Earnestly Contending

New blog address

2005-03-20T16:17:00.000-08:00

In trying to find a site where I could best format the look the way I wanted I have located and started to reconstruct my 'blog' at the following URL:

http://ecftf.myblogsite.com

The new site, I think, looks better and allows for more options and better admin. functionality.

"An Arminian on his knees would pray desperately like a Calvinist" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-03-16T09:57:00.000-08:00

C. H. Spurgeon, in his characteristically humorous manner, writes:

"An Arminian on his knees would pray desperately like a Calvinist. He cannot
pray about free-will: there is no room for it. Fancy him praying, 'Lord, I thank
Thee I am not like those poor Calvinists. Lord, I was born with a glorious
free-will; I was born with power by which I can turn to thee myself; I have
improved my grace. If everybody has done the same with their grace that I have,
they might all have been saved. Lord, I know thou dost not make us willing if we
are not willing ourselves. Thou givest grace to everybody; some do not improve
it, but I do. There are many that will go to hell as much bought with the blood
of Christ as I was; they had as much of the Holy Spirit given to them; they had
as good a chance, and were as much blessed as I am. It was not thy grace that
made us to differ; I know it did a great deal, still I turned the point; I made
use of what was given me, and others did not - that is the difference between me
and them'. That is a prayer for the devil, for nobody else would offer such a
prayer as that. Ah! When they are preaching and talking slowly, there may be
wrong doctrine; but when they come to pray, the true thing slips out; they
cannot help it." (Freewill-- A Slave)

Praise God for His sovereignty, His grace, and His mercy.

(http://www.mbrem.com/calvinism/elect3.htm)

"Maintaining the Cause of the Reformation" - (Sermon Audio Recommendation)

2005-03-15T17:43:00.000-08:00

Sermon Audio Recommendation

Dr. Alan Cairns, Pastor of Faith Free Presbyterian Church, Greenville, SC

Speaking on the topic of: Maintaining the Cause of the Reformation

Click here for the link

This is a great message on the need for Christians today to maintain the cause of the Protestant Reformation. Listen to Dr. Alan Cairns exhort the Christian to not only remember the Reformation but to passionately defend and maintain its cause. Too many professing Christians today have never heard of the Reformation, have outright forgotten about the Reformation, think of it as some boring story from long ago, or if they have heard of it do not care to acknowledge its importance and continued relevance. In abandoning the Reformation Christians trample underfoot the giants of our faith and founders of our western liberty - but more seriously they indirectly depreciate and count as insignificant the glorious truths of the gospel reclaimed by men of renown over the last 500 years.

I love this speaker for his no-holds-barred, unashamed, gospel defending, dogmatic manner of communication and his ability to demonstrate a fiery passion for the truths of scripture and for defending the cause of the move of God known as the Reformation. His strong stand against the depreciated modern 'gospel' and his bold opposition to the church of Rome are just two of the many reasons I recommend this to any who have the time to listen.

Click here for the link

"Dead Men Walking" by R.C. Sproul - (from monergism.com)

2005-03-14T18:27:00.000-08:00

Dead Men Walking, by R.C. Sproul
An Excerpt from the June 2002 issue of Tabletalk
(taken from http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/deadmenwalking.html)

Attention to detail is far more important in our theology than in our penmanship. For instance, we need to be sure to dot the I in TULIP, the well-known acrostic whose letters represent the classic five points of Calvinism. In the age-old debate between Augustinian and Semi-Pelagian theologies, the crucial point at issue is irresistible grace. Before we consider the qualifier "irresistible," we must define the use of "grace" in this term.The grace in this formula has to do with an action or operation. This operation is wrought on us by God the Holy Spirit. It is a divine work or operation that cannot be earned or merited. We can never earn or deserve grace. If grace were earned, it no longer would be grace. Rather, it would be justice.

The specific operation of God that is in view in the doctrine of irresistible grace is the divine work of regeneration. Regeneration literally means "to regenerate again." It is the concept that rests upon Scripture's teaching concerning rebirth or being born anew. This is the idea expressed in Paul's concept of "quickening," by which the sinful person is raised from spiritual death to spiritual life.

Most Christians agree that regeneration is necessary for salvation. The debate rages over the question of how this necessary condition is met. Historic Semi-Pelagianism teaches that in order to be regenerated one first must have faith. In this schema, it is clear that faith precedes regeneration and that regeneration rests upon a prior response to faith. Thus, God is seen as offering salvation to whosoever will cooperate with His grace.

In contrast to all forms of Semi-Pelagianism, Augustianian and Reformed theology teaches that the grace of regeneration is a monergistic work that is done by God alone because it is a work only God can do. It is a work accomplished on us and in us by which our very natures are changed. It is at once a divine act of re-creation and of liberation. By re-creation we are quickened to spiritual life, or raised from the state of spiritual death.

Regeneration is not a joint venture. We do not cooperate in it because we will not cooperate in spiritual matters while we are still dead in our sins. Our hearts are totally disinclined and indisposed to the things of God. We love darkness and will not have God in our thinking. The desires of our hearts are enslaved to sin. We will never choose Christ until or unless we are liberated from that slavery. In short, we are morally unable to exercise faith until and unless we are first regenerated.

This is why the axiom of Reformed theology is that regeneration precedes faith. Rebirth is a necessary pre-condition for faith. Faith is not possible for spiritually dead creatures. Therefore, we contend that apart from spiritual rebirth there can be no faith.

Of course, once the divine initiative of regeneration has been wrought by the sovereign monergistic work of God, the rest of the Christian life is synergistic. But the transformation of the person from death to life, darkness to light, bondage to liberation is done by God alone, effectually and irresistibly. This is the Biblical basis for the church's confession Soli Deo Gloria.

The Wolves Among Us

2005-03-13T12:58:00.000-08:00

"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves". (Matthew 7:15)

Jesus warned his disciples, early on in His ministry, about the danger of men who would come with the appearance of godliness and wisdom but who inwardly would be of a wolfen nature working to infiltrate and devour the flock. In likening these false prophets to ravenous wolves Jesus indicates they would not outwardly resemble wolves, as that would reveal their true nature, but rather they would "come...in sheep's clothing" so as to appear non-threatening. How much more relevant must these words be in the 21st century with falsehood having such a long time to develop and with the wolves having so many generations to perfect their beguiling craft?!

I read the following quote provided by an administrator at the NTRmin.org forum. This quote is from John Charles Ryle (1816-1900), a minister and bishop in the Anglican Church, who became a famous defender of the evangelical reformed faith in England:

"I ask your special attention to this point. Such is the simplicity and innocence of many Churchmen in this day, that they actually expect false doctrine to look false, and will not understand that the very essence of its mischievousness, as a rule, is its resemblance to God's truth. A young Churchmen, for instance, brought up from his cradle to hear nothing but Evangelical teaching, is suddenly invited some day to hear a sermon preached by some eminent teacher of semi-Romish, or semi-sceptical opinions. He goes into the church, expecting in his simplicity to hear nothing but heresy from the beginning to the end. To his amazement he hears a clever, eloquent sermon, containing a vast amount of truth, and only a few homeopathic drops of error. Too often a violent reaction takes place in his simple, innocent, unsuspicious mind. He begins to think his former teachers were illiberal, narrow, and uncharitable, and his confidence in them is shaken, perhaps for ever. Too often, alas! It ends with his entire perversion, and at last he is enrolled in the ranks of the Ritualists or the Broad Churchmen! And what is the history of the whole case? Why, a foolish forgetfulness of the lesson St. Paul puts forward in this text. As the serpent beguiled Eve by his subtlety, so Satan beguiles unwary souls in the nineteenth century by approaching them under the garb of truth". J. C. Ryle, Warnings to the Churches (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, reprinted 1992).

I have heard it said that when a criminal prints a counterfeit $20 dollar bill, he does not use a picture of Liza Minelli. A counterfeit, by definition, is an imitation of an original made with the intent to deceive. And if one is not trained to know the difference between the original and the imitation, the true and the false, then they are predisposed to accept the counterfeit. This applies not only to money but also to spiritual truths. If one is not trained to discern the difference between biblical Christianity and the counterfeits that so subtly pervade the minds of the 'simple' and 'unsuspicious', they are in danger of unwittingly following erroneous beliefs.

J.C. Ryle rightly observed in his time the dangers of preachers using "clever" and "eloquent" speech to hide specks of malignant falsehood amidst an abundance of truth. During his time there was a growing camp of ecumenists that sought to bridge the gap between roman catholicism and Protestantism. What is known as the tractarian controversy saw notable religious leaders attempting a return to the rituals and traditions of popery. J.C Ryle sought to defend the reformed faith, a biblical faith, against the errors of the roman catholic church and those seeking a 'religious unity' with them. Those familiar with Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), a disturbing and unfortunate joint declaration of beliefs between leading 'evangelicals' and catholics, will recognize it's similarity with the unbiblical ecumenical ideas posed in Ryle's day.

Biblical Christianity today faces not only the dangers of roman catholic ecumenism but many other subtle counterfeits that hide errors behind an appealing veil of truth. And it is not only those so obviously unchristian, such as Mormonism and the Jehovah's Witnesses, that can appeal to the baby Christian. Many counterfeits within the walls of Christianity operate, some with sincerity but deceived themselves, others more "ravenous", to gather sheep to a different pasture. Whether in the Toronto 'blessing' movement, liberal 'Christianity' or pragmatic charismania, there is always something fundamental about Biblical Christianity being compromised. And the Christian owes it to himself or herself, or maybe more importantly out of the love for Him who bought us, to read the Bible and pray that God would strengthen them with His Spirit to "sanctify them in the truth" (John 17).

While I can not in good form, and without possibly resorting to attacks ad hominem, outline a detailed expose on wolves in sheep clothing, I would be remiss and foolish not to acknowledge that many leaders, whether self-appointed or put on a pedestal by well-meaning people, have deviated from the biblical truths of the Gospel and are perpetuating error under the guise of truth. If there were dangers of false teachings two-thousand years ago, then there certainly are today. The Jews in the days of Jesus' ministry were warned of such people. The apostles after the death and resurrection of Christ painstakingly preached to and pleaded with believers to watch out for false teachers and false prophets. Post-apostolic church fathers fought against a number of heretics and their heretical teachings. The Reformers, seeking a return to true Biblical Christianity, fought against the errors, corruption, and unbiblical tradition of the roman catholic church. How much more relevant then, in our day and age after 2000 years for the cancer of error to have metastacised, do you think the warnings of false teachings are? We cannot afford to resign to complacency or compromise when the truth of the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is at stake.

J.C. Ryle wrote of the importance to stick to the Word of God, and nothing else, as the rule of faith and practice - especially when faced with the alluring but subtly dangerous errors of heresy:

"The first leading feature of Evangelical Religion is the absolute supremacy it assigns to Holy Scripture, as the only rule of faith and practice...Show us anything plainly written in that Book, and, however trying to flesh and blood, we will receive it, believe it, and submit to it. Show us anything, as religion, which is contrary to that Book, and, however specious, plausible, beautiful, and apparently desirable, we will not have it at any price...Here is rock: all else is sand".

Ryle here, at the end of the quotation, appeals to the words of Jesus in Matthew 7:24,26 - "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock...Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand". He (Ryle) precedes this with an endorsement of one of the Reformation's most cherished truths - that of sola scriptura - that the only rule of faith and practice is the Word of God found in the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. Nothing else, however "specious", "plausible", "beautiful" or "desirable" should be received at any price. Truly the wise man builds his house on the Rock of the Word...the fool on the sands of error.

However appealing the words of men may be let us always, as exhorted to in scripture, turn to God's Word only as our guide - just as the Bereans in Acts 17 "received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily" - and act on the words of Jesus our - Rock and our Salvation.

"Your Word is Truth"

2005-03-13T12:51:00.000-08:00

"Truth is so obscure in these times and falsehood so established, that unless we love the truth, we cannot know it." - Blaise Pascal

"Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth". - our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ (John 17:17)

I can't remember the whole quote or who said it but I remember reading something like: "By the time falsehood has traveled around the world, truth has just put it's boots on". Error, myth, superstition and all things deceitful - whether subtle or obvious - always seem to find their way into the minds of men without having to knock. But when truth gets to the door - and knocks loudly - some people are too busy to answer; others will not let it in. Well what is truth and what is error? I am no epistemological guru or master of philosophy but I do have the confidence and the reassurance that I do not have to be any of those things to know and understand truth. While many are quick to ridicule the source of truth that I subscribe to - and still more are wont to avoid it - I stand firm on that source, God's eternal Word. In addition, and to clarify, I don't believe for a minute that God's Word is one truth out of many to pick from. In other words I do not believe in religious pluralism or moral or epistemological relativism. Objective truth exists and is found manifest for our faith and practise in the fully and irreducibly sufficient words of God on the pages of the Bible. Further to that, while truths exist that are not written on the pages of the Bible, these truths can not contradict the Word of God. Any truth claim made that contradicts the clear meaning of a scriptural truth is, in reality, a claim made in error.

Truth is not relative and is not changing - it is an eternal, objective foundation of fact found on the pages of the Bible and confirmed, not usurped or paralleled, by many sources found outside it's pages. While some truths can be found within the walls of a synagogue, inside the confines of a mosque, or within the halls of a buddhist temple it is by the presence of so many errors and denials that these truths are rendered null. The presence of truth is never an impetus by which the totality of it's source should be embraced. In other words, just because a body of laws and principles - or a religious institution - contain truth undisputed, it does not follow that the entire corpus of that institution is free from error and should be followed.

Ah, but when it comes to the Word of Alimighty God, the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, we have a corpus free of error and abounding in eternal truth - the stuff of which to surely follow. The psalmist praising God in Psalm 119:160 says this: "The sum of Your word is truth..."; and our Lord echoes this in His prayer for all believers in John 17:17: "Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth". May God continue to sanctify us in the Truth of His Word! We have the faith that His Word is eternal and it will not and can not fail. Many will call our faith a blind faith, laughing at it's apparent simplicity and criticizing what they think is a conclusion reached in haste with no discernment. But we as Christians should know full well that our faith is not blind and that the source of our faith demands us to be discerning. God tells us in Hebrews 11:1: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". Our faith has both substance and evidence - giving us hope for things we can not see.

Scoffers will come ridiculing the 'foolishness' of our faith and mockers will take pleasure in vain attempts to shipwreck it. Skeptics will sit in their houses built on sand, resting unwittingly on the errors of human reason, trying to discredit and disprove the God who made them. But might we, standing firm on the Word of God, never waver, never hide, never give in, and never be ashamed. Laughed at, spit on, avoided or criticized, may we stand firm on the Word of God, and the promises that come with it, knowing that we have built our houses on the Rock of Truth.

But by that Faith - (Quote of the Day)

2005-03-13T12:49:00.000-08:00

It's not scripture, but it certainly supports a scriptural truth: justification by faith...

"All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." Clement of Rome; 1st Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (AD 30-100)

The church of rome will consistently appeal to the "unanimous consent" of the early church 'fathers' when trying to 'prove' many of their man-made traditions and unbiblical dogmas. Since clear Biblical understanding too often eludes them, proponents of roman catholic dogma will switch to patristic writings in attempts to reconcile their false teachings with some nebulous historical understanding. Then, when shown that their 'source' from an early church father either contradicts their tradition - or only remotely supports it - and at the same time either implicitly or explicitly opposes other traditions, they will retire to the last answer that remains "thus saith mother church so thus believeth us". The quote from Clement is only one quote from the early church that supports the biblical truth of justification by faith and contradicts the roman gospel of works/sacraments/merit - there are many others. But one thing is clear. Far from being a doctrine only of the reformation, justification by faith existed as a normative understanding for true Christians before the corruption of the roman church.

Link: "The Resurrection is More Important Than You Think" (ntrminblog.blogspot.com)

2005-03-09T15:46:00.000-08:00

With Resurrection Sunday coming soon, we Christians can't help but focus more attention on the Biblical story of Christ's resurrection. At least we should be focusing on the resurrection. Many Christians, myself included, tend to spend a lot of time on the once-for-all sacrificial death of Christ - with good reason - but sometimes forget about the Resurrection. Truly the resurrection is vital to Christian truth as an actual event that took place in time - truly the most significant event in history.

Here is a quote from Real Clear Theology and an article there that talks about the necessity of Christ's resurrection:

The gospel is not encapulated in "Christ died for our sins." If Christ died for our sins but did not rise from the dead, his death avails nothing:

"But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. . . . and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins." (1 Cor 15:13-17).

The emphasis the NT witnesses placed on the resurrection as absolutely essential to the gospel is striking

Click here for the full article.

Link: "How the KJV Tripped up Mormon Leaders" (From aomin.org)

2005-03-08T15:08:00.000-08:00

The following is a quote from an article at Alpha and Omega Ministries about the silliness of early Mormon 'prophets' and their confusion regarding the KJV and the translation of the name Elijah:

One of the names that appears in two different forms in the KJV is that of Elijah, which appears in the New Testament as Elias. Now, as difficult as it may be to believe, early Mormon leaders, men who identified themselves as "prophets" and "apostles," confused this simple translational issue and came up with two different "prophets," one Elijah, and one Elias.

Click here for full article.

The Carnal Christian: A Horrible Oxymoron - (With Off Site Link)

2005-02-20T18:30:00.000-08:00

There are a number of camps within Christianity that endorse the notion that one can be saved without having to live a life that is indicative of their salvation. This notion, often published in tracts and accompanied by an explanatory drawing of a throne with the 'believer' on the throne instead of Jesus, assumes that a regenerate Christian can live like the old self - as his or her own bond-servant - denying Christ His rightful place as Master. Apparently this 'Carnal Christian' just has not yet begun the sanctification process (like the Holy Spirit is too busy) - if that process is still deemed necessary - and is for all intents and purposes indistinguishable from the non-believer. That this idea is unbiblical - and dare I say heretical - should be easily discerned from a simple reading of the Word of God and yet many Christian leaders go as far as printing tracts that carry this teaching.

I read a great article at ReformedOnline.com that details this oxymoronic attempt at removing the necessity of sanctification as that which follows the believer's justification. This article is quick to identify two of the major problems that have plagued Christianity for 2000 years: 1) the combining of justification with sanctification as a life-long process; 2) the notion that sanctification is not necessary - or is 'optional' - as an expected outworking of the 'new man'. The first of these tramples on the biblical truth of justification being declarative - an instantaneous declaration of God whereby the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the believer. Combining justification with sanctification depreciates from the perfect righteousness of Christ - and ultimately His ability to perfectly save His elect - while, perhaps not intentionally, implying that we contribute in some sense to our salvation. The second problem completely misses the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in the believer and walks the line of antinomianism, reducing the grace of God to a license for immorality or in the very least creating an unhealthy disdain for God's law.

Anyway, the author of this article can speak much more intelligently about this topic then I can...click to read.

