John Piper, in his August 22, 2007 message at desiringgod.org, provides a vivid word picture for the doctrine of regeneration, also known as the new birth.

You ask, “John, how do you know you were born?”  I would reach for a birth certificate and say “Look—right here--proof, a doctor’s signature and a date, January 11, 1946, and Chattanooga, Tennessee--proof positive that I was born.”  I wouldn’t do that.  That’s stupid.

 I would say, “I can see you!  I hear you!  I feel hungry, I get hungry!  I have feelings!  I can taste!  I can smell, I can breathe!  I’m alive!”  That’s how I know I was born.  I don’t need any documents.

 So, when you ask, how do I know that I was born—again—don’t reach for your decision card, don’t turn to that page in your journal where you wrote it down.  Say, “I can see Christ, in his beauty and his worth, I see him!  I can hear the voice of God in the gospel!  I feel the need to repent and be forgiven of my sins!  I get hungry for the Word of God!  I breathe the air of grace!  I’m alive in hope!  That’s how I know I’m born again.”

 

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

(Ephesians 5:25-28 ESV)

 

 

The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases; his mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is your faithfulness. "The LORD is my portion," says my soul, "therefore I will hope in him." The LORD is good to those who wait for him, to the soul who seeks him. It is good that one should wait quietly for the salvation of the LORD.

(Lamentations 3:22-26 ESV)

This morning, the new mercies I saw related to a couple of financial matters and prayer, or lack thereof.  I got up early yesterday and went to pray with my pastor and a friend who attends another church.  Midway through the morning, my wife calls and says our basement is flooded--the A/C is dripping water.  Cha-ching goes the cash register sound in my mind.  Do we have a warranty?  Is it still good?  Oh boy, how much is this going to cost.  Darn it, I got up and prayed this morning and now Satan is going to attack.  Oh, wretched man...

Later that morning, I get an email, a check came in the mail reminding us of God's mercy in only charging us $20 for making a significant financial decision that did not include talking to him about spending a lot of money.  We were released from a contract for a home repair we had second thoughts about and received all but $20 of our $400 deposit back.  Next time, we'll remember to talk to God about how we are going to spend large sums of money, like wanting a different vehicle.

The repair did not cost us a dime.  The company we bought the A/C from gave us a little free advice and even offered to send out a repairman for free.  My father-in-law ended up coming over and implemented the free advice and it is not leaking anymore and the floor was nearly dry this morning.  Hopefully, just a clogged drain was the answer.

Great is thy faithfulness, Lord unto thee!  Do you have any doubts that God cares about every detail of our life?  Days like this reminds me of how good our God is and how utterly incredible it is that the God of the Universe included my family in His concerns yesterday.  What a mighty God we serve.

 

 

 

Posted in Current Events

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070626/28171.htm

"The Church of England is getting help from the Simpsons to provide a more relevant way of teaching children about theology and to give a boost to dwindling congregations."

Yes, that's right, the Simpsons teaching "theology."  Of course, this is not a new idea, as our culture has spit out such garbage as "The Andy Griffith Show" Bible Study and the Harry Potter curriculum, just to name two.  But here is what theology is to the author of the series:

’The Simpsons’ is hugely moral, with many episodes dealing with issues and dilemmas faced by young people. The willingness of the show's writers to deal with questions of both morality and spirituality makes the program an ideal tool

So, theology is morality and spirituality to this writer, and the Simpsons contains "Christian" themes.  The article says that the Simpsons focus on Christian themes such as "love and punishment," but when I watched the show over 15 years ago, it mocked Christianity with characters such as Ned Flanders and the primary Christian theme I remember is that "man is sinful."  I suppose you could use Bart as an example of how not to act, but then it seems that our boys and girls don't need a lot of help in modeling sinful behavior, but need more models of right living according to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

While it may accomplish its stated goal of "to help keep youth interested in church, as the number of under-16s attending worship in the Church of England on Sundays has decreased by 12 percent over the five-year period between 2000 and 2005," I do not see finding a show that is militant against Christianity (unless it has changed dramatically in the last several years, which I sincerely doubt) being able to teach children Biblical theology, which "morality and spirituality" is not even close to accomplishing such an end.  Rather, using "relevance" as a guise, the Church of England is ashamed of the gospel of Christ and does not believe it is the power of God unto salvation, so they resort to obnoxious cartoon characters to teach "morality and spirtuality."  And that is just great--those are the same things Mormons, Muslims and Jehovah's Witness' are teaching.  Perhaps the Church of England can do seminars to show those groups how to run a Simpsons program of their own.

