrist. But does this necessarily mean that Christians will not be in the Tribulation period? Yes, I think it does. Each resurrection has it’s own expectations and they thought they missed the first one. The one that has no signs, other than being a time when we don’t expect it, is obviously the first resurrection that they thought they missed in regards to Paul’s teachings.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. Let me close with some sanctified speculation out of Luke 17: 26-34”
26″Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.
28″It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.
30″It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32Remember Lot’s wife! 33Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.”
I think Noah and Lot represent the first resurrection, or when we are suddenly raptured up to be with the Lord whether dead or alive. I think lot’s wife represents those left behind. If they loose their life, they will gain it. If they hang on to their life [she looked back], they will loose it. Also remember what Christ said to those who are found waiting in Luke 21: 34-36:
34″Be careful, or your hearts will be weighed down with dissipation, drunkenness and the anxieties of life, and that day will close on you unexpectedly like a trap. 35For it will come upon all those who live on the face of the whole earth. 36Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man.”
Christ also had this cryptic but encouraging promise for the faithful church of Philadelphia in Revelation 3:10;
10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth.
paul
Was Paul Really Talking About Synergistic Sanctification In Galatians?
Almost everyday, I stumble upon an article presenting Galatians as a Pauline contention against synergistic sanctification. Galatians is presented this way as a proof text to validate passive forms of sanctification running rampant in reformed circles. As I was sorting through some scribbled notes on scrap paper the other day, I even saw a reference to a teacher that called any separation of justification and sanctification an “abomination.” Whew, that’s a pretty heavy statement, but not foreign to advocates of theology which combines justification and sanctification in every respect.
Simply stated, the formula is the following: like justification, sanctification is a total work of God that requires no effort on our part. As a matter of fact, any effort on our part is works salvation and sin. Yes, our bodies and mind will obey and do good works, but it is not us performing the work, it is the living Christ in us doing the work through us. How do we know when it’s us or Christ doing the work? Easy, whenever we serve and obey with a willing, joyful spirit, that’s Christ doing the work. Any performance of duty with a grudging, joyless spirit is sin. You are better off not performing the duty if you cannot do it as a “mere natural flow” accompanied by joy. The role of the believer is passive. We are primarily transformed by “gazing” on God’s glory and the gospel via the scriptures. John Piper advocates a “beholding as a way of becoming [pg 15 Pleasures Of God].” Michael Horton advocates a regular immersion in the “gospel story” as the primary way of change [pg 118 Christless Christianity]. Paul David Tripp says we should merely “rest and feed” on Christ [pg 28 How People Change].
Admittedly, Galatians 2:20 -3:3 seems to strongly validate this view. Paul says in Galatians 2:20:
“I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
Furthermore, Galatians 3:3 seems to even put the icing on the cake:
“Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? “
Indeed, these verses seem to strongly affirm this view. Also, 3:4,5 is cited to suggest that effort on our part nullifies salvation:
“Have you suffered so much for nothing—if it really was for nothing? Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?”
But is this really what Paul was saying in Galatians? Even proponents of this passive view must admit that scripture makes a distinction between justification, sanctification and glorification [1Cor.1:30, 6:11]. But beside that, Paul is not talking about sanctification at all in the first 4 chapters of this book. As a matter of fact, he takes a hard left turn in 5:7 , and there begins to talk about the implications of sanctification and our role thereof. The fact that Paul is addressing the subject of justification in the body of where Galatians 2:20-3:3 resides is clearly evident [ 3 times alone in Galatians 2:16, Galatians 2:17, 2:21, 3:8, 3:11, 3:24, 5:4].
What is Paul really talking about? We have many examples today, but let me illustrate at least one. The Church of Christ believes [not all veins] that you are saved by the ordinance of baptism. Not only that, you can lose your salvation. How? Well, by not keeping the law. I believe this is the closest example of what we have today that Paul was talking about. First of all, it is clear that a salvation by circumcision [ordinance] is in the mix here: 2:3, 2:12, 5:2, 5:3, 5:6, 5:11. Paul is talking about a form of Judaism that required circumcision to get in the kingdom, and then an observance of the law to stay in the kingdom. The keeping of the law to retain salvation, also required observance of additional ordinances [4:10:11]. Paul summarizes these points in 5:2-5:5;
“Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.”
This is what was going on: The Galatians had been saved out of this false gospel and were being intimidated into going back to it. This is the whole point of Paul sharing his confrontation with Peter in 2:11-14. The Lord used me to save a guy from a Church of Christ sect back in 1984. If he ever went back to that sect, the book of Galatians would be a good picture of that, but it certainly would not be a picture of some evangelical striving to please Christ! By the way, take note as well that Paul doesn’t say the Galatian error is trying to be SANCTIFIED by the law, the error is an attempt to be “justified” by the law [5:4].
As far as Paul teaching a plenary monergism from Galatians, consider what he says as he takes a hard turn into the sanctification part of this letter:
“You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you [5:7,8].”
Hello, note that although we are saved by grace alone, there is still a “running” and “obeying.” Furthermore, because Paul has made such a hard case for our freedom in Christ, he cautions against an unbalanced approach in 5:13-15;
“You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love.”
Here, we may have a clue as to what drew the circumcision party to Galatia and why they got a hearing. An overly passive approach to our freedom in Christ was yielding bad results, Paul even eludes to it in several verses like 5:16 and 6:7.
Let me conclude with a thought on Galatians 2:20. Paul says we live this life in the flesh by faith. But faith does not equal “let go and let God”!!!! In a matter of fact, when our efforts bring us to the point where we don’t feel like we can go on, we continue by faith, believing that God will supply what we need to persevere. That’s why Paul says in 6:9:
“Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.”
Why is Paul exhorting us not to give up? Gee whiz, we must feel like it some times. The exhortation here is to continue by faith regardless of how we feel, not to back up and figure out why we are weary of well-doing in the first place. We also see this in Hebrews 12:12:
“Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees. 13″Make level paths for your feet,”so that the lame may not be disabled, but rather healed.”
Striving by faith is the key, but even though it is by faith, it is still a striving. It’s the same as our “hanging on” to Christ. We are hanging on, but that’s not where our confidence is [Hebrews 3:6].
Any teaching that propagates a “gazing” at the gospel in scripture that results in an automatic exhilaration to obey is grievous error. We are to work out our salvation with trembling and fear, knowing that we have all the resources of Christ working in us to persevere accordingly [Philippians 2:12,13]. Though faith is a gift from God and we can do nothing without it, the fact remains that our works contribute to faith and the two work together to perfect both [James 2:22]. This is a mystery made possible only by God, but be sure of this, Galations does not teach that we are only potted plants in the sanctification process.
paul
Crank-Up The Bathtubs , We Be livin The Gospel Everyday
As I was doing some study in Matthew 28 the other day, this silly thought came to mind: with all of the latest rave about living by the gospel everyday, and “experiencing” the gospel afresh everyday, why not crank-up the baptismal and baptize everyday? Why not? It would seem to be a most helpful exercise in that regard.
Really, you could start everyday the way you publicly identified yourself with the gospel. What a great reminder of why we get up and go out into the world everyday [maybe this isn‘t so silly after all!]. Now, one could argue that the scriptures are void of such a thing but so what? It’s a good idea, and we live in an age where going to the bible to prove a good idea is perfectly acceptable. Point in case: John Piper openly admits on page 17 of “The Pleasures Of God” that the whole premise of the book was based on a idea he got while reading Henry Scougal. Piper’s idea was a supposed logical conclusion of one of Scougal’s ideas. He then took a sabbatical from his church to research the possibility that his idea was biblical and SHAZAAM!, there it was! Regardless of the fact that old fogies warned me against eisegesis in bible college, this book is considered the hottest thing since sliced bread in reformed circles so who I’m I to judge?
Let’s explore further, this thing is really coming together in my mind. In developing this idea, we have the Gospel Centered hermeneutic on our side. This is also known as the Redemptive Historical and Christocentric hermeneutic. This enables us to conclude all sorts of exciting gospel centered ideas from the scriptures because it reads all of scripture from that perspective. It’s an awesome hermeneutic because when a verse is literally about the gospel, you read it literally. But if you run into a pesky portion of scripture that seems to imply some practical application to life and worse yet, abhorrent concepts such as duty and obedience, you merely switch to redemptive symbolism. Awwwwesome.
This could help explain the other Church ordinance as well, the Lord’s Table. We only practice that every so often which is confusing. Christ said to “do this in remembrance of me.” If we are to live the gospel everyday and this is the primary focus of everyday sanctification, why would Christ initiate an ordinance to remind us of the gospel? And if Christ said to do it to remember him, why wouldn’t we observe the Lord’s Table everyday? Maybe because there are other ways we are supposed to remember Christ?, like maybe “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded.” Hey, I’m just asking. I am in no way suggesting that the concept of Gospel Sanctification is in logical conflict with Church ordinances. Nooooo, not me.
Besides, I am confident the Gospel Sanctification movement has another thing going for it other than it’s hermeneutic, inclusion. Yep, if you believe in Gospel Sanctification, your in the club baby. We have “reformed” Charismatics, reformed Catholics, ect, ect., ect. If you advocate GS, all that other doctrine is “secondary.” Sweet dude. Therefore, these various and sundry belief systems can bring in all sorts of different ways to live the gospel everyday. We can at least recognize the gospel every time we assemble by communion and sprinkling. Obviously, in some large churches, baptismal services would be a time killer and create a huge water bill to boot. If our Charismatic friends want to remember Pentecost by speaking in tongues every time they assemble, that would seem to be an apt recognition of the gospel as well.[ mark it well, weird stuff is coming down the pike, remember I said it].
However, there is one practice that I assume would be excluded: Old line Baptist churches are no longer hip in reformed circles so the often sneered at alter call would be out of the question all together. Funny, a call of the gospel at the end of every service isn’t cool among those who teach that we should live by the gospel everyday. Whatever.
Never the less, I am confident it will all work out. Until then, use your bathtub.
paul
Will The Real Calvinist Please Stand Up?
This started out as a reply in a Facebook conversation, but ended up as a post:
Ok, let’s bring this conversation down to where we live. I believe most Christians who discuss doctrines of grace today do not truly understand where modern Calvinism stands in our current church culture, and how it actually effects peoples lives. Today’s Calvinist not only believes we have no part in our own salvation, but there are those who believe sanctification (the growth part of salvation) is achieved by God alone as well.
“Monergism” is a term that means God acted alone without the >cooperation< of man. “Synergism” means that man must have the basic and ongoing enablement from God to do anything, but cooperates and co labors with God in the process. As I stated previously, many modern Calvinists believe that the salvation process, which includes salvation, sanctification and glorification, is all monergistic in nature.
