Stand in the Gap

What's Wrong with this Picture?

2012-02-11T20:38:00.000-06:00

Friends, the last few days have been very frustrating for me. I have watched as a recurring debate has erupted, both on the social networks and in Baptist newspapers over whether and to what extent Baptists should or should not be disturbed by a resurgence of Calvinism in our seminaries and pulpits. I'm not going to get into who I think is right or wrong. That would only fuel the debate even more, and to no good purpose.

Why, I ask, are we debating this when 70% of our SBC churches are either plateaued or in decline? This sad state of affairs cannot be blamed on resurgent Calvinism because the best estimates I've seen put Calvinists in pulpits in the SBC at only about 10%. Something else is driving the downward spiral of our churches. But rather than try to face and deal with that we choose to debate theological minutiae like the Medieval Schoolmen who debated how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

It's time to set aside the theological wrangling for a minute and refocus on the Gospel. Both Calvinists and non-Calvinists in the SBC (at least the ones I know) believe in the free offer of salvation to all who hear the Gospel. Both believe that it is the responsibility of every believer to share his/her faith with unbelievers and call them to repent of their sins and trust in Christ for salvation. Both believe that whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. Both believe in biblical inerrancy and justification by faith alone in Christ alone. Both believe in the substitutionary atoning work of Christ on the cross.

How can we show a lost world the love of Christ if we can't even show it to each other? It's time to refocus on the main thing. We've got a lot of churches that are dying. Why? Each church has its own particular pathology that must be faced and dealt with. But behind it all may lie a kind of subconscious hardshellism that says "our four and no more." Oh, we would never state it so blatantly (okay, so I've heard of one church that did), but it prevails, I suspect in many of our churches. We say "Everyone is Welcome", but are they really? Do we want drug addicts, alcoholics, prostitutes, and swindlers (you know, the people Jesus went to) coming through the doors of our churches? Our priorities are out of focus, and repentance needs to start with us if we're going to reach a lost nation and a lost world.

God's Sovereignty, Human Responsibility, and the Molinist Position

2012-02-06T23:56:00.000-06:00

I've been reading the recently published book, Calvinism: A Southern Baptist Dialogue, edited by E. Ray Clendenen and Brad J. Waggoner. On the whole this is a book worth reading, especially if you are a Southern Baptist with questions about Calvinism. The book presents an irenic debate between Calvinists and non-Calvinists in the SBC on the role of Calvinism in Southern Baptist life, past and present. The authors of the various essays are well chosen and articulate. They share a common commitment to the Gospel and the evangelistic mission of the denomination.

Some chapters I found somewhat lacking were the two chapters on the extent of the atonement, and then a later chapter on a Molinist interpretation of God's sovereignty. David Nelson sought to make a biblical defense of general atonement and for the most part he succeeded. However, at one point he raises the issue of God's love in relation to the Calvinistic position of particular redemption (the idea that Christ died particularly to redeem the elect; 132). He implies that the doctrine of particular redemption indicates God does not love all people, at least not in the same way. At the same time he admits to holding unconditional election (131). But does not his affirmation of unconditional election raise the same questions regarding the nature and extent of God's love for sinners as does particular redemption? It is a question worth asking.

In the next chapter Sam Waldron set out to present a "biblical" defense of particular redemption. However, this chapter, rather than building on key biblical passages that affirm the definite nature of the atonement, argued primarily from logical deductions and inferences for the doctrine of particular redemption. Waldron most commonly cites the Puritan John Owen and the twentieth century commentator John Murray, with an occasional nod to B. B. Warfield.

For me, however, the most interesting and troubling chapter is the one by Ken Keathley on Molinism as the best solution for the tension between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. For Keathley logical consistency is a driving force. He wants to find a way to make the infralapsarian position logically consistent, and for him Molinism is the key. Molinism was first advocated by a Jesuit priest named Molina. His position has been roundly criticized by all sides as giving too much ground to the other side and so has never enjoyed a great following among either Catholics or Protestants, Calvinists or Arminians. Essentially Molina argued that God knows at three levels. He knows what is necessarily true, he knows what will be, and he knows what could be if circumstances were different. This third knowledge is said to be "middle knowledge" and stands between God's necessary knowledge and his knowledge of what will be. In the Molinist system God employed his "middle knowledge" or knowledge of what would be in any given circumstances, to plan the course of creation to accomplish his perfect will by establishing the circumstances in which free moral agents would free choose to do what God intended. At first glance this looks like a good proposal. Bruce Ware has also argued for God's use of middle knowledge (God's Greater Glory, chapter 4, although Keathley doesn't present Ware as holding to middle knowledge). A thorough and much more capable critique of middle knowledge can be found in John D. Laing's "The Compatibility of Calvinism and Middle Knowledge" in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 47, no. 3 (Sept 2004): 455--67. My only observation is that, looked at carefully, Molinism doesn't really resolve the tension. It only moves it back one step. As I understand it (and maybe I don't, really; Molinism always gives me a headache when I try to look at it too closely), in the Molinist schema, God simply governs the universe with a stacked deck, so to speak.

God determines the context in which we live and move in such a way as to secure our doing his will because he knows perfectly how we will each respond in a given circumstance. In one sense this is little different than the Arminian view that God merely ratifies our choices through his foreknowledge. In another sense the hard determinism of some forms of Calvinism are maintained, except this time God is merely manipulating his creation to achieve his goals.

Herein lies the problem of a theological system too slavishly devoted to human logic. God says, "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways" (Isa 55: 8 NASB). I find pure, supralapsarian Calvinism, pure Arminianism, Molinism, and Open Theism to be far too committed to perfect internal logical consistency. They all share a common arrogance--that the human mind can fathom the mysteries of God through logic. Can I resolve the tension between God's sovereign rule of the universe and the free moral agency of humanity and angelic beings? No. Is that a problem for me? No. I assume that God has the issue resolved in his mind, and that satisfies me. I don't need for my system to be perfectly symmetrical. Let me rest in the biblical witness. Those who are saved are saved completely owing to God's grace--his undeserved favor freely given for reasons known only to God (Eph 1: 4--6). Those who are lost are condemned for their sins and for no other reason than that they die in a state of unbelief, unforgiven and unregenerate (Rom 3: 23; 6: 23). Some say this makes God unfair. If God were fair and if every individual received his proper due, we would all be lost. None would be saved because no one of us deserves even the next breath of air we breathe (Rom 3: 10ff). I'll take his mercy over fairness any day. "God, be merciful to me, the sinner" (Luke 18:13, NASB).

Reflections on the New Year

2012-01-02T06:46:00.000-06:00

I don't make new year's resolutions, at least, I haven't since I resolved never to make them again. It's the only resolution I've managed to keep. But the turning of the year is a good time to think about the future while reflecting a bit on the past. In many respects 2011 was quite a mixed bag for me. I lost my brother unexpectedly. My family finished the year coping with some unexpected stress. On the other hand, I was elected president of the Association of Baptists for Scouting (http://www.baptistscouters.org) and both my older son and my older daughter have excelled in their respective Scouting activities (Boy Scouts and Venturing Scouts, respectively). I've enjoyed being part of a great praise team in my church and have launched, by God's grace, a wonderful Bible study class of very caring and devoted people. Memories of the past are a great gift because they anchor us--give us a context in which to face the future. There is a danger, however, in dwelling too much on the past. An anchor can give stability in times of storm, but it can also become a burden that impedes progress.

In his letter to the church at Philippi, the Apostle Paul wrote, "Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3: 13--14, NASB). Paul, here, is clearly not saying to forget completely the past, for in this very chapter he reviewed his past in Judaism and his role in persecuting the early church. So what is he saying? He is saying that the past doesn't have to define our future. We who are followers of Christ have been called by God through his Spirit and his Word to become more and more like Christ. That is the goal of our salvation (Rom 8: 28). Because God has called us to this, and because he both works the will to be Christlike in us (Phil 2: 13) and dwells in us by the Holy Spirit (Rom 8: 9), then we are both willing and able to strive to be more like Christ in our daily lives (Phil 2: 12). What Paul is saying here is that we should not become fixated on the past in such a way that it keeps us from reaching for the goal of becoming like Christ. Don't let your past sins and failures define the limits of your future growth in Christian maturity. Rather, with gratitude to God for his indescribable gift, press on toward the goal of being like Christ.

A Year of Trials

2011-12-26T06:58:00.000-06:00

I have not posted a blog entry since March of 2010. The year 2011 has been a year of trials for me and my family. Faith in God, the support of our church family, and the prayers of many faithful friends have sustained us.

In spite of all our trials God is good and his grace in Christ is sufficient. The trials began for us in March, when my older brother suddenly became ill. He was experiencing strange lapses in memory and confusion. By about Easter he was given a preliminary diagnosis of Cruetzfeldt-Jakobs Disease, a neurological disease that progresses rapidly, destroying the brain. It's pathology is hardly understood by medical science. There is a hypothesis about the disease, but it seems to raise more questions than it answers. It is extremely rare and always fatal. At age 54 my brother passed on May 29, 2011. I had a very hard time finding closure because the very nature of the disease required a closed casket. My only comfort is in knowing that he is now whole and with his Lord Jesus.

The summer was hard, emotionally. I couldn't focus on work. I only wanted to spend time working on an old truck I had bought from a friend. It became my therapy. The old truck and my involvement in Scouting kept me sane, I think. I simply pushed through each day.

Just as I felt I was climbing out of the whole of losing my brother, one of my children became ill. On or about her 11th birthday she began exhibiting odd behavior. We've been to the pediatrician and three specialists. We're now preparing to see a fourth specialist. God has been good and sustained us in this most recent trial. We're hopeful that we will get a diagnosis and course of treatment soon.

Trials are often God's way of preparing his people for some new challenge. They are God's training ground for our next step in his service. They also serve a purgative purpose. They wean us from the world and aid in our sanctification. As the writer of Hebrews observed, no trial is pleasant at the time, but the outcome is always worth the hardship. So, I'm looking to 2012 and wondering just what God is up to and what will the new year bring for me and my family.

Taking a Stand in the Political Debate

2010-03-15T06:04:00.000-05:00

How should Christians respond to the current political climate in the United States? Glenn Beck has recently called on anyone who attends a church that supports a leftist socialist agenda, often termed "social justice" to leave such churches. His call is rooted in his deeply held political belief that such an agenda will undermine American liberties guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution and replace our representative republican form of government with a socialist/communist state. For an excellent discussion of Beck's call, see Dr. R. Albert Mohler's blog at http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/03/15/glenn-beck-social-justice-and-the-limits-of-public-discourse/

Recent moves in Congress do have some elements that I think should be disturbing to any Bible reading and history savvy Christian. On the front burner is the debate over national health care. On the back burner is an immigration bill that would require every U. S. citizen to have a federally issued identification card with his/her fingerprints on it and other possible biological markers as well as a condition of employment.
In the big picture this looks ominously like the federal government seeking more and more control over every aspect of our lives in complete disregard of the Tenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. But how should a Christian view such events?

At the risk of being labeled an apocalyptic, I'm going to venture into territory where I don't usually go. I want to be clearly understood at this point. I am not saying that this is the fulfillment of a specific biblical prophecy. I'm saying this looks similar to that. In Revelation 13: 11-18 John describes a "beast" from the earth. That "beast", I believe in context, represents the fascist state of the Roman Empire and stands as a type, or figure of a future government or dictator that will seek to impose his will on everyone.

Fascism is nothing new. It was not invented in the twentieth century. It was the heart of the Roman political system after the fall of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Caesars. Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary defines fascism as " a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition" (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism). At its heart, fascism usually includes the worship or adoration of the state or the dictator. Such was the case with the ancient Roman emperors, who saw themselves as gods, and such was the case with Adolf Hitler of the National Socialist (NAZI) Party in Germany.

In the text in Revelation 14 the "beast" assumes the role of God vis-a-vis the people of the world. There is no way for anyone to provide for his/her own needs or those of his/her family apart from the permission of the "beast", which is the state or the dictator. To me the current trend in Washington toward government sponsored health-care, the welfare program, social security, medicare/medicaid, and the new immigration reform bill all look like attempts to make the federal government all-powerful and the place everyone must turn to for help instead of turning to God.

I believe it is the duty of every God-fearing Christian to resist these items of legislation whether they become law or not, as unjust laws that infringe on the rights of every free-born U. S. citizen under the Bill of Rights of the U. S. Constitution. I also believe that to submit to this movement is to allow the state to assume the role of a "god" in your life by making the state your source of hope for deliverance from life's trials rather than the God of the Bible. Resist the cult of big government. God alone is sovereign over your life.

Saved by Grace, through Faith

2010-03-05T08:48:00.000-06:00

Grace is God's unearned favor. But how does it become effective in the life of a sinner? Here is a man who is lost in his sins. He's perfectly content to live his life as he pleases without God. How is it that he is going to come to benefit from God's grace? God has to do several things in order to save this man.

First, God must bring this man to an opportunity to hear the Gospel. "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ" (Rom 10: 17). No person of ordinary years and intelligence can be saved apart from hearing the Gospel. That is why the church has and must fulfill its mandate to preach the gospel to everyone. You and I are part of the means by which God fulfills his saving purpose in the world by sharing the Gospel with friends, relatives, neighbors, and strangers. The kind of faith necessary to appropriate God's grace is not natural to a fallen man or woman. It is something that must "come" to him or her as a gift of grace from God, and God bestows that gift, according to Paul, through the hearing of the Gospel: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes" (Rom 1: 16). The Gospel message, not my testimony, is what God has promised to bless for saving sinners. I need to share my testimony, but I need to be sure that it contains the Gospel and not just my religious experiences.

Secondly, God must bring the sinner to an awareness of his sinfulness, lostness, and need of salvation. This is often referred to as "conviction of sin". This is an aspect of evangelism that I believe has been by-passed in our day. Look at most of the evangelistic methods that are trumpeted in churches and what is substituted for this step is a quick admission that "you are a sinner". There is no brokenness in that. It is merely an acknowledgment of a fact. Sinners must come to be "broken" for their sins. "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Matt 5: 4 NASB). Our society has become jaded to sin. We watch it on T.V. and laugh about it when we should blush for shame. God give us sinners broken over their sins and desperate for some kind of deliverance!

Thirdly, God must work in the sinner the gift of the new birth. "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3: 3 NASB). This "new birth" must come from God and not ourselves: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3: 6 NASB). Contrary to the teachings of the revivalist Charles Finney, the new birth is God's work, not ours.
"[W]hen we were dead dead in our transgressions, [God] made us alive together with Christ" (Eph 2: 5 NASB). "In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth" (James 1: 18 NASB).

What results from this labor on God's part toward his enemy is that the sinner, as a result of God's merciful working, receives a new nature through the new birth that instinctively looks to Christ for salvation. Faith and repentance are born in the heart and the one who was a rebel now submits to the will of God freely and gladly. God drags no one kicking and screaming into his kingdom. Repentance from sin and faith in Christ come as the natural outflow of a life changed by the new birth. God then deals with the legal status before his bar of justice in relation to the changed sinner. He forgives all sin and declares the sinner to be as righteous as Christ himself. The sins of the sinner have been paid for by Christ on the cross, and the perfect obedience of Christ is "credited" or "imputed" to the sinner on the basis of his faith. Luther called this an "alien" righteousness, because it is not our righteousness that justifies but the righteousness of another given by grace through faith in Christ. "Therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 5: 1). And so the sinner is saved by grace through faith.

Saved by Grace, Part II

2010-03-04T08:46:00.000-06:00

Yesterday I wrote about the problem of sin. Without understanding our predicament with sin it is simply impossible to understand grace. Today I want to talk about grace specifically. Paul wrote, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, so that no one can boast" (Eph 2: 8--9). What Paul says here is that your salvation and mine is God's work from beginning to end. There is nothing we can boast before God or men about as having made us worthy of God's gift of salvation.

Some people have a hard time accepting this. It strikes at the heart of human pride. It is God's intent to humble us before his majestic presence. Grace is God's to give or withhold as he sees fit: "For he says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion'" (Rom 9: 15 NASB). You and I have no "claim" on God's mercy. We must come as beggars in need of mercy. There is no inherent "right" to God's forgiveness, even though he has promised it to whoever will call to him for salvation (Rom 10: 9--13). The promise is not an entitlement. To use Andrew Fuller's term, we must come as "supplicants" and not as "claimants".

God is not merely the Merciful One. He is also the Just Judge of all people. As Judge God has the right, because of our sins, to withhold his mercy or to give it. He is sovereign over who he will save. You and I stand in a position of complete dependence upon him. He can be glorified in our salvation or in our condemnation. One brings praise to his grace and the other brings praise to his justice. Yet the words of the Bible are encouraging--"Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved" (Rom 10: 13 NASB).

So, rather than becoming discouraged because all depends on God's mercy, have hope because he is a merciful God. He has provided the only perfect sacrifice for the salvation of sinners in the person and work of Jesus Christ. But do not come to him thinking you are somehow worthy of his attention. Come to him realizing that you stand in abject need of mercy and have nothing to offer him. It is you who stand in need of him, not him in need of you. Embrace him with a loving heart of surrender and faith and you will find him merciful.

Saved by Grace Alone

2010-03-03T08:49:00.000-06:00

This will be a short week of posts because I have a lot of student papers to grade. I want to address the issue of salvation by grace. What does it mean? How is it appropriated? What is God's role, and what does call tell us to do in order to be saved? These are some of the common questions people ask.

First of all, to be saved by grace means to be saved apart from any merit I possess. I have nothing to bring to God by which to earn his love and favor. He is free to give his love or to withhold it. He is free to show mercy or not show mercy. Someone might say, "Well, that doesn't seem quite right." Why would someone think that? Perhaps because he or she doesn't understand and appreciate the sinful condition of lost human beings.

Every person born except one has a problem. That problem is SIN. It's an ugly three letter word that people don't like to use anymore. We may be neurotic, socially maladjusted, dysfunctional, or any of a number of other conditions defined by psychologists today, but don't use the word SIN. Sin involves guilt, and guilt involves personal responsibility for my actions. Furthermore, sin means that I've offended a holy God and earned his wrath. It means I stand justly condemned to eternal torment unless God saves me out of sheer grace.

In its fullest sense to say that I am a sinner means that I am corrupted in my person and my actions. It means I've inherited a "sin nature" from my ancestors going all the way back to humanity's original parents, who violated God's law and brought condemnation on themselves and all their posterity. God finds me worthy of condemnation for two reasons: (1) I bear in my person a defaced and deformed image of God that has been corrupted by sin--I have a sin nature--a propensity to sin. God finds that nature worthy of his condemnation because it is contrary to his standard of perfect holiness. (2) Because my nature is corrupted, left to myself I freely and willingly choose sin over holiness, even when I do "good" things. That is, even my best actions are tainted with self-will, pride, or other impure motives. But given the chance and not guided by grace, I am capable of the most horrendous crimes. So, I stand condemned for my actions, thoughts, and words, as well as for my nature. No wonder the old hymn writer said "Be of sin the double cure."