We have all had the opportunity to see the disturbing video and/or images of a murderous mad man.  I will not give them the light of day here.  But then, what about this image:

Yes, this trial ended in finding Mary Winkler guilty of murder this week for murdering the man she is standing next to, both with happy little smiles on their faces.  She accused him of being abusive, she shot him because, well, she's not sure, she just snapped.  There they are, a popular pastor and a smiling pastor's wife with their three darling children.  Jeremiah said it:  "the heart is deceitful...who can know it."  Paul said it:  "There is none good, no not one."  Jesus said it:  "if you hate someone in your heart, you are guilty of murder."  We are all totally depraved and capable of the most wicked deeds without Christ.  And you never know who is going to "snap" and when. 

Then, I also think about the mourning of our nation over the 30+ souls entering eternity in a "massacre," yet someone is sitting out there arguing that the Supreme Court decision on partial birth abortion was not letting a doctor make decisions about a woman's health.  I imagine Columbus will have at least that many lives snuffed out this week in the abortuaries.  Thousands will die across the nation, but no vigils are being held for them today on universities across the land.

God, have mercy on me, a sinner.  God, have mercy on our nation.  I know these events happening in the same week was not by accident, but by your sovereign decree.  May we quit trying to save ourselves with a "decision for Christ" or a raising of the hand or a sinner's prayer and throw ourselves on the mercy of the only Just Judge, the Most Honorable and Holy King Jesus Christ.

 

It has been a long while since I posted anything in these parts, but I have been thinking about a portion of God's Word that I have always understood but refused to obey by faith.  Paul told the Ephesian husbands, and in this case all Christian husbands of all time to love their wives as Christ loves the church.  Obviously, this is an analogy that is not hard to fill in the blanks what Paul is getting at.  However, I am not sure that there is any Christian responsibility that is harder to fulfill.  And it is not hard because I do not love my wife, because I am very much "in love" with my wife.  But it is hard to fulfill because of the high standard it places on Christian husbands.

The high standard comes because it is not hard to put feet to the phrase "as Christ loved the church."  Christ loved the church so much that He did not grasp equality with God and hold on for dear life (cf. Phi. 2:5), but he let go and willingly entered the virgin's womb to be found in fashion as a man.  Those same angels that ministered to him after the temptation by Satan in the wilderness were at his beck and call as he hung on the cross breathing his last breath.  Yet, by the predestined will of His Father, He hung there, allowed himself to be mocked and spit upon, wore a crown of thorns, and let sinful men hang the Lord of glory on a tree for their own crimes, as well as the sins of all mankind.  He washed the feet of his disciples, knowing who He was and what awaited Him one day, even though they should have been washing his feet as the guest of honor.  He healed the diseases of nine lepers who did not show a bit of gratitude for their new found health.  He died and rose again so that one day, some two thousand years later, He could save my soul from hellfire, with much mercy, longsuffering, and irresistible grace to pour out and overwhelm my dark heart.  Yea, Christ loves His bride, and is sanctifying her moment by moment until He comes to meet us in the air.

Then there is me, the Christian husband, who is supposed to love his wife like that?  You've got to be kidding. 

Apparently not, because as I have meditated on this Scripture for going on two weeks now, I keep on coming back to this thought.  About two weeks ago, there was a death in our marriage.  Except it was a good death, because it was me dying to the type of husband that learned a lot of bad habits from our culture's portrayal of marriage, among other places.  It is easy for a man to say "sure, I'd stand in front of my wife and take the bullet," knowing full well that he is very unlikely to ever have to fulfill that promise.  However, how many men die for their wife through their life in Christ?  How many Christian husbands are taking seriously the mandate to present their bride without spot or wrinkle to a holy God?  Yet, that seems to be exactly what we men are called to do by these words of the apostle. 

I admit that I had not, on any kind of a consistent basis, put my wife above my own needs in our marriage, or my own pleasure, or my own comfort.  In short, I was being the typical American husband.  By doing so, I have wasted almost ten years of our lives together chasing after my own needs, wants and desires.  Sadly, a Christian witness of a husband is so rare that I'm not sure many noticed.  And that is the greatest travesty, because the Christian marriage is just another opportunity to show the world how glorious God's kingdom really is.   I am dull in this area, so my normally not-so-longsuffering wife is a testimony to the power of God to sustain us as He has our marriage through this time of disobedience by me.  But now, by faith, I seek to please God through loving my wife as our Lord loves us, to wash her with the water of the word as Christ lives through me.  It really has been fun so far dying daily to my wants, needs and desires and thinking first what my family needs, both physically and spiritually.  However, there is always the Spirit to lead us into the wilderness to test our faith, and a willing tempter to zing flaming arrows at my deceitful and desperately wicked heart.