Spurgeon on Obstacles to Effective Gospel Witnessing - (With Off Site Link)

2005-02-17T15:20:00.000-08:00

Adrian Warnock has a small but informative post at his UK Evangelical Blog citing Spurgeon's take on some obstacles to effective gospel witness. The following struck me as one of the more important and relevant items for the church of today:

False security "We ought so to preach as to make every sinner
tremble in his seat; and if he will not come to the Saviour, he ought at least to have a hard time of it while he stops away from Him. I am afraid that we sometimes preach smooth things, too soothing and agreeable, and that we do not set before men their real danger as we should. If we shun in this respect to declare all the counsel of God, part at least of the responsibility of their ruin will lie at our door."

It is so important that the Biblical Gospel be preached without compromise and without a mind to soften it or to exclude items deemed "offensive". The first mistake is taking the position that we are to please men; that we are to tailor the gospel to their liking so that it becomes appealing; that somehow we have the autonomy to make the gospel more palatable to the "unchurched seeker", changing it to fit a culturally relevant mold. If only Christian men would understand that the gospel is God's gospel - it is "the power of God unto salvation". If only Christian men would preach the gospel, and all its implications, unashamedly, free of compromise and with passion from a fiery pulpit. The power of the gospel lies not in hands of men and their ability to communicate it or make it relevant - it lies in God and His sovereignty and providence. This does not mean that He has not chosen us to be effective and powerful witnesses to the gospel. But might we never think that we have the ability, or heaven forbid the authority, to compromise the Biblical gospel by picking and choosing that which we are comfortable with and avoiding that which we feel would not be well-received. The deficiency of the modern gospel, a symptom perhaps of the false response by Christians and Christian leaders to the objections Spurgeon noted, is summarized well in the following quotation. H. Richard Niebuhr, commenting on the tragedy of the 'watered-down' gospel, said that the modern message being peddled is a "God without wrath bringing people without sin into a kingdom without judgment through a Christ without a cross." (Quoted at ©1997-2004 The Baptist Page - www.thebaptistpage.com).

Being mindful of the fact that the biblical gospel is being compromised by a man-altered replacement, and is still besieged on all sides by the enemies of the cross of Christ, might our resolve be this: that we will not preach a God of love unless we also preach of His wrath; that we never avoid the preaching of the wretchedness and sin of man; that we always ensure that those in earshot know of the coming judgment; that we, in all steadfastness and uncompromising conviction, preach Christ crucified as the fully sufficient, once-for-all-time propitiation for our sins; and that God in His Sovereignty and in His time would use His word - whether effectively preached or passionately read - to call men by the power of His Spirit to biblical repentance and a life of obedience. Might we never compromise for the sake of comfort, or willingly avoid for the sake of men, all the glorious truths that make the Gospel great.

[DEF]

Tetelestai - (Quote of the Day)

2005-02-16T09:56:00.000-08:00

"It is Finished"
- Our Lord and Perfect Savior: Jesus Christ (John 19:30)

[qotd]

"God Bless America...with Repentance" - (Off Site Link)

2005-02-14T10:26:00.000-08:00

I read a great little post at Alpha and Omega Ministries about God's blessing through judgment and repentance. James White notes in his comments on a reading of Isaiah 17 that: "Most often, when a nation is buried in the filth of sin, as Western cultures are today in general, the greatest blessing they can receive is judgment that brings repentance".

I think we do ourselves a disservice when we focus too much on blessings being those which naturally bring happiness and joy - the blessings that are perhaps more tangible such as food, shelter, family, and finances. But how often do we think about the blessings that most people would not openly welcome - the blessings that, to those outside Christianity, do not appear to be blessings at all. In Philippians (1:29) we read that it is a blessing from God to suffer for the sake of Christ: "For to you it has been granted for Christ's sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,". Not only is the gift of faith from God, to believe in Christ, a blessing but so too is the suffering that comes from persecution - from a world that hates us.

This is not directly related to James White's post but go there to read about idolatry, judgment, and repentance - and how God can bless a nation.

[misc]

Way to Go Son - (Part 2)

2005-02-13T09:37:00.000-08:00

Not too long ago I posted a family news bit congratulating my ten year-old son for his answer on a Social Studies question about racism. The question was something like: "What would you do to solve the problem of racism"? My son answered that he "would tell the people about Jesus Christ". As a Christian father trying to raise my children in a loving environment characterised by biblical principles and a Christian worldview, my son's answer was both delightful and encouraging.

I am happy to report that my son is growing, as best a 10 year-old can, in his Bible reading having recently told me that he brought God's book to school for the weekly morning reading. This was very nice to hear. That my son, amidst a generation of kids many of which are reared in part by MTV and Xbox, would choose to bring his Bible for reading at school is testament to the wonderful work of God in his life. I praise God for that. Might this be a strong beginning to an ever-increasing passion for the Word of God in my son's life.

[fam]

Good Stuff from Real Clear Theology...

2005-02-11T17:45:00.000-08:00

Over at Real Clear Theology Eric Svendsen has responded to an open theist's argument that "no Christian has a right to call into question another professing Christian's activities or beliefs". A simple reading of the New Testament will uncover the repeated exhortation to "strive for the faith of the gospel", to "contend earnestly for the faith", to "rebuke", and "reprove". There is no message in the New Testament that calls for the believer to retire to complacency, indifference, or to love at the expense of the truth being compromised. We are called to "let no one deceive" us - whether from outside the Christian camp or within the realm of those professing to be Christian. Yes, we are instructed not to judge in hypocrisy but this is markedly different from judging based on biblical discernment and the principles of godly living therein. John, Paul, Jude - all give us examples of what to look for in identifying the true believer and instructions on what to do when it is clear the professing believer is not what he professes to be. Anyway, here is a quote from the Real Clear Theology post. Good job by Eric in his response:

The problem with Boyd and those like him is not so much that they error on the side of love. It is rather the case that they mistake a complete lack of judgment for love, and as a result are misleading the believing community into adopting a blind, anti-discernment paradigm. No one in the NT lauds blind acceptance. And no one in the NT equates the scrutiny and rejection of the aberrant beliefs and practices of some who claim to know Christ with a lack of love. That's simply a modern distortion of what true love is. In case it slipped anyone's notice, the apostle who so strongly exhorted us to love ("God is love"; "let us love one another"; etc.), and the one who so strongly exhorted us to scrutinize the claims of those who hold to aberrant theology or lifestyle (see above), are one and the same. [def]

Evangelical Underground Awards

2005-02-08T08:56:00.000-08:00

Evangelical Underground has completed the 2005 Evangelical Blog Awards see below for the results or click here to go to the site. Congratulations to the aomin.org (Alpha and Omega Ministries) team - one of my favorite sites!
_______________________________________________________________________

The winners of the 2005 EU Evangelical Blog Awards are…

Best Evangelical Teen Blog:To Be Least
Best Evangelical Group Blog:Dead Yet Living
Best Evangelical Youth Pastor Blog:Stu’s Rants
Best Evangelical Missionary Blog:Under The Acacias
Best Evangelical Blog-Humor:Rantings of a Lord of the Rings Fanatic
Best New Evangelical Blog:Amy’s Humble Musings
Best Evangelical Blog-Pastor:Mark D. Roberts
Best Evangelical Blog-Apologetics:Weapons of Warfare
Best Domestic Evangelical Blog (U.S.):From The Morning
Best International Evangelical Blog:Tim Challies
Best Evangelical Blog-Ministry:21st Century Reformation
Best Evangelical Blog-Politics:La Shawn Barber
Best Designed Evangelical Blog:Tim Challies
Best Overall Evangelical Blog:Alpha and Omega Ministries, The Christian Apologetics Ministry of James R. White
People’s Choice Award (highest vote total overall, including nominations):Alpha and Omega Ministries, The Christian Apologetics Ministry of James R. White

[misc]

"but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-02-04T22:21:00.000-08:00

It's not scripture, but it certainly supports a scriptural truth: justification by faith...

"All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." Clement of Rome; 1st Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (AD 30-100)

The church of rome will consistently appeal to the "unanimous consent" of the early church 'fathers' when trying to 'prove' many of their man-made traditions and unbiblical dogmas. Since clear Biblical understanding too often eludes them, proponents of roman catholic dogma will switch to patristic writings in attempts to reconcile their false teachings with some nebulous historical understanding. Then, when shown that their 'source' from an early church father either contradicts their tradition - or only remotely supports it - and at the same time either implicitly or explicitly opposes other traditions, they will retire to the last answer that remains "thus saith mother church so thus believeth us". The quote from Clement is only one quote from the early church that supports the biblical truth of justification by faith and contradicts the roman gospel of works/sacraments/merit - there are many others. But one thing is clear. Far from being a doctrine only of the reformation, justification by faith existed as a normative understanding for true Christians before the corruption of the roman church. [qotd]
[ecf]
[reformed]

"Don't Waste Your Life" - (Link of the Day)

2005-02-03T15:47:00.000-08:00

I read a great little excerpt, at Christian Liberty, from a book by John Piper called: Don't Waste Your Life (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2003). The book is a sobering message to Christians, compelling them, not to retire to complacency, but to "joyfully display" God's "supreme excellence in all spheres of life". The tragedy of the unbeliever's life is presented against what the life of a passionate Christian should be. I plan to read this book so that I can more adequetly review its content. In the meantime, here is a quote from the book:

Television is one of the greatest life-wasters of the modern age. And, of
course, the Internet is running to catch up, and may have caught up. You can be
more selective on the Internet, but you can also select worse things with only
the Judge of the universe watching. TV still reigns as the great life-waster.
The main problem with TV is not how much smut is available, though that is a
problem. Just the ads are enough to sow fertile seeds of greed and lust, no
matter what program you're watching. The greater problem is banality. A mind fed
daily on TV diminishes. Your mind was made to know and love God. Its facility
for this great calling is ruined by excessive TV. The content is so trivial and
so shallow that the capacity of the mind to think worthy thoughts withers, and
the capacity of the heart to feel deep emotions shrivels....
[chliv]

God Justifies - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-31T11:09:00.000-08:00

"This truth that God justifies needs to be underlined. We do not justify ourselves. Justification is not our apology nor is it the effect in us of a process of self-excusation. It is not even our confession nor the good feeling that may be induced in us by confession. Justification is not any religious exercise in which we engage however noble and good that religious exercise may be. If we are to understand justification and appropriate its grace we must turn our thoughts to the action of God justifying the ungodly". John Murray [qotd]

"the fears of ignorant consciences" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-30T16:35:00.000-08:00

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. (John 5:24)
This is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life. (1 John 2:25)
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. (1 John 5:13)
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43)
____________________________________________________________________
"But shall I tell you who the gentlemen are who generally raise objections to the glorious privilege of assurance? There are, first of all, the adherents of the Pope of Rome. Of course, the Papist does not like full assurance. And why? The Pope and his priest would have a lean larder if full assurance were well preached. Only conceive my brethren, if the Roman Catholic could get the full assurance of salvation, surely the Cardinals would hardly find money enough to buy their red hats. For where were purgatory then? Purgatory is an impossibility, if full assurance be possible. If a man knows himself to be saved, then he is not to be troubled with a silly fear about waiting in the intermediate state, to be purified with fire, before he can enter into heaven. Purgatory is only acceptable to those poor trembling souls who know of no sure salvation here, and are glad of this deceptive hope of a salvation to be wrought in the world to come. Purgatory being thus builded upon a lying imposition—on the fears of ignorant consciences, becomes what brave old Hugh Latimer used to call it, “Purgatory Pick-purse,” to the poor sinner, and “Purgatory Fillpurse” to the vagabond priest. Once let full assurance be given to all Christian men — first make the Romanist a Christian, and then let him be fully assured of his interest in Christ, and away goes purgatory, and there will never be a soul found to tremble at it any more". Charles H. Spurgeon; from a sermon on Sunday, April 28th, 1861

[qotd]

[rcc]

Once again the Bible withstands scientific skepticism...

2005-01-27T13:16:00.000-08:00

Once again skeptics of the Bible will have to scramble to find another weak argument against its historical accuracy. A Canadian archeologist and his team have unearthed proof of the Edomite kingdom that places it in the time period that the Bible has always indicated. Hopefully ending the controversy stirred up by those doubting the Biblical account, this just proves once again the inerrancy and trustworthiness of scripture. Here is a sample from the Globe and Mail article:

Their findings mean that those scholars convinced that the Hebrew Old Testament is at best a compendium of revisionist, fragmented history, mixed with folklore and theology, and at worst a piece of outright propaganda, likely will have to apply the brakes to their thinking.

(Click Here to read full article)
[curev]

"From Tradition to Truth..."

2005-01-27T13:06:00.000-08:00

What a wonderful story is that of Richard Bennett, a former dominican priest in the church of rome, who was brought out of papal darkness and into the Truth of the Biblical Gospel. Here is a small excerpt from his testimony @ BereanBeacon.org:

"I returned to Vancouver, B.C. and in a large parish Church, before about 400 people, I preached the same message. Bible in hand, I proclaimed that “the absolute and final authority in all matters of faith and morals is the Bible, God's own Word.” Three days later, the archbishop of Vancouver, B.C., James Carney, called me to his office. I was then officially silenced and forbidden to preach in his archdiocese. I was told that my punishment would have been more severe, were it not for the letter of recommendation I had received from my own archbishop, Anthony Pantin. Soon afterwards I returned to Trinidad".

You can read Richard's full testimony here: http://www.bereanbeacon.org/testimony.html.

The reason I posted this excerpt is because I live in the "archdiocese" that Bennett was forbidden to preach in. And I remember when the archbishop jimmy, dressed like Constantine, came to the roman temple that I was raised in to perform the sacrament of "confirmation". Anyway, it is always interesting, but obviously not surprising, when a roman leader silences a person for preaching Biblical Truth. Bennett's statement, "the absolute and final authority in all matters of faith and morals is the Bible, God's own Word", is like fingernails on a chalkboard to a catholic leader. We should not be shocked that a roman archbishop cringes when finding out that the truth of the sufficiency of God's Word has been preached to his followers. We can only pray that at least one of those catholics were listening to Richard Bennett the day he spoke the truth that is so reviled by the propagators of popery. [rcc]

"the gigantic walls of Popery fell by the power of their faith" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-26T23:01:00.000-08:00

"Since he was cursed who rebuilt Jericho, much more the man who labours to restore Popery among us. In our fathers' days the gigantic walls of Popery fell by the power of their faith, the perseverance of their efforts, and the blast of their gospel trumpets; and now there are some who would rebuild that accursed system upon its old foundations. O Lord, be please to thwart their unrighteous endeavours, and pull down every stone which they build. It should be a serious business with us to be thoroughly purged of every error which may have a tendency to foster the spirit of Popery, and when we have made a clean sweep at home we should seek in every way to oppose its all too rapid spread abroad in the church and in the world. This last can be done in secret by fervent prayer, and in public by decided testimony. We must warn with judicious boldness those who are inclined towards the errors of Rome; we must instruct the young in gospel truth, and tell them of the black doings of Popery in the olden times. We must aid in spreading the light more thoroughly through the land, for priests, like owls, hate daylight. Are we doing all we can for Jesus and the gospel? If not, our negligence plays into the hands of priestcraft. What are we doing to spread the Bible, which is the Pope's bane and poison? Are we casting abroad good, sound gospel writings? Luther once said, 'The devil hates goose quills,' and doubtless, he has good reason, for ready writers, by the Holy Spirit's blessing, have done his kingdom much damage. If the thousands who will read this short word this night will do all they can to hinder the rebuilding of his accursed Jericho, the Lord's glory shall speed among the sons of men. Reader, what can you do? What will you do?" Charles Spurgeon; "Evening By Evening" (Uhrichsville, Barbour and Company, 1991)
[rcc]
[qotd]

The Sufficiency of Scripture

2005-01-24T19:03:00.001-08:00

2 examples of Early Church understanding

"For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell thee these things, give not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures." - Cyril of Jerusalem; Bishop of Jerusalem, 4th Century (Catechetical Lectures, 4:17)

"They [heretics] gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures...We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith....It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and to demonstrate the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these heretics rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to 'the perfect' apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon to the Church, but if they should fall away, the direst calamity....proofs of the things which are contained in the Scriptures cannot be shown except from the Scriptures themselves." - Irenaeus, 2nd Century (Against Heresies, 1:8:1, 3:1:1, 3:3:1, 3:12:9)

(reference: Catholic, but not Roman Catholic series; available at http://www.ntrmin.org/catholic_but_not_roman_catholic_index.htm )

[ecf]

Our Salvation is from the Mercy of God - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-24T18:12:00.000-08:00

We shall never feel persuaded as we ought that our salvation flows from the free mercy of God as its fountain, until we are made acquainted with His eternal election, the grace of God being illustrated by the contrast - viz, that He does not adopt promiscuously to the hope of salvation, but gives to some what He denies to others" (John Calvin; III,XXI,1). [qotd]

My Will be Done?

2005-01-24T13:36:00.000-08:00

Total Depravity, a doctrine of the Gospel, is one that is too often misunderstood and maligned without good reason by those who seek to proclaim the necessity of man's will in the 'economy' of salvation. If the 'good news' is that man has been left with the responsibility to choose his saving faith, then God help us all. But since the God-breathed scriptures tell us that faith is a gift of God, not anything of our own doing, we have the confidence to trust in the providence of God. Salvation is His to give, not ours to appropriate. The great Reformer Martin Luther had this to say about the notion of man willing his saving faith:
“Granted that your friends assign to ‘free will as little as possible,’
nevertheless they teach us that by that little we can attain righteousness and
grace: and they solve the problem as to why God justifies one and abandons
another simply by presupposing ‘free-will,’ and saying: ‘the one endeavored and
the other did not; and God regards the one for his endeavor and despises the
other; and He would be unjust were He to do anything else!’...They [the
guardians of ‘free-will’] do not believe that He intercedes before God and
obtains grace for them by His blood, and ‘grace’ (as is here said) ‘for grace.’
And as they believe, so it is unto them. Christ is in truth an inexorable judge
to them, deservedly so; for they abandon Him in His office as a Mediator and
Kindest Savior, and account His blood and grace as of less worth than the
efforts and endeavors of ‘free-will’!”
One of the many perils of the modern gospel is that man, by the power of his own will, can be the initiator of his saving faith. Without getting into the historicity of this view and without going into detail, it is actually one that goes back to the 4th century (probably in manifestations before this) and was something that marked the Pelagian Heresy. Pelagius, a celtic monk, came into conflict with Augustine claiming that man has the free will to choose to put his faith in Jesus Christ thereby being the initiator of saving faith. Pelagianism has reared its ugly head in modern day evangelicalism and finds itself, unfortunately, being propagated as the Biblical Gospel. "Make a decision for Christ", "choose Christ", "invite Christ into your heart", are common refrains coming from the pulpits of evangelical churches. And while these examples themselves sound all well and good, the implication is the unbiblical notion that man has the ability, devoid of God, to make the decision to choose Him - that Jesus Christ has completed His work and now waits for men to choose Him out of an act of sheer will. That men and women, spiritually dead, can make a conscious decision to follow Christ and thereby be the impetus, in a sense, of their own salvation, is representative of the modern deficient gospel. The cause, in part, of this belief may be the notion that mankind is not spiritually dead but spiritually sick or spiritually handicapped. Usually coming from a faulty understanding of 'the fall' this notion implies that men are not dead to God but created "with a hole in their heart that needs to be filled by Jesus". Again while this might sound nice it is not biblical because it implies that a man need not be 'born again' but rather decide on his own to fill "the hole" with Jesus. This, when exposed to the light of Biblical Truth, is silly.