In order for me to come to God for salvation I need to realize first just how lost I am and in what kind of state I live. I must first realize that God is perfectly just to do with me as he sees fit. I have nothing to offer him that would move or motivate him to show me mercy. I must face squarely the problem of my sin and see it as God sees it. Otherwise I will never appreciate what it means to be saved by grace.

Punitive Church Discipline

2010-02-25T17:40:00.000-06:00

In what should be hoped would be only rare cases there are instances when the church should move to exclude a wayward member from the congregation. Jesus talks about this in Matthew 18, which was referenced yesterday, and Paul discusses it in 1 Corinthians 5. If a case of corrective discipline advances to the point where it must be brought before the whole church, then it is has become a very serious matter indeed. This is reserved only for those are remain unrepentant or in situations that private intervention cannot resolve. It is to be hoped, once the church hears all the facts and gives admonition to the parties involved, that a reconciliation will be achieved. However, if one or both parties fail to follow the instruction of the church, then Jesus said that such persons were to be treated as unbelievers-outside the fellowship and privileges of church membership.

Similarly, in the case of the incestuous marriage discussed yesterday, there are situations where the integrity of the church, the honor of Christ, and glory of the gospel compel swift and decisive action. It is not unloving or unkind to take such action. In fact, it is unloving to leave such persons in their sins and in the church, for it engenders a false assurance of spiritual well-being where none exists.

Even at this point the goal of church discipline is the eventual restoration of the one who comes under the church's rebuke. That a person is excluded from membership does not mean he or she should be told to "go away." Rather, they should be loved as any other unconverted person and encouraged to attend to the teaching and preaching of the word in the hopes that it will have its desired effect upon their lives.

I knew a young man once, a deacon's son, who took up a life of sin. His father moved to have him excluded from the church, and the church complied. Some years later I saw that same young man come before the church, confess his sin, acknowledge that he had been an unconverted church member but that through the ordeal of church discipline he had come to see his lost condition. God saved him, the church restored him, and he himself went on to become a deacon in the community. Done right church discipline works. It is another way we are commanded in Scripture to take a stand for Christ.

Corrective Church Discipline

2010-02-24T08:04:00.000-06:00

Formative church discipline focuses on positive instruction in both right belief (orthodoxy) and right living (orthopraxy). It happens in relationships, sometimes formal (such as with a mentor) and sometimes less formal (discussions and observations between friends). It should be intentional. It should move each of us closer to Christlike living, for that is what it means to be a "Christian", to live like Christ.

What happens when formative discipline fails? What do you do when a fellow believer strays from the path of truth (doctrinal error) or falls into sinful conduct? This is where corrective discipline comes into play. If the problem is a private one-not publicly or widely known-Jesus said to handle it privately if at all possible. The detailed instructions are given in Matthew 18:15-20. Go privately first to the one who has offended you and attempt to be reconciled without the matter going any further. If that fails, then take one or two as witnesses of your efforts and help in persuasion, and attempt again to be reconciled. Only if that fails should the matter then be taken to the whole congregation for help. All should be done in a spirit of love and humility and with the goal of restoration and reconciliation (Gal 6: 1).

What do you do, though, if there is a case of open, flagrant sin or doctrinal error? What do you do if everybody already knows about it? Paul encountered such a case in the city of Corinth. A young man had taken up cohabitation with his step-mother in a clear case of incest. Rather than dealing with the young man the church at Corinth had taken pride in how "loving" they were in accepting this relationship which Paul said would not even have been tolerated by the pagans in the city. Paul instructed the church, in 1 Corinthians 5, to move quickly and decisively to put this young man out of the church-to exclude him from the rights of membership until he repented (that he did repent is indicated in 2 Cor 2: 6-8).

Corrective church discipline serves the function of believers aiding one another in progress toward greater sanctification and perseverance. It serves as a check on our residual sinful tendencies that continue to war against the spirit. It also reminds us that, as a church is supposed to be a company of redeemed souls, so there should be evidence in each life that redemption has come to each member through a life-changing experience with Christ.

Formative Church Discipline

2010-02-23T13:52:00.000-06:00

In most of today's Baptist churches the weakness in the cord of regenerate church membership is the strand of church discipline. Once Baptists succumbed completely to the combined pressures of (1) Jacksonian individualism, (2) revivalistic piety, and (3) urban prosperity, church discipline became an apparent problem rather than a potential solution. Numbers began to matter more than purity, and efficiency became the watchword of Baptist life in the early twentieth century. Nothing is less efficient than church discipline. And so the practice of opening each church conference with the examination of the spiritual health and unity of the church was discarded. Southern Baptists in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have reaped a bitter harvest from this careless discarding of church discipline.

Today the Southern Baptist Convention claims some 17 million adherents in the United States, but at least sixty percent are unaccounted for on any given Sunday. Why? What happened? Well, in part there was a change in evangelistic methodology that followed the revivalistic approach of Charles G. Finney, and a mere outward response in the form of "walking the aisle" or reciting a "sinner's prayer" was made to "seal the deal" between God and the sinner without further examination for proof of a genuine conversion experience. Secondly, discipline in its various forms was lost on an entire generation in the name of the right of individual soul competency and the right of private interpretation.

In recent years Southern Baptists have taken a step in the right direction and begun to focus on what is often called "formative" church discipline-discipleship training. But the nagging problem of shallow evangelism still persists in many places, and serious discipleship remains an option and not an expectation for most church members.

Formative church discipline involves the careful instruction of the new believer in both the teachings of the church and the expected life-patterns of a Christian. It is not a matter of indifference how church members live their lives. It is not merely a matter of learning what the Bible says. Christians must learn to live their lives patterned after biblical obedience to the commands of Christ as an evidence of their life-changing relationship with him. This is formative church discipline, and it requires mature Christians modeling and teaching the less mature how to live the Christian life while equipping them to pass their knowledge to the next generation of believers.

A Cord of Three Strands

2010-02-22T09:24:00.000-06:00

Last week was spent dealing with the very touchy issue of believer's baptism vs. infant baptism. Baptists practice "credo-baptism" because we believe that a church, ideally, should be composed of those who have experienced God's grace and have been born again by the Holy Spirit. We do not believe that any rite or act of man can cause this to happen but that it is a work of grace in the heart resulting in repentance and faith (Baptist Faith & Message, IV, A). But a number of problems have arisen in Baptist church life in the last 100 years. Believer's baptism serves as an entry point into a regenerate church, an initial check against unconverted members, but alone it cannot ensure a believer's church.

Baptists, historically, have held that two other lines of defense are both biblical and necessary to maintain regenerate church membership. One of these is church control of the Lord's Table. Communion is a church ordinance to be observed in accordance with the biblical pattern under the authority of the church. It is not just for anyone who wants to have it. According to the Apostle Paul the Lord's Supper not only represents our union with Christ but our union with one another in a church relationship through shared doctrine and practice, a practice that includes holy living (1 Corinthians 10). That is the second cord.

Church discipline is the third cord that is necessary to make the rope of the believer's church a living possibility. Christ himself enjoined the practice of church discipline (Matthew 18) and Paul tied it to the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 5). Without church discipline it is near to impossible to practice the identification of false believers who slip past the baptismal waters unawares and work with them redemptively to bring them to Christ, or failing that, punitively to purify the congregation. This week's blog will deal with the even more touchy issue of church discipline, its decline, and its needed restoration in our churches.

From Immersion to Sprinkling

2010-02-20T07:08:00.000-06:00

So how did the practice of the Church go from immersion to sprinkling or pouring? Or, more properly, how did the practice in the Western Church go to sprinkling and pouring? The rite of immersion persists in the Eastern Tradition, even of infants.

Basil the Great, according to Apostolic Canons, I, enjoins trine immersion, stating "if any bishop or presbyter shall administer baptism not by three dippings but by one, let him be punished with deprivation" (cited in Robinson, History of Baptism, 74). That immersion was the common practice in the fourth century can be seen by the design of the baptistry of St. Sophia, built by the Emperor Constantine. In Rome itself the baptistry of St. John Lateran had a depth of up to thirty-seven inches and was obviously suited to immersion. A. H. Strong cites Dean Stanley (March 1879), as stating that immersion remained the mode of baptism until at least the thirteenth century (1200s) in the West (Systematic Theology, 936). Some writers maintain that the immersion of infants (at least of Edward VI and Elizabeth I) continued in England into the sixteenth century (Robinson, 124). Even today the Catholic Catechism admits that the original and full sign of baptism was complete immersion (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/628.htm).

According to Robinson sprinkling began as a pagan ritual that can be traced to Roman antiquity and was introduced into Christian practice as part of the act of exorcism in conjunction with the practice of baptism (in the Catholic tradition, Eastern and Western, an exorcism is performed prior to any baptism). From this beginning point the act of sprinkling eventually was confounded with the act of baptism and sprinkling supplanted immersion as the mode (Robinson, 137). As was shown in a previous blog, sprinkling or pouring was allowed as a substitute in extreme cases as early as the early second century (see the Didache cited in a previous blog). In 1311 the Synod of Ravenna set sprinkling and pouring on equal footing with immersion, and so from that point onward sprinkling or pouring became the dominant mode practiced on the European continent.

That immersion was not the practiced mode on the European Continent at the time of the Reformation is clearly evident by the fact that Martin Luther argued for its restoration in his 1519 Treatise on Baptism (Works of Luther, vol.1, 56), and by the fact that Calvin admitted that immersion was the primitive mode but in his opinion the mode was a matter of indifference and ought to be left ot local preference (Institutes, IV. xv. 19). I find it odd, given Calvin's emphasis on strictly biblical worship based on the Second Commandment, that he should so lightly set aside the explicit practice of the ancient Church for what was undoubtedly a human innovation of late origin. Furthermore, his detailed treatment of the significance of baptism as a Christian rite can only properly be answered by the baptism of adult believers. His defense of infant baptism at this point is most inconsistent with his theology of baptism.

Moving from immersion to sprinkling was a long, winding path for the Church. The first step involved extreme cases. Eventually infant baptism rose to prominence, and many other factors also came into play which resulted in the acceptance of infant sprinkling as a recognized form of "baptism". In all of this both the form and the true significance of baptism as an individual's profession of faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for salvation was lost and the gospel perverted. Scholars of all Christian denominations have been forced to admit that the Baptist claim to believer's immersion was the practice of the New Testament Christians. So why would someone who professes to follow Christ not follow him in the waters of baptism?

How We Got Infant Baptism

2010-02-19T07:04:00.000-06:00

The question must be asked and answered, "Where did infant baptism come from?" We know from the writings of Tertullian, who lived in North Africa, that infant baptism began to be practiced in the second century (A. D. 100s), because he wrote a challenge to this practice. New Testament scholar and Lutheran Kurt Aland wrote an excellent short study of the subject in the early 1960s entitled Did the Early Church Baptize Infants?

Aland carefully examines all the New Testament evidence and writings of the apostolic fathers. He concludes that the New Testament church only baptized professing believers and that the practice of infant baptism developed along side the church's growing understanding of original sin, the concept of baptismal regeneration, and the issue of infant mortality. The earliest instances of infant baptism involved children who were sickly or ill, and the Christian parents feared that these children, if they died, would end up in hell.

The practice of the Church in the Patristic period down to about the fifth century, was to delay baptism. The Cappadocian Fathers, considered some of the greatest theologians fourth century (A. D. 300s), were all from the homes of Christian bishops, and yet they were not baptized until they were grown and in their 20s and 30s. It was St. Augustine who, more than any other, pushed infant baptism into the norm in his anti-Pelagian writings and his defense of the doctrine of original sin.

What can be concluded from this is quite clear. Infant baptism was an innovation of the late second century that gradually grew in acceptance until it became the norm in the late fourth or early fifth century. It was not a biblical practice. It substituted baptism for faith in Christ as the basis for salvation as baptism took on a sacramental meaning, becoming the primary means by which grace was dispensed by the Church through the priesthood.

Can the Church Alter Christ's Command?

2010-02-17T12:48:00.000-06:00

It has long been argued, especially by the Catholic Church, that the magisterium has power vested in it by Christ to alter Church practice. And so baptism in the Western Church gradually ceased to be by immersion and became routinely a matter of sprinkling or pouring. But two questions come to mind. First, does the Church really have this authority? Secondly, does sprinkling/pouring answer to the intended representation given in baptism?

First of all, the Bible is explicitly clear on the place of human innovation in matters of worship. In the Old Testament God made it very plain that his precepts were not to be altered at all. Paul made it very plain that the message of the gospel was not to be altered (Gal 1: 7-8), and baptism is a presentation of the gospel message in dramatic form. In baptism several things are represented at once: (1) the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (the essence of the gospel), (2) the death of the old man, his burial, and the resurrection to walk in a new life (repentance, remission of sins, and faith in Christ), and (3) the hope of our own future bodily resurrection when Christ comes again (eschatological hope). Altering the mode and/or the recipient of the rite fundamentally alters its message and meaning, and so it is forbidden by Scripture.

This leads naturally to the second question. Does pouring or sprinkling adequately communicate the message of baptism? The answer is a resounding "no". Baptism is intended to represent cleansing from sin, death to the old life, and resurrection to new life. Simply sprinkling or pouring some water over someone cannot possible represent those things. Furthermore, baptism in the New Testament was the public profession of faith and is essential to one's owning Christ publicly. Performing a rite, even immersion, on an infant, subverts this essential quality of baptism because the infant cannot have faith in Christ. That must come as an intelligent response of the heart to the moving of the Holy Spirit through the gospel.

When looked upon from this perspective it becomes very clear that Christian baptism is and can only be the immersion of a believer in the name of the Trinity as a profession of faith in Christ if it is to answer to the New Testament meaning of the rite. Anything less is a sham, and infant baptism has been the source of more mischief throughout Church History than nearly anything else because it deliberately fills churches with people who are not saved but believe themselves to be Christian because of something that was done to them in infancy. It undermines the doctrine of the new birth and tends to vaccinate the soul against the gospel as surely as any other false gospel does.

Taking a Stand for New Testament Baptism

2010-02-16T10:41:00.002-06:00

What is baptism, and why is it important to the Christian faith? Two rites define the Christian faith more than any other: baptism and communion. From the beginning of the Christian church baptism has been seen as essential to all other church privileges, including participation in communion. But the practice of baptism has changed through the centuries.
Jesus commanded baptism for his followers when he said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" (Matt 28: 19 NASB). The word order here is significant. The primary verb in this text is "make disciples," and what follows explains, in part, how to do that. The first step in becoming a disciple is baptism. Verse twenty adds that the church is to teach "them to observe all that I commanded you."
So, back to the original question, what is baptism? Baptism, by definition, is immersion. The Greek word, baptizo, signifies dipping, plunging, or immersing something in a liquid (Friberg's Lexicon, 4491). Christ commanded his followers to be baptized in accordance with a particular pattern, "in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit." Regardless of what you call it, any other ritual substituted for this is simply not New Testament Christian baptism.
But, it is often argued that the Church, through the magisterium, has the authority to alter the commands of Christ. Is this true? Can this be supported biblically?
If the Church does not have the authority to alter the practice of baptism, then is baptism a "first order" practice? Is it something on which our fellowship with other professing Christians should be based, especially as it relates to communion? These are the questions that will be explored in tomorrow's blog.

Taking a Stand in Water

2010-02-15T08:57:00.000-06:00

Christians are called by Christ to take a stand, and that stand must begin somewhere. According to the New Testament it begins in water, the waters of baptism. I want to take some time this week to explore the relationship of water baptism to taking a stand for Christ and why believer's baptism by immersion is both the biblical model and the only model that answers to the theological, kerygmatic, and didactic roles of this foundational Christian rite.

This week I will look at baptism from its New Testament basis, its corruption and restoration, and its theological, kerygmatic and didactic purposes. I will also look at the question of whether or not those claiming to be God's people have the right and authority to alter what Christ himself commanded and the early church practiced in the New Testament.

Check in each day for a short lesson on how to take a stand in the water and why it is important.

Reflections on the New Birth

2010-02-05T06:22:00.000-06:00

How is it that a sinner comes to faith in Christ? How is it that a person is "born again"? And how does one's view of the new birth effect how one prays for sinners in need of salvation? Several recent conversations have prompted me to think on these questions anew.

In our day the prevailing notion of the new birth has been that which was espoused by Charles G. Finney, the great revivalist of the nineteenth century, who said, "The Spirit's agency is not needed to give him power, but to overcome his voluntary obstinacy" ("Sinners bound to change their own hearts," 1834 from http://www.gospeltruth.net/1836SOIS/01sois_sinners_bound.htm). Finney's view was that the new birth, or change of heart, was not a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit but simply the work of moral persuasion to convince the sinner voluntarily to change his/her governing principles of action. In Finney's view the Spirit works by moral persuasion through the "living voice" of the preacher to induce the sinner to change his own heart, but there is no supernatural power exerted by the Spirit to effect a change of heart. If there were, according to Finney, the change of heart would have no moral virtue to it. But does God save in light of some moral virtue in the creature? Is this the key that unlocks God's treasure room of mercy? "He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3: 5 NASB).

Evangelical Christianity in the twentieth century was virtually swallowed up in this notion of salvation as ultimately resting, not on the graciousness of God, but on the decision of the sinner (referred to as "decisional regeneration). This, in effect, puts the power of salvation in the hands of the sinner and not in the hands of God. It ignores the true nature of human depravity and reduces sin to merely sinful actions and not a sinful disposition inherited from our fallen first parents. Finney's arguments are sophistry of the worst sort, for he failed to understand the position against which he argued or deliberately misrepresented it for rhetorical purposes.

But my question here is, "How does one's view of the new birth effect how one prays for a lost sinner?" If I believe that the sinner ultimately is responsible for causing the new birth by his/her own choice to believe or not believe in Christ, then what motive is there to pray to God to convert that sinner? God cannot do it. God can only lay before the sinner certain inducements designed to encourage the sinner to believe in Christ. In Finney's view God is not Lord of the conscience. The sinner is. God cannot intrude into the heart of the sinner and effect the new birth. He can only seek to persuade the sinner to do it himself. So what is the point of praying for God to save someone if, in fact, the person's salvation is finally dependent upon his/her choice and not the gracious purpose of God? Has this spirit of a man-centered view of the new birth undermined our sense of duty to pray for the lost? Could this way of thinking about salvation be the very reason so many of our churches are flat-lining and dying today? Is this why we shed no tears in prayer for unconverted friends and family members? "Well, it's really up to her whether she wants to follow Christ or not." Preserving an inviolate free will becomes more important than the salvation of the soul and the individual is made into his/her own savior in the process. Is God really honored by such a view of salvation?