My prayer at this point is that the Lord continues to mold me into a Godly leader of this family that He has so blessed Me with, pressed down and running over beyond what I could ask or think.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Current Events

So, the American Diabetes Association just now noticed the inconsistency? 

 

Of course, the real question is, does this make them a Christian organization since we are clearly the only hypocrites known in the free world? 

 

And I'm not making this up, like this excerpt:

"“I’m glad the A.D.A. finally took its logos off of sugary cereals,” said Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition and food studies at New York University."

Yes, that is the real last name of the "nutritionist."  We'll assume he has no lineage to the famous chocolate makers

Posted in Current Events

In prayer this morning, I was praying that God would exalt his name in the world, based on a wonderful resource called "What to Pray For" from John Piper and Desiring God ministries.  So, I did a quick search on the Southern Baptist Convention website and found this wonderful article.

 

Suffer the little children to come to me, for such is the kingdom of God...indeed.  May God's name be exalted in homeschools all over the world today. 

Everyone is apologizing these days, it seems.  Again, we are given a really bad explanation.  So, Senator Kerry misread his notes that bad?  I think its time for bifocals, Senator.  Ridiculous excuse.

 

Kerry says he is sorry for "botched" Iraq joke

Apparently, North Korean leader Kim is "sorry" for getting the entire world upset at the Communist nation for setting off a nuclear explosion.  My kids try this all the time, like when they let out the dog and he nearly gets run over by a car.  "Sowwwy!"  Plow over their baby sister.  "Sowwwy!"  What is the world supposed to say?  "Well, Mr.  Kim, we understand that folks have these urges.  I mean, if I had a nuclear bomb ready to go, boy I would want to see that baby work."  Sorry?  I sure hope that the world does not fall for that old trick. 

Who knew that being a parent would help me to smoke out a disingenuous response from a world leader one day!

 

UPDATE:

Apparently it was disingenuous because the report was false.  SORRY!!!

You guys have brought me a pizza here before.  The White House.  It's on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Ok, next!

Now the word of the LORD came to me, saying, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:4-5 ESV)

The weeping prophet was introduced to the nature of his relationship with the Lord that was speaking to him.  This was not something that Jeremiah pursued, but before he was even conceived, the Lord had intimate knowledge (Heb. yada) of this man.  Not only did the Lord "know" this man, he also consecrated him before his birth as a prophet to the nations.  So, it seems pretty clear that in this particular instance, God personally knew Jeremiah and determined prior to his physical existence of Jeremiah what his calling would be, which also means prior to any choice made during his lifetime. 

I suppose that one could start off by pointing out that this is only true of Jeremiah as we know so far.  But, does this apply to all believers of all time?  Paul states in his opening of the letter to the Ephesians that "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved." (Ephesians 1:3-6 ESV)

The prophet does not appear to be the exception, but his preexistent determined life seems to be the case for Paul  and the Ephesians as well, which by extension, also applies to us.  This is the heart of predestination.  God is not looking down corridors of time at decisions we will make to accomplish foreknowledge.  He foreknows whom (not what) he predestines, as Paul wrote to the Romans (cf. Rom. 8:29-30).  His words to the prophet make this even more clear.  "...before you were formed in the womb, I knew you..." 

This article appeared in the NY Times Friday.  One of they key premises is "that if current trends continue, only 4 percent of teenagers will be 'Bible-believing Christians' as adults."  Later in the article, it is pointed out that this figure came from a poll commissioned by a Southern Baptist former professor of ministry, Thom S. Rainer, and it appeared in his book, "The Bridger Generation."  The problem is that the study is about 10 years old.  However, George Barna's research indicates that 5 percent of teenagers are "Bible-Believing Christians."  Those who desire to keep their head in the sand criticize that figure "...for defining 'Bible-believing' so narrowly that it excludes most people who consider themselves Christians."  To that, this writer says "you go, Mr. Barna, if that is the complaint, your figure is likely accurate."

This look at youth ministry focuses on an event put on by the founder of an organization known as Teen Mania, Ron Luce.  The writer attended one of the arena events, titled this year "Acquire the Fire."  Mr. Luce notes that "We’ve been working as hard as we know how to work — everyone in youth ministry is working hard — but we’re losing."  Having a very good friend who was a youth minister for about 10 years and worked in youth ministry for about 20 years, I do not doubt that statement.  However, one must ask if the work being performed has been done wisely.  And while Mr. Luce is attempting to do something, his large events that have attracted over 2 million youth across the country over the course of 15 years are a microcosm of what I consider to be some serious errors in any ministry, not just the teaching of our youth.