I heard one presbyter use an analogy similar to this: "an unregenerate man can no sooner choose on his own to follow Jesus than a corpse can get up and play tennis or discuss philosophy". To put this discussion in better hands, let's have a quick look at what God's Word has to say about man and his complete lack of saving will:

And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. (Genesis 6:5)

...and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. (John 3:19-20)

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:7-8)

So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. (Romans 9:16)

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:12-13)

While I have only referred to five God-breathed verses I think the message is clear. The carnal mind is enmity towards God; the thoughts of the unbelievers heart are continually evil; those that are in the flesh - not regenerated of the Spirit of God - cannot please God. Men by nature love darkness - choose darkness - rather than light; faith comes not by "him that willeth" it so, but by the mercy of God; the believer is not born of blood, the will of the flesh nor of man, but by the power of God who is in full control. Not to me, not to my wife, not to those who witnessed to me, but to God be the thanks and to God be the Glory!

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;" (Hebrews 12:2)
[reformed]
[doctrine]

Rightly Worshiping God (From Archives)

2005-01-21T17:24:00.000-08:00

One of my favorite excerpts from John Calvin's Commentaries on the Prophet Jeremiah and the Lamentations (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), is his commentary on Jeremiah 7:31:

"Which I commanded them not, and which never came to my mind". This reason ought to be carefully noticed, for God here cuts off from men every occasion for making evasions, since he condemns by this one phrase, “I have not commanded them,” whatever the Jews devised. There is then no other argument needed to condemn superstitions, than that they are not commanded by God: for when men allow themselves to worship God according to their own fancies, and attend not to his commands, they pervert true religion. And if this principle was adopted by the Papists, all those fictitious modes of worship, in which they absurdly exercise themselves, would fall to the ground. It is indeed a horrible thing for the Papists to seek to discharge their duties towards God by performing their own superstitions. There is an immense number of them, as it is well known, and as it manifestly appears. Were they to admit this principle, that we cannot rightly worship God except by obeying his word, they would be delivered from their deep abyss of error. The Prophet’s words then are very important, when he says, that God had commanded no such thing, and that it never came to his mind; as though he had said, that men assume too much wisdom, when they devise what he never required, nay, what he never knew”.

This quote is characteristic of one of Calvin's reform ideas that would come to be called the regulative principle of worship. Now, maybe as a caveat, and stealing some wording from Calvin, I would like to establish that 'we cannot rightly' form our theology and our approach to Christian worship 'except by obeying God's Word' (the Bible) and adhering to the truths therein. In other words, and relating to my quoting of Calvin, we cannot do something just because a pillar of the Reformation said so and it "sounds good to me".
With that out of the way, we are forced, by good conscience, to see the truth in what Calvin has discerned from the Word of God. Devising our own implements to approaching and carrying out worship of God is not something we have been given the autonomy to do - "I commanded them not". And, further to that, we cannot assume that we have the liberty to form components of our worship on the basis that they were not specifically commanded against in God's Word. We can read throughout the Old Testament, whether in pagan circles or by Israel that God has punished and disciplined those who have departed from his commanded form of worship. Whenever those who, albeit with some form of sincerity, have chosen to devise from their own minds methods of worshiping God, God has in many different ways said it "never came to my mind" ("...into my heart" [KJV]).

Is it right to worship God in ways by which he has not specifically commanded against? Or, because God has not specifically condemned certain aspects and implements of worship that man has devised, can we assume that these methods of worship have His blessing? I believe the answer to both of these questions is a strong no. The only way by which we can worship God is by obeying His inerrant, fully sufficient Word. In Matthew 15:9 Jesus states the following: "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Clearly we are not to invent our own modes of worship - however sincere the intention and however appropriate we may think the implements to be. In 1 Samuel 15:22-23 we can read that "to obey is better than sacrifice...For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry." It is better that we obey God because, in our relatively stupid minds, we humans are accustomed to creating new and original ways of expressing our adoration - and in that, because we create them, we commit ourselves to God's judgement.

When it comes to rightly worshiping God, if we would only retire our imaginations and rid ourselves of our carnal inclinations that tell us it is legitimate to create our own forms of worship, how much more wonderful would our relationship be with our Creator. John Calvin adds this to the subject of the right worship of God "...he wholly calls us back, and withdraws us from petty carnal observances, which our stupid minds, crassly conceiving of God, are wont to devise".

Stick to God's Word and pray that He would strengthen you in the Truth!

The Myth of Tradition and its Authority - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-21T13:49:00.000-08:00

Furthermore, that the body of tradition is not of divine origin nor apostolic is proven by the fact that some traditions contradict others. The church fathers repeatedly contradict one another. When a Roman Catholic priest is ordained he solemnly vows to interpret the Scriptures only according to “the unanimous consent of the fathers.” But such “unanimous consent” is purely a myth. The fact is they scarcely agree on any doctrine. They contradict each other, and even contradict themselves as they change their minds and affirm what they previously had denied. Augustine, the greatest of the fathers, in his later life wrote a special book in which he set forth his Retractions. Some of the fathers of the second century held that Christ would return shortly and that he would personally reign in Jerusalem for a thousand years. But two of the best known scholars of the early church, Origen (185-254) and Augustine (354-430) wrote against that view. The early fathers condemned the use of images in worship, while later ones approve such use. The early church almost unanimously advocated the reading and free use of the Scriptures, while later ones restricted such reading and use. Gregory the Great, bishop of Rome and the greatest of the early bishops, denounced the assumption of the title of Universal Bishop as anti-Christian. But later Popes even to the present have been very insistent of using that and similar titles which assert universal authority. Where, then, is the universal tradition and unanimous consent of the fathers to papal doctrine? - Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962), pp. 78-79

[rcc]

[qotd]

The Anti-Christianity of Catholic Leaders

2005-01-19T13:50:00.000-08:00

The title of this post might seem a little insulting to roman catholics. That is not the intent of the title or this post. The purpose of this post is to show, albeit not extensively, the betrayal of Jesus Christ and Biblical truth being perpetrated by Catholic leaders. While I believe the roman catholic church falls under the anathema of Galatians 1:6-9 - and while I believe strongly that the totality of roman catholic teaching disqualifies it as being Christian - I think the majority of congregants of that church do not understand the full scope of their church's departure from biblical authority. I also recognize that catholics share many doctrinal positions with evangelical Christians and that there is a strong sense of ecclesiastical allegiance that roman catholics express towards their 'mother church'. In addition I will grant catholics the distinction of having a heightened cosmetic religious reverence made obvious by their pomp and ritual. But for the sake of the Biblical Gospel I cannot, in the context of rightly representing Christian truth, grant them anything beyond a golf clap for diligence and a secular tip of the hat for sincerity and superficial piety. To slightly change the wording of a previous post, while many truths can be found within the labyrinthine teachings of the catholic church, it is by the presence of so many errors, additions and denials that these truths are rendered null. The presence of truth is never an impetus by which the totality of it's source should be embraced. In other words, just because a religious institution contains truth, it does not follow that the entire corpus of that institution is free from error and should be followed - especially when it elevates oral tradition and the writings of the magisterium to the same level as, or above, scripture. The catholic church does this to their own peril.

I would like to demonstrate that many catholic leaders - while perhaps wearing the sheepskins of 'Christian' piety - are nothing more then religious pluralist wolves. There has been, for quite some time now, a growing spirit of ecumenism within the halls and walls of the roman church that seeks to unite the adherents of many faiths under the cold shadow of the vatican's dark umbrella. Catholic leaders have been, and are now, promoting an interfaith unity to bring together many different religions that have previously been separated by the tenets of their respective teachings. Having at one time been the monstrous tyrants of the inquisition and the innovators of unmentionable torture, the once exclusive roman church is now embracing anyone willing to reciprocate religious courteousness. The church that killed millions of true Christians throughout the centuries is now opening its arms to embrace her "separated brethren". Not only is she willing to extend a religious courtesy to evangelical Christianity but the roman catholic church is also bridging gaps between herself and religions such as judaism, islam, and buddhism - to name a few. In the process they are abandoning the traditional Biblical understanding of salvation (at least their previous distortion of it) for an all-inclusive approach and they are departing from objective biblical truth to a universalist position that implies God gives His blessing to idolaters and 'Jesus-haters'.

This type of religious pluralism and unbiblical ecumenism is not only being perpetrated by catholic leaders. So-called evangelical Christian leaders are extending a welcoming hand to catholics, not to evangelize, but to validate the corrupt catholic gospel as one that is in harmony with Biblical truth. The tragic ecumenism of ECT ('Evangelicals and Catholics Together') and ECT2 testifies to the current climate of unbiblical unity and speaks volumes about the departure from the Biblical Gospel to a deficient gospel born out of false unity and poor motives.

But in this post I am going to focus solely on the anti-christianity of catholic leaders. It is their blatant disregard for Biblical Truth that must be exposed to the light of the Gospel.

Before we have a look at some of the things Catholic leaders and thinkers are saying regarding salvation, Jesus Christ, and other religions, lets take a look at some primer verses from the Word of God that point to salvation ONLY through Jesus Christ:

John 14:6 - Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me".
Acts 4:12 - "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life
Matthew 10:33 - "But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven"
John 10:19 - I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture

Now let us take a look at the betrayal of Christ being perpetrated by catholic leaders. These are men supposed to be shepherding the flock - instead they are leading goats into darkness:
(Note: I have bolded the parts I felt are really serious attacks on Christ and biblical understanding)

Potential Pope Declares Jesus Is Not The Only Way! CardinalFrancis Arinze, who's considered a possible successor to Pope John Paul II, has denied Jesus is the only way to heaven. In a recent interview the pope's spirited 66 year-old deputy for outreach to other religions was asked, "So was Jesus wrong when he said he was the way, the truth and the life?" Arinze responded, "If a person were to push what you said a little further and say that if you're not a Christian you're not going to heaven, we'd regard that person as a fundamentalist...and theologically wrong. I met in Pakistan a Muslim. He had a wonderful concept of the Koran. We were like two twins that had known one another from birth. And I was in admiration of this man's wisdom. I think that man will go to heaven. There was a Buddhist in Kyoto, in Japan. This man, a good man, open, listening, humble--I was amazed. I listened to his works of wisdom and said to myself, 'The grace of God is working in this man." The interviewer then repeated the question, "So you can still get to heaven without accepting Jesus?" "Expressly, yes [he laughs with the audience]." (Dallas Morning News, 3/20/99)

So here we have a potential successor to the pope saying that Jesus is not necessary for salvation. Here we have a Cardinal of the "true church" founded by Jesus Christ (I am using 'catholic speak') essentially calling Jesus Christ a liar! He also gives his blessing to a muslim - who denies the trinity, denies Christ as God (among other denials of God's truth) - and says he admires his 'wisdom'. The cardinal also says that the grace of God is working in a Buddhist! One wonders if this cardinal has ever read the Bible!

How about the apparent 'successor of Peter', the supposed representative of Christ on earth? Here is Pope John Paul II with what can only be described as a universalist, pluralistic approach to God and salvation. This is anything but Christian:

On Wednesday, Sept. 9th 1998 at the general audience in St. Peter's Square, the Pope spoke on the theme of "The Spirit of God and the 'Seeds of Truth' in non-Christian Religions." "The 'seeds of truth'," said John Paul II, are "'the effect of the Spirit of truth operating outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body'," Pope Paul explained that "in all authentic religious experiences, the most characteristic manifestation is prayer. ... Every true prayer is inspired by the Holy Spirit, Who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person."

"Through the practice of what is good in their own religious traditions, and following the dictates of their consciences, members of other religions positively respond to God's invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even though they may not recognize Him as their Savior."

"The attitude of the Church and of individual Christians with regard to other religions is characterized by sincere respect, deep kindness, and also, where it is possible and appropriate, cordial collaboration" (Vatican Information Service 9/9/98)

All I can say is...wow! Any Christian has to, in the very least, shake their head at such unbiblical confusion. Since when is the Spirit of God in non-Christian religions? Here's what the Word of God tells us: "And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him" (Acts 5:32); and also: Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). God does not give the Holy Spirit to those who deny Jesus Christ. God does not give the Holy Spirit to anyone other than those whom He calls to be kept by Jesus Christ. Those who repent and believe in Jesus Christ are given the Holy Spirit. How can the pope claim that the Spirit somehow operates in a limited capacity within the adherents of other religions? That would imply that the Holy Spirit maintains the beliefs of religious people who actively deny the claims of Christianity. Such are the ramblings of an anti-Christ. For the pope to say that the spirit of God is present in other religions is not only erroneous but is blatantly blasphemous.

The pope also claims that the prayers of all religions are inspired by the Holy Spirit. Every prayer is inspired by the Holy Spirit?! So when a Muslim (who denies the existence of the Holy Spirit) prays to allah, the Holy Spirit (whom they blaspheme) is the inspiration for that prayer?! The pope is not only wrong - he is speaking against the clear understanding of God's Holy Word.

The pope, having not said enough to misrepresent and malign biblical Christianity, follows with a self-condemning statement saying that even though members of other religions do not recognize Jesus Christ as Savior, they nevertheless receive salvation through Jesus Christ having somehow subconsciously assented to an invitation by God while remaining faithful to their pagan system of religion. The pope has, in so many words, proclaimed that one can be saved without having to believe in Jesus Christ! With this he has departed from the Word of God, betrayed the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and has issued his own ticket to eternal judgment. The pope also claims that Christians should approach other religions with respect, kindness, and cordial collaboration. While I would never advocate a position of taking action against people through hatred towards other religions, I don't think our God has asked us to respect other religions as being representative of a sound approach to worshipping God. But Isn't that what John Paul II is implying? That, rather then tolerance with a mind to evangelize, we should in kindness respect other religions and serve to work together? This certainly does not come from the Bible. While God does tell us to love our neighbor, He does not tell us to leave them in their sins. He does not endorse a hand-shaking between a believer and an unbeliever for the sake of a Christ-less unity. Here is what the word of God has to say about spiritual fellowship with non-Christians: "Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14); and , "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" (Ephesians 5:11). The pope is suggesting that we bind ourselves together with unbelievers; that we have a partnership with lawlessness; fellowship with darkness; and that there is no need for reproof. The pope has departed from biblical Christianity, if he was ever there in the first place, and has entered the realm of religious pluralism endorsing other religions as means by which people can be saved. In doing so, and yes while giving lip-service to the gospel, he has established himself as anti-Christ.

VATICAN CITY, (ZENIT.org) - "How is it possible to explain the unique characterof Christ and of the Catholic Church to a Jew or a Lutheran", a reporter asked Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, during a press conference to present the "Dominus Jesus" declaration, which is concerned, precisely, with the unique and universal salvation of Christ and the Church. Referring to a believing Jew, Cardinal Ratzinger clarified that "we are in agreement that a Jew, and this is true for believers of other religions, does not need to know or acknowledge Christ as the Son of God in order to be saved, ....". (6-Sep-2000 -- ZENIT News Agency)

Cardinal Ratzinger has, along with the pope, betrayed Jesus Christ and the truth of His Word. What more needs to be said after reading the last sentence of the above quote?! The biblical Peter would have a heart attack if he heard anyone claiming that Jews did not need to hear the Gospel in order to be saved. Peter was tortured and killed for passionately evangelizing Jews, preaching to them pleading with them to understand the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy in the person of Jesus Christ. His whole ministry was to the Jewish people, proving to them the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and reinforcing salvation through Christ alone. If a Jew does not need to hear the Gospel and believe in Jesus Christ to be saved why did Jewish Christians after the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior implore the Jews to hear the Gospel and believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?! I guess their work was in vain. All that effort was pointless because it was never necessary. Thanks Cardinal Ratzinger for clearing that up. What anti-Christian, universalist blasphemy! Cardinal also throws in that believers of other religions also do not need to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. So, for any animal worshipers, witches, voodoo practitioners, and others who hate the name of Jesus Christ - good news - you have the blessing of the roman catholic church!

Next we have a famous catholic apologist claiming that a muslim - again who denies Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, among other things - somehow practices his anti-Christian religion in the presence of Christ and His grace:

"When a pious Muslim practices his islam, his submission, might this be
taking place through Christ and His grace and presence, though the
Muslim does not know it or acknowledge it? I think this is very likely.
God loves to hide. (Catholic Apologist, Peter Kreeft)

On a Larry King interview on CNN, a catholic priest reinforced the pope's stance on the lack of a need for Christ as a means of salvation:

Catholic priest Michael Manning was interviewed by Larry King on December 1,2001. King, who is a Jew, asked, "Now Father, if you don't believe in Christ when you die, are you going to hell?" Manning replied: "No, not at all. It's the Catholic belief that Jesus is the source of salvation, Jesus is God; we believe that. But what [do] we say to the millions and billions of people who don't even know about Jesus, are they just thrown into hell? Or what about a Rabbi who really follows the Lord as best he can? As a Catholic, I'm very comfortable that he attains salvation by doing this." King then asked, "So he achieves it without believing in Christ?" Manning replied, "Correct." King asked, "[H]ow do you view Mohammed?" Manning replied: "As a very wise man. I see the beauty of Islam in a very strong way. A simple approach to God. I'm very touched by Ramadan, by the fasting; the beautiful presence of God and the power of God. And as a Catholic, I need to learn from that."

I think the above excerpt speaks for itself. Catholic leaders are abandoning Jesus Christ as the means of Salvation - to the Catholic, Christ is no longer needed for all men. What a horrible tragedy!

More catholicism against Christ...

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- In their relations with Jews, Christians cannot conceal the strong missionary dimension of their faith, but also must recognize that Jews do not have to convert in order to be saved, a top Vatican official said. Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, said Nov. 6 that Christians take a different missionary approach toward Jews than toward followers of other non-Christian religions. That's because Christians and Jews share a long biblical and religious tradition, a belief in the same God and a conviction that God will complete human history, he said.

And still more...

EVANGELISM OF JEWS NOT NECESSARY, SAY U.S. CATHOLICS - Washington, D.C., USA .... [Bettina Krause/ANN] Roman Catholic leaders in the United States declared last week that they will no longer target Jews for conversion to Catholicism. According to a document released jointly by the Catholics and a major U.S. Jewish organization, the Old Testament covenant between God and the Jewish people is "eternally valid." The Bishops conclude in their portion of the statement that there is no need for Jews to embrace Christianity in order to receive salvation.

I am happy that roman catholics will no longer target Jews for conversion to catholicism. They can leave missionary work to true Christians who still believe the necessity of Jesus Christ for salvation.

While 'mother' Theresa should be commended for her humanitarian work, she is an example of some of the most blatant universalism and pantheistic religiosity ever expressed by a professing 'Christian':

"We never try to convert those who receive [aid from Missionaries of Charity] to Christianity but in our work we bear witness to the love of God's presence and if Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, or agnostics become for this better men -- simply better -- we will be satisfied. It matters to the individual what church he belongs to. If that individual thinks and believes that this is the only way to God for her or him, this is the way God comes into their life -- his life. If he does not know any other way and if he has no doubt so that he does not need to search then this is his way to salvation." ('Mother' Theresa; Life in the Spirit: Reflections, Meditations, and Prayers)

What a shame! She was satisfied with leaving unbelievers in their sin. She never tried to convert the lost to Christianity. Here is more of the religious pluralism of the soon to be 'Saint':

"I love all religions. ... If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there."