First of all, the modern Calvinist believes that a denial of monergism in any three parts (glorification of course is a non issue) IS A DENIAL OF SALVATION ITSELF. Therefore, if you believe you contribute to the sanctification process, that thinking is also a denial of the true gospel. “The gospel that saved you, also sanctifies you,” and….”If you move on to something else (the calvinistic gospel that saved you,) you loose both.”
Secondly, the modern Calvinist recognizes that most Christians hold to a belief in synergistic sanctification (not salvation,) and therefore calls for a NEW REFORMATION. Even the belief in a monergistic salvation and synergistic sanctification calls one’s salvation into question.The modern calvinist believes that we are in an era of “Christless Christianity” and sees himself as the Martin Luther of our age.
Thirdly, this not only throws the gauntlet of damnation at the feet of those who believe in free will, it throws the same gauntlet at the feet of those who fancy themselves as an orthodox Calvinist. Somehow, I find this intriguing.
Fourthly, In regard to how this modern movement effects real life: as this teaching permeates churches, some spouses embrace it and others do not. This creates conflict in a marriage where a spouse who formally saw their partner as saved, now thinks otherwise. This might actually effect the soundness of a marriage, ya think? Another consequence of plenary monergism is a contentious attitude toward others by those with this reformation mindset, seeing them as Papal minions. Furthermore, a paralyzing confusion is more and more prevalent in the lives of many as the issue is not being openly addressed.
This is not a debate about semantics. Doctrine and philosophy always translate into life. The majority of Calvinists today do not fully realize the beliefs of their Calvinist teachers. And many of the aforementioned teachers have doubts as to the true conversion of their flock. This particular post is not to take a position, but to suggest that if true Calvinism is being hijacked, leaders should either stand up or give up the city. Fellowship and unity with men who are on the book circuit, speaking circuit, or with highly valued Westminster degrees is not to be valued above God’s truth.
paul
Will The Poo Pooing Of Scripture’s Plain Sense Ever Cease?
I stumbled onto a pretty good post today. It was a commentary on the Bob Newhart skit where his counsel to a young lady is to “JUST STOP IT!” The YouTube link is the following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLMTvxOaeE
I think Tim Challies had a good scriptural observation in regard to the skit:
“Some time ago I spoke to a friend about an ongoing sin in his life and tried to show him that the essence of his problem was this: he hates his sin just a little bit less than he loves it. Sure he wants to stop sinning, but even more he wants to keep sinning. And I think he came to agree. My advice was pretty well what Newhart offered the woman in this video: “Stop it!” Are you fighting sin? I’ll pray for you—really, I will. And I’ll recommend that you memorize some Scriptures, some fighter verses, that will help you battle that sin by bringing to mind the promises of God. But I’ll also challenge you to just stop it and to stop it now. You stop sinning by turning your back on it. You do not sit back and wait for God to change you while you remain in your sin. Rather, you join him in the fight, joining your will with His strength. And together you go to war.”
The post can be viewed in it’s entirety here: http://www.challies.com/archives/articles/just-stop-it.php
Let me emphasis a segment of the above quote: “You stop sinning by turning your back on it. You do not sit back and wait for God to change you while you remain in your sin. Rather, you join him in the fight, joining your will with His strength. And together you go to war.”
Truly, the sanctification process is somewhat of a mystery with it’s share of paradoxes. However, there is plenty of certainty to go around and one thing we can be certain of is sanctification is impossible without God’s power in us. With that said, neither are we merely potted plants in the process either. In a matter of fact, I find the word’s of Christ spoken to the servant who hid his talent in the ground a bit chilling, if not terrifying. Christ straight up called the servant “lazy.” That’s why I like the above quote by TC. I think it captures the biblical application to real life as stated in Scripture.
But in this day when proponents of a purely monergistic view of sanctification are launching a full court press and claiming to be new reformers, someone was bound to object in the comment section armed with the profound wisdom of the father of modern day “let go and let God” theology, David Powlison. In the comment, a link is supplied to an interview where Powlison comments on the Newhart skit and objects to the idea of biblical abstinence. Here is his comment: “Our Father never simply says “Stop it!” to the Katherine Bigmans or anyone else.”
This is what drives me absolutely nuts in regard to these guy’s at CCEF. They continually contradict the plain sense of scripture and continually get a pass on it. Tim Challies is making the point that abstinence is a viable faucet in the scheme of sanctification that is often looked over in our overly analytic, book infested, counseling infested culture. If you understand Powlisons theology, he can’t give into this one little fact without pulling the rug out from under his overly passive psychoanalytic approach to sanctification. Our Father “never” tells anybody to simply stop it? Consider the following scriptures:
“Later Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, “See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you [John 5:14].”
By the way, suggest to many these day’s that God would threaten punishment as an incentive to right behavior and watch the blood vessels start popping out in their necks. It’s as if these guy’s don’t think Christians even read their Bibles anymore, and perhaps that is the case.
“You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell [Acts 15:29].”
“As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality[Acts 21:25].”
Let me make a point here with this verse:
“Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul [1Peter 2:11].”
Why is “Just stop it” an important element of sanctification? It’s not rocket science. Look at the above verse. Sinful desires war against our soul. If we abstain, the desire cannot even get on the battlefield. That should be pretty evident. However, let’s stop a moment and consider another excerpt from TC’s post:
“Some time ago I spoke to a friend about an ongoing sin in his life and tried to show him that the essence of his problem was this: he hates his sin just a little bit less than he loves it. Sure he wants to stop sinning, but even more he wants to keep sinning. And I think he came to agree. “
Let me show you how profound that counsel is from Romans 12:9;
“Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.”
What would one do to stop loving his wife? IGNORE HER, then focus on all of her negative attributes. Sin has no positive attributes except temporary good feelings. One aspect of our role in sanctification is to abstain from sinful relationships and cling to Godly relationships and the affections [sincere love] will follow. Is it my contention that Paul teaches the biblical prescription for sincere love in this one little verse with 13 words? Yes it is. Do I also believe that it takes the power of the Holy Spirit to effect the prescription? Yes I do.
Again, let me emphasis that this is only one aspect of what sanctification looks like on ground level. In another one of the comments in regard to this post, the following was said:
“That video IS awesome. It always reminds me of two things:
A. Al Mohler’s three step “counseling technique” that he (jokingly) talked about at Shepherd’s Conference 2006:
1. What is your problem?
2. What would God have you do about it?
3. Why are we having this conversation?”
Al Mohler makes an extreme comment to make a good point, but we all know what the real answer is to question 3: Another aspect of sanctification is the need for encouragement, accountability and discipleship by others. CCEF waxes eloquent about many other elements of sanctification while leaving out the one that the Bible talks about most, obedience. The argument that obedience is a human sucking it up while picking ourselves up by our boot straps is a pathetic straw man. Biblical obedience is depriving the enemy of our souls in regard to provisions while loving our Lord [Romans 13:14 John 14:15].
paul
A Biblical Argument For Synergistic Sanctification
I want to be careful, this post does not concern Justification but I want to touch on it by way of introduction. There are two major, major questions that have always been afoot in Christianity: What is the role of God and man in Justification [salvation] and what is the same for Sanctification. Also, a new question could even be added; Is there really any difference in the two?
Let me first begin by touching a little on my view of salvation. I want to begin at ground level. Though God planted seeds of the gospel throughout my life, the full court press was about a one year period leading up to my confession. It would seem to me, from ground level, that I was involved in that process. There was a great mental debate going on in my head. Not only that, I will never forget the crude bible lesson I gave a well meaning Christian and church leader who pleaded with me to disregard any concern for the sin in my life and “just say the prayer.”
I knew becoming a Christian meant giving up the old life, and I was not willing to do that. Oh, I had come to the point where I believed the gospel intellectually, but I was not about to give up the present life that I loved to follow Christ. Then God brought circumstances into my life that were very effective theological instruction and the decision was then made.
With that said, I firmly believe that all the circumstance stated above happened because God decided it would happen before the foundation of the world. I repented because it was “granted” to me [Acts 11:18]. Though I had a role, God made it all possible. God injected all of the necessary elements of salvation into my life. Like a wind-up toy that can do nothing until someone picks it up, winds it up, and sets it on the floor, so is man without God’s predetermined choosing before the foundation of the world. This drives my new found brothers in arms nuts. But it’s ok, they agree with me. When we pray together, they are constantly asking God to save people. Case closed.
Now some further confession. This doctrine, though I hold to it, doesn’t exactly thrill me to death. I have unsaved family members whom I love dearly and the prospect that God has possibly predetermined that they will spend eternity in hell does not exactly give me warm fuzzes. Yes, I use to throw around all of the reformed clichés while sticking my chest out: “What’s worse, people going to hell or God not getting all the Glory he deserves?” “We should be utterly amazed that God would save anybody!!” These may be good and true statements, but they should be spoken with trembling and fear. I am not as stoic and “spiritual” as some modern day self styled “reformist” that are alright with people going to hell so God won’t be robbed of any glory that they are self-proclaimed contemporary custodians of. God can well take care of his own glory and does not need help from the arrogant.
I instead focus on the positive attributes of the doctrine that I can understand and apply. If God does all of the saving, the job was done right. In trials, I can take comfort that God is sovereign. The rest I can trust God for. This is the bottom line for me: I am committed to follow and believe God’s revelation concerning who he is, what he has done, and his instruction for mankind. Psalm 25:8 says the Lord is good in all he is and all he does. That’s true whether I understand everything or not. That’s true whether I embrace all of God’s truth with all joy or not. I will confess Psalm 25:8 to him and wait on his understanding. He has always given us trust as our mainstay, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding [Proverbs 3:5].”
Is there any difference?
But now what of sanctification? If salvation is totally of God, would we have a part in sanctification either? Admittedly, it sounds a little inconsistent. A sole work of God in salvation or sanctification is known as “monergism.” A cooperative work between man and God in either is known as “synergism.”
With that, the three traditional parts of redemption would be “justification [salvation],” “sanctification [growing process of salvation],” and “glorification [when we are not only declared holy but made holy in God’s presence].”
The admitted difficulty of my biblical argument should be as follows: Everyone including so-called atheist would not deny that glorification is a monergistic act of God. If you then also propose “election” or Calvinism, this only leaves a synergistic interpretation of sanctification sandwiched in the middle and only one out of three. This should be easy pickings for those who want to argue for monergistic sanctification, but such is not the case.