A Book to Consider

2010-01-28T12:20:00.000-06:00

Anyone who reads Christian authors should be familiar with the late D. Martin-Lloyd Jones. Crossway has re-released his book on the kingdom. Here's the link if you're interested. http://www.crossway.org/blog/2010/01/the-kingdom-of-god-on-trackback-thursday/

The Deal of a Lifetime

2010-01-19T20:13:00.000-06:00

In Pilgrim's Progress there is a scene where Christian is confronted by Satan, who offers to "double" his wages if he will return to the City of Destruction and his old way of life. Christian says that he cannot live on Satan's wages, for "the wages of sin is death" (Rom 3: 23).

Now, as a general rule I'm opposed to any evangelistic approach that speaks of salvation in "salesman" terms, but this is worth thinking about. The deal each of us has coming into the world is that we can work for all our lifetimes doing whatever we want, and at the end as a reward we will get an eternity of pain and loneliness beyond description. That's the "default" deal we have. And God is justified in that deal for two reasons. First, in ourselves we carry the defaced and deformed image of God as a result of the fall. God finds this deformed image worthy of judgment and condemnation. Secondly, as a result of the fall we freely choose sin and selfishness over obedience and love, and so God justly condemns us for our actions as well.

At the same time God is also loving and merciful. He, of his own initiative and not because of any merit in us, provided a way of escape from this sad condition. He sent his own Son, born of the virgin, to live the perfect life we could not and bear the eternal punishment we were due as a substitute for any and all who repent of their sins and trust in Christ alone for salvation. He offers peace and forgiveness in this life and eternal happiness in his presence in the hereafter. What does he require of you? Look to him for life. "That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." "For whoever will call upon the name of the Lord will be saved" (Rom 10: 9, 13, NASB).

So will you stick with the deal you already have or take the free offer of mercy God extends? Where will you stand?

Hearing the Word

2010-01-09T10:16:00.000-06:00

In Romans 10: 17 Paul says, "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." In our highly literate society, where reading is prized above all else (it seems), we've forgotten how to listen to the word. We do word studies, read commentaries, and some of us learn to study the Scriptures in Greek and Hebrew. We read and analyze the text ad infinitum. But do we hear the text? Can listening to the Bible bring insights that reading may overlook due to mental/input familiarity? I wonder.

So this year I'm not reading my Bible through. I'm hearing my Bible through. Some time back we bought the entire Bible on CD-ROM in the NIV. Now, I know that for serious study the NIV is not the best version to use. I prefer something more literal, like the New American Standard Bible or the English Standard Version; however, I don't have either of those in audio edition, and I've not worked through the NIV in several years. So I'm listening to the Scriptures every day. I'm getting some Old Testament and some New Testament. Right now, as might be expected, I'm working through Genesis and Matthew.

Here are my initial thoughts. The Bible was originally intended to be heard. In the days in which the biblical writers were living most people couldn't read and access to written materials was limited due to the expense involved in producing them. For thousands of years God's people listened as a handful of learned people read the text or recite it from memory. Listening to the Bible is a discipline that has to be learned. You don't just pick it up. I'm finding that in our day learning just to sit and listen takes a lot of effort. But this morning as I listened to the Sermon on the Mount I noticed things I'd never noticed before. Chapter 5: 1--20 is a kind of prologue to the rest of the message, and introduction if you will. The rest of chapter five is "stitched" together by means of the phrase "You have heard" (NASB). These become the connecting seams that hold that section together. In reading I never noticed that. It took hearing the text for me recognize the connecting flow of the Sermon at this point.

Try listening to the Bible and see what God shows you. You might find it challenging at first, but I thing you'll find it reward in the end.

On the Lighter Side

2009-12-28T12:41:00.000-06:00

I love getting books as gifts. This year for Christmas I got a book by one of my favorite authors--Johnny Hart. The book, Growing Gold with B. C.: A 50 Year Celebration. Now, if you're like me and you've been a fan of B.C. for years, this book is something you need to get. It's not a comprehensive collection of all the B. C. strips. It is a good representative sampling of some of Hart's best work.

I got hooked on B. C. way back in high school. My piano/voice instructor's wife was a distant cousin of Johnny Hart, and they always had copies of B. C. and Wizard of Id on the coffee table. I would go early just to read the comic books while a school classmate had her lesson.

I've finished reading the book already. In it I found B .C. strips going back to the beginning of B. C. in the late 1950s. I saw B.C.'s character development and presentation from a short, fat cave man to the taller, somewhat leaner version we all know today. What I found most interesting was Hart's own testimony of overcoming hurdles to breaking into syndicated comic strip work, the inspiration he got from Peanuts, and the way he chose his main characters for the strip (turns out most are friends or relatives).

So what's missing? Well, Hart's classic Christmas and Easter strips are missing, and I wish they weren't. Hart has a way of sharing the gospel with his readers that is engaging, thought-provoking, and winsome. He doesn't preach at you with his Christian vignettes, but he makes you think about the message of Christ. I remember many years ago he had a Good Friday strip that my wife found quite disturbing. I told her to be patient, and wait for the Easter strip--that it would be okay. It was better than okay. Hart knocked it out of the park.

May we all be so gifted as to find winsome ways to take a positive stand for Christ.

A Christmas Meditation

2009-12-25T19:48:00.000-06:00

Christmas day is almost done as I sit down to write. Christmas Eve was a late night as we filled the stockings and finally got to sleep after midnight. Christmas morning started at 5:30 when I found my oldest up with her watercolor set making last minute stocking stuffers for me and her mother.

By seven we were working on breakfast and getting everyone out of bed. At breakfast we read the Christmas story from Luke's Gospel, then we went to the living room to sing Christmas carols before getting into the gifts. The hardest thing about Christmas is keeping the incarnation of God in the person of Christ at the center of it. Many churches no longer have Christmas or Christmas Eve services. The focus is on gifts and food for so many people. For me Christmas is another opportunity to press the claims of the Gospel on my children and urge them to come to Christ. Today I spoke of the inn which had no room for a late-term pregnant mother and her traveling husband, and I raised the question, "Is there room in your heart for Christ?"

Think about it. The very one who created all things came to his creation only to be told, "No Vacancy!" when he arrived. John put it this way: "He came unto his own, and his own received him not." (John 1: 11). Did Christ find a place in your heart, your home, your family at Christmas this year? Or was he crowded out by all the gifts, food, parades, and frivolity that have become part and parcel of the season? Did you take a stand for Christ this Christmas?

Ethics, Ecology, and Evangelicalism

2009-12-10T09:33:00.000-06:00

In today's world ethics has been redefined from traditional morals about how you and I treat one another as human beings to how we treat the planet we live on. Everything is about going "green". My Boy Scout Council has set a goal to become a "green" council. We have a supplier that produces cups, plates, utensils, and trash bags out of biodegradable corn starch. They're really amazing, too, unless you have a corn intolerance. I'm not sure if enough of the corn would leach into food to become an issue, but I'm not willing to try it on my daughter who is very corn intolerant. But I love using the stuff myself. I also play guitar. And guitars are made of, well, wood, for the most part. And they're not just made of any old wood. Special woods are used, some from exotic places like Africa, India, or South America and Indonesia. My acoustic guitars are made by Walden (http://www.waldenguitars.com), and I love them. They are well made and affordable. Well, Walden has just announced a new "green" guitar in the name of ecological ethics--the Madera line. It's a beautiful instrument made of excellent woods from a variety of places. What's unique is not the wood itself but the suppliers. Apparently the suppliers for these woods are certified as participating in efforts to sustain the forests, presumably by replanting trees for the ones they harvest for guitar production. It's a great idea, and I applaud Walden for being involved in this. It will ensure that guitar players for generations to come will be able to buy and enjoy fine instruments crafted from the best woods.

Having said all of that, the question comes to mind, is ecology an ethical issue? If it is, how should believers respond to ecological issues?

First, I do believe that ecological issues are ethical issues. How we treat the planet says something about how seriously we take our God-given stewardship of it (see Gen 1: 26--28). Secondly, believers should not respond to ecological issues in the same way as many others are responding. Much of the talk of ecological ethics today is rooted in the worship of "mother earth". Everything from questions about global warming (and there are a lot more questions now than answers in the wake of "Climategate") to whether I should burn charcoal in my grill to cook my deer steaks seems to be eco-ethical question these days (including whether I should have shot bambi to begin with).

How we treat the planet impacts how we treat each other. We do want to keep our planet in a healthy condition, because this is the only home we have until Christ returns. As believers you and I should demonstrate good and responsible uses of the natural resources we have. Every renewable resource should be maintained. If we drop a tree to make a guitar, another should be planted to replace it (foresters have a formula for how many trees should be planted--glad I don't have to keep up with that). We shouldn't pour paint thinner and other contaminants down storm drains or onto soil to contaminate ground water supplies. In short, we shouldn't just trash our planet. On the other hand, we shouldn't make everything here so "sacred" that we can't hunt or fish or harvest trees. We shouldn't worship the ground we walk on. God created all of this, and he will sustain it to the fulfillment of his purpose for human history, which will culminate in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God is the one we should fear and worship. We should care for the earth because he has commanded it. Our exercise of ecological ethics should be an extension of our worship of God and appreciation of all the good things he has made. So take a stand for a Christian perspective on ecological issues and don't get caught up in the frenzy of an unbelieving world that makes ecology into a kind of religion in its own right.

Saint Nicholas vs. Santa Claus

2009-12-09T10:41:00.000-06:00

With Christmas always comes the wonder of "Santa Claus", that jolly old bearded man in the red suit with the reindeer and sleigh and the bag of goodies. Oh, and let's not forget the elves who work in his shop building toys all year long. Personally, I'm not a fan of telling kids about "Santa Claus", and here's why. We tell them about both Santa Claus and the baby Jesus side by side. They grow up to find out Santa isn't real, and will that lead them to question whether Jesus is real, too? It's just a question.

But, I love Saint Nicholas. Not the fictionalized St. Nick but the real Saint Nicholas. Yes, he really lived. This morning I watched with my kids a Veggie Tales video that sort of tells the story of the real Saint Nicholas. I say "sort of" because the wonderful people at Veggie Tales always take some creative license to make the stories more readily understandable for kids, but they keep the essential facts in place. It's not a criticism, just an observation. I love Veggie Tales as much as any kid.

So who was Saint Nicholas? He was a bishop who lived in the Roman Empire during the last great persecution and into the early years of Constantine's reign and the legalization of Christianity. He lived in the Eastern part of the Empire, never saw the north pole, and was probably never fat. You can see an icon of Saint Nicholas at http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/icons/data/nikola.gif that represents how he is often viewed in the Orthodox Church. Saint Nicholas was a man of character and generosity. He endured persecution for the faith and was beaten so badly that his body appeared bruised for the rest of his life. He came from a wealthy family, and as a bishop he used his wealth to help the poor. One story relates how he dropped gold coins into the stockings of three poor sisters to provide a dowry for them so that they could marry. This the beginnings of the "stockings" legend related to Saint Nicholas. Another story relates that he was one of the 318 bishops at Nicaea in 325, and that he rose up in anger at the Arian heresy and struck an Arian bishop to the floor with his fist. Saint Nicholas was a man who was not afraid to take a stand for Christ and the gospel. He was not afraid to spend his wealth to help the poor. He was a respected bishop of unquestioned character and generosity.

May we all be more like Saint Nicholas--standing firm for the gospel with generous hearts toward the poor. The world needs to see what we stand for.

Christmas Caroling

2009-12-08T08:04:00.003-06:00

One of the great delights of the Christmas season for me is the music. I love Christmas carols. I'm not talking about "Santa" songs. I'm talking about the songs that celebrate the incarnation of God in the person of Jesus Christ. These songs, for the most part, were written to be sung, not played on an instrument. They are vocal arrangements. I love Handel's Messiah, and not just the "Hallelujah Chorus" but the whole thing. My favorites, though, are those minor key songs like "O Come, O Come Emmanuel" and "What Child is This?" Recently I've fallen in love with the minor key harmonies of "One Small Child". Shades Mountain Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, has an excellent performance of this great song by David Meece at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtHQA9ThUwk&feature=related

Other songs that I love from Christmas include "O Little Town of Bethlehem", "Stille Nacht" (I prefer the German to the English), and of course, "O Come, All Ye Faithful". "I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day" is the first Christmas song I ever played by sight-reading at the piano, so it has special place in my heart, too. There are so many wonderful songs about the birth of our Lord that I love to sing.

But why should this be so central to my Christmas? It is because I grew up in a home of music, and Christmas was doubly so. Three of my dad's four sisters played piano. And most of us lived within 100 miles of each other. Christmas was a time for family to get together. Yes, we'd eat, but mostly we'd gather around the piano. One of my dad's sisters would play, and we'd sing Christmas carols. Most of us read music (some read only shape notes, but that was okay since most of our books were shape note books), so we had plenty of harmony. Music was a central part of my childhood Christmas experience. But today I see the music as a key way of transmitting the gospel. Many people who do not regularly attend church will listen to Christmas carols. Keep the caroling tradition alive. Maybe get some friends together and go caroling through your neighborhood this Christmas. Think of it as another way to take a stand for Christ and remind everyone that HE is the reason for the season.

Christmas Interrupted

2009-12-07T09:51:00.003-06:00

Well, my Christmas spirit has been interrupted by something a friend pointed out to me via Facebook. Then I saw a news story about it at www.onenewsnow.com. It's appeared on MSNBC, too, I think. I feel I need to address this issue.

Led by Andy Schlafly, son of the anti-feminist leader, Phyllis Schlafly, a group of amateur Bible scholars (and I emphasize "amateur" while using "scholar" loosely) have set out to create a modern Bible translation free of the "liberal" biases they see in translations today. They read liberalism into such famous passages as Jesus' prayer for his executioners in Luke 23: 34 (which appears in the KJV--I bet there were some liberals on that translation team) and Jesus' forgiving the woman taken in adultery (another text in the KJV). Acts 2: 44 is right out as it clearly endorses socialism, so it must be retranslated in a way that makes no sense of the rest of the Acts narrative that culminates in chapter 5 with the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira. You start to get the idea of why I emphasize "amateur" and use "scholar" loosely.

This project is free and anyone can contribute. It's a wiki project, similar to wikipedia. No advanced competency in the languages or textual criticism is required. There seems to be an emphasis on the ability to spot deceptive liberal wordings in the text and correct them with "powerful conservative terms" (http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project). This is so obviously an agenda driven translation project as should require no rebuttal, but the press had latched on to this thing and given it legs with its reporting.

I am not going to address the particulars of the project. Rather, I want to say a word about the textual transmission of the Bible, textual criticism, and translation theory. But I must qualify all that I say with the caveat that, on this, I am an amateur, too. My specialty is Church History, not biblical studies, and while I've studied Greek, Hebrew, and Latin for my degrees, I'm by no means a scholar in those fields.

When you pick up a Bible, you hold in your hands the culmination of thousands of years of work, from the writing of the "autographs", the originals penned by the biblical authors, to the centuries of hand-written copies, the translation work of scholars through the ages, and much careful study. No book is as closely proof-read by publishers as is the Bible. Why? Because so many of us consider it to be the very word of God written. Therefore it is treated with special reverence and care.

When biblical scholars work on what is called a "critical" edition of the Greek New Testament or the Hebrew Bible they have certain guidelines they follow to sort through a variety of "textual variants", minor discrepancies that appear here and there in the text as a result of centuries of hand-copying by scribes in various circumstances. They do this, not to include or eliminate specific readings because of an agenda, but to determine what was most likely the original wording of the text as it appeared in the autographs. With regard to the New Testament, scholars have over 5,000 manuscripts to work with, and the level of certainty is above 99% recovery of the original text. Our level of confidence in the Hebrew text is similarly high, though I don't have an exact figure for that.

Next comes the matter of translation. This is where there is more potential for bias. There is a saying among translators: Traduttore traditore--"the translator is a traitor." What this means is that no translation from one language to another is ever entirely complete. Something is lost or added in every translation attempt. The question is, are there intentional changes taking place due to translator bias? Has translator bias impacted some translations? Yes. Still, most of the popular translations today (I'm not speaking of paraphrases, which are a separate issue) seek to remain faithful to the original thought or wording of the Greek and Hebrew texts. Given that, you can have confidence that the Bible you own, whether it is a King James Version, New American Standard, New International Version, or English Standard Version (or some other--there are so many today) is substantially the Word of God written and is reliable to communicate to you God's message of redemption.

Here a quote from the 18th century English Baptist leader John Gill is in order: "The Scriptures in our English translation, have been blessed of God, either by reading them in [the original], or by explaining them according to it, for the conversion, comfort, and edification of thousands and thousands. And the same may be said of all others, so far as they agree with the original, that they are the rule of faith and practice, and alike useful" (Body of Divinity, Baptist Standard Bearer ed., 13b).

Anticipating Christmas

2009-12-03T07:20:00.003-06:00

An oft recurring theme in the New Testament is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies in the life of Jesus. Indeed, Jesus said that the Old Testament spoke of him. Think for a minute what life would be like in a land without Christmas, without the coming of the Christ. Try to imagine yourself living before Christ came. Now, if you were an Israelite with some familiarity with the Hebrew Scriptures, you would know that God had promised to send a Messiah. You might not be entirely sure what kind of Messiah he would be, but you would have the hope that God would send someone from the lineage of King David to be a Deliverer. But if you were a Gentile you would likely know nothing of this hope. What would that be like?

One of the great Old Testament promises referred to in the New Testament is Psalm 2, a royal psalm. Scholars believe this psalm may have been used during the installation service of a new king in Israel. But the New Testament sees in this psalm a prophecy of the One King promised to come from David fulfilled in Jesus.

"As for me, I have set my King
on Zion, my holy hill.
I will tell of the decree:
The LORD said to me, 'You are my
Son;
today I have begotten you" (Ps 2:6--7, ESV).

In the coming of each of the Davidic kings the promise of the One King was carried forward. And even when the kingdom fell due to sin, the line of kings, the line of descendants from David remained unbroken until the coming of Jesus. In Jesus the promise of an everlasting kingdom and an everlasting King has been fulfilled. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords. Here is the good news of Christmas. The King has come. Take a stand. Spread the good word.