"All is God -- Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, etc., all have access to the same God." 'Mother' Teresa (12/4/89, Time magazine, pp. 11,13)

"These people are waiting to die. What are you telling them to prepare them for death and eternity? She replied candidly, 'We tell them to pray to their Bhagwan, to their gods.'" 'Mother' Theresa (reported in Christian News)

It is sad to read that Theresa thought this way and held to beliefs that clearly oppose Biblical Christianity. It grieves me to think someone so devoted to helping the sick, disease ridden, and dying - and whom so sincerely felt she rightly represented Christ - might not have repented and believed the true Gospel before passing.

The following is from an interview with a Catholic nun, "Sister" Ann, who worked in Kathman-du, Nepal, with "Mother" Teresa's organization Missionaries of
Charity. The interview was conducted 11/23/84 at the Pashupati Temple:
Q: Do you believe if they die believing in Shiva or in Ram [Hindu gods] they will go to heaven?
A: Yes, that is their faith. My own faith will lead me to God, ... So if they have believed in their god very strongly, if they have faith, surely they will be saved.
Q: Today it does not seem that the Catholic Church is trying to convert anymore. I know that John Paul II is saying now that those of other religions are saved. You do not believe they are lost anyway, right?
A: No, they are not lost. They are saved according to their faith, you know. If they believe whatever they believe, that is their salvation.

Universalism; Religious Pluralism; unbiblical; anti-christ. Just one more from Theresa...

When "Mother" Teresa died, her longtime friend and biographer Naveen Chawla said that he once asked her bluntly, "Do you convert?" She replied, "Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you've found God, it's up to you to decide how to worship him" ("Mother Teresa Touched Other Faiths," Associated Press, 9/7/97)

Well...there you have it. Theresa did not attempt to evangelize unbelievers living in sin. Rather she encouraged them to be better pagans - to remain in a systems separated from God; even more: systems that God hates. She encouraged them to stay in religions that hate Christ - that choose to actively deny Him. I think it is clear that nothing in the above quotes are indicative of someone practicing Biblical Christianity.

Just in case you thought that these leaders do not represent the true teaching of the catholic church, let us take a look at what their catechism says:

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God" (Catechism #841)

"The Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life." (Catechism #843)

"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, as they know it through the dictates of their conscience-those too may achieve eternal salvation." (Catechism #847)

So again, this church grants salvation to Muslims - who deny and blaspheme Jesus and the Holy Spirit - claiming that they both adore the same god. I am beginning to think that may be the case but their god certainly is not the God of the Bible. The catechism also claims that God gives "goodness and truth" to religions that hate Him. Enough said.

In addition (by now I am sure you get the point) the roman church claims that 'sincerity of heart' and 'dictates of conscience' are in themselves adequate for salvation. The tragedy is not just that this "true church" is making these anti-Christian claims but that so many people either do not know they are trampling on the Word of God, actively choose to ignore these grave errors and remain in bondage to this church, or agree with this teaching and pass it on to their children. If only they knew and understood the wrath to come for all those who steer people away from, and compromise, the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

While I am sure the quotations cited in this article do not represent the beliefs of all catholics I think it is blatantly obvious that the current ecumenical climate of catholic leaders is characterized by an unbiblical motivation for unity and is therefore anti-Christian. To claim to be the church founded by Jesus Christ and then turn around and claim He is not necessary for salvation is very disturbing to say the least. If it wasn't enough that catholicism already finds itself submerged to the neck in man-made tradition that nullifies the Word of God, a labyrinthine "economy of salvation" that tramples on the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice, an ever-increasing marian idolatry, and a works-based false gospel, they have to hammer the proverbial nail in the coffin of their spiritually adulterous system by betraying Jesus Christ as the sole means of salvation. While hiding behind a thin veil of Christology, the fullness of the roman system lurks in the shadow of truth as an enemy of the cross of Christ.

Am I a hater of Catholics? Heavens no! My whole family - excepting me, my wife, and my children - are entrenched in roman catholicism. I love my family and I love catholics. It is my love for them that compels me to defend Biblical Christianity, and effectively witness to it, with the hope that they will see the light of the true Gospel. I would be remiss if I retired to an unbiblical ecumenical stance simply because I did not want to offend anybody. It is for the sake of the Gospel that I find myself in opposition to the catholic system. While I strongly believe the catholic system is not Christian I know that catholics sincerely believe it is and will defend their case quite passionately. I also know that catholics are some of the strongest defenders of morality in today's society, strongly fighting for the unborn, for the traditional definition of marriage, and opposing the sexual immorality so apparent in today's society. If only they would put as much passion into reading the Bible and submitting in obedience to Him and His Word rather than relying on the 'wisdom' of their fallible magisterium and retiring to tradition rather than scriptural truth. As indicated at the beginning of this post it is by so many unbiblical and extrabiblical tenets through their attempt at representing Christianity that they deeply immerse themselves in error. My prayer is that God would use the truths that are still preached to catholics, the biblical truths that are not compromised, and that He would call them out of that false system and into the light of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I felt it fitting to again refer to God's Holy Word as it pertains to Jesus Christ as the only way by which we can be saved. These are by no means the only verses that speak about this, but let them sink in - really read them:

John 14:6 - Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one
comes to the Father except through Me".
Acts 4:12 - "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life
Matthew 10:33 - "But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven"
John 10:19 - I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture
[rcc]
[def]

You gotta be kidding me...God help them!

2005-01-14T10:08:00.000-08:00

From an external news source...

UTRECHT, January 11, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Royal Dutch Medical Association has concluded, after a three-year investigation, that Dutch doctors ought to be able to kill patients who are not ill but who are judged to be "suffering through living."

Click here for full story...
[curev]

The wonderful words of our Shepherd; our Lord; our God

2005-01-13T13:21:00.000-08:00

"What man among you, if he has a hundred sheep and has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open pasture and go after the one which is lost until he finds it? When he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!' I tell you that in the same way, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance". Jesus Christ (Luke 15:4-7)

I will be the first to confess that I sometimes get caught up in reading the letters of Paul, Peter, Jude, James, and John in the New Testament, more than the 4 Gospel accounts, because of the 'task theology' nature of the epistles that strongly appeal to the defense of the Christian Faith. However I was struck with tears after reading these simple but eternally powerful words of our Lord and Savious Jesus Christ. I am going to make a point of reading the Gospels more frequently as the words of the Lord are so extraordinary, so clear, and cut right to the heart. How wonderful it is that our God speaks of His love for us as the love of a shepherd for his sheep! 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!' The Creator of heaven and earth, in all His might and power, has such a love for His sheep that He wants none to be lost. Might we never find ourselves forgetting about the love of our God - that He greatly rejoices, along with all of heaven, when the lost of His flock repent and are carried back to the fold on the shoulders of our Shepherd.

More on "The Emerging Church"...

2005-01-12T11:18:00.000-08:00

Eric Svendsen of New Testament Research Ministries has addressed, in brief, the growing movement called, among other names, "the Emerging Church". At his Real Clear Theology blog Dr.Svendsen rightly states that this growing movement (that has also been labelled "neo-liberalism") is rethinking Christianity by looking through postmodern lenses and that they are reacting to the "perceived errors of modernity". Dr.Svendsen also has this to say:

"The “Emerging Church” movement is so called because it is the collection of
postmoderinst “Christians” who are emerging from the process of “deconstructing”
their own prior “modernist” Christian worldview, and “reconstructing” it into
something that avoids the past errors of the Enlightenment".

He also recognizes that these men (leaders in the Emerging Church movement) are not driven by Biblical Christian principles but have adopted an "intellectually liberal" "worldview trend".

Read Eric Svendsen's full article by clicking here.

Read my last post on the "Emerging Church" by clicking here.

"but if I am asked what is my creed, I reply, “It is Jesus Christ”" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-11T09:48:00.000-08:00

"I would propose that the subject of the ministry in this house, as long as this platform shall stand, and as long as this house shall be frequented by worshippers, shall be the Person of Jesus Christ. I am never ashamed to avow myself a Calvinist; I do not hesitate to take the name of Baptist; but if I am asked what is my creed, I reply, “It is Jesus Christ”. My venerated predecessor, Dr. Gill, has left a body of divinity, admirable and excellent in its way; but the body of divinity to which I would pin & bind myself forever, God helping me, is not his system, or any other human treatise; but Jesus Christ, who is the sum & substance of the Gospel, who is in Himself all Theology, the incarnation of every precious Truth, the all-glorious personal embodiment of the Way, The Truth & the Life." (Charles H. Spurgeon)

"...except God prepares his heart by His grace" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-10T11:03:00.000-08:00

"To write the Law in the heart imports nothing less that so to form it, that the Law should rule there, and that there should be no feeling of the heart, not conformable and not consenting to its doctrine. It is hence then sufficiently clear, that no one can be turned so as to obey the Law, until he be regenerated by the Spirit of God; nay, that there is no inclination in man to act rightly, except God prepares his heart by his grace; in a word, that the doctrine of the letter is always dead, until God vivifies it by his Spirt." (John Calvin)

Going too Far

2005-01-09T18:23:00.000-08:00

Adrian Warnock, from the UK, provided this post on his blog recognizing the fact that some people have taken protest and objection too far re: "Jerry Springer's: The Opera":

I was criticised by a commentator for calling on people to provide email addresses of supporters of the for the concerned public to contact in a civil manner. Personally I do not think that is going too far at all. Provided emails are pollite they are merely a nuscience and pose no security risk. Worst case scenario even if your mailbox is flooded you can always change your address. Most public figures have a public email account in any case (I am no public figure but mine is published freely above).

But a website calling itself the Christian Voice was foolish in the extreme in publishing public figures private addresses and phone numbers online. You will be glad to know that they are offline now but I can vouch for the fact that they were there previously.

There should not be a right to protest outside someones private house. It is one thing to picket a workplace to write letters or yes emails another to invade a family home and send children into hiding for fear of their lives.

I guess one could use the fact that death threats have been issued as a measure of the strength of feeling generated by this blasphemous broadcast but I am shocked and appalled that someone feels that such behaviour is an acceptable protest concerning a TV program.

The BBC do need to look at what they have done in being so offensive but just tor riterate I wish to distance myself completely from the so-called "Christian Voice" who had no business publishing personal details online and from the dangerous cranks who made the phone calls that have sent BBC executives into hiding.

I shall be emailing the BBC a copy of this message.
(from Adrian Warnock's UK Evangelical Blog)

No Burden, No Debt (Repost)

2005-01-08T13:21:00.000-08:00

I recently read, for the first time, an excerpt from John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress that I found quite moving as it pertains to Christian liberty. The story was at a point where the title character, a man appropriately named Christian, is travelling down a road burdened by a load he is carrying on his back. Eventually Christian gets to a hill on which stands a cross - and at the bottom of the hill lies a tomb that is empty. Bunyan writes that, in his dream, when Christian drew level with the Cross the burden broke free from upon his shoulders, fell off of his back, and rolled down the hill to the mouth of the tomb. Then as Christian stood with tears streaming down his face, there appeared three angels who declared: ‘Your sins have been forgiven’. Then - and this is the part that really hit me about as far as something written outside of scripture can - Christian sings this after the angels have departed him:

‘So far did I come loaded up with sin;
Nor could anything ease the grief that I was in,
Till I came here: what a place is this!
Must here be the beginning of my bliss?
Must here the burden fall from off my back!
Must here the chains that tied it to me crack?
Blessed cross, blessed tomb, blessed rather be
The man who here was put to shame for me.’

What a great little bit of writing - what a wonderful song to sing! Can we as Christians ever ponder enough the fullness of what our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ did for us upon that cross? Let us not ever downplay, trivialize, over-intellectualize - or, heaven forbid, forget - Christ's saving work upon the cross. Peter wrote in 1 Peter 2:24: "and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed". Was ever there a more wonderful thing then that which Jesus Christ did for us upon the cross? I regret to call it a 'thing' but my words are tripped up by the glory of it all! My eyes are quick to tear and my heart quick to flutter at the greatness of His sacrifice! What a horrible thing to think of the state of our utter hopelessness; to think of our death because of sin; to think of eternal seperation from God our heavenly Father. Ah, but what a marvelous contrast to then "fix our eyes on Jesus"; to find our righteousness in "him who justifies"; to be healed from the sickness of sin! What can we do but stand in awe - for there is by no means a manner in which we can repay. For this ransom was not paid so that the purchased would live a life of debt - it was a debt that was cancelled! No, we cannot repay. Nor should we serve to try. ( Continue on to the rest of No Burden, No Debt)

"When words can mean anything they mean nothing" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-07T13:49:00.000-08:00

"Unorthodoxy makes its advance in the face of tolerance and undermines orthodoxy like a slowly creeping paralysis. It does not need to repudiate evangelicalism explicitly because it constantly destroys and overthrows it by more subtle means. Unorthodoxy is always happy to keep evangelical terminology because it simply redefines the terms and makes them meaningless. When words can mean anything they mean nothing". - C.H. Spurgeon

Rock of Truth; sands of error - Joining in on the "neo-liberal" discussion...

2005-01-05T22:57:00.000-08:00

I wanted to 'chime-in' on the discussion of "neo-liberalism" as it pertains to the context of Christianity today. I would first, however, like to begin with a quote that rightly identifies the peril of the modern gospel (as opposed to the true biblical one) and speaks to the disappointing compromise of changing the gospel to suit contemporary society.

H. Richard Niebuhr once described the modern gospel as consisting of a "God without wrath bringing people without sin into a kingdom without judgment through a Christ without a cross." (Quoted at ©1997-2004 The Baptist Page - www.thebaptistpage.com)

This modern gospel is an obvious departure from the biblical message and reflects a changing of that historically understood message to a different gospel tailored to appeal to contemporary society. The proponents of "neo-liberalism" (description forthcoming), many of whom preach this modern gospel, are likewise involved in departing from biblical truth to a theology that is more 'palatable' to the modern 'unchurched seeker'. In this is grave error that we will now explore further.

Adrian Warnock, rightly coining the term "neo-liberalism" for a growing branch of postmodern thinking within Christendom, has posed the following definition of neo-liberalism: the intentional adaptation of Christianity to post-modernity. Adrian has identified in a number of his blog entries that this new movement, also referred to as "postconservative evangelicalism" and "the emerging church" (among other names), carries with it some dangerous theological implications - the most grave of which are a reduced view of scriptural inerrancy and the idea that biblical Christian truths are changeable and not eternally relevant. This new approach to Christianity serves to dismantle the traditional and historical Christian faith and erect a malleable replacement shaped by postmodern thought and 'cultural awareness'. While the proponents of this neo-liberalism may be sincerely concerned with the current climate of evangelical Christianity, their prescribed methods to improve the state of things fall short of reverence, fail the test of biblical obedience, and diminish our submission to the providence of God.

When the implication of a new approach to Christianity is that the current system of 'the faith' (as biblically defined) is deficient, those of us holding to the historically biblical view of Christianity would be remiss not to sound the alarms for discernment and defense. Given that this neo-liberal approach to Christianity assumes a position marked by the dismissal of objective truth; an embracing of progressive epistemology; and the endorsement of redefining Christianity to fit a culturally relevant mold - I felt that we must expose this new-fangled approach to the light of scripture (with the hope that God's Word is still relevant enough for neo-liberals).

In the New Testament, Jude writes the following to 1st Century Christians: "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints" (Jude 3). This verse has many powerful messages and lends itself quite meaningfully to our discussion. Firstly, rather then write about the salvation that all Christians had in common, Jude was compelled by good reasons to write to them ('the saints') with urgency to ensure that they zealously defend, against adversaries, the once-for-all-delivered faith. Secondly, 'the faith' referred to here is not simply the theological virtue of believing in and trusting God but rather the totality of Christian doctrine and the fullness of evangelical truths to be believed. John Gill in his Exposition on the Bible writes of 'the faith' in Jude 3 as such:

"...the whole scheme of evangelical truths to be believed; such as the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity and sonship of Christ, the divinity and personality of the Spirit; what regards the state and condition of man by nature, as the doctrines of the imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity, the corruption of nature, and the impotence of men to that which is good; what concerns the acts of grace in the Father, Son, and Spirit, towards, and upon the sons of men; as the doctrines of everlasting love, eternal election, the covenant of grace, particular redemption, justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, pardon and reconciliation by his blood, regeneration and sanctification by the grace of the Spirit, final perseverance, the resurrection of the dead, and the future glory of the saints with Christ"

Thirdly, Jude establishes that this faith has been 'once for all' delivered. The Greek word used here, 'hapax', is also used in 1 Peter 3:18 to describe the finality and sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice: "For Christ also died for sins once for all". So unless we want to go the way of the papists, who erroneously claim that Christ's sacrifice is perpetuated and represented, we are forced by sound exegesis to apply a similar finality as that of 1 Peter 3:18 (Christ died once for all) to 'the faith' referred to in Jude 3 (delivered once for all). Just as there is no need for any further sacrifice for sin there is likewise no need for any further development of Gospel Truth, or a changing thereof. John Gill in his study notes on Jude 3 comments on the 'once-for-allness' of the faith this way:

"it was delivered by God the Father to Christ as Mediator, and by him to his apostles, who may more especially be meant by "the saints", or holy men; who were chosen to be holy, and to whom Christ was made sanctification, and who were sanctified by the Spirit of God; and this faith, being a most holy faith, is fit for holy men, and only proper to be delivered to them, and preached by them; and by them it was delivered to the churches, both by word and writing; and this delivery of it supposes that it is not an invention of men, that it is of God, and a gift of his, and given in trust in order to be kept, held forth, and held fast; and it was but "once" delivered, in opposition to the sundry times and divers manners in which the mind of God was formerly made known; and designs the uniformity, perfection, and continuance of the doctrine of faith; there is no alteration to be made in it, or addition to it; no new revelations are to be expected, it has been delivered all at once: and therefore should be "earnestly contended for"

The reason I am writing all of the above is to show that unalterable Christian truths (read: 'the faith') were delivered once for all at a period in time and that it is this same faith that should be kept, held fast, and earnestly contended for. Only decades following the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior, ungodly men were secretly creeping in to pervert the Christian faith. If the faith had not been final and complete, what was to be earnestly contended for? In our day and age creeping men still lurk amongst the church seeking to pervert the faith. Albeit with some level of sincerity these men nevertheless operate under their own philosophical presumptions seeking to alter God's revealed truths. If Christian truths are malleable, changing and subject to being adapted to contemporary society in order to better appeal to a postmodern demographic, why does the Word of God tell us that the faith was once-for-all handed down and should be defended? While neo-liberals more then likely would avoid the explicit biblical references establishing the finality of the Gospel message (or perform exegetical hand-stands to re-define it) and when pressed might even call the Bible a relic relevant only to an age gone by, evangelical Christians must hold hard and fast to biblical truth as God's eternal objective truth and to 'the faith' as that which is final and to be zealously defended.