I guess my first argument for synergistic sanctification is the fact that direct and numerous Bible statements that support monergistic salvation and glorification are for the most part conspicuously absent in regard to sanctification, regardless of the “sandwich” model presented above. What appears to build as a strong argument for the opposition quickly falls into peril under this reality. Actually, in regard to sanctification, unlike salvation and glorification, the Bible is flooded with the idea of a co labor between God and his children in the same way the latter are marked with statements of monergism. In his introduction to 20 letters on Holiness, J.C. Ryle argues this from the perspective of saving faith:
“ But surely the Scriptures teach us that in following holiness the true Christian needs personal exertion and work as well as faith. The very same Apostle who says in one place, “The life that I live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God,” says in another place, “I fight–I run–I keep under my body;” and in other places, “Let us cleanse ourselves–let us labor, let us lay aside every weight.” ( Galatians 2:20; 1 Corinthians 9:26; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Hebrews 4:11; Hebrews 12:1.) Moreover, the Scriptures nowhere teach us that faith sanctifies us in the same sense, and in the same manner, that faith justifies us! Justifying faith is a grace that “works not,” but simply trusts, rests, and leans on Christ. ( Romans 4:5.) Sanctifying faith is a grace of which the very life is action: it “works by love,” and, like a main-spring, moves the whole inward man. ( Galatians 5:6.) After all, the precise phrase “sanctified by faith” is only found once in the New Testament. The Lord Jesus said to Saul, “I send you, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith that is in Me.” Yet even there I agree with Alford that “by faith” belongs to the whole sentence, and must not be tied to the word “sanctified.” The true sense is, “that by faith in Me they may receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among those who are sanctified.” (Compare Acts 26:18 with Acts 20:32.)”
In my estimation, an utterly profound argument: “…..the Scriptures nowhere teach us that faith sanctifies us in the same sense, and in the same manner, that faith justifies us!”
The anticipated argument that comes will be an eisegesis of God’s sovereignty as apposed to an exsegesis of the same according to His choosing. Obviously, God has chosen to limit his attributes before in the grand scheme of his Devine pleasure and purposes [ Matthew 24:36 Philippians 2:6]. This sends the gate keepers of God’s self esteem running away screaming with their hands over their ears, but is none the less the plain sense of Devine writ.
How does sanctification work?
It’s ironic, the ESV bible that most proponents of monergistic sanctification prefer translates 1 Thessalonians 3:2 by calling Timothy “God’s coworker.” That’s what we are and that’s what we do, co labor with God in the sanctification process. 1Corinthians 3:9 says we are God’s “fellow workers [though this applies to the Apostles and leaders in a technical way, a further study and reference to 2Corinthians chapter 5 reveals that it is applicable to all believers].”
I think Colossians 1:29 gives us the best picture but at any rate, it’s not rocket science:
“For this purpose also I labor, striving according to His power, which mightily works within me.”
Paul said he labored and strived [struggled] “according” to God’s power. We do the work, but God gives us unlimited resources to tap into. A pastor I once knew used to say, “The power is in the doing.” Sure it is, because when you work, it is according to God’s power, but it is still you doing it. Paul again puts it this way in Philippians 2:12,13;
“So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for {His} good pleasure.”
Ever feel like you don’t have the will to do what God wants you to do? It’s just a feeling. God has given you all the will, energy and power that you need to obey and please him. That’s why Paul also said in Philippians 4:13, “I can do all things through him who strengthens me.” God also employs outside resources as well like encouragement from others and promise of reward [1Corinthians 3:12-15 2Corinthians 5:10].
Let me drive home this point with another quote by J.C. Ryle:
“But surely the Scriptures teach us that in following holiness the true Christian needs personal exertion and work as well as faith. The very same Apostle who says in one place, “The life that I live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God,” says in another place, “I fight–I run–I keep under my body;” and in other places, “Let us cleanse ourselves–let us labor, let us lay aside every weight.” ( Galatians 2:20; 1 Corinthians 9:26; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Hebrews 4:11; Hebrews 12:1.)”
“But, on the other hand, it would not be difficult to point out at least twenty-five or thirty distinct passages in the Epistles where believers are plainly taught to use active personal exertion, and are addressed as responsible for doing energetically what Christ would have them do, and are not told to “yield themselves” up as passive agents and sit still, but to arise and work. A holy violence, a conflict, a warfare, a fight, a soldier’s life, a wrestling, are spoken of as characteristic of the true Christian. The account of “the armor of God” in the sixth chapter of Ephesians, one might think, settles the question.”
The Hebrew writer exhorts the exhausted and exasperated Hebrews to ”lift up the hands that hang down and strengthen your weak knees [Hebrews 12:12].” I relate well to this as I use to be a long distance runner [a looooong time ago]. That’s what is going on with your body when you feel like you can’t run another mile. The writer tells them to get their second wind, it is there to be had by God who supplies it. But be sure of this, we are the ones running and also feeling the pain.
As we work hard to obey, think biblically, serve well and love well, God’s power is unleashed. Mark it and mark it well, passive forms of sanctification will always lead to an unfortunate result.
God’s Sufficient Wisdom In Trials: James 1:2-8
Manuscript for Sunday 06/21/2009: Germantown Baptist Chapel
2] Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials,
3] knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance.
4] And let endurance have {its} perfect result, so that you may be perfect and
complete, lacking in nothing.
5] But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and
without reproach and it will be given to him.
6] But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the
surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind.
7] For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord,
8] {being} a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.
There is an old saying that says there are only two things certain in life, death and taxes. Sadly, for those without Christ, this is probably a true statement. When you are not a follower of Jesus Christ, you do live in a world of uncertainty, no doubt about it. But also notice, what few things that are certain in the life of an unbeliever are no cause for joy, only dread. This proverb mentions death and taxes, Job 5:7 says a man is born to trouble as surely as sparks fly upward.
Not so with those who have a relationship with God and his Son. There are many many things that are certain for us. For the most part, a right thinking Christian lives in a world of certainty for even in uncertainty he can be sure what God has to say about it. It is also worthy to note that uncertainty is often a cause for joy in the Christian. We discussed last Sunday how even death is not a certainty for Christians in this age.
But we come this morning to what James says is another certainty in the life of a believer, trials. James says “when” not “if.” We know that as believers trials are coming. If for no other reason, we know this because it is one of the primary ways God molds us into the likeness of his Son. John 15:1,2 says:
1] “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.
2] He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does
bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.
Another good indication that trials will come is 2Timothy 3:12,
In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,
Trails are coming because he who has begun a good work in us will complete it. But James is going to instruct us as to what we are to do when trials come. The first thing we are to do is to stop and do the first thing first, “Consider.” The idea in the English is a good one according to the Greek commentaries. It means to count or evaluate. Ecclesiastes 7:14 says:
When times are good, be happy; but when times are bad, consider: God has made the one as well as the other. Therefore, a man cannot discover anything about his future.
James says to first consider the situation joyful. This would not be a natural response, nor does God expect us to break out in praise upon news of some tragedy. But when the initial shock wears off and the thinking process begins, we are to consider. What in the world could we consider or “count” that could produce joy in the midst of a trial?
Ecclesiastes 7:14, which we just read gives us a clue. God does not create any of the evil that is part of our trial, but he has preordained or predetermined that we will go through that trial. This is not so difficult to understand. God did not create any of the evil that hung Jesus on the cross, but he certainly preordained it according to his plan of salvation. Acts 2:23 says:
This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
Here is the first thing you need to know and consider in any trial, God is in control. The trial is part of God’s purpose in your life. He was not taken by surprise in regard to your circumstance. God is up to something. Esther lost both of her parents. Thats pretty tragic. But read the whole book of Esther and see how God had a plan for Esther’s life, how all of the circumstances of her life played a part in God’s plan for her and others. As you read, remember this, you are no different. Your life reads the same way
but with different circumstances that all fit together for God’s purpose and sometimes I wonder if we can even mess it up. I doubt it. Yes, Oh yes, we will fail, but will God not use those failures to still establish his goal for our life? YES HE WILL!
Know this in any trial: God is there with you and his plan is right on schedule. This is why Job said to his wife:
“ You speak as one of the foolish women speaks. Shall we indeed accept good from God and not accept adversity?” [Job 2:10]
Trials are the hand of God on your life. We must not forget that in the midst of any trial. But Peter further explains why we must think biblically about trials we find ourselves in and why we can have joy in the midst:
1Peter 1:3-9
3] Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His
great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4] to {obtain} an inheritance {which is} imperishable and undefiled and will not fade
away, reserved in heaven for you,
5] who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be
revealed in the last time.
6] In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have
been distressed by various trials,
7] so that the proof of your faith, {being} more precious than gold which is perishable,
even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at
the revelation of Jesus Christ;
8] and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him
now; you believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of
glory,
9] obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls.
Peter’s focus is the glorious salvation we will attain. This promise is eternal while trials are temporary, but the trials we endure increase our faith and assurance. Trials have a purpose, They contribute to our spiritual strength, confidence and service to others as we wait for his appearing.
Note that James mentions that our trials are “various.” This is absolutely critical. The King James says “diverse”, the Amplified says “any sort”, the NIV says “many kinds.” As Christians, what kind of trials can we expect? Anything. This is so critical. The kinds of tragedies and trouble that can befall Christians is sometimes shocking and leaves many bewildered and puzzled. Remember Job, what trial was he spared?, not many. It’s important, as much as possible, that Christians are not perplexed at the trial that they find themselves in. This is not a helpful state to be in and does not facilitate the healing process. Peter put it this way in 1Peter1:12,13;
12] Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as
though some strange thing happened unto you:
13] But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his
glory is revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
As Christians, we view trials through the big picture. Our life doesn’t look exactly like Job’s or Esthers, but it is the same principle. God is moving his plan forward and using trials to transform us.
James starts with the word “consider” in verse 2 and begins with “knowing” in verse 3. We know that the “testing of our faith”, the first step of any trial, leads to more endurance. This endurance comes from faith it’s self. The idea is like an athlete who conditions himself to gain strength for greater challenges. As his strength increases, he also gains confidence. The whole process leads to spiritual maturity in several different areas of life or as James puts it, “so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.”
This study has been a challenge to me in my own life. Do I value my own salvation and it’s sanctification process to the point where I will look at trials in a different way? Will my focus be the trouble and difficulty, or the spiritual benefits for myself and others? When you are strengthened by a trial, it is not only you who benefits, but the church body you belong to stands to benefit as well.
Now we come to another critical truth in this passage, absolutely critical. We must “LET “ endurance have it’s perfect work, verse 4. Let the endurance that is sustaining you in the trial by faith, have it’s perfect work. In other words, we must endure the trial God’s way in order for the process to have it’s desired effect intended by God. Listen to what Paul says in 1Corinthians 10:13;
No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.
Though there will be an escape, or a limit to the trial as James said, the way out is still going to require endurance. The testing of our faith that exercises our endurance is the whole purpose of the trial. Here is one of the critical things we must do in a trail, we must seek God’s way of escape, ie, scriptural wisdom and not the worlds way or the way of the flesh.