More about Christmas

2009-12-01T09:26:00.002-06:00

The thread of redemption for a fallen humanity runs throughout the Old Testament. We saw it yesterday in Genesis 3: 15. Walter Kaiser, in his book, Toward an Old Testament Theology, zeroed in on the concept of the promised "seed" as the seam that ties the Old Testament together. This promise, as we have seen, begins in Genesis 3: 15, but it certainly doesn't stop there. Early in Genesis several "threats" appear to this promise. The first threat comes with the murder of Abel, but the line of Seth is the line through whom seed will come. Then the flood threatens all of humanity, but from the line of Seth, Noah finds favor with God, and he and his family are spared. From the family of Noah the focus narrows to the line of Shem, and from Shem to the sons of Eber (father of the Hebrews). In the line of Eber, Abraham "the Hebrew" is chosen, and the promised seed again becomes a dominant theme.

Abraham is given the promise that "in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed" (Gen 12: 3, ESV), and in Galatians 3: 15--19 Paul says that God's promise to Abraham should be interpreted as Christ being the promised "seed" who would bring salvation to both Jews and Gentiles alike.

Christmas reminds of in a very concentrated way of the fulfillment of the promise of salvation. In that way it shows us the unfailing faithfulness of God. If God was faithful to Eve and to Abraham to keep his promise for the giving of his Son as our Redeemer, will he not also be faithful to sustain and keep us in his Son, and to send his Son to claim us for himself at the last day? Christmas should remind us that he who came the first time will come again because God is faithful. This is good news. Spread the word.

Standing Up For Christmas

2009-11-30T12:49:00.002-06:00

Yesterday was the first Sunday of Advent. That may not resonate with a lot of my fellow Baptists, for whom the liturgical calendar means little beyond actually celebrating Christmas and Easter. Still, in this day of politically correct jargon, believers need to stand up for the uniqueness of Christmas amid all the other festivities of the winter season. Some of the festivities are pure fabrications intended to be substitutes for Christmas. Others are legitimate religious holidays rooted in other religious belief systems. Christians can respect all of these while at the same time making a case for Christmas.

Christmas celebrates the fulfillment of promises strung throughout the Hebrew Bible regarding the coming of a God-sent deliverer for a lost humanity. The first such promise occurs in Genesis 3: 15, where God promises Eve that her seed will "crush the serpent's head." No sooner had the fall occurred than God promised a remedy who would come from the seed of a woman (not a man, a woman). Clearly, there is an implication here of a virgin born Chosen One sent from God to deliver fallen humanity.

Christmas is a joyous celebration precisely because it embodies this good news, this gospel, of the coming of the Deliverer. Wish everyone you see a merry Christmas, and do so from your heart. In the process look for opportunities to explain to people the real significance of Christmas--the good news that God has sent his Deliverer, and that they may find deliverance from sin through him.

Touching Lives Through Wrong Numbers

2009-11-27T20:29:00.003-06:00

I've had an interesting journey with my cell phone of late. Some months ago a person got a new cell phone number almost identical to mine. This person mis-memorized her number and has given my number out to everyone from her doctor to her friends. I know way too much about her personal life. At first it was irritating, but I've learned to take it in stride. I've even begun to build a kind of friendship with one of her friends. When she calls, expecting to get her friend and realizes that again she has dialed the wrong number, I take a minute to ask how she's doing. We chat briefly. Today we talked about our Thanksgiving meals and eating too much, and I wished her a merry Christmas. It's not much, but if it brings a little joy to her life I can spare a few cell minutes. It gives me a chance to pass on a little of the grace I've found in Christ. My family is rather entertained by the whole thing now.

What do you do with wrong numbers? Do you see every encounter as something intended by God as an opportunity to touch a life? Are there really any wrong numbers? Use those "happenstances" to spread God's love to others and be a channel of grace. Take a stand and be a blessing.

Still Giving Thanks

2009-11-25T08:12:00.003-06:00

Well, it's the day before Thanksgiving Day. This will probably be my last blog of the week. I have more things to be thankful for, and I hope you do, too.

I've had some absolutely wonderful experiences and opportunities in 2009. Early in the year God showed us that our work at one church was done and it was time to go elsewhere. God has provided another wonderful church home for our family where I get to teach a class and pretend I can actually play a guitar (mostly I beat on one, sort of in rhythm and in the right key). God has given me the opportunity through my work as an adult Scout leader to build a lot of wonderful relationships, but the ones I'm most mindful of at this moment are the guys in my Wood Badge Patrol (SR 982 Antelope Patrol). What a great group of men. They are godly and dedicated to making a difference in the world through touching the lives of youth in Scouting. I'm thankful also for the Wood Badge experience. Our entire troop seems to have been brought together providentially, and our Scoutmaster made the entire event one which he had bathed in prayer.

I'm also thankful for a week spent this summer at Philmont Scout Ranch for "Bringing Youth to Christ through Baptist Scouting Ministry". During that week I spent time with the leadership of the Association of Baptists for Scouting, and somehow I got elected to office myself. I guess I don't have enough to do.

I'm thankful for having been raised in a Christian home. Although the Lord took my father when I was in 8th grade, my mother is still with us, now 84 years young and doing well. I have two wonderful brothers and a sister still living. God bless them all.

Take some time today and tomorrow to make a list of things you are thankful for and give God the thanks for all his wonderful benefits to you. "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change" (James 1: 17 ESV).

Giving Thanks

2009-11-24T08:13:00.003-06:00

What are you thankful for? How often do you sit down and really ponder the blessings you enjoy--small and great--in this land of ours? Personally, I don't do it enough. And I think that all the clamor on the part of many for the government to do more for us is a tacit admission that we have grown ungrateful for what we do have. Some recently have begun to speak of the U. S. Constitution as comprising "negative rights", by which they mean that it says what the government does not have the right to do. And they find a problem with that. Personally, I like it that way. The less the government can do for me, the less it can do to me. So for the individual and the states, limitations on the federal power constitutes positive rights--more freedoms for you and me to pursue what the writers of the Declaration of Independence sought: "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

But, back to what I'm thankful for today. I'm thankful for a nice house to live in, located in a nice, quiet subdivision. I'm thankful for hot and cold running water, heat in the winter and air conditioning in the summer. I'm thankful for good transportation (all paid for). I'm thankful for my job, which God has provided for me that allows me to afford all these things and time with my family. I'm thankful for the Boy Scouts of America and the American Heritage Girls--youth organizations that help me instill in my children the values I believe are important to their becoming good citizens and followers of Christ.

Most importantly, I'm thankful for the relationships in my life. I'm thankful for my wife. God has given me the most wonderful wife in the world. I can't imagine life without her. I'm thankful for my children. They are a blessing to me everyday. I'm thankful that one has heard and answered the call of salvation, and I'm hopeful that the others will, too, in the course of time. I'm thankful for oh, so many good friends and a wonderful church in which to serve the Lord. But more than any other relationship, I'm thankful for my relationship with God through Jesus Christ. It was God who looked down through the stream of time, saw me in my sin and rebellion, and loved me anyway. He chose, freely, to send his Son to die on the cross for my sins. He chose, freely, to send his Holy Spirit to convict me and convert me, drawing me to himself by his grace. He chose to set those influences in my life that he used to awaken me to my lost condition. He has claimed me for his own and conquered me for himself. It is solely by his grace that I am what I am. I can claim no credit for myself, for left to myself I would be a loathsome, sinful wretch of a man given to every unclean appetite. But praise be to God he did not leave me like that. He saved me and has called and equipped me to take a stand. So my deepest gratitude is to God for all the blessings I enjoy, but most especially for my salvation.

Giving Thanks this Week

2009-11-23T07:32:00.002-06:00

Well, I'm glad to be home from my trip the Evangelical Theological Society's sixty-first annual conference. The shortage of blogs last week was due to poor internet access at the premier hotel hosting the event. I tried twice to post blogs only to have them get lost in cyber-space and gave up.

So I'm thankful that I was kept safe and brought home from the trip. There are so many things to be thankful for during this week when we will celebrate national Thanksgiving Day. Among the things to be thankful for is that we live in a nation that was established on what could broadly be termed Christian principles, though those have fallen by the wayside in the last fifty plus years. Take notice, for instance, of this quote from President Washington's Inaugural Address of 1789: "we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained" (A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789--1897, vol. 1, 53). In his first Inaugural Address, Washington noted throughout the hand of Divine Providence in establishing the United States. Let us not forget during this week of food, football, and hunting, that the original intent of this celebration was to show gratitude to God for his blessings on this nation and our lives. Let us also be mindful of the need to support and maintain biblical morality in the public square and our private lives.

Bearing in mind Washington's comments on the "eternal rules of order and right" I would refer the reader at this critical point in our nation's history to the Manhattan Declaration (http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/) as an affirmation of commitment to maintain Christian standards of conduct in the face of a government now gone astray from its roots. Be thankful you still have the right to protest and stand for what is right.

Holidays

2009-11-17T07:07:00.002-06:00

Well, it's happened. The "holiday season" is rolling around again. When I was a kid the stores put out the Halloween stuff around Labor Day, and the Thanksgiving stuff the day after Halloween. Then the Christmas stuff came out the day after Thanksgiving. Now Christmas stuff shows up in September along side Halloween and Thanksgiving decor barely gets shelf space. Furthermore, there's the whole "Happy Holidays" greeting push so as not to offend anyone. Please! We still live in a free country, and the U. S. Constitution gives me the right to wish anyone a Merry Christmas and to celebrate the heritage of the English Settlers who first came and laid the foundation for what was to become the United States through this wonderful holiday we call Thanksgiving.

But what about that word, "holiday". It originates from "holy day" and has as its primary reference a day off for religious observances. By extension it could also be applied to going on pilgrimage, but in England today is used of anything we, in America, call a "vacation". But, back to the idea of "holy day". Why should we treat one day more holy than another. Why should we have only one day a year when we express deep gratitude to God for his blessings? Shouldn't we do that every day? Why should there be only one day a year when we celebrate the coming of Christ into the world? Shouldn't that be a constant theme in our lives?

Of course the answer to both of those questions is "yes". Still, I find it helpful to have these special days. They give us time in the midst of life's chaos to stop and reflect more deeply on God's blessings and the gift of the incarnation. They also afford us special opportunities to show good to our neighbors and share our faith with them. During this holiday season when you are celebrating Thanksgiving and wishing others merry Christmas, be sure to include in that a word of witness to the life-changing power of God's grace. Render good service to others in the process. By so doing you'll show the positive side of Thanksgiving and Christmas, and you'll take a stand for Christ.

Being Odd for God

2009-11-16T07:33:00.002-06:00

Do you ever feel like you're an odd-ball? I do. I always have. I was a "nerd" back in the 70s in high school. Even had the pocket protector to prove it. Still, somehow I found a way to be comfortable in my own skin and build some good friendships, even with the non-nerds in my school. Throughout college I seemed to attract other odd-balls as friends. How I ended up with my wife is still a mystery to me. Must be a God-thing (we just celebrated 20 years). Anyway, it's okay, even good to be odd sometimes.

I'm leaving this week to go to New Orleans for the annual conference of the Evangelical Theological Society: Two and a half days of professional theologians reading papers to each other, a banquet dinner, and a vendor's hall with every Christian publisher you can imagine selling books that I will want to buy. I will enjoy myself and be spiritually renewed at the same time. To most people that sounds odd. I find spiritual renewal at a conference where theologians are presenting papers and debating weighty doctrinal issues. But it's part of how God has made me and prepared me to take a stand for him.

Here's the question. In what way are you odd? How does that make it possible for you to take your stand for God? Learn to be comfortable in your own skin. Embrace your uniqueness as one of God's children and let your uniqueness become a way of pointing people to God. Take a stand and be odd for God.

Stand for Compassion, Part 5

2009-11-13T08:20:00.002-06:00

In this last blog on compassion I want to address the need for compassion for our Christian wounded. Now, in many ways that could be each of us. We're all damaged goods in some sense, and we need to keep that in mind to help us maintain perspective. But what I'm mainly concerned with here is that category of wounded we often tend to treat like a horse with a broken leg. It's not pretty, and it's not a good reflection on the One who has called us to be instruments of mercy, healing, reconciliation, and grace.

So what am I talking about? I'm talking about persons who fall into grievous and public disgrace, whatever the circumstances. It could be related to finances, marital failure, or sexual immorality. It could be problems with "Bud" or "Wild Turkey". It could be a false accusation of misconduct that never gets put to rest properly. We often sweep these people aside. Oh, we let them come and occupy a pew, but we can't let them have an office in the church, no matter what kind of track record they have of demonstrated repentance. They have committed what amounts to an "unpardonable" sin in the eyes of the church.

I had a friend, now gone to be with the Lord, who, before he was saved, had a terrible drinking problem (smoked, too). God delivered him from both, and called him to preach. He spent most of his life in small churches or planting Hispanic missions. One church interviewed him, and the interview went great until they found out he was a recovering alcoholic. Never mind that he had been clean and sober for twenty years. They couldn't have a pastor who was an alcoholic, even though he was in recovery.

How does your church treat those who are the Lord's wounded? Are they second-class members or does your church look for ways to bring healing and restoration to their lives. Christ died to make them whole, too. If the ground is level at the cross, then it is level for all God's people. Work to bring recovery to God's fallen soldiers and take a stand for real compassion.

Stand for Compassion, Part 4

2009-11-12T07:11:00.002-06:00

A couple of years ago I heard about Christians in a predominantly Muslim country who refused to pray for or share Christ with their Muslim countrymen. Why? Because these Muslims has persecuted the Christians in this country for over thirteen hundred years. If these Muslims died as infidels and went to hell, then that was just fine with these professing Christians. You might be thinking, "That's horrible. Christ commanded us to love our enemies." True enough, but let me ask, are we not equally conflicted in our posture toward Muslims now that we are engaged in a war against what the press so delicately terms "Muslim extremists"?

In reality the War on Terror will not be won with bullets, warships, and fighting aircraft. It will not be won with drones and missiles. If it is to be won, it must be won one heart at a time. First, our own hearts must be won to the idea of compassion for men, women, and children bound in the darkness of Islam's fatalistic and works based idolatry. Our hearts need to melt in prayer for these people--a people to whom the Gospel came in ancient times and among whom it once flourished. God is bringing Muslims into contact with Christians in ever increasing and creative ways through mass communication and transportation. In the small town to my south my own pastor spends time at the gym every day with a Muslim, and looks for ways to share Christ with him. I had the privilege once, sitting in the airport in Charlotte, N. C., of sharing with a Pakistani who is now a U. S. citizen and a wonderful gentleman with a Catholic wife. Our hearts must be won first. Maybe as you prepare your Operation Christmas Child Shoebox, you could take just a few minutes with your family to pray for the child who will receive each box, that he or she will also receive Christ, God's gift, through your gift.

In fighting the War on Terror, not only must our own hearts be won, but also the hearts of Muslims around the world must be won. They must be won through ongoing acts of compassion. CNN reports that a Christian in Pakistan saved the lives of many Muslim women by blocking a suicide bomber from entering a crowded school cafeteria (read the story at http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/11/11/pakistan.hero/). In ancient Rome the Christians softened the hearts of their persecutors by their willingness to love their enemies in the face of overwhelming violence. On the one hand, as citizens, we must fight to protect our nation. But on the other we must send more missionaries, pray harder, and give more sacrificially to show love for Muslims here in the U. S. and around the world. Pray that God will open their hearts to the Gospel. If you can afford it, take your vacation to a Muslim country and help out struggling Christians there. There are any number of missions agencies that have a long list of temporary needs and assignments. It will change your life. And by the grace of God, it may change the lives of people living in darkness and bondage. Do something the world views as radical as you take a stand for compassion.

A Stand for Compassion, Part 3

2009-11-11T06:31:00.002-06:00

I had the great privilege for three years of working with Seven Springs Baptist Church (http://www.sevenspringschurch.net), and one thing that is central to the ministry of Seven Springs Church is working with people who many may see as hard luck cases, for lack of a better word. I saw something extraordinary, too. I saw a businessman who was not connected with our church come forward and say, "I'd like to put the government out of the social ministry business." And he put his money where his mouth was. He came to several churches and offered to help them help the needy. He would supply the financial resources and the churches would administer them. Here was a man whom God had blessed with wealth and a heart of compassion. It was a delight to work with him.

What is needed is more men and women like him and his team. We would not need a "welfare state" in the U. S. if the churches would do what they're supposed to do and care for the sick, the poor, the orphans and widows. Most of the time we don't even provide for our own widows in our own congregations. Never mind helping those on the outside. And why is it that we're that way? I think part of it is that when theological liberals like Walter Rauschenbusch promoted social action as the gospel many conservatives ran from social activism for fear of being associated with the Social Gospel. In effect they threw out the baby with the bath. In a few places today Evangelical churches are waking up to the real need to minister to the needy.

We need to be more effective in working with drug addicts, helping people recover from failed marriages, sexual addictions, and training people to enter the workforce. Churches should be a place where people who need a basic education can come for free and learn how to read and write and do basic math. Why aren't our church buildings, which often sit empty for hours and hours each week, used to provide basic life skills classes, GED courses, and parenting classes? Remember, compassion is something you show by doing something about the situation people are living in. Let's rise up and take a stand for compassion by doing more with our time and our facilities to help people who are genuinely in need, and at the same time let's show them Christ, the One who gave everything that they might live.

Stand for Compassion, Part 2

2009-11-10T08:09:00.003-06:00

In writing today's blog I'm writing to myself as much as to anyone else. I recently took a friend's word for granted and posted something on Facebook related to John Stossell leaving ABC that contained both truth and error because I got caught up in the heat of the moment, trusted a friend, and didn't do due diligence. Something in our nature causes us to see opponents as enemies--bad guys (and of course, we're always the good guys, at least in our eyes). In reality we should not see every opponent as an enemy. Sometimes an opponent is simply someone who differs from us in some point of belief or practice. But they enemy or opponent, we, as Christians, should treat them with the same compassion. Somehow we forget that in the heat of political debates. Right now there is a major political debate in the United States over whether we will remain a free republic that values and honors the rights of the people and the states or become a socialist state where everything is made subservient to a centralized government. To be sure, such a transformation would not be done all at once. How could it? But the general direction of our federal government has been in this direction since the administration of Franklin Roosevelt.

My purpose here is not to debate the political developments themselves but to look at how Christians should demonstrate compassion toward their political opponents in this kind of cultural environment. The political left stands against virtually everything that most Evangelicals believe is both biblical and right. They stand against traditional marriage. They stand against the rights of parents to discipline their children and raise them as they see fit. They stand against life, preferring the culture of death with their support of euthanasia and abortion. They stand against smaller, limited government and individual freedom. They stand against the full and free public exercise of religion, at least traditional Christianity. How ought Christians respond to this?