This topic has by no means been exhausted, here or elsewhere, and I will continue with the support of other likeminded Christians to defend traditional biblical Christianity against the vain philosophy and precepts of "neo-liberal" thinkers. These men seem to forget that it is God's truth to reveal not man's truth to change. The Bible (of which the Gospel message is central) is not a malleable blob of theological clay to be shaped and fitted to human preference. It is a fully sufficient, complete, and closed book, "inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness", and it need not be added to, changed, or supplemented.

I have used this quote recently in other posts but would like to use it again. J.C. Ryle, in the 19th century, was defending evangelical truth against the tractarian heresy that was seeking a unity between protestants and catholics. Much like the disturbing Evangelicals and Catholics Together ecumenism that we see in our day and the growing problem of Christian "neo-liberalism", the Gospel was being compromised for a man-devised rendition that better suited the cultural climate. J.C. Ryle said this as part of a dissertation on the essentials of a biblical faith:

"The first leading feature of Evangelical Religion is the absolute supremacy it
assigns to Holy Scripture, as the only rule of faith and practice...Show us
anything plainly written in that Book, and, however trying to flesh and blood,
we will receive it, believe it, and submit to it. Show us anything, as religion,
which is contrary to that Book, and, however specious, plausible, beautiful, and
apparently desirable, we will not have it at any price...Here is rock: all else
is sand".

More to come as the discussion on this continues...
(Click to read introduction to Rock of Truth; sands of error)

"The Word of God, which is freely available to all..." - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-05T14:51:00.000-08:00

"...once we stand before Christ's glorious presence and are asked to give an accounting for our time spent here, I suspect we're not going to [be] asked how many books on culture we familiarized ourselves with while on this earth. We're not going to have to give an account for how many 13th-century church history documents we knew. We're not going to be quizzed on how well we studied the Enlightenment, Modernism, or Postmodernism. But I have a feeling we will be asked what we did with, what our attitude was toward, and what we did to further our understanding of the word of God, which is freely available to all..." - Eric Svendsen, New Testament Research Ministries; (extracted from an article @ Real Clear Theology (blog); read full article by clicking here).

"Your Word is Truth" - (Random Musing)

2005-01-05T10:14:00.000-08:00

"Truth is so obscure in these times and falsehood so established, that unless we love the truth, we cannot know it." - Blaise Pascal

"Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth". - our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ (John 17:17)

I can't remember the whole quote or who said it but I remember reading something like: "By the time falsehood has traveled around the world, truth has just put it's boots on". Error, myth, superstition and all things deceitful - whether subtle or obvious - always seem to find their way into the minds of men without having to knock. But when truth gets to the door - and knocks loudly - some people are too busy to answer; others will not let it in.

Well what is truth and what is error? I am no epistemological guru or master of philosophy but I do have the confidence and the reassurance that I do not have to be any of those things to know and understand truth. While many are quick to ridicule the source of truth that I subscribe to - and still more are wont to avoid it - I stand firm on that source, God's eternal Word. In addition, and to clarify, I don't believe for a minute that God's Word is one truth out of many to pick from. In other words I do not believe in religious pluralism or moral or epistemological relativism. Objective truth exists and is found manifest for our faith and practise in the fully and irreducibly sufficient words of God on the pages of the Bible. Further to that, while truths exist that are not written on the pages of the Bible, these truths can not contradict the Word of God. Any truth claim made that contradicts the clear meaning of a scriptural truth is, in reality, a claim made in error. Truth is not relative and is not changing - it is an eternal, objective foundation of fact found on the pages of the Bible and confirmed, not usurped or paralleled, by many sources found outside it's pages.

While some truths can be found within the walls of a synagogue, inside the confines of a mosque, or within the halls of a buddhist temple it is by the presence of so many errors and denials that these truths are rendered null. The presence of truth is never an impetus by which the totality of it's source should be embraced. In other words, just because a body of laws and principles - or a religious institution - contain truth undisputed, it does not follow that the entire corpus of that institution is free from error and should be followed.

Ah, but when it comes to the Word of Alimighty God, the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, we have a corpus free of error and abounding in eternal truth - the stuff of which to surely follow. The psalmist praising God in Psalm 119:160 says this: "The sum of Your word is truth..."; and our Lord echoes this in His prayer for all believers in John 17:17: "Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth". May God continue to sanctify us in the Truth of His Word! We have the faith that His Word is eternal and it will not and can not fail.

Many will call our faith a blind faith, laughing at it's apparent simplicity and criticizing what they think is a conclusion reached in haste with no discernment. But we as Christians should know full well that our faith is not blind and that the source of our faith demands us to be discerning. God tells us in Hebrews 11:1: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". Our faith has both substance and evidence - giving us hope for things we can not see.

Scoffers will come ridiculing the 'foolishness' of our faith and mockers will take pleasure in vain attempts to shipwreck it. Skeptics will sit in their houses built on sand, resting unwittingly on the errors of human reason, trying to discredit and disprove the God who made them. But might we, standing firm on the Word of God, never waver, never hide, never give in, and never be ashamed. Laughed at, spit on, avoided or criticized, may we stand firm on the Word of God, and the promises that come with it, knowing that we have built our houses on the Rock of Truth.

Scripture Alone - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-04T13:51:00.000-08:00

"The first leading feature of Evangelical Religion is the absolute supremacy it assigns to Holy Scripture, as the only rule of faith and practice...Show us anything plainly written in that Book, and, however trying to flesh and blood, we will receive it, believe it, and submit to it. Show us anything, as religion, which is contrary to that Book, and, however specious, plausible, beautiful, and apparently desirable, we will not have it at any price...Here is rock: all else is sand". - J.C.Ryle (1816-1900)

Hey BBC, the devil called...you left your lip gloss on his bedside table

2005-01-03T10:07:00.000-08:00

Once again the propagators of moral corruptness that so cleverly hide behind the tactless garb of artistic freedom have stepped deeper into their own excrement and found themselves driven by the support of a major broadcast corporation. With the help of the BBC, closet God-haters can now relish in televised blasphemy. And those with wont to indulge Christian mockery but have previously not had the proper channel to turn to, can thank the BBC for accommodating them.

With the leaders and idealists of free countries relishing in the 'progress' made by social reform, praising the conquest of liberal humanism over conservative 'close-mindedness', and waving the flags of a new 'tolerance', there seems to be a corporate energy that is fueling the war machine against the only remaining enemy: Biblical Christianity.

Perhaps we Christians should not be surprised that the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) is airing Jerry Springer's "The Opera", a piece of crap - I mean art - that depicts Jesus, Mary, and God as "sexual deviants who give and receive extreme verbal abuse and a horrific series of blasphemies, all in the name of comedy". After all, they regularly air 'scholarly' programs attempting to pick apart bible stories such as the Genesis account of Noah's Ark. And they are always pleased to 'properly represent' the historical truth about the life and times of Jesus - bringing in more 'scholars' to tell us how the Bible is "a cute little book of literary forms" that romanticises and distorts the 'real' story as a means of promoting a religious movement. They would never think of having a panel of reputable conservative New Testament scholars who can, for instance, speak very intelligently and convincingly about the historical reliability of the Gospel of Luke. The media, with its liberal agenda, seems intent on sucker-punching biblical objective truth and then quickly jumping behind a rock. But while we should not necessarily be surprised with the airing of "The Opera" we would be remiss to not be both appalled with its content and angered by its utter blasphemy.

It is becoming more and more clear that, in the current climate of liberal ideological dominance, the only acceptable prejudice is that which rails against Biblical Christianity. As Christians we should actually expect this type of prejudice and even rejoice in its value as a prophetic fulfillment of the words of Jesus: "...and you will be hated by all because of My name" (Luke 21:17). But while I would proudly wear any badge that said "hated by the world" for the sake of Jesus I can not resign to a position of passive forbearance. I will endure to the end but not with 'my tail between my legs'. Let not the expected reality of a disbelieving world pacify us into a state of inaction. This type of blatant and tasteless attack on Christianity can not fly without the winds of our righteous discontent making it a bumpy ride. Christians need to take some sort of action against the unrelenting media and their tasteless disregard for the Bible and the Christian demographic.

One can only wonder about the kind of outrage that would ensue if the BBC, or any broadcasting corporation for that matter, aired a program that ridiculed Mohammed, Buddha, or the Hindu religion. If the BBC aired a program that depicted Mohammed as a pedophilic crossdresser there would be a global outrage the likes of which we have never seen. I hope it is not unfair and presumptuous of me to write this but I wager that if the BBC aired anything blatantly disparaging about Islam, there would be within a week a pile of rubble and smoke where the BBC main broadcast headquarters once stood. But when it comes to Jesus and Christianity the BBC seems to throw all good sense, respect, and courteousness to the wind. It is within allowable censorship and in good judgment to depict Jesus as a verbally abusive sexual deviant, but the minute a Christian with sound moral principles presents an argument against gay marriage the cries of discrimination can be heard around the world. The double standard of our 'free-thinking', 'open-minded' world is confounding.

If the BBC was ever, in decades past, a monogamous bride married to respectability, in today's climate of moral ambiguity it now stands in stark contrast as an adulterous whore bedding depravity when it seems fit or popular to do so. It is disgusting that a corporation could in one breath plea for us to pray for the victims of the tsunamis and in the next breath promote something that blasphemes the God we Christians pray to. Such is the current state of media integrity.

Perhaps once the chaste bride of moral soundness, the BBC finds itself drunk on the blood of character and virtue - and in bed with the devil. Bad form BBC...extremely bad form!

With dramatic expressivity and perhaps undue rhetoric,
I'm Cameron Porter for the Good News :)

From Adrian Warnack's UK Evangelical Blog...

2005-01-02T13:24:00.000-08:00

the following is from: Adrian Warnack's UK Evangelical Blog...
British Blasphemy Corporation - lets do something about it!
Its important to pause for a moment before you hit the delete key. As you can guess when I first saw this in my email box I was conviced it was yet another hoax alert. It isn't. We CAN do something about it.

BBC2 plans to broadcast Jerry Springer's "The Opera", immediately after Christmas. This musical, notorious for containing over 8000 expletives, depicts the characters of Jesus, Mary and God as self-centred sexual deviants who give and receive extreme verbal abuse and a horrific series of blasphemies, all in the name of comedy. The artistic director admits that it is a deliberate attack on good taste and the BBC concedes that the intended broadcast "pushes back the boundaries of taste and decency". Nevertheless, the show is scheduled to be transmitted without any cuts.

If you strongly disagree with the BBC's plans to broadcast this material (and I honestly believe you will disagree). Please register your feelings with the BBC, this does make a difference - 500 calls are considered as a very significant complaint, so I am sure we can do this!!!!!!!!!Email: info@bbc.co.uk or Tel 08700 100222Please forward this message to as many people as possible, because time is of the essence as the 8th Jan gets nearer. Let us also pray for the material that is now being presented as entertainment on the BBC, and let us make a difference by being salt and light.

If this concerns you as it does me, a call to the BBC, a mention on your blog if you have one, and an email to both the BBC and other Christian friends would be helpful.Lets utilise the Bloggers famous "swarm" ability to have this cancelled. If this was about Mohammed it would never be allowed.Just in case you still think this is a hoax, the following quotes come from the BBC review of the stage show which was filmed for this.

Jerry, in a delirious dream, is taken down to Hell, which he really doesn't want
to do as it would be a sideways step in his career. This is a great excuse for
some stage pyrotechnics. In Hell he is made to present a show where his guests
are Satan, Jesus, Adam & Eve, Mary and God. This is where the show has come
in for some criticism for blasphemy. Indeed the Jerry Springer Show declined to
invest in the opera because they objected to its language, and sexual and
religious content.

The Programme is due to be aired on the 8th January. We have 6 days to raise a storm of protest to get this off the air.

"It's better to stand alone with the truth, than to be wrong with a multitude" - (Quote of the Day)

2005-01-01T23:03:00.000-08:00

"It is better to be divided by truth than to be united in error. It is better to speak the truth that hurts and then heals, than falsehood that comforts and then kills. Let me tell you something, friend, it is not love and it is not friendship if we fail to declare the whole counsel of God. It is better to be hated for telling the truth, than to be loved for telling a lie. It is impossible to find anyone in the Bible who was a power for God who did not have enemies and was not hated. It's better to stand alone with the truth, than to be wrong with a multitude. It is better to ultimately succeed with the truth than to temporarily succeed with a lie. There is only one Gospel and Paul said, 'If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.'" - Adrian Rogers (cited in The Berean Call, December 1996)

Rock of Truth; sands of error - Biblical Christianity vs the "emerging church"

2005-01-01T07:45:00.000-08:00

"O that you would be completely silent, And that it would become your wisdom"! (Job 13:5)

We would all be well served by any advice to be silent when faced with the decision to choose between speaking our own wisdom or submitting to the wisdom of God. Unfortunately many people choose rather to run with their own wisdom, or that of a shared philosophy, under the assumption that it is either in God's plan for them to do so or that wisdom apart from God, with the intent to represent His truth or subjectively find it, is wisdom blessed by God. When this type of independent, pragmatic approach is applied by Christians with the intent to change the way Christianity is viewed and practiced, we need to be both guarded and concerned - to say the least.

There is a growing (and by that I am implying malignant metastasis) movement within Christianity that is seeking to usurp the objective truth of the Word of God and replace it with a man-devised gospel of subjective revisionism. With the pretense of properly actualizing the Christian faith, and claiming to rightly represent it, this movement is not coordinated by any one organization but is 'unified' by a postmodernist philosophy and the motivation to synchronize Christianity with that to fit the needs of contemporary society. Called, among other names, "the emergent church", "postmodern ministry" and "postconservative evangelicalism", this growth within the Christian world is alarming. While the proponents of this postmodern approach to Christianity - that I would call a departure from biblical Christianity - seem vindicated by their sincere appeal to please the 'spiritual seeker', Christians who strongly believe that God's Word is eternally relevant and His Truth "once for all delivered" (Jude 3) should be concerned about the dangers that this new movement carries with it.

Stay tuned for more...

Here's Your Trumpet! (Quote of the Day)

2004-12-31T09:45:00.000-08:00

A man says to me, "Can you explain the seven trumpets of the Revelation?" No, but I can blow one in your ear, and warn you to escape from the wrath to come. Charles Haddon Spurgeon

Keeping our focus on the essentials of the Gospel is very important. Try not to be pulled out into the weeds of struggling to understand the nonessentials. As the bible is the infallible Word of God all biblical truths are important. However, attempting to understand cryptic eschatology, or struggling to reach a point of complete intellectual biblical comprehension, is not going to be of any eternal benefit. Rather, the called of God must realize the gravity of the 'wrath to come'; fall on their knees in genuine repentance - not just of individual trangression but of the totality of their sinful nature - realizing their death to sin and eternal condemnation without reconciliation to G0d; be convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit, and turn from that sin; believe in the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ for their sin; rejoice in that means of reconciliation, not by anything of their own doing, but that they are saved by the Grace of God alone through Faith alone in Jesus Christ alone; and live a life of obedience to the Word of God - witnessing to, and defending, the glorious truths of the Gospel.

The Wolves Among Us

2004-12-30T09:59:00.000-08:00

"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves". (Matthew 7:15)

Jesus warned his disciples, early on in His ministry, about the danger of men who would come with the appearance of godliness and wisdom but who inwardly would be of a wolfen nature working to infiltrate and devour the flock. In likening these false prophets to ravenous wolves Jesus indicates they would not outwardly resemble wolves, as that would reveal their true nature, but rather they would "come...in sheep's clothing" so as to appear non-threatening. How much more relevant must these words be in the 21st century with falsehood having such a long time to develop and with the wolves having so many generations to perfect their beguiling craft?!

I read the following quote provided by an administrator at the NTRmin.org forum. This quote is from John Charles Ryle (1816-1900), a minister and bishop in the Anglican Church, who became a famous defender of the evangelical reformed faith in England:

"I ask your special attention to this point. Such is the simplicity and innocence of many Churchmen in this day, that they actually expect false doctrine to look false, and will not understand that the very essence of its mischievousness, as a rule, is its resemblance to Gods truth. A young Churchmen, for instance, brought up from his cradle to hear nothing but Evangelical teaching, is suddenly invited some day to hear a sermon preached by some eminent teacher of semi-Romish, or semi-sceptical opinions. He goes into the church, expecting in his simplicity to hear nothing but heresy from the beginning to the end. To his amazement he hears a clever, eloquent sermon, containing a vast amount of truth, and only a few homeopathic drops of error. Too often a violent reaction takes place in his simple, innocent, unsuspicious mind. He begins to think his former teachers were illiberal, narrow, and uncharitable, and his confidence in them is shaken, perhaps for ever. Too often, alas! It ends with his entire perversion, and at last he is enrolled in the ranks of the Ritualists or the Broad Churchmen! And what is the history of the whole case? Why, a foolish forgetfulness of the lesson St. Paul puts forward in this text. As the serpent beguiled Eve by his subtlety, so Satan beguiles unwary souls in the nineteenth century by approaching them under the garb of truth". J. C. Ryle, Warnings to the Churches (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, reprinted 1992).

I have heard it said that when a criminal prints a counterfeit $20 dollar bill, he does not use a picture of Liza Minelli. A counterfeit, by definition, is an imitation of an original made with the intent to deceive. And if one is not trained to know the difference between the original and the imitation, the true and the false, then they are predisposed to accept the counterfeit. This applies not only to money but also to spiritual truths. If one is not trained to discern the difference between biblical Christianity and the counterfeits that so subtly pervade the minds of the 'simple' and 'unsuspicious', they are in danger of unwittingly following erroneous beliefs.

J.C. Ryle rightly observed in his time the dangers of preachers using "clever" and "eloquent" speech to hide specks of malignant falsehood amidst an abundance of truth. During his time there was a growing camp of ecumenists that sought to bridge the gap between roman catholicism and Protestantism. What is known as the tractarian controversy saw notable religious leaders attempting a return to the rituals and traditions of popery. J.C Ryle sought to defend the reformed faith, a biblical faith, against the errors of the roman catholic church and those seeking a 'religious unity' with them. Those familiar with Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), a disturbing and unfortunate joint declaration of beliefs between leading 'evangelicals' and catholics, will recognize it's similarity with the unbiblical ecumenical ideas posed in Ryle's day.

Biblical Christianity today faces not only the dangers of roman catholic ecumenism but many other subtle counterfeits that hide errors behind an appealing veil of truth. And it is not only those so obviously unchristian, such as Mormonism and the Jehovah's Witnesses, that can appeal to the baby Christian. Many counterfeits within the walls of Christianity operate, some with sincerity but deceived themselves, others more "ravenous", to gather sheep to a different pasture. Whether in the Toronto 'blessing' movement, liberal 'Christianity' or pragmatic charismania, there is always something fundamental about Biblical Christianity being compromised. And the Christian owes it to himself or herself, or maybe more importantly out of the love for Him who bought us, to read the Bible and pray that God would strengthen them with His Spirit to "sanctify them in the truth" (John 17).