One example. I know of a Christian man some years ago who was falsely accused of a heinous crime. Though I do not remember the details exactly, it went something like this: In a plea offer by the prosecution, he was offered a few years probation verses a possible 25 year sentence for a guilty plea. I never heard what the results were, but the man would not take the shortcut out of the trial due to the fact that he would have lied to accept the plea. He rightly concluded that a lie is not God’s open door to escape in any trial.
So, in any trial, we must manoeuver through that trial according to God’s wisdom so the endurance can have it’s perfect work.
Yet another critical truth about trials, perhaps the most important one, verse 5 says: “But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach and it will be given to him.”
In every trial, even among the unbelievers, this one thing must be present, GOD’S WISDOM. In the healing community of the church, it should be a given that God’s word will be the primary authority in that situation. But when you are privy to a trial among unbelievers, that is your call to bring God’s message to that situation. But you say “I don’t know how.” Will, as my grandma used to say, “then get a learnin.” If it’s not your gift, call on the leaders of the church.
Let me ask you a question, how often did Christ present the Fathers wisdom and the gospel in the midst of life circumstances? Life events always call for God’s wisdom and the opportunity for real hope. People flocked to Jesus because they heard he could heal. But the woman at the well did not get the whole town and bring them back to Jesus because he healed her, she went and told them because she perceived he taught God’s truth.
Likewise, in the age we live in, some churches are large because they feed peoples idols. Since Chuck ask in a message 2 weeks ago what our vision for this church is, let me share mine. My vision for this church is that the word will get out that this is a church that offers real answers and real hope for every life and every problem from the word of God.
Yes, yes. Many of life’s problems will require doctors, medicine, the police, the fire department, the army ect. ect. But the complete solution is never never complete without the implementation of God’s wisdom in every situation. Never.
Keep this in mind. The world knows this. The world knows that people need more than physical and emotional healing. Why do think there are so many philosophers in the world? By the way, just as an aside, do you know what group of professionals has the highest rate of suicide? Psychologist!
How bad is the situation in our culture? Let me give you a clue. People tune in to Oprah Winfrey to try to find solutions to their problems. Listen, in every trial, some kind of wisdom is going to be brought to bear. It will either be the worlds wisdom or God’s wisdom.
Let me give you a life example of this. My grandmother lived in an area heavily dominated by a works oriented denomination. This group was heavily ingrained in the geographical culture. For a lot of people, especially those without means, this was the only option for church. However, the pastor of the church she attended did not necessarily buy into much of the official doctrine of this denomination. When he took the pastorate there, another couple followed them and the husband started teaching the adult Sunday school.
The first trial under their watch was when my grandfather developed terminal cancer. He was not a Christian. Regardless of my grandmothers propagation of works salvation in the midst of the situation, The pastor was able to lead my grandfather to the Lord in a very sound way.
After my grandfathers death, the area was hit by heavy flooding. The Sunday school teacher and his wife used the situation to become involved in my grandmothers life. As they shoveled out her basement and listened to her speak, they detected many comments that did not line up with the word of God in regard to truth and attitude and confronted her accordingly. I have good reason to believe these many conversations led my grandmother to a true saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
Trials always have a purpose, and it is the duty of Christians everywhere to make sure God’s purpose in every trial is maximized. This cannot be done without God’s wisdom.
When James tells you to pray for wisdom in the midst of trials, that is, if you do not already know what that wisdom is in your particular trial, this is not a call to pray and wait for some kind of premonition. It is a call to pray for the right understanding from God’s word. This is to be safely assumed from numerous other scriptures.
In many situations, prayer, encouragement and servitude will all be administered. But in most cases, if not all, the treatment is not complete without God’s wisdom and instruction. In verses 6-8, James says the one who prays with a double mind is not likely to receive what he needs from God to endure.
What does “double minded” mean? Simply put: It is a person who is unsure as to whether the bible has the solution, or Oprah Winfrey. James says those who doubt the total sufficiency of God’s word for life and Godliness are “unstable in all their ways” or in every area of life. Only God’s truth leads to stability.
So in conclusion, James has outlined 4 critical mindsets when you find yourself in a trial.
First, consider what scripture has to say about your situation, rather than the only other alternative which is to be dragged away by emotional and fearful thinking. Once dragged away from Godly consideration, you will be enticed to sin. Selfish desire will always rear it’s ugly head in trials, not wanting to accept the trial God has sovereignly allowed into your life. These thoughts will invariably arise, but you must answer them with God’s word and not allow them to control you. This is what James is talking about in verse 14 and 15. Also, consider that God is right in the midst of this trial with you, with the desire to execute his purposes for your life and mold you into the likeness of his Son.
Secondly, do not be perplexed by the severity or the kind of trial you are in. Christ clearly stated that God causes it to rain and the sun to shine on the just as well as the unjust.
Thirdly, you must be guided through the trial by God’s wisdom alone.
Fourthly, you must reject any wisdom that will lead to additional temptation, this is the way of the “double minded” man.
An Apostolic Call To Discernment In The “Last Days”
Manuscript on Sunday 06/14/2009: Germantown Baptist Chapel
Isn’t the view of the Christian landscape a pretty confusing sight? As your driving around, you can’t help but to notice all the different churches everywhere with all kinds of different names. You ever been to a Christian book store? Good grief!
Some recent comments by friends of mine on Facebook reflect the kind of confusion and questions bouncing around in our heads. One friend of mine recently posted a note on Facebook that said, “Doesn’t anybody have any discernment anymore?”
Another dear friend of mine wrote me an email recently in the same tone of exasperation, “I just do not understand why theologians today are always looking for a new twist rather than a true interpretation of each passage – allowing scripture to interpret scripture.”
Yet another friend showed frustration at God himself and ask, “why can’t God make things simple?” Why is everybody so confused”?
What is the deal? How can their be so many takes on “one faith delivered to the saints” as Jude put it.
Well, I’m here to tell you that our God is not a God of confusion. Perish the thought! Neither does God want us to be confused about the above questions, he wants us to understand the landscape and why things are the way they are.
This morning and tonight we will look at what the scriptures say in regard to these vital questions. But first, In order to understand the landscape of our day, we need to understand where we are at in the scheme of redemptive history.
Why? Because that is the prism that the scriptures use to describe WHAT WE SHOULD EXPECT AND LOOK FOR IN THIS TIME AND THERFORE NOT BE SURPRISED OR CONFUSED ABOUT IT.
Not only that, the scriptures also outline a course of action as well.
Therefore, let’s start in Hebrews 9:26;
“for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” ESV.
Let me ask you a question. Are we in the last days? How do we know? Because of a book someone wrote? No, we know that we are in the last day’s because Hebrew 9:26 says the last days are marked by the coming of Christ to die for our sins.
What we are going to see is that the coming of Christ in the flesh to die for the world takes place in a specific time period that has a beginning and an end. Then we are going to look at the characteristics that come with this age. Before we go on, we see that this age is marked by the first appearing of Christ as a man, it is the last age among ages since ages is in the plural. All of the major and most used versions along with the Greek Interlinear reflect this.
This is also reflected at the beginning of Hebrews as well in Hebrews 1:1,2;
“Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.”
The beginning of this specific time period is open for debate. Really, you could make an argument for the beginning of the Lord’s ministry being, the resurrection, the ascension or Pentecost. However, it is clear that the beginning is sometime during the coming of Christ and his ministry through the Disciples who later become the Apostles. It doesn’t much matter when exactly it started, we can be sure that we are now in it.
Next, this specific time period has a specific end:
First, the end is determined by the total gathering of all of those he foreknew and the beginning of what is known as the “Day of the Lord.”
2Peter 3:3-10
knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.
Notice we have 2 separate events here, the “Last Days” and the “Day of the Lord.” The present age will continue until all that God foreknew are saved. The way Peter puts it is, the Lord is patiently waiting for all of his children to be saved, not willing that any perish. Others mistake this for the Lord being slack, or he is not coming back at all because it has been such a long time.
Another text that speaks of the difference between the “Last Days” and “The Day of the Lord” is 2Thessalonians 2:1-7
Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time.
So the end of the last days will be proceeded by the full gathering of God’s children and precede the appearance of the Antichrist and the day of the Lord according to the Apostle Paul.
Also, the end of the last days time period will end with an unexpected resurrection of many believers who are still alive.
1Corinthians 15:51,52
Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.
John 21:18-23
“Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go.” (This he said to show by what kind of death he was to glorify God.) And after saying this he said to him, “Follow me.” Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them, the one who had been reclining at table close to him and had said, “Lord, who is it that is going to betray you?” Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them, the one who had been reclining at table close to him and had said, “Lord, who is it that is going to betray you?” When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, “Lord, what about this man?” Jesus said to him, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!” So the saying spread abroad among the brothers that this disciple was not to die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die, but, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?”
1Thessalonians 4:15-17
For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
Also keep in mind that this resurrection otherwise known as the “Rapture” is what we call “imminent.”
In other words, it is likely to occur at any time without warning:
Acts 1:6,7
So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority.
The Lord restores the kingdom to Israel at the end of the Day of the Lord . The beginning of the Day of the Lord marks the end of the Last Days. Christ also states the following in Matthew 24:36-44;
“But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. “As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. “For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark,”and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. “Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. “Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. “Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.
The whole issue of imminence separates the Last Days and the Day of the Lord because if I’m a believer in the Day of the Lord, otherwise known as the “Tribulation Period”, I know exactly when the Lords coming back to the day. Let me demonstrate. Go to Daniel 9:27
“And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”
The Tribulation period has designated times and not much on the imminent side is going on during this time. If I am a believer during that time, I know that the Lord’s return is 7 years from the date of a treaty made with Israel by the antichrist [other scripture] and 3.5 years from the “Abomination of Desolation” spoken of in 2Thesssalonians 2:4.
II.
So there you have it, this is the age we are living in, “The Last Days.” So what does the Bible say these day’s will be like? What should we expect?
Go to 2Timothy 4:2,3 and I will be reading from the NIV:
Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage-with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
Men will not only be seekers of “A” truth rather than “The” truth, they will not TOLERATE “ sound doctrine!” When you go into a teaching situation, in many cases, they just aren’t going to reject your teaching, THEY AREN’T GOING TO TOLERATE YOU!, and really, some of us here have our share of horror stories.
Really, in the age we live in, there are 3 kinds of churches. Churches that are driven to follow “The” truth at all cost, churches that will follow the truth as long as it doesn’t cost them anything and churches that the apostle Paul said would be indicative of the age, seekers of “A” truth that feeds the evil desires of their heart with a rabid intolerance of truth tellers.
Go with me now to 1John 2:18
Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.