Jesus commanded us to love our enemies, as was noted in yesterday's blog. Paul, in 1 Timothy 2: 2 enjoined the believers of his day to pray for the king. Who was the king? He was a Roman emperor and a pagan. He was an enemy of the faith. Christians need to engage their human enemies first by praying for them, realizing that those who oppose the faith are under the control of the true Enemy from whom they need to be set free. Pray first that God will open their eyes to the truth. Pray that God's will for the nation will prevail over the evil intentions of sinful men. Then, with genuine and unselfish love engage them in informed and meaningful debate on the issues of the day, but always do so with respect. Never engage them in a vindictive spirit. Above all remember that they are fallen human beings in need of God's mercy and grace every bit as much as you are. Only God's grace separates you from them. Pray that God's grace will bring them to where you are. Pray for their conversion and for God to open their eyes. In so doing you will take a stand for genuine Christian compassion.

Stand for Christian Compassion

2009-11-09T07:40:00.002-06:00

How do you respond to someone who maliciously attacks you? How do you respond to someone you believe is a danger or threat to society? How do you respond to a drug addict or someone addicted to pornography or gambling? Most of us, sadly, do not respond to these situations and persons in a way that is biblical. Often we strike back at those who hurt us. Those whom we see as a threat to society we want to see removed from power or locked up, and we leave it at that. In short, we fall victim ourselves to a judgmental attitude. But how ought we to respond?

Jesus said, "Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you" (Matt 5: 44, ESV). Where does Christian compassion begin? How can you and I find it in ourselves to model before the world the heart of God toward the lost and enslaved in sin a winsome compassion that draws them to Christ?

Many years ago, while preparing a sermon on John 11: 35, "Jesus wept," I came across a definition of compassion somewhere that went like this: "Pity moved to action." It's one thing to pity someone in a terrible plight. It's another to do something about it. Down here in the South we often say "Bless his heart," which is just another way of saying "poor thing". It's an expression of pity. But it's not compassionate. This week I'm going to look at ways you and I can show compassion to those who would seek to do us harm and those who are trapped in bondage and need the liberty that only Christ can give. I'm going to look at ways to see others as Christ sees them and as he saw us in our need of salvation. I'm going to look at ways to treat others as Christ treated us and continues to treat us--with undeserved love. This week I want to explore what it means to stand for compassion--pity moved to action.

Take a Stand for True Liberty, Part 5

2009-11-06T07:16:00.002-06:00

So what makes liberty work is the disciplined, responsible exercise of freedom. Why is that so hard for us? It requires a Christian worldview for that kind of liberty to flourish. Without the proper worldview liberty will degenerate into the selfish, me centered licentiousness we are seeing in American society today.

We're having trouble maintaining liberty today and tottering on the brink of totalitarianism precisely because we, as a nation, have lost our moral compass. We've given up the biblical concept of human sinfulness that must be curbed with God-ordained laws because they seem to us to be restrictive to our desires, and we've exchanged it for a concept that says we're all moving toward becoming better and better people by virtue of some kind of biological and social evolution. The problem is that evolution has no basis for an objective ethic beyond what benefits the self. This reinforces a certain selfish tendency in our fallen human nature and feeds the further deterioration of the fabric of society. When that happens people begin to feel insecure, and history is replete with stories of whole nations selling themselves into servitude in exchange for security.

What has been called the "American Experiment" is on the verge of failure because our nation's political and intellectual leaders in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries cut us loose from the worldview that made that experiment viable. For the most part our churches are so compromised and infected with the worldview of our surrounding society that we're not even in a position to try to call the nation back. What is needed is a repentance in the churches on a massive scale. God's people must forsake every vestige of the prevailing worldview and live their lives before God and the world as a counter-cultural revolution of devotion to him and his will before we can even begin to think of calling the nation back. "Do not be conformed to the world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect" (Rom 12: 2, ESV). Forsake the selfish way of "me" first and embrace God's way as revealed in the Bible and take a stand for true liberty.

Take a Stand for True Liberty, Part 4

2009-11-05T07:37:00.002-06:00

If the difference between liberty and freedom is the difference between disciplined responsibility and licentiousness, then how can Christians tap in and reinforce disciplined responsibility in their own lives and in the lives of their children?

Several great organizations are available for Christians to become involved with that will help. Of course, you will always want to start with a solid, Bible believing and Christ following church. I'm not talking about a group of people who get together and "play" church on Sunday with a little singing, a little prayer, and a vacuous sermon devoid of any real meat. I'm talking about a church that takes discipleship seriously and lives the Great Commission as well as the Great Commandment. If your church isn't focused on the glory of God through worship, evangelism, and spiritual growth, then become an agent of change in the place where God has planted you or look for another church. The kind of church that makes a difference is a church that has a heart for God and humanity. It is a church where church discipline matters. At the same time, it is a church that is not legalistic but compassionate, helping fallen human beings become more Christlike.

Another great place to plug in is with the Boy Scouts of America. Here is an organization that focuses on duty to God and country, others, and one's self. The BSA recognizes, along with its founder, Lord Baden-Powell, that it is impossible to instill moral virtue in young people without a belief in God. What is needed is more committed Christians involved in Boy Scouts, bringing a Christian perspective to the Scouting experiences of young people. Yes, there is a place for young ladies in Scouting. The BSA has two organizations that are coed, Venturing Crews and Explorer Scouts. For more information on how you can be involved contact your local Scout council (to find your local council visit http://www.scouting.org). You may also want to visit the Association of Baptists for Scouting website at http://www.baptistscouters.org.

Yet another great organization just for young ladies is the American Heritage Girls. This organization, which now has a formal relationship with the Boy Scouts of America, is a Christian organization intent on raising up young women of virtue, trained in traditional family values and a Christian worldview. AHG provides programming for girls from kindergarten through senior high school. For more information about AHG visit http://www.ahgonline.org.

Take a Stand for True Liberty, Part 3

2009-11-04T08:33:00.003-06:00

Yesterday I wrote about the importance, the necessity of legislating morality. Today I want to address the issue of taking responsibility. Freedom without responsibility is not liberty. It is license. What seems to be lacking most in our culture today in regard to personal conduct is a sense of moral responsibility for our choices and our actions. Everyone is looking for someone else to blame for why he or she did this or that. If you can't find someone to blame, then simply say, "It's none of your business what I do." At any rate the sense of personal responsibility, of accepting the consequences for our actions, seems lost on people today.

Responsibility requires discipline, and discipline is something we don't like. Discipline means curbing our natural desires and wants for the good of others around us. Our society has been told for a generation or more that you can "have it your way." It is the mantra of advertising. It was the choice method of child-rearing for a generation. Negotiate with that child. Work out a deal. The harsh reality is that actions have consequences. If you raise a generation of undisciplined children you will reap an adult generation of undisciplined whiners and cheats. And that is what seems to have happened in our nation. Our whole society has become dysfunctional as a result of abandoning time proven methods of rearing children in a way that built an orderly, cohesive society.

It is time for Christians to get back to fundamentals for living. The first thing that needs to be stressed is moral responsibility for one's actions. Churches need to hold members accountable when they sin or imbibe heresy. Parents need to discipline children and teach them the benefits of hard work, solid study, and careful thinking. Christians need to do more than believe the right things. We need to do the right things, modeling for society what liberty looks like. By living responsible, disciplined lives you will take a stand for liberty.

Take a Stand for True Liberty, Part 2

2009-11-03T07:31:00.002-06:00

In our area we had a very prominent political figure and recently elected mayor convicted of sixty counts of receiving bribes and corruption. This was a Bible quoting mayor, too. I commented on it hearing the announcement on the radio in our car and my son said, "Is bribery wrong Dad?" I said, "Yes, son, it is." That set me to thinking about where our concept that bribery is wrong came from. It didn't come from Roman Law, as did much of our legal inheritance, for the ancient Romans were notorious as rulers for accepting bribes. One case in point comes from the New Testament itself, in Acts 24: 26, where Felix was noted as hoping to receive a "gift" from Paul in exchange for his freedom.

So where does the Western legal system's criminalization of bribery come from? Exodus 23: 8 says, "You shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of the just" (NASB). The notion that bribery is wrong comes to our legal system by way of the Hebrew Scriptures. The logic of it is clear: Bribery undermines trust in the legal system and makes it possible for those with means to get their way against those who have less.

Does this somehow establish a joining of "church and state" because the origins of our proscription of bribery derives from the Bible? No, because there is no implicit endorsement of any one religion in it. Is the forbidding of bribery an attempt to legislate morality? Yes. Laws, when at their best, are legislating morality, whether in the form of forbidding murder, theft, bribery, prostitution, etc. Without such laws society would descend rapidly into sheer anarchy. Christians should never shrink from engaging the foolishness of the catch-phrase of our day--"you can't legislate morality". Engage that kind of thinking with keen logic and show the logical conclusion of a society without objective moral foundations. In so doing you will take a stand for true liberty.

Take a Stand for True Liberty, Part 1

2009-11-02T07:21:00.002-06:00

Liberty and freedom are key terms in the American experience and the American consciousness. Everyone thinks they know what these words mean. Many people seem to think the words are interchangeable, too. It seems to me, however, that there is a nuanced difference between the two words. In my mind, when I think of "freedom", I think of the raw power of choice to do this or that. But when I think of "liberty" I think of the responsible use of freedom--choices bounded by a moral compass or a legal code that is supported by an objective morality. Of course, this runs counter to most current thought today. The Enlightenment helped create the American ethos of liberty and freedom, but it contained within it the germ of its own demise. Freedom without an object morality is acidic, and over time it will destroy the worldview fabric that holds a people together. The Founding Fathers of the United States understood this and understood the need for a biblical morality as a basis for social conduct. Morality, to them, was not merely a social contract to behave a certain way.

This week I want to explore the importance of a biblically informed ethic as foundational to a healthy society. This does not mean a joining of church and state, as some think. It does mean legislating morality, but that is what laws are actually intended to do anyway. Those who cry against such a thing are simply asking for social and moral anarchy and a schizophrenic legal code that makes no sense.

I will also explore ways that Christians, everyday believers, can impact society in a positive way with a biblically informed ethic. The question if not "How should we do it?" or "Can we do it?" but "Will we do it?" Will you take a stand for true liberty?

Stand for Prayer, Part 4

2009-10-29T08:19:00.003-05:00

Home from my trip, I'm still thinking about that book title, Armchair Mystic. What is it about our prayer lives as evangelicals that is missing? Could it be that we've turned into a bunch of "me" centered whining babies? Our prayers at best often amount a string of perfunctory "thank you" clauses and a very vague and general confession of sin (how often do we get into specifics like greed, pride, gossip, lust, or hate?). At worst our prayers are little more than a wish list (or for some, an attempt to invoke god-like powers to "claim" their blessing) of things we thing we need to be happy. Our prayers are a mile wide and an inch deep. Why is that?

Maybe we've missed the point of prayer. Prayer is about communion with God. We listen to God in his word, but we need to learn to "listen" to God in prayer, too. How do we do that? First we need to know God. Here I'm not talking about merely intellectual awareness or having in our minds a string of facts about God. I'm talking about contemplating who God is in prayer. This involves praying theologically informed prayers. Prayer should be the joining of heart and head in a mystical union that seeks to know God as you would know any person.

With that in mind I offer the following suggestions: (1) learn what God's attributes are; (2) learn what Scriptures support our belief in the divine attributes; and (3) pray through those attributes in contemplative prayer using Scripture to reinforce your awareness of God's greatness and his presence in your life. Let prayer become a practice of the presence of God. Now, to do this you're going to need to read a bit of theology. I would recommend something like Millard Erickson's Introducing Christian Doctrine, 2nd ed. It's concise, readable for the layman, and scripturally grounded. Learn to live life corem deo, in the face of God, and you will learn how to "pray without ceasing," for all of life will become some form of prayer--of the practice of the presence of God.

Take a Stand for Prayer, Part 3

2009-10-28T05:09:00.002-05:00

I've mentioned that prayer is a discipline. It is work. And this kind of prayer is something I believe we are unaccustomed to in our world today. Yesterday I sat on a plane and visited with a lady from New England who was reading a book by a Jesuit author entitled Armchair Mystic: Easing into Contemplative Prayer. I asked her about the book, assuming she might be a Catholic. She said the book was good. She's a divinity student, a Protestant, and the book was assigned to her in a spiritual formations class.

In reality this is an area where the Orthodox and the Roman believer may have one up on us evangelicals. The Catholic tradition understands well the power of mystery in the contemplation of God. It's not that this is not a part of our Protestant heritage. The Puritans entered into this very well. It is that it has become a lost art among evangelicals since the Enlightenment and the advance of a analytically "methodological" approach to everything. To borrow from St. Augustine, we seek to understand in order that we may believe, getting the cart before the horse.

How can you and I counter this in our own lives? First, I think it would be useful to approach the Psalms from the perspective of seeing them as meditative prayers. That, after all, is what they are. Learn to pray the psalms, and then learn to model your prayers after them. Secondly, look at other prayers in the Bible. Do the same with them as they fit your circumstances. Above all, do that with the Model Prayer in Matthew 6: 9--13. Thirdly, set aside time for prayer in a place where you will not be disturbed and focus on God, his grandeur and majesty, holiness and infinity, and learn to contemplate his perfections. Let yourself get lost in the wonder of Who God is.

Take a Stand for Prayer, Part 2

2009-10-27T05:46:00.002-05:00

Confession time. Several years ago I was the pastor of a church while I was in seminary. The church was a country church with its share of problems. I had a rough two years at that church that ended bitterly. I did a lot of things right, but I did one thing wrong. I didn't pray as I should have. I had all kinds of good excuses, too.

I was commuting daily to seminary (three hours a day). I had to study. I had one baby and one on the way. I had to visit people, both church members and prospects. I had to prepare for three services a week. There just didn't seem to be enough hours in the day.

My preaching was theologically orthodox. My pastoral care of my people was adequate. But I was spiritually dry. Why? Because my prayer life was barren, and as a result my ministry was fairly barren, too. I think I baptized three people in two years.

This morning I'm rushing to get to the airport and struggling with finding time to pray. Oh, I'll pray on the plane--just before take-off and as we land. I love to fly. I hate take-offs and landings.

Your single biggest preparation for the day is what Luther discovered--prayer. "Pray without ceasing."

Take a Stand for Prayer

2009-10-26T07:44:00.002-05:00

This week I want to think about prayer. Praying is something all Christians talk about but most do far too little. I'm talking about myself here, too. The thing is, the prayer life is a private life. There is little accountability regarding time spent in prayer. Do you know how much time your pastor spends in prayer? Does he know how much time you spend in prayer? Would you each be embarrassed if the other knew?

Martin Luther is attributed with saying, "I have so much to do that I can't get it all done if I don't spend the first four hours of each day in prayer." In our society we look at that and say, "What?" Most of us have a hard time sustaining four minutes in prayer, and then in the back of our minds are the nagging thoughts of all we have to do that's not getting done because we're just "sitting" there. And we're just sitting there because we haven't really entered into the work of prayer. Our prayers are not earnest. They are not Spirit led. They are perfunctory. Shakespeare aptly wrote in Hamlet,

"My words fly up, my thoughts remain below.
Words without thoughts never to heaven go" (Hamlet, Act III, Scene III).

Prayer is a discipline, partly of the mind, and partly of the heart. If the heart is not transformed to love God no amount of discipline of the mind can effect genuine prayer. Jonathan Edwards considered prayerlessness the tell-tale sign of a false Christian--one who is Christian in name only and not genuinely saved (see his sermon, "Hypocrites Deficient in the Duty of Prayer" in vol II of The Works of Jonathan Edwards). Is it any wonder that our pulpits lack power, our witness is weak, and our world is the state it's in? We wring our hands and work our minds looking for the "method" that will bring the desired result but fail all the while to tap the power, the only power, than can effect real change in us and in our world--the power of God through Spirit driven prayer.

Love the LORD Your God, Part 5

2009-10-23T08:41:00.002-05:00

"You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all you are and have" (Deut. 6: 5, my translation). Jesus interpreted the final words of this verse as "with all your mind, and with all your strength" (Mark 12: 30 NASB). The Hebrew of Deuteronomy 6: 5 could literally be rendered "muchness" or "all you have". The word is usually taken for "strength". Strength need not be limited, as we're prone to think, merely to physical prowess. What God calls for here is putting everything you've got into loving him--your worldly possessions, your physical body, your intellect. Quite literally, God wants everything from you. He wants it all at his disposal. The emotions and will were discussed under the heading of "heart", and the total person was discussed under the heading of "soul". What's left?

Jesus said we're to love God with our "minds" or our intellect. Your ability to think and reason should be at God's disposal. You are called to "think God's thoughts after him" as one theologian put it. You are called to the task of learning to do theology well. Everyone does theology. Some do it better than others, but even the atheist has a theology, although his is the most minimal. Whatever your field in life, whether you're a plumber or a physicist, you should put your mind at God's disposal to look for his glory in all the things you see, experience, and think about. Believers are not called to follow blindly. Christian faith is not a "leap in the dark." You are called to use your mind and think. Sanctified reason is both a blessing and a command for the believer. "Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things" (Phil 4: 8 ESV).

You are also called to love God with all you have. Everything you have, from your health to your wealth (be it little or much) is a gift from God, and you are his steward over it. He did not give it to you to squander on the trinkets of the world in what Bunyan called "Vanity Fair" (Pilgrim's Progress). Churches spend a lot of dollars building new, lavish facilities when they could be spending that same money launching a new church across town or sponsoring missionaries in a third world country. Christians buy the best and latest things even though what they have is just fine. The extra money they spend could be used to feed hungry children somewhere or support mission work. Think before you spend. Ask yourself, "Do I really need this, or is it a luxury?" "Is there some better use I could put this money to?" "Will God be glorified in this purchase?" Take a stand and love God with your thoughts and with your possessions. "Do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor 10: 31).

Love the LORD Your God, Part 4

2009-10-22T08:02:00.003-05:00

In Deuteronomy 6: 5 God commands that his people love him with all their "soul". Here the Hebrew word is nephesh and indicates the totality of one's being. The heart speaks to the inner, immaterial part of the individual, but the nephesh speaks to the whole person--what we would call body and soul. Where the heart leads the body will follow.

In practical terms this means that if you love the Lord people will know because they'll see it in how you behave. Your body will be consecrated to his purposes, not your own gratification. Jesus said it this way: "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments" (John 14: 15 NASB). The person who says he loves the Lord but lives in willful sin lies and is deceiving himself. Obedience isn't the source of salvation. It is a distinguishing mark of salvation. The one who loves the Lord will open his heart and his hand to the poor. The one who loves the Lord will speak the truth. The one who loves the Lord will be faithful to his/her marriage vows. The one who loves the Lord will keep himself/herself sexually pure outside of marriage in thought and deed. The one who loves the Lord will not envy the blessings of his neighbor. In short, the one who loves the Lord will live a life of integrity, of righteousness, fulfilling the second table of the Law just as much as the first table.