While I can not in good form, and without possibly resorting to attacks ad hominem, outline a detailed expose on wolves in sheep clothing, I would be remiss and foolish not to acknowledge that many leaders, whether self-appointed or put on a pedestal by well-meaning people, have deviated from the biblical truths of the Gospel and are perpetuating error under the guise of truth. If there were dangers of false teachings two-thousand years ago, then there certainly are today. The Jews in the days of Jesus' ministry were warned of such people. The apostles after the death and resurrection of Christ painstakingly preached to and pleaded with believers to watch out for false teachers and false prophets. Post-apostolic church fathers fought against a number of heretics and their heretical teachings. The Reformers, seeking a return to true Biblical Christianity, fought against the errors, corruption, and unbiblical tradition of the roman catholic church. How much more relevant then, in our day and age after 2000 years for the cancer of error to have metastacised, do you think the warnings of false teachings are? We cannot afford to resign to complacency or compromise when the truth of the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is at stake.

J.C. Ryle wrote of the importance to stick to the Word of God, and nothing else, as the rule of faith and practice - especially when faced with the alluring but subtly dangerous errors of heresy:

"The first leading feature of Evangelical Religion is the absolute supremacy it assigns to Holy Scripture, as the only rule of faith and practice...Show us anything plainly written in that Book, and, however trying to flesh and blood, we will receive it, believe it, and submit to it. Show us anything, as religion, which is contrary to that Book, and, however specious, plausible, beautiful, and apparently desirable, we will not have it at any price...Here is rock: all else is sand".

Ryle here, at the end of the quotation, appeals to the words of Jesus in Matthew 7:24,26 - "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock...Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand". He (Ryle) precedes this with an endorsement of one of the Reformation's most cherished truths - that of sola scriptura - that the only rule of faith and practice is the Word of God found in the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. Nothing else, however "specious", "plausible", "beautiful" or "desirable" should be received at any price. Truly the wise man builds his house on the Rock of the Word...the fool on the sands of error.

However appealing the words of men may be let us always, as exhorted to in scripture, turn to God's Word only as our guide - just as the Bereans in Acts 17 "received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily" - and act on the words of Jesus our - Rock and our Salvation.

Gospel Freedom (Quote of the Day)

2004-12-29T13:29:00.000-08:00

"I challenge any skeptic to find a ten square mile spot on this planet where they can live their lives in peace and safety and decency, where womanhood is honored, where infancy and old age are revered, where they can educate their children, where the Gospel of Jesus Christ has not gone first to prepare the way. If they find such a place, then I would encourage them to emigrate thither and there proclaim their unbelief". - James Russell Lowell

From Righteousness to Moral Depravity...

2004-12-28T11:38:00.000-08:00

...in only 173 years! It is only those that actively participate in or passively resign to the growing moral decline of the western world who can not see, nor care to fathom, the most prominent contributing factor to the defective socio-political climate of our day: the departure from the Bible as the moral anchor of society.

In 1831 French writer and judge Alexis de Tocqueville went to America to discover why this relatively new nation was thriving. France was in a state of moral decay, being overtaken by crime and corruption (sound familiar? It should), so he was sent to find the source of America's enthusiasm and moral health. Alexis reported the following upon investigating a proud and flourishing America: "I sought for the greatness of the United States in her commodious harbors, her ample rivers, her fertile fields, and boundless forests - and it was not there. I sought for it in her rich mines, her vast commerce, her public school systems and in her institutions of higher learning - and it was not there. I looked for it in her democratic Congress and her matchless constitution-and it was not there. Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and her power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good , America will cease to be great"!

It is not simply significant that de Tocqueveille observed the source of America's greatness as being the 'flames of righteousness' heard from the pulpits of Christian churches - it is of an extreme importance to understanding the bleakness of the times in which we now live. Sure we in this generation have so much more in the way of technological advancement, scientific splendor, personal hygene, health care, and other items of an obstensibly valuable nature. However when these things are not rightly accompanied by a sound moral climate, but rather one of moral regression, we must be alarmed and take action lest we fall headlong into complete depravity. I do fear though that any chance at reconciling our departure from biblical morality has already come and gone. I believe that the headlong fall has taken place - and there are no parachutes to slow the descent. The western world, owing to the almost unanimous consent of its population, finds itself in an irreversible state of moral depravity.

Recognizing that this might seem somewhat overdramatic and unfairly pessimistic, I acknowledge that I can only see this ugly moral landscape through the lens of an unpopular worldview: that of Biblical, Evangelical Christianity. Yes certain conservatives who hold to a less categorical but equally concerned worldview may also come to a similarly gloomy outlook on the state of the current moral climate. But I say it is only the true Christian who can discern that there is a problem with immorality, that the source is the abandonment of biblical morality, and that the solution is a return to the righteousness that comes only with the preaching of the Word of God. This diagnosis of the current moral climate is laughable to those whose worldview is dominated by naturalistic humanism; lamentable to those who subscribe to non-Christian religions; a contentious position to moral relativists and religious pluralists; intolerant to the morally debase; and unintelligible to the passively indifferent.

But to the Christian this position makes complete sense - that there can not be a sound moral society without the influence of a solid biblical foundation. But there is even more needed to drastically change the moral landscape of our society - at least to change the lives of those who populate it. Hearts cannot be changed by legislation, minds cannot be changed by the imposition of laws or its enforcement, and souls cannot rightly be invigorated by the human psychology of a godless world. What is needed is the faith in Jesus Christ which comes by the hearing of the Word of God. I joyfully and unashemedly proclaim this unpopular opinion.

As de Tocqueville so rightly observed 173 years ago, the difference between the total depravity of his home country and the greatness of America was the preaching of the Word of God. Absent in his country but powerfully preached in America, the Bible stood as the moral anchor of a proud and growing nation. But as de Tocqueville warned, when they abandoned the Bible and hence compromised their moral goodness, America ceased to be great. The light of Biblical morality has beamed against the landscape of the western world and has found it wanting - and its inhabitants unwilling.

How great it would be if we could see a renewal of, if not the greatness that de Tocqueville saw, the powerful preaching from pulpits that flame with righteousness! How great it would be to see Christian leaders devote themselves to an increasingly stronger, completely accurate, unashamed, uncompromised and unrelenting preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. While we will not see an unrepentant, ungodly world return to recognizing the Bible as the moral anchor of society we should pray that those Christians seperated from the world and kept by Jesus Christ will shine their light amidst the darkness of an unbelieving world. And let us likewise pray that some of those now living in darkness will be compelled by that light, and by the calling of God, to come out of the dark and into the glorious truth and freedom found only in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour.

Born, But from Eternity

2004-12-27T10:13:00.000-08:00

"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, {Too} little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity." (Micah 5:2)

It is an unwritten convention around this time of year to display nativity scenes bearing the baby Jesus. From roof tops and barber shops to church floors and bathroom doors, various depictions of the birth of our Savior can be observed by anyone with eyes to do so. But to play the advocate of unpopular opinion, while I can understand the sentiment behind this tradition and obviously appreciate the biblical story behind it, in it's simplicity, meekness, and numbing familiarity there is a powerful message oft' forgotten and a glorious truth unintentionally hidden - the eternal existence of Jesus Christ.

Before getting into the topic of this post I thought I would, as briefly as possible, outline some of the problems I think form speedbumps or roadblocks to a biblically informed understanding of Jesus Christ. While I have not the time (and by no means the ability) to exhaustively elaborate on the problems and errors that prevent proper understanding of the truth, I am going to quickly ramble about some things, closer to the context of the holiday season in general, that impede a fair and accurate representation of the biblical truth of our Lord and Savior.

With the liberal media airing programs discounting the biblical historicity of the life of Jesus Christ, the truth is getting no respect and no press. Add to that a growing presence of universal spirituality - a palatable, 'uninsulting', pluralistic approach to the diversity of beliefs expressed during the holiday season (which should alarm, not comfort, biblical Christians). Throw in a little of the "I want this, I want that" attitude of western youth and the subsequent "ok I'll get it, here it is" of their obliging parents. Then take away the relatively miniscule portions of temporary joy, genuine spirit and selfless giving and what do you get? You get error perpetuated under the guise of informed opinion. You get a fostering of vague spirituality rather then a spotlight on the truth. You get a lot of getting for the sake of getting and giving for the sake of giving. What you do not get is what everybody should seek to receive, but unfortunately what only a relatively small number of people find - the truth of the Word of God.

If anyone took the time to read my previous article, Just another day of the Lord's, I briefly talked about the confusing - but not unexpected - spiritual ambiguity of unbelievers. Many non-Christians embrace some semblance of religiosity around this time of year but leave it as an uninformed, unexplored seasonal manifestation. Whether it is tradition, cultural conditioning, or a genuine attempt at spiritual-mindedness, many people display some form of heightened devotion to holiday ritual. Many non-believers might even know a little bit about, or show some level of respect to, Jesus Christ and the surrounding biblical story. But the tragedy, of rudimentary knowledge and only seasonal arousal, is that this is the extent of interest shown and attention paid. And so, to add to the problem, the relatively secular agenda of the liberal media rushes in to fill the void where biblical knowledge and Gospel Truth are so blatantly absent. And Jesus Christ is reduced, it is sad to say, to merely a historical figure of obvious significance - "a great teacher" or "wise prophet" - but not the Son of God. So, rather then follow Christ who was and is fully God and fully man, they turn to or follow false religion, vain philosophy, foolish self-styled spirituality, or simply retire to the depressing realm of naturalistic humanism.

Those of us however, who are of and who have come to "the faith" - true biblical Christianity - should know and proclaim the awesome truth about Jesus Christ: that yes He was born...but from eternity. While many people like to see Jesus depicted as a baby around Christmas time - and while catholics seem to want to keep Him there in the arms of Mary - the Christian should always be mindful that Jesus was in the beginning with God, He is God. I believe many of us, while calling Him God, or referring to Him as the 2nd of the Trinity, don't think enough about the eternal nature of Jesus - that He did not have His beginnings in Bethlehem 2000 years ago, but has existed forever.

Lets have a look again at the verse from Micah 5:2 - "But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, {Too} little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity". Hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem a prophet proclaimed the words of God saying that "One will go forth" from "Bethlehem" and that this "ruler" is "from long ago", "from the days of eternity". Here we have an Old Testament prophecy about the coming of Jesus Christ! And not just the beginning of His existence but the coming of Himself from eternity to earth to, as we find in the New Testament, save us from our sins.

I have heard it said that Jesus is more on the pages of the Old Testament then on the pages of the New. While His name might not be there He is referred to in anticipatory writing and in the words of prophecy. He is figured typologically in many Old Testament characters (Adam, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Melchizedek, and others) and is represented in many a foreshadowing event such as the Exodus, and the Passover. He appears as the 'Angel of the Lord' throughout the Old Testament where He carries the authority of God (not the simple message of an angelic host). He is why the Old Testament was written - and on that note, the New Testament as well.

Further to the Old Testament appearances and references, let us look at some (not all) of the New Testament verses that speak loudly of the eternal nature and deity, of Jesus Christ. Jesus is creator of all in John 1:3 "all things were made through Him", 1 Corinthians 8:6 "through whom all things came", Colossians 1:16 "all things were created by Him", and Romans 1:25 "worshiped the creature rather than the creator". Jesus is called God in Romans 9:5 "Christ, who is God overall", John 1:1 "the Word was God", John 1:18 "the God, the One and Only", Titus 2:13 "the great God and Savior, Jesus Christ", and 1 John 5:20 "Jesus Christ: This is the true God". He is the object of our faith in many places like Romans 10:13 "whoever will call on the name of the Lord shall be saved", Acts 16:31 "believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved", and Acts 10:43 "everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness". Not to mention hundreds of references to being equated with God, having divine attributes, sharing divine titles, and having divine activities. Jesus Christ is Lord, our Savior, the 2nd of the Triune God - and He has been so before the "foundations of the earth" (Psalms 102:25; Hebrews 1:10).

In closing, and to return to the context of Christ's birth, I would like to quote Isaiah 9:6 "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace". Here we see the prophet Isaiah foretelling of the birth of Jesus Christ but quickly revealing to us that He is also Mighty God! During the holiday season, and every day of the year, always remember that, while for a time a baby in Bethlehem, Jesus has always been, and will forever be, our almighty God. Jesus did not 'enter into existence' at a point in time and history 2000 years ago - as important as His birth was - His "goings forth are of from long ago, from the days of eternity"! While He did physically 'enter our world', for the sake of His prophesied ministry and saving sacrifice, at a point in time and history - He did so out of eternity, coming down from glory and authority in heaven.

Let us rejoice in the biblical story of the birth of our Savior. But let us likewise rejoice always in the fact that our Savior was creator not created, begotten of the Father not made, that He sits now at the right hand of our Father in heaven - that yes, He was born...but from eternity.

(References: http://www.ntrmin.org, Is Jesus God?; NASB Bible @ crosswalk.com)

Just another day of the Lord's

2004-12-24T13:35:00.000-08:00

Ah, the christmas season. Where to begin? I have always celebrated Christmas with my family and have always felt 'different' - in an emotionally positive way - at this time of year. I am however, as an Evangelical Christian compelled by good reasons to be somewhat guarded and concerned with many things that surround the christmas season. * Quick definition: Evangelical: Of, relating to, or being a Christian church believing in the sole authority and inerrancy of the Bible, in salvation only through regeneration, and in a spiritually transformed personal life *. The christmas season sees people at heightened levels of 'joy' and 'spirit' and there is never anything wrong with that nor the seemingly large increase in selfless giving that occurs around the holiday season. But as a Christian I am persuaded by right motives to not engage the worldliness of the season and the vague spirituality of the status quo. And as en ex-catholic who rejoices in his Christian freedom I am compelled to distance myself from the obligatory observances and errors of the Roman church. However, I am not suggesting an abandonment of the celebration of the holiday season - as it is a good time to witness to and bless other people - I simply would like to stress the need for Christians to be recognizable during the holidays and not to disappear into the fog of the secular majority. Also, the way we approach December 25th, I am suggesting, should be no different then the way we approach each day - rejoicing in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior!

I am forcing myself not to write a cliched dissertation about the overcommercialization of christmas and the secularizing of something once largely observed as Christian. I am likewise struggling to not ramble on about the confusing once-a-year, 'can't-put-my-finger-on-the-source', sociological and spiritual ambiguity of statements such as: "it's a time of joy", "'tis the season (to be jolly)", or "get into the Christmas spirit". I am at the same time both touched by the increase in happiness during this season but also frustrated and confounded by people who appear to subscribe to some sort of positive agnosticism. These people seem to readily buy-in to notions that there exists something greater then themselves but either don't know what and why, or don't have the energy or attention to explore it further. And so we have people who rightly celebrate and share in the seasonal joy of the holidays but who wrongly maintain a passive indifference to it's source. And given that the "joy" and "christmas spirit" put-on by these 'positive agnostics' is limited to a seasonal manifestation, I am inclined to assume that much of the rest of the year is marked by an absence of joy and a return to humdrum.

In addition, I am trying not to mark myself as a 'puritan elitist' by identifying the pagan origins of the December 25th celebration and the heathen typology of the many accoutrements used in 'decking the halls'. After all, isn't it indicative of Christian victory over darkness - truth over error - that we replaced a pagan celebration with one based on the coming of our Lord and Savior? While we can trace much of the traditional christmas celebration, and it's accompanying ornamental overkill, to Babylonian 'mystery religions' and various pagan superstition we as Christians should not resign ourselves to snobbery and 'scroogery'. Likewise, even though it is still debatable as to when Christ was born (spring, fall, or winter) that does not mean we cannot acknowledge, and rejoice in, the biblical account of the birth of our Savior.

As someone formerly trapped in the traditions and bondage of the Roman church, and whom rejoices in his Christian liberty having been pulled out of a false religious system, I can appreciate (and even relate to) the camps within Christianity who choose not to celebrate or observe christmas. Their reasons are sound and are based on biblical theological ramifications (if not exegetical ones) as well as the desire to maintain the spirit and memory of the Reformers who bravely struggled against the perversion and error of the Roman catholic church. One can't blame any Evangelical Christian for wanting to distance themselves from the unbiblical observation of 'holy days of obligation' (where catholics are required to attend mass under 'canon law') that are so cherished by Roman catholics but which stand in contradiction to the New Testament church's freedom from the law (required observance). Every day is the Lord's day - no day is more important than another. The Roman church lumps in the arbitrary December 25th 'day of obligation' with other such required days like: 'the assumption of mary', 'the immaculate conception (of Mary)', 'mary the mother of god' - all of which exalt a mythical mary we don't see in the pages of the bible. Any church that observes Holy days of obligation required by 'a law' is adding to God's Word and trampling on the Christian liberty won for us by Jesus Christ.

But does the fact that we, as Evangelical Christians, must separate from the errors of the world and those of false religions preclude us from acknowledging and paying a heightened attention to the biblical story of the coming of our Lord? Would it not also be a slight to our Christian liberty to 'boycott' a holiday? We do not have to acknowledge christmas as a 'holy day' - in fact we should not do so - but we should not actively forbid a once-per-year celebration of the birth of our Savior. Or, perhaps better stated, while we should ensure that EVERY DAY we acknowledge and rejoice in the coming of our Lord we should not forfeit or reject one day of the year to do the same simply because of its historically pagan and Roman catholic implications. Every day we should rejoice in our freedom in Christ - December 25th is no different. And so, while we should reject and oppose the 'holy day' requirements imposed by the catholics we should not, because of that, abandon the day altogether as one to rejoice in Jesus.

With so many people trying to eliminate Jesus from the consciousness of society - and, in keeping with the current topic, pull Christ out of this season - Christians need to witness to and defend the objective truths of the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Far be it from any Christian to add to the secularizing of the holiday season by, albeit with good intentions, choosing to not participate in a Christian representation of it. We have a biblical precedent to rejoice in the story of Christ's birth. Satan opposed the coming of the Messiah since his fall and throughout biblical history up until, and after, Christ's birth in Bethlehem. But God, in keeping with His divine plan and in full sovereign control kept our Savior away from the hands of the enemy. At His birth and shortly after the angels, the shepherds, and the Magi came to worship the King. So we as Christians should likewise rejoice in Christ our King! Let us not give any day back to the enemy, whether December 25th or July 23rd - Let us keep every day as a day the Lord has given us!

Many of you may be asking, "well, I have never NOT celebrated Christmas - what's all the hubbub, bub"? Well I would respond by acknowledging the fact that too many 'Christians', by that I mean true and so-called, hyper-elevate the celebration of christmas and counterbalance that with a 364 day partial-abandonment of Jesus Christ. Too many of these people pay seasonal devotion but then retire to the crowded streets of worldly distractions. I don't want to come off as elitist, gnostic, or a doctrinal snob but as Christians we must try and bear daily witness to the hope that is in us - Christ Jesus our Lord. Yes the birth of Jesus Christ was, and still is, an amazing true story and of monumental biblical importance. But we would do ourselves a disservice by only spending energy once a year to marvel in the wonder and to rejoice in what it means.

Celebrate Christ's coming into the world - do it in freedom, do it in praise and do it in thanksgiving - but do it every day of the year!

Where's the Update?