You see the reference here to a future day that will be the time when the antichrist appears, but the apostle John says MANY of his forerunners will be active in this age. In a matter of fact, it’s how we know it is the last age!!!! Incredibly, the Apostle is saying “many antichrist” mark this age.
Go now to 1John 4:1
Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
This is a different group than what John spoke of earlier. There are also MANY “false prophets” in our age. Many antichrist’ and many false prophets mark the age we live in.
Additionally, there where also FALSE APOSTLES among them. Turn with me to 2Corinthians 11:13
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
Revelation 2:2 also speaks of false apostles and there was even a problem with fictional letters being sent out as if from the Apostles telling the saints that they missed the resurrection. [ 2Thessalonians 2:1-3].
In the New Testament, of the 27 books that make up the cannon, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1st and 2nd Peter, 1st, 2nd, and John 3, and Jude deal primarily with error and false teaching as a theme. All other New Testament books contain portions that deal with false or erroneous teaching.
In Revelation chapters 2 and 3, of the 7 churches, 5 contain and tolerate false teachers and are warned by Christ accordingly. In a matter of fact, his specific charge is that they “TOLERATE” false teaching.
The first century church, always looked at as the ideal model, was entrenched in constant and vicious warfare to protect the truth. When the Disciples ask Jesus what the sign of the end of the age and his coming was going to be, the first thing he said was “BE NOT DECEAVED”
Well, maybe things have gotten better since then, right? Not according to the Apostle Paul and what he promised Timothy in 2Timothy 3:1-5
But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God-having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
Again, Paul says in 2Timothy 3:13
while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.
Once you view the present Christian landscape through scripture, it’s not very confusing at all. The Church was engulfed in warfare for the truth from it’s conception and the powers of darkness have had 2000 years to perfect their schemes, neither have they retreated.
However, I am not challenging you to pass judgment on anybody, I am challenging you to be a Berean like those talked about in Acts 17, the ones the Holy Spirit called “honorable.” The Bereans would not even give the Apostle Paul a pass without searching the scriptures to confirm what he was teaching.
Therefore, you need not and should not give any teacher of this age a pass on what they teach. Christ made it clear that the way of destruction in this age would be a wide road while the way of life would be narrow.
I was once sitting in a Sunday school class where the teacher made this statement: “You need to run to the bookstore and get this book.” Listen, I don’t run to any teaching, I move in slowly with binoculars while hiding behind rocks and trees as I go, and so should you.
Why are there so many denominations, isms and teachings covered in spiffy book covers? Because we live in an age that will not tolerate sound doctrine. There is no middle ground in this war, you either stand with darkness or you stand with light, the choice is yours.
Bad News For Michael Horton: The Gospel Is Also Imperative
According to Michael Horton, a Westminster Professor with all the titles that go along with it, the “gospel” is the summation of all doctrine and purely “indicative” of what God has done. In other words, there is no connection between the gospel and law [imperatives or commands], other than it’s purpose to drive us to the cross daily. Put another way by Horton: “ the gospel is not an imperative, but an indicative; not a program to follow, but an announcement to welcome for our own salvation and to herald for the salvation of the world.” Therefore, we would not dare incorporate any kind of imperative in the gospel, it is purely indicative and separate from the law and it’s imperatives. We could also address the daily role of the gospel and the notion that it is the summation of all doctrine, but that would be a digression from the matter at hand here.
This would not bode well for “lordship salvation”, which would require something from the individual in the gospel presentation. As John MacArthur puts it, an exchange for everything we are for everything he is. Therefore, plan A would present the gospel and sit back to see what God does. Plan B would present the Gospel and also emphasize commitment and perseverance. This is far from being a matter of mere semantics, this in fact determines how we present the gospel and what we believe about it.
I was initially prompted to post this by a real life experience that came to mind while reading some of Hortons articles. I was reading my bible one day and thought Acts 17:30 would be a good presentation of the gospel when a very narrow period of time was allotted; “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all {people} everywhere should repent,” I unwittingly shared this with a follower of Michael Horton and this person proceeded to go ballistic, accusing me of being a Pharisee and propagating works salvation, though not in those words. I thought this bazaar and peculiar, taking into consideration that I borrowed this example from how the apostle Paul presented the gospel to those in Athens. Paul’s presentation included the resurrection and warning of judgment as well but was prefaced by the concept of repentance, an obvious imperative. So, I thought I would make my point with a few scriptures that presented the gospel in the imperative, thinking there weren’t that many. Then came the shocker.
First, let me say this, I don’t know that there is a bigger Calvinist around other than myself. But I also remember the words of a pastor friend of mine in Fort Wayne Indiana, “you can’t cram God and his truth into a theological system, it will raise questions you can’t answer every time.” Amen. God’s truth is applicable truth and we are commanded accordingly. Nowhere in scripture are we commanded to figure out all of the paradoxes of the Bible. If all of scripture cannot reconcile your system, it’s a bad system. In regard to a system that says the gospel is purely indicative, consider the following scriptures:
Acts 3:19
Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord,
Acts 8:22
Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord. Perhaps he will forgive you for having such a thought in your heart.
Acts 20:21
I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
Acts 26:20
First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.
And last, but certainly not least:
1 Peter 4:17
For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
1 Peter 1:2
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.
Take note that in many of these verses concerning the gospel, they not only encompass the imperative, but the imperative precedes the indicative, so you can skip the whole “the imperative command is grounded in the indicative event “ routine. And if a literal approach to scripture is not applicable, why do you employ such to prove the latter when other such verses state that one side of the case?
In light of this shocking discovery, how can I even face my Arminian son-in-law? But it’s ok. I think all true Christians evangelize like Armenians and pray like Calvinist. Actually, I prefer the Calminians [that word did not pass spell check for some reason], they know how to party [an idiom for evangelism]. In the mean time, Professor Horton please phone home, I have some questions for you that could be bad news.
paul
Lawless Christianity: Part 3; Contemporary Antinomianism In Reformed Garb
The apostle Paul dealt with some pretty straightforward antinomianism in his day. Apparently, some not only taught that Christians were not obligated to obey the law, but rampant sinning served the gospel by multiplying grace! [Romans 6:1, 15] Deception nor error are always that blatant. Today, we have a form of antinomianism that says the following: “ By all means we uphold the law of God!, absolutely! The law of God must be obeyed!, and all of God’s people say amen.
Now let’s talk about how they believe the law of God is upheld. You see, as a Christian, you are still not obligated to keep the law, in a matter of fact, if you even try to, you are in a works salvation. Huh? They believe that Christians should obey God’s law but if they try to it’s works “salvation?” Yes. How can that be? Well, Christ does it all for you. Proponents of this view do not believe Christians are “born again” so to speak. We are still dead, the only life in us is the indwelling Christ.
But they also believe that we did “die” with Christ and therefore are dead to sin, [Romans 6:2-4] but a remnant of sin remains in us from being formally of the sinful “realm.” Though there is still sin in us, [I will explain this sin and how it operates in us later according to them] they believe the “flesh” is not sin in us, but a sinful realm. The other realm is the realm of the Spirit. Both of these exert pressure on us and at any given time we are “yielding” to one or the other. Therefore, they refute a traditional view of a warfare between our “flesh” [the remnant of sin that remains in us] and our redeemed spirit with the necessary help and dependence of the indwelling Holy Spirit of whom we are sealed till the day of redemption.
Therefore, we are not only dead and unable to do anything because we are dead, but we are helpless against the “realm” of sin because it is a “law” like the law of gravity [Romans 7:21]. We ourselves cannot do anything against sin anymore than we can overcome gravity. Therefore, we are also dead to the law [Romans 7:4].
However, if you would challenge them by saying, “are you saying that we are not ‘born again?’ They would say, “of course not! Of course we are born again!” But what they really mean is that we are born again in respect to the fact that the only life in us is the indwelling Christ. Contemporary antinomianism is fraught with this kind of deceptive double speak.
Their primary proof text is Galatians 2:20;
“I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
The believer no longer lives, he is dead and can therefore do nothing. Christ does all the work through us. Any effort on our part is works salvation.
This is not new. J.C. Ryle contended with the exact same teaching in the 19th century and cited work by Samuel Rutherford who also contended with the same error two centuries before. Samuel Rutherford specifically called it out as antinomianism. The teaching has recently made a comeback around 1980, mostly through Reformed groups. It is the very idea propagated in “How People Change” by Paul David Tripp [especially pages 64 and 65] and various writings by Micheal Horton.
What J.C. Ryle wrote in regard to this follows this paragraph. Stay with it till the end to get my main point for he starts out with the concern of how this teaching is an unbalanced view of the Trinity as well. It’s interesting to note that antinomian teaching is often accompanied by a distorted view of the Trinity and this is also reflected in Johns three epistles. The following is from Ryles introduction of 20 letters on holiness:
(5) In the fifth place, is it wise to use the language which is often used in the present day about the doctrine of “Christ in us”? I doubt it. Is not this doctrine often exalted to a position which it does not occupy in Scripture? I am afraid that it is.
That the true believer is one with Christ and Christ in him, no careful reader of the New Testament will think of denying for a moment. There is, no doubt, a mystical union between Christ and the believer. With Him we died, with Him we were buried, with Him we rose again, with Him we sit in heavenly places. We have five plain texts where we are distinctly taught that Christ is “in us.” ( Romans 8:10; Galatians 2:20; 4:19; Ephesians 3:17; Colossians 3:11.) But we must be careful that we understand what we mean by the expression. That “Christ dwells in our hearts by faith,” and carries on His inward work by His Spirit, is clear and plain. But if we mean to say that beside, and over, and above this there is some mysterious indwelling of Christ in a believer, we must be careful what we are about. Unless we take care, we shall find ourselves ignoring the work of the Holy Spirit. We shall be forgetting that in the Divine economy of man’s salvation election is the special work of God the Father–atonement, mediation, and intercession, the special work of God the Son–and sanctification, the special work of God the Holy Spirit. We shall be forgetting that our Lord said, when He went away, that He would send us another Comforter, who should “abide with us” forever, and, as it were, take His Place. ( John 14:16.) In short, under the idea that we are honoring Christ, we shall find that we are dishonoring His special and peculiar gift–the Holy Spirit. Christ, no doubt, as God, is everywhere–in our hearts, in heaven, in the place where two or three are meet together in His name. But we really must remember that Christ, as our risen Head and High Priest, is specially at God’s right hand interceding for us until He comes the second time: and that Christ carries on His work in the hearts of His people by the special work of His Spirit, whom He promised to send when He left the world. ( John 15:26.) A comparison of the ninth and tenth verses of the eighth chapter of Romans seems to me to show this plainly. It convinces me that “Christ in us” means Christ in us “by His Spirit.” Above all, the words of St. John are most distinct and express: “Hereby we know that He abides in us by the Spirit which He has given us.” ( 1 John 3:24.)