Take a stand. Demonstrate your love for God by living the life that honors him. Take up the challenge issued by Paul to strive for the upward call of God in Christ Jesus (Phil 3: 14). Make a difference where you live by demonstrating that the Christian life is a life that is different, and different in a good and positive way. "Love the LORD your God with all your soul."

Love the LORD Your God, Part 3

2009-10-21T08:27:00.004-05:00

In Deut 6: 5 Moses commands that you "love the LORD your God with all your heart." What does it mean to love God with all your heart, and what hinders people from doing that? In the Hebrew Bible the "heart" refers to "the totality of man's. . . immaterial nature" (Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 1: 466). It is more than mere emotion, as we so often think of the heart today. It is the will and one's thoughts as well. With this in mind, loving God with the whole heart means loving God as an act of the will, being devoted to God in your thoughts, and being affectionately attached to God. That sounds pretty comprehensive.

What keeps people from loving God with their whole hearts? First and foremost, I think, is self-love. Today people are encouraged more than ever to love themselves, even in popular preaching (note Robert Schuller). Whitney Houston sings about the "greatest love of all" being the ability to love yourself. But what does the Bible say about self-love? Jesus calls his followers, not to self-love but to self-denial: "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me" (Matt 16: 24 NASB). Rather than thinking that I have some good in me whereby to please God and earn his favor, I need to recognize with Paul that "nothing good dwells in me" (Rom 7: 18 NASB), and so the first step in loving God is renouncing myself, abhoring and loathing my sinful self as something worthy only of God's wrath.

Another barrier to loving God as we ought is loving the world. "Do not love the world, nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him" (1 John 2: 15 NASB). One of the biggest challenges facing Christians in the affluent West today is love of the world, or worldliness. We've become obsessed with games, television, sports, and a host of other insignificant trivialities. We entertain ourselves to the edge of moral bankruptcy. Church services in many places are either nostalgic adventures into beloved tradition or mere entertainment. Instead of putting money into missions and church planting we build bigger and more lavish buildings. The thing is, we do a lot of this in the name of God and under the pretext of honoring him. In reality we do it for human pride and show that we really don't love him.

True love for God shows itself, not in the accumulation of wealth and possessions but in an open heart to the needs of others. How can you love God and not love others? How can you say you love God and not share the greatest news of all time--the good news of salvation in Christ--with other people? Why does the State feel a compelling need to get involved in relief for the poor and help for the sick? These are things that Christians should be taking care of voluntarily. The State shouldn't even have a pretext for getting involved. If only believers would do what they're supposed to do in caring for others there would be no basis for a welfare state. What will you do today to stand and show your heart's love for God?

Love the Lord Your God, Part 2

2009-10-20T07:22:00.003-05:00

"Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God is one LORD. And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all you are and have" (Deut 6: 4--5, my translation). The God of the Bible is one God, yet he is one God in three persons (cf. Matt 28: 19, where the Name of God is "the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit"). It is not enough to love just any god with all your heart, soul, and strength. It must be the God who is revealed in the Bible. Foundational to loving the LORD is knowing who he is. He is the one eternal and triune God revealed in the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. He is not the fictitious man become god of the Mormons. He is not the distant and inattentive god of deism. He is not the vindictive and unmerciful god of Islam. Nor is he sometimes Father, sometimes Son, and sometimes Holy Spirit as the modalists believe.

You and I are called to love the Lord our God with all our hearts. Once you know who he is you must embrace him as your God. To embrace him in this way means to own his name and his calling on your life. It doesn't mean he belongs to you. On the contrary, you belong to him. As a believer in Christ you have been bought with a price, "with [the] precious blood. . . of Christ" (1 Peter 1: 19 ESV). You have been ransomed and redeemed from bondage to sin and self, and Christ has laid claim to you by his death and resurrection. How could you not respond to such sacrificial love by owning him as your Lord and King?

Because he is your God you are called to "love" him. While the Hebrew word has a broad range of meanings, the New Testament writers render it with the Greek word agapeo, which always signifies a willful and unconditional commitment to another. This love for God is not merely an emotion. It is a choice on the part of the individual, rooted in the gracious actions of God who loved us first in this way, to commit one's life unconditionally to God. God will have first place in your heart because he alone is worthy of it. The real man knows this, and the real man, drawn by grace, lovingly gives himself to the Lord his God in sacrificial commitment. Stand up. Be a man, and love God as you ought.

Love the Lord Your God, Part 1

2009-10-19T07:44:00.002-05:00

Yesterday evening and last night I watched a series called "Liberty" about the War for Independence. This was produced by PBS in the 1990s, and my wife checked out the DVD set from our local library. In it were detailed, from the diaries and letters of the actual men and women involved, the sacrifices made for U. S. independence from the tyranny of the British Crown. The signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to the cause of liberty.

For two thousand years Christians have been sealing their testimony of love to God in blood. But today in Western Europe and North America, how many have love enough for God and faith enough in Christ to seal their love with their blood? Are you so sold out to Christ and the gospel that you will die to spread the good news of salvation in Christ to others? Think about it before you answer. If you cannot be inconvenienced to attend a Wednesday evening prayer service or go next door to tell your neighbor about Christ, do you really think you would stand in front of an executioner and bear witness for Christ to the point of death?

The Evangelical Church today is in desperate need of men, real men, godly men of courage and commitment and sold out sacrificial love for God. These men are needed in pulpits, in military chaplaincy, in Scouting packs and troops, in board rooms, in classrooms (public and private, from kindergarten through grad school), in Congress, state legislatures, and municipal governments, and in every walk of life. You don't have to be a seminary educated pastor to be this man. You just have to love God more than anything else and follow him. Where are the men who will stand in the gap and demonstrate what it means to "love the LORD your God"?

Stand for True Righteousness, Part 5

2009-10-16T14:46:00.003-05:00

So, if taking a stand for true righteousness involves sacrificial love for others, how should that influence our overall demeanor?

First, in all things be courteous. There is no reason for a Christian ever to be rude to another person, regardless of what the other person says or does. Show acts of kindness in every possible situation. This is doubly true when dealing with persons who are avowed enemies of the Gospel.

Secondly, never leave room for an accusation. Guard your reputation. In a recent conversation in a store I was discussing Boy Scouts Youth Protection training and guidelines and how they are there to protect youth on the one hand and adult leaders from false accusations on the other. False accusations can ruin a person's reputation, and the gentlemen observed, "Where do you go to get your reputation back?" Right now the Evangelical community is reeling from a loss of credibility. At the height of its influence several of its most notable faces (televangelists) in the 1980s and 1990s were discovered to be involved in a variety of moral compromises. The actions of a few prominent people brought shame, disgrace, and loss of respect on all Evangelicals. Where do we go to get that back? We've got to live it down by rising above the accusations and demonstrating truly transformed lives.

Thirdly, be fair, honest, and factual in any debate. I've seen far too many "Christian" books on science that play loose with facts, especially their treatment of their opponents' views, in the interest of winning the debate. It is as if all is fair so long as we win. If you have to misrepresent to win, have your really won? Be sure of your facts. Represent the other side fairly and dispassionately, and be ready at any moment to show where you got your facts. If you find that you've erred, get out in front of it, admit the error, and issue a correction. Eating crow never tastes good, but it sure goes a long way to maintaining credibility.

Stand for True Righteousness, Part 4

2009-10-15T08:00:00.002-05:00

Jesus said that the two greatest commandments were "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength," and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Mark 12: 29--31 ESV). These two commandments sum up the two tables of the law. If the Church would live by these her impact on the world would be much more significant than it is.

A stand for true righteousness comes down to this--living a life of sacrificial love for others. That means doing what is best for others, even when they don't appreciate it, don't want it, and oppose you for it. That's the kind of love God demonstrated to us when he sent his Son to save us from our sins. We like our sin. We don't want to be delivered from it until God makes us aware of how terrible it really is. So when God sent his Son we didn't appreciate it. "He was despised and rejected by men; . . . he was despised, and we esteemed him not." (Isa. 53: 3 ESV). Did that stop him? No. He came anyway. He kept doing what he came to do, even in the face of mounting opposition. "He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him" (John 1: 11 ESV). Finally, to get rid of him they killed him by hanging him on a cross. But that was his plan from the beginning to obtain our salvation (Acts 2: 22--24). He gave everything out of love to a people who did not love him in order to bring us back to God. In that act he provides for us the only way to be righteous before God (Rom 5: 1; 2 Cor 5: 21).

At the heart of the Christian ethic lies the sacrificial love of God in Christ. You and I are called to imitate that sacrificial love to others by our actions, thoughts, and attitudes. "Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children" (Eph 5: 1 ESV). A stand for true righteousness means imitating God by loving the unlovable, giving others what they need rather than what they deserve, and treating others with the same compassion you have received from God in Christ. Standing on a sidewalk and yelling at people in an angry tone is not what we're called to do. Rather, with tear-filled eyes and hearts melted with compassion we need to show people the end result of their sin and point them in the direction of the only hope for life. We need to model a life before them that makes them hunger and thirst for what we have. The world sees us as a negative people, angry, hostile, and ignorant. We need to demonstrate to the world that we are hopeful for our own future, grieved over the future of our world, compassionate toward our enemies, and informed--informed to the point of being able to show a better way to live. Make a difference where you live. By exemplifying sacrificial love to others take a stand for true righteousness.

Stand for True Righteousness, Part 3

2009-10-14T09:00:00.002-05:00

If the kind of righteousness talked about here, what is often called "horizontal" righteousness, begins with the core commitment that each person is unique and created in the image of God, then how does that play out in actual interchanges between individuals, groups, and in society at large? At the heart of the word "relationship" is the matter of how we "relate" to one another. God, in the Bible, calls us to an ethic of love--of unconditional caring for others. This kind of love is not an emotional attachment but a commitment to seek what is in the best interest of others, putting self in second place.

When you take a stand for true righteousness in a marriage, then your spouse will know it. You will not treat your spouse merely as the means to your financial security, sexual fulfillment, source of happiness, or whatever else you can come up with. Rather, you will look for ways to fulfill your spouse in every area of marital life by giving yourself sacrificially to him or her in every area of life.

In your friendships you will seek the best for your friends. You will build them up, encourage them, and look for opportunities to do them good. In dealing with those who oppose you, you will likewise look for peace--genuine peace. If need be, you will endure persecution without retaliation. Still, it is important to speak the truth, even when doing so seems to hurt. There are times when showing a loving concern for others means opposing their self-destructive and sinful conduct. The Christian engages in the battle for true righteousness when he or she stands for biblical morality in opposition to the degradation of the world. This means saying things others may find offensive or unpleasant. It does not mean saying those things in an offensive and unpleasant way. Even when standing against the prevailing immorality of our day, believers should make every effort to be winsome in their conduct.

Don't be afraid to say that homosexuality, adultery, fornication, theft, murder, abortion, cheating on taxes, lying, political corruption, etc., are wrong. Don't be afraid to say that Jesus is the only way to have real peace with God and escape his wrath. These things are all true, and ultimately to say them is to show genuine love for others, because saying these things points others to the best possible way to live and the only way to eternal life. It is no crime to speak against the evils of our age. However, find ways to do it that are constructive, not destructive, loving, not insensitive. Learn to build bridges, not burn them. Demonstrate a stand for true righteousness by how your relate to others.

Stand for True Righteousness, Part 2

2009-10-13T08:31:00.002-05:00

Applied Social Darwinism has given us a society where gang crime is rampant, abortion is legal, and in some places, assisted suicide is also legal. Add to that the current debate about health care, the possibility of socialized medicine and the health-care rationing that is necessarily a part of such a system, and you can see quickly that human life today is not measured by intrinsic worth but on economic terms. At the most fundamental level individuals view one another through a cost-benefits lens when building relationships and exploiting the weaknesses of others. Is this any way to maintain an orderly and cohesive society? No! Such treatment of one another builds distrust in relationships because every relationship becomes "disposable" based on the constant changes in the cost-benefits equation.

In this setting marriages become mere "economic" arrangements that are valued for everything from sexual gratification to obtaining insurance for one's "soul mate". So long as the benefits outweigh the costs, the marriage is not in danger of dissolution. Thus there is a move on today to redefine marriage, in defiance of 5,000 years of written history, not as a formal union between a man and woman for the purpose of establishing a family and propagating the human race, but as any consentual relationship so that homosexual couples may enjoy the economic benefits and social acceptability that married couples enjoy. The push has nothing to do with what's objectively right or wrong but with the cost-benefits equation of a utilitarian ethic. The end result of this redefinition of marriage will also be the eventual legalization of polygamy if marriage is so broadly defined by the courts.

In short, one's worldview defines how one approaches the issue of ethics--of how you treat your fellow human being. If you find yourself uneasy with "defining" what is or is not a "marriage" or "family", or what is or is not morally acceptable conduct, then you need to do a worldview self-check. Yours is not a Christian worldview, whether you profess to be a Christian or not. Christians need to apply a Christian worldview to their ethics and treat every individual as someone created in the image of God. Certainly, the effects of the fall must be taken into account, but still, each person is created in the image of God. Rather than viewing someone from a merely utilitarian perspective, we need to treat all persons with dignity and respect regardless of how they live their lives or what the mental ability or economic status is. We also need to show them the compassion of the Savior by (1) lovingly drawing attention to the problem of sin and (2) mercifully pointing them to the only hope for forgiveness and deliverance from sin. This is one way, and the most fundamental way, to take a stand for true righteousness.

Take a Stand for True Righteousness, Part 1

2009-10-12T05:34:00.002-05:00

In ancient Israel during the time of the judges it was said that "In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes" (Judges 17: 6 ESV). What happens to a society where determining what is "right" is left to the individual? In this passage it is a sad story of idolatry, corruption of the priesthood, and theft, all for personal gain. Morality left to individual determination inevitably leads to self-interest and self-preservation. A society cannot long endure where there is no external, objective sense of what is right and what is wrong in how individuals treat their fellow humans. This week I want to explore what it means to take a stand for true righteousness in interpersonal relationships. This will not be about saving righteousness in the sight of God but about fair dealings with one another--horizontal righteousness, if you will.

As God's people we are called to treat others right. The kids in my old neighborhood had a saying that was a variation on the Golden Rule: "Do unto others--then split!" That is the way many people live today. It is evident all around us. Corporate heads take shareholders' money and "split". Then they ask for a government bailout, take the money and "split". It's the "me" generation. Darwinian evolution advocates a selfish, survival of the fittest mentality that focuses on getting what you can when you can. Better to be at the top than the bottom of the food chain. The problem is, this is no way to maintain an orderly society.

God's word has a different plan for society:

"He has told you, O man, what is good;
and what does the LORD require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?" (Micah 6: 8 ESV)

There is a lot of talk today about "social justice". From a biblical perspective, what does social justice look like? How should I treat my fellow human being? That will be the topic for this week as we examine what it means to take a stand for righteousness.

Stand for Life, Part 5

2009-10-09T07:04:00.004-05:00

When God created human beings he gave them a blessing in the form of a command: "Be fruitful and multiply," God said. There is a reason why we are created as male and female. Nature itself should teach us that man and woman were made for each other, not man and man, nor woman and woman. We were designed in a wonderful way to enjoy the intimacy of the sexual union in marriage and to produce children as a result of it. To take a stand for life is to take a stand for children, for something more than zero population growth. Today's Western Civilization views children as a burden, not a blessing. In the recent past the campaign for zero population growth focused on world food supplies. Today it's the "carbon footprint" we leave behind that they say might threaten to destroy our planet.

But what has God commanded? God has commanded you to "be fruitful and multiply." Solomon said,

"Behold, children are a gift of the LORD,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one's youth.
How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them;
They will not be ashamed
When they speak with their enemies in the gate" (Psalm 127: 3--5).

Why did Christianity win out over paganism in ancient Rome? One reason was sheer attrition. Christians, following biblical principles, had large families. Abortion was against Roman law, but it was routine for unwanted children to be "exposed", or left in the open at night for wild animals to find and feast upon. Christian women went through the towns in their areas every evening looking for these unwanted children, collecting them and placing them in Christian homes. In short, because of a different worldview, the Christians eventually came to outnumber their pagan counterparts. They took a stand for life in very practical terms, and it paid off.

Today most Christians are so compromised by the prevailing worldview that they have bought into the birth control mentality. Many have only two children, if that many. We are called to obey God and accept his blessing. Why refuse the blessing of a child that God sends? Christian couples should have families and accept the hard responsibility of rearing godly children who will be able to stand up and lead in the next generation. Don't be afraid of the large family. Older siblings help with younger ones. Yes, it gets messy. It's a lot harder to keep a clean house when you have five kids running around (I know). But the joy I receive from being with my five is worth all the toil and stress. Don't be afraid to adopt or be a foster parent either. Look around and see where you can make a difference in a child's life. Be a Scout leader. Be a mentor. Be a children's Sunday School teacher. Find a way to make a difference and take a stand for life.

Take a Stand for Life, Part 4

2009-10-08T07:42:00.002-05:00

What is the measure of a human life? In Western Civilization today the tendency is to measure the value of a life in terms of its economic or utilitarian value. A life that can contribute more is more valuable than one that cannot. Is this the way to measure the value of a life? An unborn child's life is left subject to the whim of a mother who may either view the fetus growing inside her as a blessing (net positive) or an unwanted burden (net negative). If the fetus' mother sees the child as a net gain, then that child has a shot at life, but if she sees it a net loss, then that child is more likely to be reduced to "biological waste" and discarded as trash. What's the difference between the two fetuses? Physiologically they both have human DNA. They both came to be through the joining of man and a woman in the act of sexual relations. The difference is nothing other than the whim of the mother.

At the other end of the life spectrum people speak of "death with dignity," by which they seem to mean, "you take charge of your own destiny and end your life on your terms." There is a tendency in our society today to avoid pain and suffering at all costs, even if it means suicide to avoid the physical pain of a terminal disease. Little regard in this setting is given to the possibility of endless suffering in the afterlife. The prevailing notion in our world seems to be either (1) there is no afterlife (nihilism) or (2) everyone gets to go to heaven except maybe the really bad people (functional universalism). The notion that God may have a good purpose in someone's suffering doesn't even enter the equation. Individual self-determination, a concept from the Enlightenment, is the guiding principle.

In the middle of it all now in the United States we have the debate over government allocated health care. When you have the controlled allocation of limited resources based on government criteria, each life, and the care it will receive, have to be weighed on utilitarian grounds. How much will this life contribute to society versus what will it cost to maintain it? In that kind of equation, the elderly, rather than being honored as the Scripture says (Lev 19: 32), are viewed as a drain on the system and should be given less care so that they may cease to burden the system sooner rather than later.