2004-12-23T19:09:00.000-08:00

I know, I know - I am trying to stay up-to-date and post here regularly. It's just tough around this time of year. So to those two people out there that read this blog, I appreciate your patience and I will have something else for you to read very shortly. Take care, God bless!

No Burden, No Debt (continued...)

2004-12-20T15:09:00.000-08:00

In the introductory post of No Burden, No Debt I ended with a statement identifying that we cannot repay Jesus Christ for his sacrifice, nor should we serve to try. Now, before I continue with some thoughts on this, I would like to qualify that with some words of clarification. Often we hear people say, "what can I do to get to heaven", or, "If it gets me into heaven, I'll do it", or other like-worded statements that imply personal works of accomplishment are requisite for our justification before God. Many people picture God on judgment day weighing our good works against our dirty deeds and making a judgment based on one outweighing the other.

I actually recall an insulting bit of roman catholic "teaching material" that had a picture of an angel holding a scale. On one side of the scale was 'good deeds', 'almsgiving', 'tithing', 'went to mass', etc. and on the other side was a list of various sins and other items of rebellion. The picture had those whose good works outweighed the bad ascending into heaven and those whose bad outweighed the good being thrown into hell. Nice bit of anti-biblical, pseudo-Christian drivel that, I am sure, scared the 'poopy' out of many a Catholic girl and boy! What message was this picture sending? What was it teaching children? It was suggesting that good works get us into heaven and bad works send us to hell. "You better be good little Ricky, or God is gonna throw you into hell"! What a horrible, and blatantly false, way of trying to present any message of salvation. It is the "bad news" gospel that, whether subtle or obvious, has been preached by the catholic church for centuries. Where is the amazing grace that we sing about - where is the 'sweet sound'? While catholics, albeit with sincerity and piety, hold the truth in unrighteousness we Evangelical Christians thankfully have the "good news" of the saving grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ, the biblical message that is unshakeable and has not been usurped by the perversion of another gospel.

Not to get too off track, I was meaning to write about why we should not serve to repay God for his gift of salvation. I will focus on the catholic error of faith-plus-works in a different article. I would like to now clarify the topic of No Burden, No Debt - that being the nonexistence of anything owed to God as it relates to repayment for His gift of grace. And, in retrospect, this topic plays quite well with the erroneous catholic notion of an 'economy of salvation' - that there exists a 'financial structure' managed by "the church" by which the pope, cardinals, bishops, and priests, through sacraments, can distribute the grace of God in addition to the 'merited graces' won by the lives and sacrifices of the saints and Mary. In other words, the catholic faithful can earn or merit grace by a lifetime of works (functioning in faith) by which they are paid out of the 'deposit of faith', not directly by God, but through the administering of catholic sacraments and the 'mass' by the Catholic hierarchy.

As Evangelical Christians, we know that this is a perversion of the biblical story of God's grace and a horrible insult to the justification won for us by Jesus Christ on the cross. How can one merit grace? The very definition of grace in this context is getting what we do not deserve! Grace is something rendered by One who has no need to do so. Why? Because it is not earned - it is given freely. If grace could be earned by the individual why did Jesus need to die? If the catholic can receive the gift of salvation from the 'deposit of faith' through 'the sacraments' and the mass, why did Jesus need to be nailed to a cross? Of course catholics will tell you that He did need to die but, by the obfuscation of clear biblical truth, they will either implicitly or explicitly deny that His death was fully sufficient for our justification. And again, as Christians we know the catholic approach to justification and salvation is a deficient one - whether they mean well or not.

Anyway, finally to some of my thoughts on clarifying the 'no debt' idea. We cannot pay Jesus Christ back for his substitutionary death on the cross. Why? Because that would be blasphemous and insulting - to say the least. Romans 6:23 says: "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord". When was the last time you had to clear up a debt for a free gift gift given to you?! If God has given you a free gift, the unexchangeable gift of Jesus Christ, do you want to risk an assumption that he expects some sort of repayment? Romans 4:4 says: "Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due". In other words, the worker expects that he will receive his wage in accordance to that which is due to him based on his work. Does God owe us anything? Is there anything that we can do that we should expect God to 'give us what is due'? Are we workers under the employ of God earning a wage to be paid by God? My answer to these questions is no - what's yours?

What an insult it would be if you, out of kindness and with no expectation of repayment, paid for your child to take a flight to Hawaii, with full accommodations, and then they, upon acknowledging that gift, decided it was prudent to instead row there by their own strength in a canoe and, upon arrival, pay out of their own pocket for the hotel room that was given as a gift. How much more an insult is it then, upon God giving us the free gift of eternal life through the death of His only begotten Son, that we should live to pay for the gift of eternal life, through our own works, and not accept Jesus Christ as that which has already been paid once for all! We serve God, not by living a life of spiritual burden tantamount to paying off a credit card, but by a life of thanksgiving and obedience in the Christian liberty won for us by Jesus Christ. It is the free gift that makes us thankful - not legally bound or spiritually indebted to work-off a balance that is due.

What wonderful verses are Romans 4:5: "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness" and Ephesians 2:8-9: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast". These verses clearly tell us many things: 1) that it is not our works that justify us but our faith, our belief in Jesus Christ; 2) nothing we do makes us righteous; 3) Jesus justifies the ungodly - the ungodly (all people) have no way in which they can make themselves righteous; 4) the believer is saved though faith in Christ by the grace of God - and by this only is he saved; 5) nothing we do can save us; 6) the grace given to us is a gift from God (not a wage earned); 7) no one can brag about things done to earn salvation because this type of 'salvation economy' does not exist.

We have from God the declaration of the righteousness of Christ being freely and fully credited to the believer! God, in his mercy, has saved us - from the condemnation of eternal punishment - by the free gift of His Son Jesus Christ. Isaiah 64:6 - "But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags". In our utter hopelessness, in our state of complete loss, in the face of our own righteousness which is likened to filth - God has given us the means by which we can be reconciled to Himself: through the shed blood of our Lord and Savior on the cross! In our fallen, sinful nature and with everything that we do (and can do) being counted as 'filthy rags', we have been given a free gift by which we can be pulled out of the darkness and into the Light. This is Amazing Grace - and how sweet is it's sound!

I want to bring you back to Christian, the character in the Pilgrim's Progress, who was so burdened by the load that he carried. Such a heavy and unpleasant weight was upon his shoulders. But when he came level to the cross - that cross on the hill - his burden fell off his back and rolled down the hill to the mouth of the tomb. And he sang that sweet song of deliverance:

So far did I come loaded up with sin;
Nor could anything ease the grief that I was in,
Till I came here: what a place is this!
Must here be the beginning of my bliss?
Must here the burden fall from off my back!
Must here the chains that tied it to me crack?
Blessed cross, blessed tomb, blessed rather be
The man who here was put to shame for me.

God, thank-you for the cross! Thank-you for the empty tomb! More importantly, thank-you for Jesus Christ whom you put to shame for me! Catholics would have us exchange the burden of sin and guilt for a heavy load of penance, religious observation, sacramental participation, and good works. The catholic, while recognizing the sacrifice of Christ, still demands that the faithful merit the free gift of grace. The catholic trades the righteousness of Christ for a self-earned righteousness added to that which Christ won for us. "Christ did his 99%, now I have to do the other 1" as a catholic nun once put it so blasphemously. For the Catholic, Christian's song may well have meaning, but by implication of their confused view of the righteousness of Christ, it may just as well have ended:

...Blessed cross, blessed tomb, blessed rather be
the life of sacraments and good works done by me

How strongly and passionately we must hold to the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ! The perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ has no equal, no partner, and no substitution. His sacrifice is fully sufficient, fully propitiatory, and completely finished. Let us not add to it. Let us not take away from it. Let us not serve to make it something by which we live to repay. Rather, may we all pray for the presence of spirit to live a life of praise and thanksgiving. To live in obedience to the Word of God. To fall on our knees in worship of God our Father who gives freely so that we might have a relationship with him.

(Stay tuned for more on No Burden, No Debt...next time: not 'faith devoid of works', just not 'faith plus works')

No Burden, No Debt

2004-12-17T20:49:00.000-08:00

Way to go son...

2004-12-14T14:42:00.000-08:00

I was very pleased to read my 10 year old son's homework the other day.

My son is a very interesting character whose personality is marked by a multifaceted collection of moods and a vivid imagination. One of the things my wife and I have been struggling to deal with is his grumpy attitude and irritable demeanor. There are times where we have to shrug our shoulders in a forced indifference (if that makes sense) or throw up our hands in defeat.

However, the other day I was reading my son's answer to a question in his social studies homework and was extremely pleased at what I read. The question was something like: "What would you do about racism if given a chance"? And, unashamedly, my son answered: "I would tell the people about Jesus..."! I was extremely pleased.

For those who are not Christian my son's answer won't mean much - unfortunately. If anything, to unbelievers, "I would tell the people about Jesus..." is either ridiculous, stupid, irrelevent, or in a positive sense, and at the very least, 'cute'. But to a Christian, especially a Christian father, this answer is heartwarming, rewarding, and deeply meaningful.

To read that my son would openly answer a question by including Jesus as a solution to a problem was very encouraging. It meant that all of my efforts, and those of my wife, to instill a knowledge of , and passion for, Jesus Christ and the truth of His Gospel message was paying off. Not that we were vainly waiting for a 'return on an our investment', but seeing the dividends of years of devotional reading and biblical lessons was touching.

Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Well, all parents tend to overemphasize certain things when their children are concerned but I believe that this is something to be proud of. Perhaps more importantly, we need to continue to cultivate the source of our son's written acknowledgement: his growing faith in Jesus Christ. Nothing could be more important.

O Canada, our home and heathen land...

2004-12-11T13:34:00.000-08:00

Well, we knew the time was coming - the day when a part of the ever increasing moral decline of the western world received official sanction from a body of the federal government. Yes, the Supreme Court of Canada has said that the federal government can change the traditional definition of marriage to give gays and lesbians equal marital rights. And so the long wait for those indulging in sexual perversion is over - phewf! Oh, oopsie...isn't that hate-speech?! No, it is not. Do I believe homosexuality is sexual perversion? Yes I do. Does that make me a bigot? Not unless you define bigotry as subscribing to a set of moral principles.

My principles are part of a larger body of truth and are characteristic of my Christian worldview. My objections to homosexuality are not based on bigotry, hatred, fear, or repulsion - they are based on sound moral principles. And, just as I do not use language that is explicitly demeaning or insulting and do not resort to attacks ad hominem, I would expect this courteousness to be reciprocated by those who disagree with me.

The sanctioning of homosexuality by the Supreme Court is symptomatic of the growing moral cancer being called 'tolerance' and has surfaced as a malignant growth on the face of an already ugly state of affairs for our nation. Is there anything wrong with tolerance? No - unless you mean the new definition of 'tolerance' which is defined as: unconditional acceptance. Many gay and lesbian people, and their supporters (in the context of marital rights and moral principles), label us fundamental Christians as intolerant. Since we disagree with their position on sexual morality (read: sexual perversion), we are intolerant - sometimes to the point of bigotry. This is completely unfair and illustrates the fallacy of the modern use of the word tolerance.

We see a modern distortion of the word tolerance being used in many areas regarding morality today. This distortion has completely changed what tolerance has always meant as it pertains to morality: that we cannot tolerate someone unless we disagree with them. You see, how can tolerance be used as a synonym for agreement? The nature of tolerance implies that there is disagreement between parties - If you and I agree on something, we are not tolerating each other, we are sharing the same view. It is completely unreasonable to call someone intolerant because they hold the conviction that homosexuality is wrong. Just as it would be wrong for me to call a lesbian intolerant for not agreeing with my position. It is the nature of tolerance that a judgment has been formed about a position - the nature of tolerance includes the understanding that there is a disagreement. And so we are faced with a "catch 22" with regards to the fallacious modern view of tolerance: holding that an individual, or position, is wrong is intolerant yet we must first form the the position that an individual or position is wrong in order to be tolerant!

Anyway, back to Canada. The title of this article is: O Canada, our home and heathen land. This is, of course, a play on the lyrics of our national anthem in which the proper lyrics read: O Canada, our home and native land. But the word 'heathen' to describe our country is more in keeping with the state of moral decay we find ourselves entrenched in. Far removed from the biblical morality that our free nation was founded on, Canada has been quickly establishing itself as a forerunner in moral ambiguity, moral relativism, and passive indifference. In outlawing all forms of 'intolerance', the only acceptable prejudice now is that which rails against biblical Christianity and the moral principles thereof. And so, the self-appointed paragons of 'forward thinking' and 'open-mindedness' are relishing in the current state of affairs under the mistaken impression that it is progressive in nature and for the betterment of society. But nothing could be further from the truth.

For those of us who unashamedly subscribe to the truths of biblical morality and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the current state of morality in the western world is heathen to the core. Sure there is a level of sincerity and goodness that can be seen amongst the populous - I am not insinuating that we are a country of barbarians. No, the heathenness of our country is marked by a superficial goodness, by a patchwork of sincerity sewed onto the rotten cloth of immorality. Our country, as far as government and the aristocracy goes, is being manhandled by gaggles of contentious liberals whose agenda, whether intentionally or unintentionally, is to undermine the sound moral principles founded upon the rock solid foundation of biblical truth. And, as far as the general population is concerned, the country is largely populated by a demographic of indifferent, beer-drinking proletariats whose outlook on morality is limited to the injustice of the NHL lockout.

Ok, so maybe that is unfair...to a certain degree. There are still a number of conservatives left with government influence. And there are still a number of conservative serfs, proud of their country, that are genuinely concerned about the state of moral affairs. However, it seems all too apparent that the voice of the conservative is either not being spoken or not being heard. And even when the voice of the conservative is spoken and arguments are made, too often those things are operating devoid of respect for, or without recognizing, biblical morality.

More and more we are allowing the cold and dirty fingers of moral disrepute to fix its grip around the throat of our once proud nation. Standing on guard for our country, as sung about in our national anthem, does not refer to men in camouflage manning the controls of an aged submarine. "We stand on guard for thee" is a refrain that calls for the defense of what made our country "the true north strong and free", namely, the unwavering, unshakeable strength of biblical morality and all that which follows by the blessings of almighty God.

Betrayal of the Gospel (Part 1)

2004-12-06T13:30:00.000-08:00

Part 1...
A couple of articles ago I introduced Betrayal of the Gospel, in introductory form, outlining what I wanted to submit to my blog regarding the subject of the title. In the introduction I wrote about the falling-away that can be seen in 'Christendom' today - a departure from the Biblical Gospel to a watered-down gospel of accommodation and compromise. Many Christian leaders, yes with some level of sincerity, have turned the gospel into a malleable blob of theological clay that they change at will to conform to, or satisfy, the 'consumer' (read 'seeker'). Rather than preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ in spirit and truth from a fiery pulpit, many have surgically removed the exclusivity and so-called offensiveness from the gospel in order not to turn away consumers. Success in ministry is no longer gauged by the genuine reception of the Gospel by those called to be believers but rather is marked by the filling of seats and the number of congregants. I was appalled to read in a local newspaper of a Christian church that was temporarily modifying its worship services to fill the void in people's hearts caused by the NHL player lockout. Yes, believe it or not, Christian leaders at this church thought it acceptable that the Gospel of Jesus Christ could adequately and respectably be presented by applying it to the theme of hockey. They were taking advantage of the lingering NHL player lockout, and the subsequent depression of hockey fans, to promote church attendance and the irreverent preaching of a watered-down gospel. And so the Gospel was being presented to attendees who were encouraged to come to church wearing the jersey of their favorite team and were further suggested to bring white towels to wave during worship. The message of Christ was being 'marketed' to a 'target demographic' using a gimmicky 'advertising campaign' - all the while with the insistence that no disrespect was intended. But the above mentioned 'gospel improv' is blatantly disrespectful whether or not it was deliberately intended.

Immediately coming to mind are a number of verses in God's Holy Word exhorting us not to add or take-away from His Word. Also coming to mind are examples in Paul's epistles that illustrate that the Gospel is not man's but that which was revealed by Jesus Christ. The Gospel being preached to Jews and Gentiles in the 1st century was not the clever imaginings of men or the personally tuned reiteration of a handed down message. The Gospel was the revelation of Jesus Christ - a Spirit revealed truth that did not cultivate through apostolic development but was "once delivered" (Jude 1:3) by Christ through His revealed truth and communicated after his ascension by the apostles. Nothing was added and nothing was improved upon by the apostles who were simply preaching the truth that was revealed. In Galatians, Paul is pleading with the church in Galatia to return to the truth and purity of the true Gospel. We read the following in chapter 1:10-12: "For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. 11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it,but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." So we read a number of important things: 1) We are to please God not man; 2) a servant of Christ does not seek to please man; 3) the Gospel is not of human origin; 4) the Gospel is not given by man, or taught by man; 5) the Gospel source is the revelation of Jesus Christ. Now, am I saying that man is not to preach the Gospel? No. I am not saying that at all. What I am saying is that man is not to preach a gospel of modification - man is not to modify the Gospel, as we read it in God's Word, to please the faithful or those who may be called to faith in Christ.

Why can't we please man? Because God's Word tells us that we are to please God, not man. The issue should not be complex - we do not have the liberty to use the Gospel of Jesus Christ as a template that can be filled with modern themes and people-pleasing material. And so the example of the 'Hockey Church' illustrates how not to preach the Gospel. The 'Hockey Church' is characteristic of man's disobedience to God in assuming they have the autonomy and authority to tailor the Gospel to fit the needs and wants of the people. This is blatant disrespect for the revealed truth of the Bible and trivializes the power of the Gospel and the strength of its message.

You may ask: But don't we have to make the Gospel exciting and attractive so people will like it? Are you kidding?! The Gospel is not a marketable product that needs frequent refreshing of targeted advertising to improve its success. The Gospel is not a customer acquisition tool! If someone cannot see the saving power of the Gospel from the pages of the Bible or if someone cannot discern their reliance on Christ's saving sacrifice by the accurate and complete preaching of the Gospel then the problem is with them not with the message or the way it is packaged.

I will submit to the fact that a visible and audible passion coming from one presenting the Gospel message can make a profound impact on the one receiving the message. However, it is one thing to preach effectively but a completely different thing to revise the Gospel for the purposes of making it exciting. Paul wrote in Romans that "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (10:17). Faith does not come from the man-centered modern gospel that takes undue liberties with the Word of God and strips it of its power. If preachers would abandon the idea that they need to conform the Gospel to modern paradigms of success and return to sure-fire Biblical preaching grounded in the simple but powerful Word - unaltered and unchanged - what wonderful changes we might see in the Church of Christ. Stay tuned for more on the subject of the Betrayal of the Gospel...

grilled-cheese virgins and weeping queens

2004-12-04T17:26:00.000-08:00

Introduction…
In the context of Christianity - both true and so-called - I am not sure if there is anything quite as ludicrous as the undue attention and obsession paid by Roman Catholics, and others with like gullibility, to the phenomena commonly referred to as ‘apparitions of Mary’. Apparently Mary, the humble Jewish woman who gave birth to Jesus, has appeared to many people in various forms ranging from crying statues to grilled-cheese sandwiches (read a full news story here). In addition to better known cases such as Fatima, Medjugorje, and Guatalupe, ‘apparitions of Mary’ have been seen in window distortions, chewed and disgarded bubble-gum, tree bark, chimney smoke, spilled milk, and, well unfortunately the list goes on. I would probably take much more time to make fun of such things if not for the fact that the whole thing is quite disturbing. It is disturbing because people legitimately believe that these apparitions are the real Mary, but more disturbing is the fact that they also assume that the God of the universe has blessed these ‘appearances’.