In saying all this, I hope no one will misunderstand me. I do not say that the expression, “Christ in us” is unscriptural. But I do say that I see great danger of giving extravagant and unscriptural importance to the idea contained in the expression; and I do fear that many use it now-a-days without exactly knowing what they mean, and unwittingly, perhaps, dishonor the mighty work of the Holy Spirit. If any reader think that I am needlessly scrupulous about the point, I recommend to their notice a curious book by Samuel Rutherford (author of the well-known letters), called “The Spiritual Antichrist.” They will see there that two centuries ago the wildest heresies arose out of an extravagant teaching of this very doctrine of the “indwelling of Christ” in believers. They will find that Saltmarsh, and Dell, and Towne, and other false teachers, against whom good Samuel Rutherford contended, began with strange notions of “Christ in us,” and then proceeded to build on the doctrine antinomianism, and fanaticism of the worst description and vilest tendency. They maintained that the separate, personal life of the believer was so completely gone, that it was Christ living in him who repented, and believed, and acted! The root of this huge error was a forced and unscriptural interpretation of such texts as “I live: yet not I, but Christ lives in me.” ( Galatians 2:20.) And the natural result of it was that many of the unhappy followers of this school came to the comfortable conclusion that believers were not responsible, whatever they might do! Believers, forsooth, were dead and buried; and only Christ lived in them, and undertook everything for them! The ultimate consequence was, that some thought they might sit still in a carnal security, their personal accountableness being entirely gone, and might commit any kind of sin without fear! Let us never forget that truth, distorted and exaggerated, can become the mother of the most dangerous heresies. When we speak of “Christ being in us,” let us take care to explain what we mean. I fear some neglect this in the present day.
Notice what Ryle specifically says about the teaching of that day:
They maintained that the separate, personal life of the believer was so completely gone, that it was Christ living in him who repented, and believed, and acted! The root of this huge error was a forced and unscriptural interpretation of such texts as “I live: yet not I, but Christ lives in me.” ( Galatians 2:20.)
This is exactly what antinomians of this day teach, except most among reformed groups do not have the fanatical appearance of some in Ryles day. Outwardly, they will appear orderly and probably abide by civil law like most common people. However, they will be all but completely self willed in regard to the finer instruction of scripture, especially New Testament directives and doctrine. This really comes out in regard to biblical leadership in the home. Many reformed groups teach a co-leadership marriage and mock women who hold to a traditional view of submission to their husbands.
Furthermore, their teachings concerning the scriptures are all but totally DESCRIPTIVE with no instruction or emphasis on biblical imperatives. This still gives them an orthodox appearance with plenty of biblical material to wax elegant with. Modern day antinomians continually deride “living by a list”, “do’s and dont’s”, “moralism” ect, which also gives them additional material for teaching and is sometimes their ongoing major emphasis. Reformed antinomian teaching is often difficult to identify until you begin to watch for biblical application of imperatives. This should not be the summation of any solid biblical teaching, but present day reformed antinomian teaching and preaching will be all but completely void of it. Primarily, it denies the necessity of practical application in regard to the scriptures or any effort to obey biblical imperatives.
Also, though I hesitated to wear anybody out with too much information, the present day reformed antinomian distortion of the Trinity by over emphasizing the Son is worthy of mention and apes those that J.C. Ryle contended with in his day. Others have noted this as well. Barry E. Horner in “Future Israel”, states the following on page 192:
“But I must carefully assert, in upholding a Trinitarian perspective in regard to the headship of the Father, that it is possible for such an understanding of Christocentricity to be misguided. This is not an insignificant point since it is common today, especially within Reformed Christianity as Thomas Smail pointed out in ‘The Forgotten Father,’ for an incorrect prominence to be given to Jesus Christ [as though impossible to challenge] that results in biblical distortion.”
Ryle cites the other side of the equation with his concern for the diminishing of the Holt Spirit as well concerning the antinomian “Christ in us” teaching of his day.
Lastly, the Bible does not teach that we are spiritually dead after salvation. The Apostle Paul instructs us to put on the “new man” “created” after the likeness of God, or as the ESV puts it:
“and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”
Ephesians 4:24
When was a “new” self “created?” At salvation, obviously. Paul then tells believers how to put on that new life via several imperatives in the following verses.
Furthermore, Spiritual warfare is between our redeemed spirit, The Holy Spirit and the “flesh”, that mysterious place where residual sin from the former life resides and wages war against us and the Spirit:
“Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul,”
1Peter 2:11
“For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do.”
Galatians 5:17
Note we have three personalities / nouns here: The flesh, The Spirit, and the redeemed part of you that wants to do good. The Flesh and The Spirit are not realms, they indwell the believer:
“but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.”
Romans 7:23
“You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.”
Romans 8:9
This is a very slick form of antinomianism that is very difficult to see through. In the next part, I will reveal their Gospel and how it uses one imperative in a passive form to relinquish Christians from upholding the precepts of God. This is a matter of serious import, for Romans 8:3,4
“For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.”
paul
Lawless Christianity: Part 2; Submission Always Was And Always Will Be
I think there may be a big misconception in regard to authority and it’s required submission. Really, in the minds of most Christians, I think they believe God invented the law as plan B after the fall. Supposedly, it only serves to show us our need for Christ and after that, there is no need for it. However, submission is actually an eternal concept. After God created Adam and placed him in the garden, he established a rule to be obeyed before the fall and even before the creation of Eve:
“The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.”
Genesis 2:15-17
Why did God put the tree there? Did Adam have a free will [in this case, he probably did]? We don’t know, but I think that it is safe to assume that all relationships with God are bonded by a recognition of his Holy authority. For Adam to obey this command of God was foundational to the relationship. Think about it, the breaking of that command thrusted mankind into a redemptive history of spiritual warfare and misery that cannot be put into words. God would as one writer put it, “bankrupt heaven” to make a way to redeem God’s relationship with mankind. God states the crux of the matter when he confronted Adam:
“And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”
Genesis 3:11
What was Satan’s primary goal in order to dismantle the relationship between God and man? It was his goal to get man to disobey God and disregard his authority, and it is his same goal even today. A mimicking of God’s mind and wisdom equals peace, love and harmony. To the extent that we walk in his ways, we fellowship with him in abundant joy. It’s not about earning our way to heaven, it’s about basking in the light of his fellowship:
We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.
1John 2:3-6
In the above scripture, “commandments”, “word” and the example of Jesus who fulfilled the law are all cited. It’s all the same and is profitable toward a child of God being equipped for “every good work.”
It’s never been any different. There has always been authority structure in Heaven from the relationship between Father, Son and Holy Spirit to rank and authority structure concerning the angels. God is one who is always at work, it is one of his attributes [Genesis chapter one] and his word equips us for “every good work” as well [2 Timothy 3:17]. God accomplishes this work through his wisdom and structure:
Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.”
John 5:17
“I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me.”
John 5:36
Nor will eternity be any different:
“His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
Matthew 25:23
“Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. I tell you the truth, he will put him in charge of all his possessions.”
Matthew 24:25-27
The law of God is not some kind of negative plan B that Christ came to replace. It is the mind of God set against rebellion. And by they way, that includes ALL scripture. Let me borrow some silly philosophy going around these day’s that says if you really want to love people, you should love them the way they want to be loved. Well, this would certainly be true about our relationship with God. So what did Jesus say? “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” That’s what the law does. It shows us the way God is to be loved. It shows us how to work the way he is always working, therefore, being like him.
As we saw in the first part, those who do the bidding of the evil one are “lawless.” In this age, Satan has his own authority structure as well. His “prince of peace” [Revelation 6:1,2] is the man of “lawlessness,” the antichrist. But many born in his image are among us, the apostle John makes that clear. The primary tactic used in the garden has not changed. “Many” antichrist come to us today saying, “has God really said?”
Let me ask you a question. If one wanted to attack Heaven, how would you possibly do it? After all, even one angel slew 250,000 Assyrians. You need only to disobey, thats how.
I hear a lot today in our sanguine Christian culter about “secondary issues” and “error” verses heresy. I am here to tell you that whether wittingly or unwittingly, It is all rebellion. 2 Corinthians 10:5 makes it clear that “every” thought that is not captive to scripture is an opinion “raised up against the knowledge of God.”
In the next part, I describe the types of antinomianism [anti: against-nomian: law] that comes to us saying: “has God really said?”
paul
Lawless Christianity: Part 1
People stand by in bewilderment. I was watching Glenn Beck the other night as he was interviewing the incredulous Thomas A. Woods, author of the book entitled “Meltdown.” He could only shake his head as they discussed the way President Obama and his administration are all but completely poo pooing the Constitution of the United States, especially in regard to the sale of Chrysler to Fiat.
Furthermore, the well paid spineless politicians never cease to surprise as they stand by and watch with barley a whimper, a combination of cowardliness and the spirit of this age which is indifferent toward the rule of law and principle to boot.
The Bible has much to say about this. First, the scriptures make it clear that we are in a specific economy time frame with a beginning and end:
“Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.”
Hebrews 9:26 [NIV]
The coming of Christ as a man to die for the sins of the world marked an “end time” with a beginning and end among other “ages:”
“The end of all things is near. Therefore be clear minded and self-controlled so that you can pray.”
1Peter 4:7
“Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.”
1John 2:18
How does John say we will know that it is the last days? “Many” antichrists have come and are among us. Not only that, they are all forerunners to the big cheese himself, “the” antichrist:
“Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.”
2Thesselonians 2:3
The antichrist is deemed the man of “lawlessness,” lawlessness is synonymous with his name, and there are many of his forerunners present with us today. Along with this reality, is a power or spirit of lawlessness that is indicative of the age we live in:
“For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.”
2Thesselonians 2:7
So, to what degree will this spirit of lawlessness infiltrate the church? It was already at work when John wrote his first epistle:
“Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure. Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him. Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous.”
1John 3:3-7
It’s obvious that John was fighting a doctrine which promoted the idea that Christians were not obligated to keep the law. These verses make it clear that lawlessness and sin are synonymous.
So what is considered to be the law? The “law” is God’s word, whatever that entails:
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
2Timothy 3:16,17 [ALL scripture].
In Psalm 119, “word”, “commandments”, and “law” are all used interchangeably. Christians are obligated to keep and observe the whole counsel of God. In 1Corinthians 14:37, The apostle Paul said the following:
“If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.”
In our Lord’s mandate to the Church, he said the following in Matthew 28:19,20
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
Indeed, In our Lord’s sermon on the mount, He said the following:
“Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 5:19
The Greek word for “break” in this verse has the idea of “depriving of authority” [Kenneth S. Wuest], or as the ESV puts it:”relaxes.”