In short, what is missing is a moral center from which to make beginning and ending of life decisions. Throughout the history of Western Civilization no nation's laws until now have allowed for abortion. The Code of Hammurabi banned it. The Assyrians outlawed it. The Babylonians and Egyptians forbade it. The Greeks and Romans proscribed it. The Church opposed it. But today life is not seen as a blessing in and of itself. Humans are no longer treated as persons created in the image of God. We've had a century (more or less) of evolutionary indoctrination, and it has brought us to this sad point. Life is cheap. So we kill in the clinic or through "assisted suicide" with legal sanction, and we gun down our fellow man in the street without it. Survival of the fittest has become the rule of the day.

It is time for the Evangelical community to stand in the gap for life, not just in opposition to abortion or euthanasia, but for the dignity of every life as created in the image of God. That means taking a stand against violent crime in the inner city and getting our hands dirty making a difference there. It means teaching young people about the reality of humans as created in the image of God in ways that may have to work around the government educational system. Think outside the box and take a stand for life.

Take a Stand for Life, Part 3

2009-10-07T06:25:00.002-05:00

On the surface it is curious that many who are "pro-life" also favor capital punishment and many who support abortion and doctor assisted suicide are against it. Actually, the pro-life group is logically consistent in supporting capital punishment. Here's why.

Humans are created in the image of God, and therefore each person is worthy of dignity and respect. Furthermore, each life is sacred. When one human being, with malicious intent, however, takes the life of another human being, he or she forfeits the right to his/her life. This is because of the extreme nature of the offense, not just against the person murdered, but against God in whose image that person was created. In Gen 9: 6 God said,

"Whoever sheds man's blood,
By man his blood shall be shed,
For in the image of God
He made man" (NASB).

This text should never be interpreted to support vigilante killings, however. God has placed in the hands of the state the authority to apply this divine law so that society will be well ordered (Rom 13: 1--5).

It should be noted that there are more ways to kill a person than actual murder. Jesus considered unjustified rage or anger a type of murder--a desire to murder even if the actual act is never carried out (Matt 5: 21). In that same passage Jesus considers any thought or action that shows a disregard for others as created in the image of God an insult to God comparable to murder. How often do we put down others, demeaning them to make ourselves look better? How often do we harbor secret grudges in our hearts against others? To take a stand for life is to take a stand also for treating each person with dignity and respect regardless of his her mental ability, economic worth, race, religion, or any other factor. Rather than mistreating others let us show them the love and grace of God. When and where we're able, let us point them to the One who has saved us from sin and judgment. Take a stand that will open for them the possibility of life eternal.

Stand For Life, Part 2

2009-10-06T07:28:00.002-05:00

As long as people subscribe to the prevailing philosophy of the day that life simply evolved by natural processes, then life and death remain part of the natural cycle and no form of life can be considered superior, only different. Abortion and euthanasia are easily justified in such a worldview. Christians, on the other hand, must stand for life, and especially for the sanctity of human life as created in the image of God. That makes humans unique among all living creatures, with special rights and responsibilities that are given "by their Maker" as the founding fathers of the United States said.

Genesis 1 displays an orderly progression from non-living to living things as the story of creation moves forward. The culmination of God's creative work was the making of man and woman in his image: "Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.' So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth'" (Gen 1: 26--28, NASB).

By virtue of being created in the image of God, man enjoys a unique position in relation to the rest of creation. It is a position of stewardship. And by virtue of being created in the image of God, man has a unique relationship with God and with his fellow man. A stand for life takes that into account, realizing that to the extent we treat another human poorly we throw yet another insult, as it were, into the face of God. Taking a stand for life involves more than protesting abortion and euthanasia. It also involves taking a stand for respect for others, courteous behavior, and looking for ways to encourage rather than beat down or put down others. Could it be that we don't get a better hearing in the arena of ideas because our very methods sometimes go against what we're trying to affirm and support?

Take a Stand for Life, Part 1

2009-10-05T09:29:00.002-05:00

In the documentary movie, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, Ben Stein explores the question of the origins of life on earth. This one question continues to plague natural science. How did life begin? Where did that first living organism come from? For the Christian the answer is simple. God, who is himself Life, by an act of his will, created all the living creatures that exist. He alone is Life in the sense of being self-existent (theologians call this the aseity of God). In Exodus 3: 14 God told Moses his name was "I AM"--the one who necessarily exists in and of himself.

Our society is one that is moving rapidly in the direction of embracing the culture of death. To stand for life is viewed as a kind of extremism by many. Western Civilization has been inundated with nihilistic philosophy that pairs naturally with the naturalistic, humanistic worldview of our day. In this way of thinking death is a "natural part of the life cycle" and should be embraced. Abortion and euthanasia are encouraged (killing of unborn infants and "mercy" killing of the weak and terminally ill). At the same time, capital punishment for crimes is viewed as "cruel and unusual" punishment by many. People are who are pro-life and support capital punishment are accused of being inconsistent, but no one accuses the anti-life supporters of inconsistency when they advocate killing the innocent unborn and the elderly or terminally ill while at the same they decry capital punishment.

Over the next few days I intend to explore the importance of standing for life, and as odd as it may sound, how standing for life involves standing for capital punishment as well. If all life derives from God, then all of life is sacred in some sense, and if humans are created in the image of God, then all human life is to be valued on that basis more than any other criteria of value.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 12

2009-10-01T07:46:00.002-05:00

Today I will finish looking at the regula fide, or Rule of Faith. Also, I will be taking a break until Monday, October 5, as I will be attending "Woodbadge for the 21st Century", a Scout leadership training program.

In the last line of the Apostles' Creed we read, "[I believe in] the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen." In the treatment of Christ's own resurrection I touched upon the matter of the resurrection of our bodies. His resurrection is the promise of our future resurrection. The point of Christ's work is that death doesn't get the last say. He came to save the whole person, not just the immaterial, spiritual part. The body and soul are created together such that neither is a complete person without the other. The Hebrew word nephesh, commonly translated "soul", refers to the totality of one's being. Christ came to save the whole person. A belief in the bodily resurrection is a Christian non-negotiable. Our resurrection and Christ's are so related that to deny one is to deny the other (1 Corinthians 15), and so to deny the reality of our salvation in him. The moment a person stops believing in the bodily resurrection he or she renounces the right to claim the title "Christian". In presenting the gospel to unbelievers it is vitally important to stand for the resurrection of the body, yet how many gospel presentations mention the resurrection today?

Paul certainly included the resurrection and coming Judgment in his message at Athens (Acts 17: 31). The resurrection is a message of hope for believers because we believe in "life everlasting" in a state of bliss with God. But for the unbeliever the resurrection is a message of warning. There is a judgment to face and an eternity of suffering to be endured for all who do not know Christ (Rev 20: 11--15). No wonder Paul said, "Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade men" (2 Cor 5: 11, NASB). Our calling is not merely to inform. Our calling is to stand for the Gospel in its totality and do all in our power to persuade men and women to take seriously the message of hope in Christ and the reality of the coming Judgment of God on the world.

I believe our evangelism is weak today precisely because we do not feel in our hearts the reality of these eternal verities. We do not contemplate the blessing of the resurrection of the saints nor the awful suffering of the wicked who die under God's wrath. The life beyond this one is a mere shadow in our minds. The Gospel has been reduced to a selling technique based on benefits to be had in this life without serious regard for the life to come. And because of that we've lost the sense of urgency in reaching lost people for Christ. It's time for the Evangelical community again to take seriously the resurrection of the body and stand for the salvation of the whole person. Take a stand!

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 11

2009-09-30T04:58:00.002-05:00

Yesterday's blog touched on "the communion of the saints," the next phrase in the Apostles' Creed, noting that when we worship we join in worship with all who are worshiping God in Spirit and in truth, including those who've gone before us and now worship God more fully in his presence in heaven. They worship him consciously and without ceasing. We worship him sometimes consciously and intermittently. They have been freed from the cares of this life. We are still bound to them.

One of the greatest lines in the Creed is "[I believe in] the forgiveness of sins." That little line speaks to the yearning of the fallen human heart. Paul says, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom 3: 23). Conscience tells us we've done wrong. Every society has a concept of right and wrong and an awareness of not living up to the "ideal" of what it means to be at our best. Every culture has a belief in a deity (or deities) that has been offended. Guilt is a universal concept. Forgiveness is a universal need. The Gospel answers to the deepest need of the human condition like no other religious message, for the Gospel tells us how we may again be right with God and one another.

Forgiveness requires more than a simple "I'm sorry." First, our forgiveness of sins requires the shedding of blood in the form of a sacrifice (Heb 9:22). God himself paid the ultimate sacrifice that we could not pay: "Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when he makes his soul an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities" (Isa 53: 10--11, ESV). Jesus came as the Suffering Servant to be that perfect, sinless sacrifice (Mark 10: 45; Eph 1: 7; Col 1: 20). So forgiveness is necessarily linked with the blood atonement made by Jesus when he died on the cross. Faith in his sacrificial death and his resurrection are essential to forgiveness of sins.

Forgiveness is also closely linked in Scripture to repentance. "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his his name to all nations" (Luke 24: 46--47, ESV). Peter also connects forgiveness to repentance: "Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out" (Acts 3: 19, ESV). Now repentance is not a "good work" that merits forgiveness of sins. Repentance doesn't earn forgiveness. The blood of Christ alone does that. But God doesn't save us in our sins, he saves us from our sins. God calls all who would be forgiven to forsake sin and seek holiness.

Modern psychiatric care seeks to alleviate guilt by doing an end-run around the cross. Today more than ever Christians need to stand for genuine forgiveness of sins through the shed blood of Christ and call their friends, their neighbors, their work associates to repentance and faith in him who alone can truly heal their souls and settle their minds. From the drug addict to the "good" kid who secretly gets into candy he shouldn't, everyone knows he or she is a sinner. Everyone needs forgiveness. Stand for the only forgiveness that really counts. Stand for the Gospel of hope in Jesus Christ.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 10

2009-09-29T06:59:00.002-05:00

With Christianity today fragmented between the Orthodox East and the Roman West, Protestantism in all its various forms, and many independent congregations of various types, how can you affirm the words, "and in one holy universal Church"? How can you stand for "one holy universal Church" when there is not one visible Church but a plethora of churches?

What is the Church? In the sense intended here it is all the redeemed of all the ages. In the time of the Imperial Church this came to be confused with the official Church of the Roman Empire. Both the Eastern Rite and the Roman Rite consider themselves each to be the true Church in this sense, still (as does the Coptic Church in Africa). In this line of thought the one holy Church must be a visible Church united in doctrine and ritual throughout the whole world. Yet even in the age of the Imperial Church the visible Church never lived up to that ideal. There have been splinter groups throughout the ages who have challenged the authority of the Imperial Church.

As a Baptist I believe that the most common usage of the word "church" in the New Testament refers to local congregations. Yet in a few places the word is used to speak of all of Christ's people (Matt 16: 18; 1 Cor 12: 28; Eph 1: 22; 3: 10, 21; 5: 23--32; Col 1: 18--25; Heb 12: 23). In Heb 12: 23 the writer speaks of "the church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven" (NASB). And in Eph 5: 27 Paul speaks of Christ presenting the church to himself as a bride pure and holy. These are the two keys for unlocking this mystery of how a visibly fragmented church can exist in the world and there still be "one holy universal Church."

Stand for the church where you are as "holy." Seek, by your life and example, to pursue visible holiness. The charge to the believer is clear: "Be holy yourselves in all your behavior" (1 Pet 1: 15, NASB). You, as a believer, are called to be holy--set apart to God's purposes. You are not your own. You have been bought with the precious blood of Jesus. Recognize that personal holiness is not some arrogant, legalistic self-righteousness but living humbly before God, seeking to do his will as found in his word for the benefit of his church and the glory of his name. Christ's goal is for a holy church. "Strive for . . . holiness without which no one will see the Lord" (Heb 12: 14, ESV).

Stand for the Church as the redeemed people of the Lord from all ages. The true Church is the one Church whose names are written in heaven. Realize that every time you worship you are joining in worship with those who have gone before you as they worship in heaven. This is the communion of the saints, that we are privileged to join in with the worship that is continually happening in heaven (Heb 12: 22--23). Seek genuine worship--a life changing encounter with God through Jesus Christ. In all things seek peace and unity on the basis of truth in your local congregation as an expression of your belief in the importance of the unity of the body of Christ.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 9

2009-09-28T07:08:00.002-05:00

While the Apostles' Creed developed in great detail its teaching about Jesus Christ, the affirmation, "I believe in the Holy Spirit" is short and to the point. However, this nascent affirmation of the Trinity required more explanation later. By A. D. 381 the Council of Constantinople expanded this short sentence to "And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified." In the Western Church another addition was made later so that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son."

Evangelical Christians need to take a stand for the full deity and personhood of the Holy Spirit. At the same time, we need to remember that the work of the Spirit is not to draw attention to himself but to point people to Jesus (John 15: 26). There is a lot of confusion in our churches about the Holy Spirit. Taking a stand for the biblical teaching of the Holy Spirit could help clear some of that confusion.

What does the Holy Spirit do? He convicts the conscience of sin (John 16: 8). He, by his sovereign will, applies the benefits of Christ's work and causes the new birth (John 3: 8). He indwells every believer (Rom 8: 9). He, by his sovereign will assigns gifts to every believer for the benefit of the whole congregation (1 Cor 12: 11). He guides God's people into truth (John 16: 13). He seals every true believer as a pledge unto the day of redemption (Eph 1: 13--14). The best evidence of the Spirit in your life is not some "sign gift" but the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5: 22--23).

Baptists became so "program" driven that one wag once remarked that "the Holy Spirit could leave the average Baptist church and no one would notice." I've seen churches where I'm not sure that hasn't happened. To take a stand for the Spirit means to live your life in awareness that nothing, nothing you can do will have any lasting impact for the Kingdom without his blessing. To take a stand for the Spirit means to oppose every teaching that denigrates the Spirit as less than fully God. To take a stand for the Spirit means to uphold the biblical teaching of gifts in service of the church, for its edification, not to puff up people and make them feel "super spiritual" (Col 2: 18). Lastly, to take a stand for the Spirit means living your life in the awareness that it is his sanctifying power that enables you to persevere in the faith, keeping you to the end.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 8

2009-09-26T05:22:00.002-05:00

Recently Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis Schaeffer, the great twentieth century Christian apologist, went on MSNBC and derided Evangelical Christians for their alleged obsession with the imminent return of Christ and fascination with biblical prophecy. It is true that some Evangelicals are what Chuck Swindoll has called "prophecy freaks", obsessed with understanding biblical prophecy and mapping its fulfillment to the exclusion of other areas of biblical theology. Still, Frank Schaeffer came across as one who has betrayed his father's legacy and his Evangelical heritage. A solid belief in the Second Coming of Christ is foundational to the Christian faith. Like the resurrection of Jesus, faith in his second coming and the future judgment is a key article of faith for which believers must stand. The Apostles' Creed reads, "from whence he shall come again to judge the living and the dead."

From where? From "the right hand of God the Father Almighty." Christians ever since the first century have believed that Jesus is coming again, and that when he comes certain things will happen. There is a great deal of debate among believers about the details of that event, but the event itself remains a key article of faith. It is not my purpose here to go through all the various end-time theories. These core teachings are clear: (1) Jesus will return bodily and visibly to the earth (Luke 21: 27; Acts 1: 11; 17: 31; 1 Thess 4: 14--17; 2 Pet 3: 10; Rev 22: 12); the dead will be raised and be judged (Dan 12: 1--2; Matt 25: 31--46; Acts 17: 31; 2 Cor 5: 10; Rev 20: 11--15); the wicked will be sent away into eternal torment and the redeemed will be received into eternal bliss (see above references); and there will be a new heaven and a new earth where sin is an absolute impossibility and peace, joy, and worship are the rule (Isa 65: 17--25; Rev 21--22).

In light of his coming, how should we then live (to paraphrase Francis Schaeffer)? What does it mean to stand for his coming and the future judgment of all people by Christ? First, stand for real hope--hope that will not disappoint because it is grounded in the unchanging purpose and promise of God (Heb 6: 13--20; Rev 19: 11--16). Secondly, stand for holiness in your own personal life (2 Pet 3: 11--13; 1 John 3: 1--3). Thirdly, knowing that you will one day give an accounting, boldly seek to persuade others to come to Jesus by your words and your example (2 Cor 5: 11).

"He who testifies to these things says, 'Surely I am coming soon.' Amen. Come Lord Jesus!" (Rev 22: 20)

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 7

2009-09-25T05:47:00.003-05:00

Today I want to explore an aspect of the saving work of Christ that doesn't get enough attention in Western Christian theology. The Western Church has tended to focus on the cross and resurrection as the central event in salvation, as if all God could do in Christ he did there at Golgatha and the empty tomb.

No less important however, is the reality that "he ascended into heaven; and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty." Christ's saving work is an ongoing saving work. On the one hand his ascension speaks of victory, but on the other it is from this vantage point of sitting on the Father's right hand that he pleads the cause of the redeemed, ensuring our complete salvation. That is a source of comfort, joy, and assurance. That he ascended is affirmed in Acts 1: 9. But from his position of ascended Lord he intercedes for us on an ongoing basis (Heb 4: 14; 10: 12--14; 1 John 2: 1). He also lifts us up to the heavenlies with him (Eph. 1: 20--22; 2: 6).

From his favored position at the right hand of the Father he wields all power and authority (Matt 28: 18) as the King of kings and Lord of lords. "I have set my King on Zion" (Ps 2: 6) anticipates the heavenly session of Jesus.

How can Evangelical believers stand for the ascension of Christ? What are the implications of this teaching for our lives? First, standing for the ascension means standing in confidence of the victory that Christ has won for you over sin, death, and condemnation. You are forgiven and secure in his power. You need not live under the bondage of sin any longer (Rom 6: 22). You have been set free by the power of God. Secondly, standing for the ascension of Christ means going out in confidence of his power in the power of the Gospel to save others like yourself (Matt 28: 19). Be bold in witnessing to others, telling them (1) what God has done for you and (2) the Gospel message from Scripture. Thirdly, standing for the ascension means waiting in confident anticipation of his imminent return at the end of the age (Acts 1: 11). We say we believe he is coming again, but I wonder as I look at how we live, do we really believe it? John says, "Everyone who thus hopes in him (in his return) purifies himself as he is pure" (1John 3: 3 ESV). If purifying ourselves from the filth of the world is a mark of our confidence in his return, then how confident are we, really, given the overall worldliness of professing believers today? So lastly, take a stand in your life for purity, for holiness, as a testimony to your confidence in his ascension and second coming.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 6

2009-09-24T08:19:00.000-05:00

Today we come to two very controversial lines in the Apostles' Creed: "he descended into hell; the third day he rose from the dead." What are we to make of "he descended into hell"? The Latin version of the Creed reads "he descended into the inferno" and the Greek version "into Tartarus". In all likelihood this line is based on 1 Peter 3: 19, where Peter says Jesus went and "made proclamation" to spirits in prison. If Jesus bore all the punishment for our sins on the cross, then what was he doing in Hell? It seems to me that he went there to proclaim his victory over sin and Satan, and to show that God was indeed just in punishing those who were already there. Here is something you and I can stand for--Jesus' triumphant victory over sin and Satan, for his victory is our victory, too.