I can accept that Roman Catholics would believe these things – they already subscribe to an alarmingly large list of silly superstitions and their history is one marked by ridiculous myths. From believing shrunken heads of decaying saints carry power that can bestow blessings to insisting that communion wafers have transformed into chunks of heart, the pages of the Catholic history books are littered with fairy-tale gobbledygook. Such unabashed foolishness could be ignored if it weren’t for the fact that they blaspheme our Holy God and trample on his inerrant Word.

From burnt bread images to crying or bleeding statues there has been an ever-increasing frequency of these idolatrous 'appearances'. Now, it may be unfair to say that all Roman Catholics believe their Mary has appeared in a grilled-cheese sandwich. I am sure that they don’t and that is not what I am suggesting. And, I will also submit that not all Roman Catholics believe that every ‘apparition of Mary’ is authentic or that every bizarre story of a paranormal nature is true. However, because their Church has overwhelmingly endorsed many apparitions and have ‘verified’ a great number of ghastly occurrences, we must shine the light of the Word on their scriptural illiteracy and spiritual immaturity. Likewise, because their teachings both implicitly and explicitly endorse the worship of a female deity, claiming that Mary is, among other titles, ‘queen of heaven’, ‘mother of God’, ‘queen of the universe’, ‘spouse of the Holy Spirit’, and ‘holy mother’, we must expose their utter blasphemy.

In upcoming ‘articles’ of the grilled-cheese virgins and weeping queens series I will write of the gross irreverence perpetrated by the Roman Catholic church, and millions of it’s followers, in endorsing paranormal and fabricated ‘apparitions’ that stand in blatant opposition to God’s Holy Word.

Rightly Worshiping God

2004-11-25T14:06:00.000-08:00

One of my favorite excerpts from John Calvin's Commentaries on the Prophet Jeremiah and the Lamentations (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), is his commentary on Jeremiah 7:31:

"Which I commanded them not, and which never came to my mind". This reason ought to be carefully noticed, for God here cuts off from men every occasion for making evasions, since he condemns by this one phrase, “I have not commanded them,” whatever the Jews devised. There is then no other argument needed to condemn superstitions, than that they are not commanded by God: for when men allow themselves to worship God according to their own fancies, and attend not to his commands, they pervert true religion. And if this principle was adopted by the Papists, all those fictitious modes of worship, in which they absurdly exercise themselves, would fall to the ground. It is indeed a horrible thing for the Papists to seek to discharge their duties towards God by performing their own superstitions. There is an immense number of them, as it is well known, and as it manifestly appears. Were they to admit this principle, that we cannot rightly worship God except by obeying his word, they would be delivered from their deep abyss of error. The Prophet’s words then are very important, when he says, that God had commanded no such thing, and that it never came to his mind; as though he had said, that men assume too much wisdom, when they devise what he never required, nay, what he never knew”.

This quote is characteristic of one of Calvin's reform ideas that would come to be called the regulative principle of worship. Now, maybe as a caveat, and stealing some wording from Calvin, I would like to establish that 'we cannot rightly' form our theology and our approach to Christian worship 'except by obeying God's Word' (the Bible) and adhering to the truths therein. In other words, and relating to my quoting of Calvin, we cannot do something just because a pillar of the Reformation said so and it "sounds good to me".

With that out of the way, we are forced, by good conscience, to see the truth in what Calvin has discerned from the Word of God. Devising our own implements to approaching and carrying out worship of God is not something we have been given the autonomy to do - "I commanded them not". And, further to that, we cannot assume that we have the liberty to form components of our worship on the basis that they were not specifically commanded against in God's Word. We can read throughout the Old Testament, whether in pagan circles or by Israel that God has punished and disciplined those who have departed from his commanded form of worship. Whenever those who, albeit with some form of sincerity, have chosen to devise from their own minds methods of worshiping God, God has in many different ways said it "never came to my mind" ("...into my heart" [KJV]).

Is it right to worship God in ways by which he has not specifically commanded against? Or, because God has not specifically condemned certain aspects and implements of worship that man has devised, can we assume that these methods of worship have His blessing? I believe the answer to both of these questions is a strong no. The only way by which we can worship God is by obeying His inerrant, fully sufficient Word. In Matthew 15:9 Jesus states the following: "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Clearly we are not to invent our own modes of worship - however sincere the intention and however appropriate we may think the implements to be. In 1 Samuel 15:22-23 we can read that "to obey is better than sacrifice...For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry." It is better that we obey God because, in our relatively stupid minds, we humans are accustomed to creating new and original ways of expressing our adoration - and in that, because we create them, we commit ourselves to God's judgement.

When it comes to rightly worshiping God, if we would only retire our imaginations and rid ourselves of our carnal inclinations that tell us it is legitimate to create our own forms of worship, how much more wonderful would our relationship be with our Creator. John Calvin adds this to the subject of the right worship of God "...he wholly calls us back, and withdraws us from petty carnal observances, which our stupid minds, crassly conceiving of God, are wont to devise".

Stick to God's Word and pray that He would strengthen you in the Truth!

Betrayal of the Gospel - Preview

2004-11-22T19:05:00.000-08:00

I just wanted to introduce some thoughts that will be expanded on in an upcoming 'article' of this blog. It pains me to no end to see the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ being trivialized, abandoned, and betrayed. On too many levels, and in so many ways within the Christian church the Gospel is being compromised by "vain philosophy", the "precepts of men", and "the rudiments of the world". Christians are watering-down the Gospel so as to accommodate potential adherents or to ensure growth in numbers. Christians are softening the message and requirement of repentance for a gospel of life-enhancement. Christians are betraying the righteousness of Christ and the spirit of the reformation with a mind-boggling acceptance and validation of the Roman Church's perversion of the Gospel.

Far be it from me, however, to assume that I have never shown disrespect, that I have always adequately glorified God, or that I am perfect in my Christian walk. But I do thank God that, through prayer and His Spirit sanctifying me in the Truth (the Word), I have not resigned to believing in or accepting these 'modern gospels' - which are deficient and different from what we read in God's Word. Harsh words from someone relatively insignificant? Well, while I certainly am never immune to - nor undeserving of - criticism, and while my convictions are somewhat effected by those whose writings I have read and whose sermons I have heard, I confidently and unashamedly rest my case with the Word of God, and carefully avoid taking undue liberties with the truths therein.

The Bible is the only source by which we should discern truth - we can never form our beliefs on the words of men however charming, or however clever and persuasive their arguments and philosophy seem to be. Nor can we take the pragmatic approach to validating the truth - the idea that the believer can verify the truth by subjective experience and hence interpret the bible in light of that experience. And finally, although this is by no means the end of a list, we cannot adhere to nor rely on any type of extra-biblical orthodoxy or tradition that adds to the complete and sufficient scriptures that comprise the Bible.

An upcoming article on the betrayal of the Gospel will expand on the above thoughts and show how, albeit with a certain sincerity, many Christian leaders - long since tiring of preaching the Biblical message - have resigned to worldly ideas and inordinate autonomy when trying to present the Gospel to both the lost and the professing Christian. I will also reiterate what many faithful evangelicals have written a lot about: the departure of new-evangelicals from the saving Gospel of Christ's imputed righteousness to the endorsement of the Roman Catholic sacramental gospel of faith-plus-works that strips Christ of his perfect righteousness. Stay tuned...

Earnestly Contending? Why?

2004-11-20T17:32:00.000-08:00

The writer of the book of Jude, who was most likely Judas (Greek, [not Iscariot]) the brother of the Lord, wrote in Jude 1:3: "...it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (KJV). Jude saw the need to write to those of the Christian faith to contend for that faith because of the immediate dangers of false doctrine being propagated by false teachers. Jude wanted to exhort the Christian faithful to seriously defend the Truth of the Gospel against heresies being promoted amongst them. The prominent heresy in the first century during the time of the apostles was an incipient gnosticism that, among other things, was "turning the grace of God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ" (Jude 1:4). Jude was compelling the faithful to hold fast to the true teachings of Jesus and the apostles, to "keep yourselves in the love of God" (1:21), and to have compassion for, and try to help, those who have fallen under the influence of heretical teachings.

An important part of verse 3 is when Jude identifies the faith as being "once delivered". That illustrates a finality to the truth and, reinforced by the scriptural evidence for the absolute sufficiency of the Bible as the rule of faith, excludes any possibility of the truth being subject to change or being supplemented with further revelation.

So what kind of application does a 2000 year-old exhortation to earnestly contend for the faith have for the Christian today? Well, this cry for contention from God's Holy Word carries a strong relevance for our world today. While Jude may have been writing to specifically address this growing gnosticism, we can be certain that the message is meant for all Christians of all generations. As Christians who are faithful to the Word of God, who have a passion for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and who seek to unashamedly uphold the integrity of scripture, we have a responsibility to defend our faith against the dangers that seek to destroy the souls of the faithful.

There is a laundry list of heresies, errors, dangers and other challenges to the Christian faith today that make the exhortation of Jude, as well as those of Paul, Peter and Jesus Himself, all the more relevant to our generation. While Gnosticism exists today in many different manifestations, there are a number of other problems, in a spiritual context, that plague the church today (In future 'blogerisms' I will touch on some of those problems, as they are manifold) many of which are perpetuated by professing Christian leaders and self-appointed paragons of the faith. One of the more glaring issues facing the church is the growing threat of ecumenical unity, unity for peace and moral purity at the expense of the Gospel, the most obvious example being the betrayal of Christ's righteousness perpetrated by so-called evangelicals crossing the street to Rome (the Roman Catholic Church). Also affecting the minds of the faithful are the naturalistic teachings of mainstream secular 'science', religious in its own right, that reduces humanity to the descendants of prebiotic-soup and puts God in the category of Santa Claus, in a textbook as psychologically manifested, or as a complex development of human genetic makeup. Add to the list of challenges the fact that too many people have resigned themselves to a position of passive indifference, "the I don't care" position. We also have the post-modern notions of moral relativism and religious pluralism, the erroneous philosophy that says "True for you but not for me" or "all religions lead to god". Of course we couldn't leave out the political and social liberalism of the age with their interesting ideas of "forward thinking" and their new definition of tolerance.

Well, the above surely is not a complete or detailed list of the overwhelmingly large number of perilous deceptions that face the Christian faithful today. With that said let us heed the exhortation of Jude to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints". Let us also understand that defending the faith is not optional for the Christian, it should not be something that we reduce to 'a good suggestion' or leave to the efforts of the scholar, the theologian, or the trained apologist. Read the Word of God and pray that the Holy Spirit will strengthen you in the Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ so that you may be adequately equipped for effective witness and the defense of your faith. I would like to close with the words of Paul from Philippians 1:7: "...and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are partakers of my grace".

Why Another Christian blog?

2004-11-18T10:15:00.000-08:00

Another Christian blog?! Yes, another Christian blog! Are there any good reasons for posting/writing about Christian issues, events, etc.? While many poeple would say no, and while many people just don't care, I believe the reasons are manifold and very important. The Christian voice in the world today is relatively weak compared to the voice of the secular 'post-modern' world. From the beer-drinking, pizza-eating, sports-watching demographic who are passively indifferent to anything spiritual to the cerebral academics with their naturalistic presuppositions about the universe and man's place in it, we live in a world of growing moral decline where sex, violence, profanity, and self-indulgence sell and the people buy guiltlessly and with great fervor. What is the answer? Why is this happening? Well, many will say "what do you mean...what's wrong with that"? Or, "why is what happening"? The answer to the problem is irrelevant to the 'material world' and laughable to those who partake of her spoils. But, as unwelcome as this may be to many people, the answer to the problem is that, over the past century, there has been an ever-increasing departure from the Bible as the moral anchor of society.

While it is easy to condemn an unbelieveing or indifferent world of their disobedience to Divinely ordained moral absolutes, so-called Christendom is just as culpable for the decline of morality in the 'civilized' world. The Gospel, when it is presented, is all too often being reduced to: 1) a life-enhancement, betterment philosophy; 2) a financial prosperity message; 3) a signs-and-wonders circus show; 4) a 'holy spirit', 'charismania' blowout; 5) a National Enquirer style 'spritual' menagerie; or 6) insert your other unfortunate and unbiblical perversion here. The point is, the powerful Gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has been, and continues to be, trampled on and dragged through the mud of confusion and perversion by false teachers and their followers who have turned "away their ears from the truth", and have been, "turned unto fables" (2 Timothy 4:4). In addition, how tragic it is in today's 'church' with the watered-down gospel and the notion that we have to conform the Gospel to a target demographic. Many church leaders have abondoned Biblical authority and the True Gospel and have abused autonomy to the point where true worhip and passionate bible preaching have been replaced by a 'seeker sensitive' message and a flesh satisfying, worship-of-worship itinerary. And so we see the spirit of the age taking over when we should be looking to the Holy Spirit to point us to Jesus and sanctify us in the Word of Truth.

I acknowledge the fact, however, that there are some Churches and ministries that have not abandoned Biblical authority, Gospel Truth, and purity of worship. There are those that have sought to effectively witness without compromising - without replacing the Spirit of Truth for the spirit of error. I also acknowledge the fact that there are Christian organizations that are genuinely and actively involved in efforts to improve society. Unfortunately, these organizations are few and far between. I also acknowledge the fact that there are non-Christian organizations that are genuinely and actively involved in trying to make the world a better place. Unfortunately, these organizations, while large in number, are operating under the assumption that Biblical morality is not necessary and hence excluded from their 'betterment' philosophy and efforts. We are however faced with a problem when the voice of the Christian is loud enough for people to hear - the message is rarely received with welcome ears and all too often attacked as prejudice or laughed at as irrelevant. This should not discourage the Christian who is unashamed of the Gospel, it should identify itself as proof that Jesus Christ was right when he said, "...strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it".

There are many more verses from the powerful and unparalleled Word of God that speak strongly to the errors of a disrespectful, rebellious world, but since I have rambled enough I would like to try and close with one of my favorite quotes. James Russell Lowell, an American poet, essayist, and diplomat emphatically and truthfully stated the following in response to numerous academics scoffing at Christian missionary efforts: "I challenge any skeptic to find a ten square mile spot on this planet where they can live their lives in peace and safety and decency, where womanhood is honored, where infancy and old age are revered, where they can educate their children, where the Gospel of Jesus Christ has not gone first to prepare the way. If they find such a place, then I would encourage them to emigrate thither and there proclaim their unbelief". Too many millions live under the blanket of peace, safety, freedom and equality but pay no respect to the people who provided that blanket nor the Message by which it was weaved. By 'reverse engineering' we can trace the construction of the freedoms and rights of the Western world back through time, always enveloped by precepts and laws based on biblical principles with a Christian morality perpetuated by faithful men and women, to a man who hung on a cross. And subsequent to this point in time ~1,970 years ago literally hundreds of millions of bold men and women have died for their unashamed proclaimation and defense of the message of this man who died on a cross - Jesus Christ. "Hey, but what about the crusades, the inquisitions, the suppression of scientific inquiry" you might ask. Well, while we can never forget that religion has been used as an excuse for horrible abuse of power and for the propogation of superstition, we must also understand that these were not things that logically lead from Biblical literacy or the accurate preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, true Christians throughout the centuries have always opposed the tyranny and corruption of those who distorted religion and twisted Scripture for their own ends or out of a blatant misunderstanding of biblical truth. Also, the greatest and most influential academics and scientists throughout the ages were Christians who approached their fields with the motivation to glorify the Creator. But, regardless of your spiritual or theological leanings, if you cannot bring yourself to recognize the direct influence that biblical morality and the Gospel of Jesus Christ have had on your freedom, and unless you are at such a young age as to be unable to adequetly discern this fact, then you are either willfully ignorant or genuinely stupid - no disrespect intended.

I guess my point, if you can find it anywhere, is that Christianity needs voices. More than that it needs a return to Biblical literacy, a return to Biblical worship, a return to the defense of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It needs voices that do not waver from the Biblical Gospel. It needs voices that perservere through oppositition, through persecution, and through tribulation. Christianity needs voices who are unashamed to profess the name of Christ and the Truth of His message. And maybe to clarify: what we do not need are voices, spoken through thin veils of Christianity giving lip service to Christ, that compromise the Gospel, that usurp biblical authority in the name of ecumenism and false unity. What we don't need are the self-appointed Christian paragons who have turned the Gospel into a grab-bag of prosperity and life-enhancement where those who believe them are blessed and those who don't are cursed. What we don't need are the stage hypnotists who think they can schedule the Holy Spirit into a 3 hour timeslot for a 'signs-and-wonders' circus show. What we don't need are the gullible masses, adopting a pragmatic approach to faith, putting on pedestals certain men and women who "cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned...For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple" (Romans 16:17-18). Christianity needs the evangelical voices of old, like before, during, and after the reformation, that spoke the true Gospel boldly and who defended the truths of the sufficiency of scripture alone, grace alone, faith alone, and Christ alone to the point of torture and death.

Anyway, I have rambled on, perhaps at times incoherently and at other times without sticking with one particular point. This is by no means an academic process or the organized writing of an essayist, but rather an opinionated musing - the point of the 'blog'! Take care, God bless, and drive safe!

Brief Introduction...

2004-11-16T16:07:00.000-08:00

posted on the NTRMIN.org 'Exegetical Realm', 'Jude Bible Study' forum section...

I am a 29 year-old Canadian man...a faithful servant of Christ...husband of one wife...father of three children...growing in knowledge and understanding of God's infallible Word for the purpose of witnessing effectively and defending the faith with gentle but uncompromising conviction.

I was brought to Christ by God when I was pulled out of the Roman Catholic church and saved almost 3 years ago. A number of things led to my leaving which, in retrospect, did not include most of what I have learned about that false church since leaving.

To keep it short: After reading the Bible, as well as a book that also presented the truth about Christ's saving sacrifice, I realized my current state of being lost, and the inevitability of my death due to sin without reconciliation to God. I was convicted of my sin and, throughout an intense weeping session of repentance and cries for forgiveness I asked for Christ to help me change my life. Hating sin and turning from it, I thanked (for lack of a more meaningful term) Jesus for his sacrifice for my sin, thanked God for the grace given me that I did not deserve, and prayed for strength and for the Holy Spirit to direct me to, and to sustain me in, the truth. For the first time I came to an understanding of God's Grace and the irreducible sufficiency and perfection of Christ's atoning sacrifice. The book of Hebrews was a powerful witness to that sufficiency and an eye opener for an ex-catholic. I started to realize the unbiblical nature of the catholic system, from its labyrinthine 'economy' of salvation to heaps of extrabiblical dogma that "nullify the word of God" and stand in stark contrast to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I am a new man in Christ who, through the sanctification of the Holy Spirit and with the Bible as the one and only rule of faith, is living and learning to defend and witness to the Truth.