In more recent times, the doctrine that propagates the idea that Christians are not obligated to uphold the law is known as Antinomianism. I wish I could tell you that it is easy to spot. I wish I could tell you that it plainly teaches to live anyway you want to, but it doesn’t. However, the results are evident in many churches today. The absolute plain sense of Scripture is kicked to the curb everywhere you look. In many cases, some leaders in various movements use three different hermeneutics to make a quasi antinomian case. Like the political and secular culture we live in, rules are out and “everyone does what is right in their own eyes.”
Of course, the term “antinomian” would be avoided like the plague. The likes of Samuel Rutherford and his long after student of puritan works, J.C. Ryle, considered it heresy. In the next parts, I will look into the relationship between discipleship and the law a little further and discuss modern versions of antinomianism dressed as piety.
The apostle John warned that this age would be marked by lawlwssness indicative of the coming antichrist himself. It would therefore seem to reason that teachers would approach any concept that would “relax” the precepts of God with great caution. Think again.
paul
Gospel Sanctification: It’s As Easy As 1,2,3
Without a doubt, one of the major attractions of Gospel Sanctification is it’s so darn easy. I completely understand why it is so attractive to pastors as well. The following is a breakdown of how it makes ministry as easy as 1,2,3:
1. Teaching and Preaching:
Great news for pastors. No more laboring in the text with word study, historical background, writer intent, and cross reference. Why would you?, every verse in the Bible is about the gospel! That was easy! You can even get on the Internet and surf for “gospel centered” outlines for many Old and New Testament books. You can also exclude the need for determining “practical application” which is nothing more than “dispensational works of the law.” All you have to do now is show forth the picture of the gospel that the text is illuminating. By the listener “gazing” at this “gospel narrative” and exulting over it, he is changed from “glory to glory.”
John MacArthur complained in “Truth War” that no one wants to labor in the word anymore. C’mon Mac, get a grip.
Also, no more pesky challenges from the congregation about what you teach. The theory behind Redemptive Historical Hermeneutics is so complex, who could ever understand it? Besides, the Lord may show 25 different teachers 25 different pictures of the gospel from the same text,
nothing else is even the issue. It’s all good bro, just chill.
2. Counseling:
No problem. Even as the counselee that you have never met is on his way, you already know what their problem is: sin [anything that you value more than Christ at any given time].“Gospel centered” counseling only has one goal; determine the idols of the heart that have replaced Christ and therefore have led to the counselee being *unhappy.* Unhappiness equals idols. As you listen to the counselee talk, you are looking for idols in the heart because “from the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” Once you determine the idols, you only need to show the glory of Christ and his gospel that replaces that idol. That was easy! [never mind what Jeremiah said about our inability to know the heart].
What about counselees from other churches? That’s even easier. They aren’t saved because they have probably been sitting under Grammatical Historical teaching that doesn’t use the scriptures for it’s only intended purpose, the gospel. If they aren’t preaching the gospel to themselves every day, they are not living by the gospel and therefore could not be saved. Again, the gospel is the answer. That was easy!
What about all of those pesky peripheral issues like the responsibility of others in the situation? Again, no problem. EVERY, I repeat, EVERY circumstance in life that involves others or otherwise, only has the purpose of exposing the idols of the heart [God's “heat” on your life to expose whats in the heart].
If you didn’t have any idols in your heart, you wouldn’t even care what other people did to you. Issues of righteous indignation and justice are dead on arrival. Any conversation regarding the acts of others or circumstances is “BLAME SHIFTING.” It’s all about your wicked heart.
Confession of sin is the vital issue. Acts of sin reveal the idols in your heart that can then be dealt with. This is called a “reorientation of the desires of the heart” [I'm still foggy on how that works, even after hundreds of hours of study in the area of Gospel Sanctification]. If you remember, Job’s three friends tried to push the easy button on him as well. “C’mon Job, we’ve been sittin here three day’s, if you would just confess your sins, this will all be over and we can go home [that's a heavy paraphrase].
Marriage Counseling:
Again, figure out the husbands idols and figure out the wifes idols, and your done. That was easy!
3. Disputes In The Church:
No problem. James said that quarrels are caused by “desires that battle within you.” Ask each party involved in the dispute the following “x-ray” question [questions that reveal idols of the heart by the answers to the questions]: “what did you want.” The answers to this x-ray question will reveal what each party wanted more than Christ [idol of the heart]. Deal with those idols and your done. The other party will then not even care that the other party hired a contract killer.
What about disputes with the leadership? Hey buddy, they are administering the “gospel”, how dare you obstruct the gospel! That was easy.
Do you hope that I deliberately exaggerated in this post to make a point? Me too. However, due to my first hand experience with “gospel centered” counseling, I fear my points are not as exaggerated as I would like them to be.
Point in case, I know of a young missionary who was doing ministry in a particular place in the world that is the epitome of evil and darkness beyond your wildest imagination. Other than his wife, they had very little face to face support in the region. In my mind, many different issues could have come into play in regard to his emotional collapse while in the field. Namely, in that part of the region, demonic oppression could defiantly not be ruled out. However, he was put into the care of individuals who were proponents of Gospel Sanctification and all of it’s “redemptive” theory in regard to ministry, counseling not excluded. They would not discuss any peripheral issues at all, those were all “heat” issues to reveal heart sin. In this very dyer and complex situation, sin and supposed idols of the heart were the only issue on the table. At one point, a “counselor” slammed his fist on his desk and yelled: “we WILL find sin in your life.” The best information I now have is that this individual was traumatized by the counseling and is no longer following the lord.
Here is an important point: In the day and age we live in, you had better understand the presupposition behind the teaching and counsel you are receiving. Just listening to the product doesn’t cut it. Gospel Sanctification is clothed in the loftiest of spiritual lingo along with many other errant teachings that will effect your life in profound fashion. Secondly, do I believe Gospel Sanctification is a strong temptation in our “get it fast and easy” culture? Yes I do, and to the detriment of many.
paul
A Biblicist Answer To A Gospel Centered Approach
The following article is a typical explanation of Gospel Centered hermeneutics,” also known as Christocentric and Redemptive Historical hermeneutics as well.
My thoughts are prefaced by *
In our time, living under the law may assume the form of biblicism. Many suppose that the evangelical faith stands or falls on the matter of biblical inerrancy meaning that the very letter of Holy Scripture is without any error in everything it affirms, including theology, history, ethics, geography, biology and chronology.
*The author begins by erecting a straw man argument. It is not simply the matter of the Bible it’s self being inerrant, it is a matter of believing that God has revealed himself to mankind and had it recorded in a book by men as they were moved and guided by the Holy Spirit [2Peter 1:20,21]. Furthermore, since God chose to reveal himself in this way, it only stands to reason that he would preserve the meaning of his word [Matthew 5:18].
Plainly, the Christian faith does stand on what God has revealed about himself and all of the implications thereof. Therefore, to some degree, the Christian faith would stand on the authority and accuracy of what God has recorded about himself. However, not primarily in regard to the things the author mentions above, but rather what pertains to “life and godliness” as stated in 2Peter 1:3. This passage says we are granted his power through “knowledge of him.“ Let me also take opportunity to set up another point, Peter makes it clear that the scriptures are sufficient for two separate things: “life” and “godliness.”
This is what a “Biblicist” or “scripturist” is, not the description offered above. In addition, scripturist would not fear following the Bible for purposes of duplicating “godliness” and seeking answers for “life,” thinking this would make them legalistic or followers of the law in order to obtain salvation.*
The great danger of biblicism is that, instead of being used solely in the service of the gospel, the Bible becomes a book of rules about many other issues.
*The author is clearly in error here. Nowhere does it say in the scriptures that the Bible is to be used “solely in the service of the gospel.” In a matter of fact, our verse in 2Peter clearly states the purpose of scripture: it’s all we need for “life’ and “godliness.” Furthermore, 1Timothy 3:16 gives additional information regarding the proper use of scripture:
2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
2 Timothy 3:17
so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
Matthew chapters 5-7 are an instructional discourse by Christ himself concerning kingdom living and says little about the “gospel.”
Also, Biblicist don’t believe the bible is a “book of rules”, they believe it is what 2Peter and 1Timothy says it is, that’s why we call ourselves Biblicist. Our idea’s about the proper use of scripture comes from the mouth of God and no other source [“God breathed” 2Timothy 3:16]. Certainly, it is our final authority on what the “gospel” is and how to present it, but the whole Bible is not about this one aspect of knowledge concerning God. Certainly, if this was the case, the apostle Paul failed to make that clear in his writings and certainly passed on the opportunity to make it clear to Timothy.*
Christians may become enslaved to the Bible just as the Jews became enslaved to the Torah, their Holy Scripture (John 10:34,35). Just as the Jews barricaded themselves behind the letter of the Torah to oppose Jesus, so we may easily barricade ourselves behind the letter of a supposedly inerrant Scripture to oppose the gospel’s festival of freedom.
*The “Jews” hid behind a twisting of scripture, not scripture it’s self. And by the way, it was primarily the Pharisees that did this and not the Jews in general. They were guilty of twisting the word of God into their traditions:
Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!” Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death. But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ he is not to ‘honor his father ‘ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
” ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.”[Matthew 15:1-9].
Obeying God’s instruction in regard to kingdom living as documented in the Bible is not the issue for Biblicism. A true Biblicist does not twist the scriptures into traditions and rules made up by men.
Furthermore, as Christians, it is not our goal to partake in a “festival of freedom,” It is our goal to “please him [2Corinthians 5:9].” In the process, it may be festive or it may not be festive [John 21:18-19]. Though freedom in Christ is important to the Biblicist, his main goal is to please Christ, and the God breathed scriptures are the guide for that endeavor.*
There can be a false faith in the bible. In the proper spiritual sense faith is an act of real worship which should be rendered solely to the Creator (John 9:35-38).
*John 9:35-38 is an account of a man who worshipped Christ when he was here in person. This does not mean that worshipping Christ according to what the Bible says in the absence of the physical Christ is synonymous with bowing down and worshipping a book of stone. The reading of the word will often incite us to worship the Christ in “spirit” and “truth” [John 4:23] for “thy word is truth” [John 17:17].*
Saving faith is not faith in the Bible (for even the Christ-denying Pharisees trusted in the Bible John 5:39) but faith in Jesus (Rom. 3:22-26).
Saving faith comes from the word of God:
Romans 10:17
So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.
*Faith does come from faith and belief in God’s word, and it just so happens that it is documented in bibles. So, does faith come from the leather and paper of a bible? Of course not, but it does come from the words written in the Bible when heard by individuals [along with the illumination of the Holy Spirit].