In stating that Jesus "rose from the dead" the Creed affirms something that was equally incredible in its day as it is in ours. To take a stand for the resurrection of one who died means taking a stand against the observed reality of all of human history. Outside of a few accounts of resuscitations in the Bible, no one as far as I know before modern medicine records dead people coming back to life. Even today doctors don't call someone dead until there has been no heart beat for several minutes, which results in permanent brain damage. But what the Bible affirms here is that a man, crucified, embalmed, and buried, got up and walked out of the tomb. People in the first century found that just as hard to believe as people today do. Even some of Jesus' own disciples doubted what they were seeing (Matt 28: 17).

True faith calls us to stand for the victory of life over death in the bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. His bodily resurrection is the promise of our future bodily resurrection as well. In fact, without his bodily resurrection there is no Gospel--no good news. Paul says that the faith that saves is the faith that believes God raised Christ from the dead (Rom 10: 9), and that if Christ is not raised from the dead believers are still lost in sin and above all men most to be pitied (1 Cor. 15: 12--19). Paul even considered the death and resurrection to be the first order doctrine of the faith: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Cor. 15: 3--4, NASB).

Science says the resurrection can't happen. Human experience says that resurrections don't happen. The Gospel says that the resurrection of Christ has happened and the resurrection of his people will happen. Death doesn't get the last say. God is pro-life. We were not born to die. We were born to know him and in knowing him to live forever. In proclaiming the Gospel take a stand for Christ's resurrection. Without it we're all lost. With it comes a living hope of eternal salvation.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 5

2009-09-23T07:30:00.000-05:00

In the last entry I explored what it means to stand for Jesus Christ as fully human and fully God. Certainly yesterday's entry did not do justice to the whole of the doctrine of Christ, but time and space do not permit a detailed discussion of all Christological issues on a blog.

Today I want to look at the phrase "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried." In the ancient world in which the first believers lived this was one of the biggest hurdles to the acceptance of the Christian message. According to the Apostle Paul the Jews considered this a stumbling block and the Gentiles considered it mere foolishness that Christians would celebrate as their leader and deliverer one who had been killed by crucifixion (1 Cor 1: 23). Yet this line in the creed is pivotal for a number of reasons.

First, the reference to Pontius Pilate sets the crucifixion in its historical context. The crucifixion of Jesus happened, and it happened in history at a specific point in time. This is not some made up story. Furthermore, the Romans didn't crucify someone else by mistake, as the Muslims teach, they crucified Jesus. Secondly, they crucified him and he died. He didn't just pass out on the cross. The soldiers tested his corpse by putting a spear into his chest to make sure he was dead (John 19: 34). Furthermore, he was buried, and the tomb was sealed and a guard posted to prevent the theft of his body (Matt 27: 62ff). As far as the chief priests and Pilate were concerned, this matter was over. They had done everything humanly possible to silence this troublesome Galilean once and for all.

In his death we see the full and genuine humanity of Jesus. One who merely appeared to be a man could not have died. Christians must stand for the historical event of Jesus' crucifixion and all the details related to it in the Gospels. Furthermore, Christians need to remember that if they did this to Jesus, the world will seek to do the same to his followers. You are called to suffer with Jesus, even to the point of a shameful death (Luke 14: 26--27; Phil 1: 29; Rev 6: 9--11). If you stand for Jesus and for the Gospel you will face opposition. But in the United States you and I "have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood" (Heb 12: 4) in our witness for Christ. This should serve as a reminder and a warning. You are called to stand for the crucified Savior in the face of harsh persecution.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 4

2009-09-22T08:02:00.000-05:00

Christians are called to stand for the uniqueness of the Gospel message. That message is a message of hope because in it God invaded human history in the person of Jesus Christ. Yesterday I looked at the line which reads "And in Jesus Christ his only begotten Son our Lord." The sentence continues, explaining that he "was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary."

Jesus of Nazareth was fully human, but he was no ordinary human. His conception and birth were the result of a miraculous work of the Triune God. Matthew's Gospel states clearly that Mary and Joseph had not "come together" (had sexual relations) prior to her conceiving Jesus (Matt 1: 18). Matthew further states, as does Luke, that this conception was by the work of the Holy Spirit who "overshadowed" her (Luke 1: 35; the same Spirit who "hovered over the waters" in Genesis 1: 2). Some have tried to discount the virgin conception on the basis of the Hebrew reading of Isa 7: 14, the basis for Matthew and Luke as the prophecy of the birth of the Messiah, but the reality is that the Greek text of Matthew and Luke (as well as the Greek translation of Isa 7: 14 in the Septuagint, made before the time of Christ), can only be read as "virgin". Biologically, Jesus had no human father. Just as in his deity he is the eternally begotten Son of God, so in his humanity is he God's Son. In his virgin conception the cycle of original sin was broken. Jesus came as the "second Adam" (Rom 5: 12ff; 1 Cor 15: 22--45), sinless, holy and filled with the power to be all that God intended for humanity to be. In this way he was suited to offer the perfect sacrifice for the sins of fallen humanity.

What does a real man look like? He looks like Jesus. To the extent we are not like Jesus we do not live up to what it means to be truly and fully human as God intended. The predetermined goal of salvation for every believer, then, is the restoration of the fallen image of God in each of us--"to be conformed to the image of His Son" (Rom 8: 29). Model your life after the life of Jesus--a life committed to Scripture, prayer, personal holiness, knowing and sharing God in sacrificial love for others, and you will know what it means to stand for Jesus. A word of warning here: you can't do this without the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8: 1--11).

Stand for the Rule of Faith, P 3

2009-09-21T07:26:00.000-05:00

So far I've explored just a bit of what is involved in saying "I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth." The Rule of Faith, as finalized in the Apostles' Creed, further states, "And in Jesus Christ his only begotten Son our Lord." Of course, more follows to flesh out who this Jesus is, but today I will only tackle this much.

In this short sentence there is implied the full humanity and the full deity of Jesus of Nazareth. It took the ancient church about five hundred years to unpack what it means to speak of Jesus Christ. Yet the question Jesus asked the disciples, "Who do you say that I am?" continues to be the pressing question of eternity for everyone. Who is Jesus?

Some say he was a good teacher of morality who by his words and his actions modeled for everyone how to face life, death, and injustice. Some say he was a prophet, perhaps the greatest of prophets. In ancient times some thought he was truly God but that he only appeared to be a man. All his human life was a mere illusion for our benefit. Others have said he was a man uniquely in touch with the divine in all of us. Some have said that, as to his deity, he was the first of God's created beings who then took on human form to lead us back to God. None of these do justice to who Jesus of Nazareth is.

Christians need to stand for Jesus of Nazareth as he is revealed in the New Testament--as one who is fully human on the one hand, and one who is the eternally begotten Son of God (the second Person of the Trinity) on the other. Only one who is both God and man meets all the necessary qualifications to be an adequate Savior for a sinful, fallen humanity. Only one who is fully God can keep the law perfectly and offer to the Father a perfect, sinless sacrifice. Only one who is fully human can freely choose to stand in the place of fallen sinners and receive the punishment we should have received for our sins.

As we work our way through this major section on Jesus Christ over the next few days we will explore in more detail what it means to stand for Jesus of Nazareth.

Stand for the Rule of Faith, Part 2

2009-09-19T07:01:00.000-05:00

This journey through the Rule of Faith will take a few days. Today I want to explore the significance of standing for the next line as it appears in the final form of the Apostles' Creed: "I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth."

In our society the biblical view of the origins of the universe has been under attack for well over a hundred years now. The theory of evolution has moved from theory to dogma in much of the scientific community. Anyone who doubts this should watch Ben Stein's documentary, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.

What is at stake if we do not stand for God as Creator? What is at stake if we do not stand for man as uniquely created in the image of God? It is hard to overstate what is at stake here.

First, we need to stand for God as the Creator of all that is because without that one, central unifying truth, there can be (1) no explanation for the order found in the universe (see any of a number of works on Intelligent Design theory for a discussion of order in the universe), and (2) no purpose of meaning to human life, and (3) no objective basis for morality.

I am not academically qualified to speak to the issue of Intelligent Design. I've done some reading in the subject and watched Stein's documentary about the battle over ID in the academy. Suffice it to say that God has not hidden himself behind creation as Richard Dawkins implies in his interview with Stein. Rather, for centuries the testimony of humanity has echoed the words of the psalmist: "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork" (Ps 19: 1). Belief in a deity as evidenced in creation is a universal phenomenon among human beings. Some people groups have more sophisticated religions, others more primitive and animistic, but every culture seems to see evidence that the universe came from a power beyond itself, except the culture of natural science. Why can they not see what everyone else since the dawn of human existence has seen? Could it be that they are among those Paul mentions who "by their unrighteousness suppress the truth" (Rom 1: 18) in their own hearts?

By standing for God as Creator, Christians stand not only for a universe that bears the marks of design and order, they stand for meaning and purpose in human existence--in history. If God did in fact create everything that exists, and if humanity is uniquely created in his image, then everything has a reason and every life, no matter how insignificant it may appear to us, has purpose. God has a plan that he is carrying out in history. Theologians call this the doctrine of Providence. History is merely the unfolding of God's providential plan for creation. Your life means something to God. He has a purpose for your existence. You were not born at the wrong time. You do not live in the wrong place. And if you are living for God by faith in Jesus Christ, then even your suffering has redemptive meaning in your life and God is at work in your suffering for your greater benefit (Rom 5: 3--5; 8: 28). Knowing this has served as a source of hope and inspiration to believers throughout the ages who have dealt with persecution, bereavement, affliction, and debilitating injuries and illnesses. God is in control. As Creator he is sovereign over all things, even the details that we take for granted.

By standing for God as the Creator you also stand for God as the Sovereign Lawgiver. There is an objective basis for moral behavior. Morality is not merely a relative social construct. Right and wrong are things that exist independent of the human will because they originate in the very nature of God. We can say it is wrong to take what does not belong to you. We can say it is wrong to take an innocent life. We can say it is wrong to have sexual relations outside of marriage. We can say it is wrong to treat others as economic tools to be used or discarded on utilitarian grounds. God has given a law by which humans are to live in relationship to him and to one another. Today we have generations of people who have been taught that they are no more than highly evolved animals and that survival of the fittest is the only law of nature that concerns them. As a result the baser ones rob and destroy to get ahead and the more sophisticated ones learn to embezzle and cheat their way through life to get ahead. People fornicate like animals and society says, "You can't stop them, so let's provide them with 'protection' so they can at least have 'safe sex' and slow down the spread of certain diseases." This is the effect of Darwinian evolution on society. It has not ennobled or made humanity better. It has released the restraints that held human sinfulness in check and is threatening to undermine Western Civilization in the name of "scientific advancement".

If you truly believe there is a God who created the universe and created you and everyone you know, then you need to stand for the Law he has also sovereignly given as the basis for an orderly society. In that Law is embedded the requirement to respect each and every person as uniquely created by God in his image, even though that image is now fallen and defaced as a result of sin. You need to stand for public morality and let people know you expect them to live up to a standard that ennobles, not down to a standard that debases. This is not a call for legalism and judgmentalism. It is a call for tough compassion that motivates people to step up and live up to their true potential as human beings created by God rather than living down to the level of clever animals. People have forgotten how to respect their own persons and the persons of others, and this can be seen in drug addiction, sexual promiscuity, violent crime, theft, and the rising tide of any other criminal and immoral behavior prevalent in our society today.

As long as believers compromise on the issue of God as Creator in either thought or attitude, the Church will have a minimal effect on the direction of public morality. The Church must stand for God as Creator and stand for the positive benefits to society which that will yield. I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth. Do you?

Stand for the Rule of Faith

2009-09-18T07:48:00.000-05:00

Yesterday evening's introductory blog pointed to seven things that Evangelical believers need to stand for. The first item in that list was the core beliefs of the Christian faith found in the Bible and expressed in the Apostles' Creed. Someone might ask, "Why is a Baptist pointing to the Apostles' Creed?" Good question, and one that deserves an answer. Over the next several days I will explore the significance of the theology in the Apostles' Creed as it relates to Evangelical Christianity.

What we know as the Apostles' Creed originated as the Regula Fide, or "Rule of Faith" in the second Christian century. A heretical movement called gnosticism developed within the early Christian movement and claimed to have secret knowledge passed on by oral tradition from the Apostles to select persons. The Church developed three lines of defense against this: (1) the Rule of Faith, (2) Apostolic succession of bishops, and (3) the Canon of the New Testament. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, in Gaul, used the Rule of Faith in his defense of the Gospel in Against All Heresies, which he wrote in the mid second century. A close examination of the Rule of Faith as seen in the Apostles' Creed will serve as a positive step toward a wholesome Christian witness to the world.

First, the Rule of Faith affirms belief in "God the Father Almighty." True Christianity affirms one, and only one God. How this relates to the doctrine of the Trinity will be explored another day. In Scripture there is no place for a multiplicity of gods or of men becoming gods in the proper sense of the word. There certainly is no room for the idea that God was once a man who achieved godhood in some previous life. "Hear, O Israel! The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deut 6: 4). "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me" (Isa 46: 9). "From everlasting to everlasting you are God" (Ps 90: 2).

In affirming that God is "Father" the Creed implies the the doctrine of the Trinity, for whatever God is, he is from all eternity. Therefore God is and always has been "Father", even before he created anything, whether spiritual or mundane. Therefore it must be concluded that in the Godhead there has always been the "Son" or, as John calls him, the Word (John 1: 1, 14, 18).

Christians need to stand again for the conviction that God is their Father by virtue of his grace given in Jesus Christ. Believers are born into God's family by the power of his Holy Spirit working through the Gospel (John 3: 8; James 1: 18) and adopted as heirs with Christ Jesus through faith in him according to the gracious plan of the Father (Eph 1: 5). God is Father of the believer by grace, and so those who are his true children are such because he showered them with his grace, mercy, and love in Christ Jesus. Christians need again to remember that this is the good news--the Gospel--that God, as an expression of grace and mercy, calls sinful and undeserving men and women into his family through Jesus Christ. In the most proper sense of the word not every person is a "child of God."

Christians need to stand for God as the Almighty One. Believers give lip service to God as Almighty, but do we live like we believe it? Is God truly omnipotent--able, as one Baptist catechism says, "to do all his holy will" (A Catechism for Boys and Girls, Q. 13)? Or is God's power limited, either by the nature of creation or by voluntary choice, to make room for others? In short, can Satan or humans thwart the will of God? What does the Bible say? In Psalm 2 the psalmist describes God as laughing at the schemes or men seeking to thwart his will. In Daniel 4: 34--35 the King of Babylon, with his sanity restored, must acknowledge that God does whatever he wills with the people he has created. The cure for spineless Evangelicalism is a renewed conviction that our God is unconquered and unconquerable. The point of the book of Revelation is that all the evil that happens and all the suffering that befalls the people of God at the hands of godless humanity is (1) part of a larger plan and (2) cannot stop God's ultimate victory in the end. "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come!" (Rev 4: 8). That God is "Almighty" means that victory is certain and it is ours. Stand fast in the confidence of Almighty God who has made us "more than conquerors" in Christ Jesus (Rom 8: 37). Go today and boldly stand for the God who gives us victory!

The Need of Our Day

2009-09-17T23:47:00.000-05:00

What is the need of our day as Christians in North America? We are faced with a multitude of "crises" calling for action. But how many of these are symptoms of some deeper problem? Evangelical Christianity today in general has become so well known for what we're against that as a group we've become gun-shy of taking a stand on any issue, afraid we'll be perceived negatively in the press. At the same time, we continue to be bombarded with what we're against. According to the world's perspective we're not for life, we're against choice (and so by extension enemies of freedom). We're not for truth, we're intolerant. We're not for moral standards and wholesome values, we're legalistic bigots who are judgmental of others.

I would suggest that, among other things, the need today is for Evangelical Christians to stand for some things. We have some leaders who do an outstanding job of standing for important matters in our society and in our churches. But at the same time we have a lot of people in our churches who are afraid to stand for those same things in their day to day dealings with people at work, at play, in our neighborhoods. We need everyday people who will "stand in the gap" (Ezek 22.30) on a number of key issues. What are those issues:

1. The core of Christian beliefs as taught in the Bible and expressed in the Apostles' Creed. This, of course, means that there are some beliefs that attempt to pass themselves off as Christian that must be rejected as pretenders to the name "Christian".

2. The core Christian commitment to the sanctity and uniqueness of human life--all human life from conception until natural death without regard to mental capacity or the potential for economic or social contribution.

3. The core Christian commitment to live a life of moral rectitude toward others as created in the image of God, and therefore as worthy of dignity, respect, honesty, and unselfish, even sacrificial love.

4. The core Christian commitment to love the Lord our God above all others, even to the point of sacrificing job, family, and life, if need be, for his glory and the advancement of his cause in the world.

5. The core Christian commitment to a life of prayer. It is curious to Western believers who place great stock in intellectual attainment that in the Eastern Church a theologian is not recognized by what he knows but how he prays. Prayer is an admission of our total helplessness and dependence on God. It glorifies God by humbling us in the dust of self-humiliation. Prayer recognizes that "I" can't do anything but that "with God all things are possible." We cast about for this method or that program to bring "revival" without recognizing that only God can send a true awakening, and if we're to see it, we must seek it from him, not from some trumped up event with a lot of bling.

6. However unpopular it is to the world, and no matter how it is misrepresented, Christians must stand up for biblical morality as the God-ordained check on increasing moral degradation, sky-rocketing crime, and societal disintegration. True liberty only comes when one knows and chooses to do what is right in God's sight. All else is bondage of the worst kind.

7. Christians must stand for compassion to people whose lives have been wrecked by sin, enslaved by government, and disillusioned by unmet promises from Church and State alike. The Christians of ancient Rome won over their pagan neighbors because the one thing that could not be assailed was their sacrificial love, even for their enemies and persecutors.

This is my first blog, and it probably reads like it. In recent days I've seen an onslaught against the very fabric of the Christian worldview and moral foundations from pretenders to the Christian name with their trumped up "history" of pre-Columbian America and man-made god, to people who could not bring themselves to say something they knew was wrong was really wrong for fear of offending someone. While many of us debate and wrangle over theological minutia the world, and our churches, are crumbling around us. Where are the people who will stand in the gap? "I searched for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand in the gap before Me for the land, so that I would not destroy it; but I found none" (Ezek 22:30, NASB).