Furthermore, in John 5:39, Jesus is referring to an erroneous assessment of scripture, not scripture it’s self. Jesus was referring to a twisting and misuse of scripture that did not include a proper view of their Messiah. This would seem somewhat obvious. Especially in context.*
While Catholics have been particularly susceptible to ecclesiology — the worship of the church — Protestants have been disposed toward bibliolatry — the worship of the Bible.
*Making the Bible a “light unto our path [Psalm 119:105]” is not worshiping what God says apart from who God is. If we love him, we will keep his commandments [John 14:15].*
The purpose of all Scripture is to bear witness to Christ (John 5:39; 20:31).
*Gospel centered proponents often cite scriptures like John 5:39 to make the case that ALL scripture is about Christ with the added and supposed synonym, “gospel” in every verse and contextual meaning. In this verse, and many others like it, Christ is saying that these individuals have failed to see his role in making salvation possible as explained and proclaimed in scripture. This is not to the exclusion of his instruction for living a life pleasing to the Father and elements of discipleship [Matthew 28:19,20].*
The Bible in itself is not the Word of God. The Word of God is a person (John 1:1).
*Regardless, until God speaks, man has no life line to God [John 6:63, Matthew 4:4]. Jesus said we are “sanctified” by truth and that God’s “word” is truth [John 17:17]. That truth and those words are to be found in what we call the Bible. They are the words of God written and documented in books by chosen men as they were borne along by the Holy Spirit himself. The Bible has a word for that : SCRIPTURE. Scripture is the recognized book form of GOD’S BREATH [2 Timothy 3:16]. This is an unwitting devaluation of a book written by the Holy Spirit to “fully” equip God’ s people for “every good work.”
I will pause here to ask a question that could be ask of hundreds of Bible verses: I f God’s word was only for the purpose of equipping God’s people for the “gospel”, why wouldn’t Paul plainly say that here instead of “every good work?” *
Neither does the Bible have life, power or light in itself any more than did the Jewish Torah. These attributes may be ascribed to the Bible only by virtue of its relationship to Him who is Word, Life, Power and Light. Life is not in the book, as the Pharisees supposed, but only in the Man of the book (John 5:39).
*Again, we are not merely talking about the “bible”, 2 Timothy 3:15 calls it the “SACRED” “WRITINGS.” In fact, the problem with the Pharisees was not that they saw the power of God in the Bible [scriptures], it was the exact opposite, they could not see the power of God because they were in error concerning the scriptures [Matthew 22:29, Mark 12:24]. Also, Peter considered the scriptures a better testimony than the display of Christ’ glory and power at the transfiguration [2Peter1:16-20]. If Peter said that the written word is “more sure” than the power , life, light and majesty that he witnessed first hand concerning Christ at the transfiguration, what does that say about this authors attitude toward the written word?*
The Bible is therefore to be valued because of its testimony to Jesus Christ. The Bible is absolutely trustworthy and reliable for the purpose it was given.
*The author here says that the Bible is only valued and reliable when it speaks of Christ [and his gospel]. He also says that it was only given for that purpose.
Of course Christ is very central to redemptive history and the Bible. But yet, as anyone would agree, baptism is a very significant representation of the gospel. Christ himself says to do so in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit [Matthew 28:19]. The gospel is just as much about the other two members of the Trinity as it is Christ. Without God, there is no election. Without the Holy Spirit, there is no new birth or sanctification [John 3].
Christ also says that his word is a teaching manual for discipleship [Matthew 28:20]. Once again, here is another verse of scripture where the Holy Spirit has opportunity to say ALL of scripture is about the gospel rather than “teaching them to observe ALL THAT I HAVE COMMANDED.”*
It is designed to make us “wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 3:15), not wise on such subjects as science, history and geography, which it is our responsibility to learn through general revelation.
*The author does not quote the next verse that continues the line of thought to include other items besides the gospel:
2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
So, besides the gospel, it is a God breathed manual for “training in righteousness” as well. Maybe better put: a manual for learning how to love God [John 14:21, Luke 10:27].*
“That which makes the Bible the Bible is the gospel. That which makes the Bible the Word of God is its witness to Christ. When the Spirit bears witness to our hearts of the truth of the Bible, this is an internal witness concerning the truth of the gospel. We need to be apprehended by the Spirit, who lives in the gospel, and then judge all things by that Spirit even the letter of Scripture.
*His explanation of a practical hermeneutic when a written word is actually a person, might be helpful: In order to see all of the Bible as gospel, we need to be “apprehended” by the Spirit who “lives in the gospel.” This then enables us to “judge the letter of scripture.” Ooooooooo”k.”*
“…Christian biblicism is no different from Jewish legalism. It is the old way of the letter, not the new way of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6). Jesus and Paul declare that apart from the Spirit we cannot understand the truth (John 16:13; I Cor. 2:14). This means that unless we are caught up in the Spirit of the gospel, we cannot understand or use the Bible correctly. Apart from the gospel the Bible is letter (gramma), not Spirit (pneuma). “The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (II Cor. 3:6,17).” — Robert Brinsmead.
*The last paragraph of the quote simply says that the Spirit only illuminates the word when the word is seen thru the lens of the gospel. But this is not what Jesus said concerning his problem with the legalist crowd. He said “you do error concerning the scriptures.” Once again, why would he not have said: “you do error concerning the gospel.”*
paul
Where Is The Outrage??????
“Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55]
“Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 69)
“Not everybody is saved from God’s wrath just because Christ died for sinners. There is a condition we must meet in order to be saved. I want to try to show that the condition…is nothing less than the creation of a Christian Hedonist.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 61)
“We are converted when Christ becomes for us a Treasure Chest of holy joy.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 66)
“Something has happened in our hearts before the act of faith. It implies that beneath and behind the act of faith which pleases God, a new taste has been created. A taste for the glory of God and the beauty of Christ. Behold, a joy has been born!” (page 67, bold emphasis added)
“Before the decision comes delight. Before trust comes the discovery of treasure.” (page 68, bold emphasis added)
In fact, let me share with you where this kind of teaching meets with real life. I was ask to get involved in an individuals life who was being counseled by a pastor who is a proponent of Christian Hedonism. I sat in shock as I heard someone tell me that this individual [the counselee] was on his knees for several hours begging God to save him to no avail. Apparently, he had not yet experienced a “treasure chest of holy joy.” Pray tell, what is more horrible than a confused message concerning the acceptance of God’s gift of salvation?
Look at the quotes I took from an article written by Craig Boothe on Christian Hedonism above. Where is the outrage among God’s people? I thank God for this one soul who is speaking up [if you know of anyone else, please advise me] and cares more about the truth than the approval of men. I present the link as follows:
http://www.thefaithfulword.org/wakeupcall.html
James 4:1-4; You Do Not Have, Because You Do Not Ask
A pattern throughout the book of James is the author’s pattern of stating a problem, explaining the source or reason for the problem, and then pronouncing the necessary correction. Chapter 4 begins with the problem of “quarrels” and “fights” among the Jewish believers he is addressing [By the way, the fact that Bible writers address Jewish believers separately in the New Testament without any encouragement to assimilate into a church melting pot does not fair well for New Covenant Theology or Amillennialism].
James states the problem, quarrels. Then he states the cause, desires. Then he sites 3 corrections that also revisit the causes and further qualifies them.
The first correction seems brutally pragmatic, but remember, this is James writing. They don’t have because they don’t ask God and not having incites the desires within them. Lack of want always creates temptation, but if your needs are met, the temptation isn’t there, pretty basic. Do you think the Bible is void of these kinds of raw, practical applications? Granted, James is going to go much deeper than this, but remember what Paul’s counsel is to singles who struggle with lust: Get married! [1Cor 7:8,9]. Likewise, let’s say the Holy Spirit convicts you that you like to pray in public to show everybody how spiritual you are. Christ said to fix the problem by praying alone more than you pray in public, knowing that the private prayer is what you will be rewarded for in this life and the life to come [Matt 6:5,6]. And by the way, he encourages you to do it in order to get a reward. Oh my!!! Christ does however, put his finger on the problem. The motive thats driving this sin is the desire to be rewarded by men rather than God. More could be said about that but I digress.
James seems to be developing his instruction in a progression of cause and effect. At it’s most basic, individuals are trying to obtain their desires by their own means and God is not cooperating. They are totally dependent on self and not mindful of God. In other words, good old fashioned pride. They want to obtain their desires by their own strength so they can keep all the credit and glory for themselves as a self-esteem booster. They will fight others to get their way and the prize they seek, the supposed right to boast and feel superior to others.
Remember, James is dealing with religious people. So when all of the fighting and frustration leads to a total dead end, then they pray. We have all partaken in this kind of dead, drab, lifeless prayer time. It is this way because our life is marked by “you do not ask” [usually, you do not pray], then when you do pray, it is not a bold partaking at the throne, crying “abba, Father!”,it is a “double minded” faithless prayer driven by selfish “desire.” Along with this prayer comes the feeling we get when we only call our earthly parents when we want something.“Ya, I’m at a real dead end. All that’s left now is prayer, who knows, maybe God will give me what I want.” 3 words: ain’t gunna happen.
Where does this selfish desire come from that is “warring” within you, and causing all of this mess? That’s verse 4, friendship with the world. Friendship with the world trashes our communion [prayer]
with God in three way’s according to James in verse 4. First, friendship with the world feeds and gives provision to the fleshly desires James speaks of in verse 1 [Rom 13:14]. Sinful desires reside in the flesh and will be there till the Lord comes for us. Friendship with the world inflames this lust and empowers it to wage war within us [Gal 5:17]. As Christians, we keep the sinful desires dummed down and weak for lack of provision.
Secondly, friendship with the world makes us an enemy of God and then we expect to be able to go to God in prayer and get something while feeling the love. Again, 3 words: ain’t, gunna, and happen.
Thirdly, friendship with the world saps our desire to pray. This brings us full circle back to “you do not ask.” In turn, not praying according to the will of God feeds our propensity to fellowship with the world and fulfill the lust of the flesh. We are only then driven to cry out to God in the desperate result from a barren land, and without understanding of how we got there in the first place. If all of that is not enough, this whole nasty downward spiral gives Satan a foothold in our life [verse 7].
Friendship with the world is a subtle affair that creeps in unaware through attitude, beliefs, and influence. It also rushes in quickly to fill every void in our lack of spiritual duty and discipline, and the forces of darkness stand by to help with eagerness.
How friendly are you with the world? The answer can be found in another question: How often do you pray, and what kind of prayer is it?
Let it not be so with us. Let us instead rush the throne of God boldly with every want for ourselves and others, with every concern and deep desire according to the Spirit. We do not have because we do not ask. Christ came that we could have life and have it more abundantly, let us pray accordingly.
paul
Biblical Thinking Leads to Joy in the Midst of Trials: James 1:2-4
I don’t know about you, but I like it both ways. I want life to go my way down here and then retire to Heaven. H