First, these large events are standard fare for youth ministry.  Whether it be some evangelism celebration, a "Christian" rock concert, a pizza party, or a trip to an amusement park on the day a "Christian" band is playing, the foundation of most youth ministries in my denomination (SBC) is attending events.   What occurs at these events is an attempt to compete with the world to woo over the young person's affections to clean entertainment.  However, the article points out that "genuine alarm can be heard from Christian teenagers and youth pastors, who say they cannot compete against a pervasive culture of cynicism about religion, and the casual 'hooking up' approach to sex so pervasive on MTV, on Web sites for teenagers and in hip-hop, rap and rock music."  A false dilemma has been created by the typical youth ministry, whereby they even find themselves attempting to compete against the culture.  Authentic Christianity will go against the grain of the culture, and the command is to come out from the unclean thing (cf. 2 Cor. 6:17).

For years, the church has been busy attempting to copy the world's attractions and clean them up for Christian consumption.  From clothing to music to slang to general tolerance that "this is just the way teenagers are these days," the church has taught their children that worshiping God in the flesh is okay.  Then, as the church tries to baptize the world's fare, she seems dumbfounded that the kids are not impressed and move on to the next fad.  Of course, the typical youth ministry is then heading to the next fad.  And, as is typical with the church in general, Christians tend to pick up on fads months, or even years, after the world has moved on to some other vain philosophy.

Another alarming point that the article brought out is that a focus on body counts is already ingrained in our youth:

"I had not noticed how the humblest, and at the same time most balanced and capacious, minds, praised most, while the cranks, misfits and malcontents praised least . . ."

The above quote comes from the pen of C.S. Lewis, which I discovered in chapter 1 of John Piper's book, Desiring God. 
 
Our culture is full of bitter, discontented people who rarely pay someone a compliment but are quick to point out the faults of others.  If you carry on conversations with people, you have probably experienced what Lewis is pointing out.  In fact, there have undoubtedly been times when you could fit me in the praiseless "cranks, misfits and malcontents" category.

However, brethren, this should not be so for the Christian.  First, God is worthy of all praise and he delights in the praise of His people. 

Psa 150:6  Let everything that has breath praise the LORD! Praise the LORD!

Second, what can be praised is to be foremost in the Christian's mind according to the Apostle Paul:
Phi 4:8  Finally, brothers, 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.

Thus, it seems that the Christian, who has God in view, should be able to heap praise at any time.  Cynicism and a pessimistic view of the world ought to be the last thing coming from the lips of a Christian.  Looking at one of God's creatures, just imagine that God can look at depraved human beings and see worth in that person.  After all, one day, he looked at my depraved mind and in the twinkling of an eye made me a child of God, never again to live my life apart from praising Him.  So, it should be a little thing for me to find plenty to praise and have trouble finding things to criticize.

Posted in Current Events

Pope Benedict is in hot water with Muslims.  No, he is not a cartoonist, but dared to note in a recent speech in his native Germany that a religion is evil that uses physical compulsion to obtain a conversion.  Here is the quote:
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached".--Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus

In other words, it is evil and inhuman to convert a person to a religious system by force, which in the case with Mohammed's teachings that promote the concept of jihad and holy war.  But, one must read the entire speech, several times, to make sense of what the Pope is getting at and where this fits into his thesis, which seems to be the relationship between faith and reason and the relationship and place of scientific scholarship in the realm of religion.  Of course, that would be a fitting topic for a "Meeting with the representatives of science." 

Then there are the reactions of Muslims worldwide to the above quote:

Turkey's nationalist paper Vatan quoted Salih Kapusuz, head of the ruling Justice and Development Party's parliamentary group as saying: "The mentality of the Crusades has returned.

"(Benedict) will go down in history in the same category as leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini."

Despite the speech actually promoting faith by reason, all reason flies out the door and you get vitriolic rhetoric.  The mentality of the Crusades, convert to Christianity or die, is exactly what Pope Benedict is pointing out as "evil and inhuman."  How could he be bringing the mentality of the Crusades?  It does not take a logician to see that is twisted.

Also, Yahoo news points out that "Yemen's president became the first head of state publicly to denounce him and threatened to review ties with the Vatican unless he apologized. Ali Abdullah Saleh, campaigning for re-election, told voters at a rally Benedict had wronged Islam."

Do you think the voters at the rally even know what the Pope said?  I would be surprised if the basis for determining that the Pope had "wronged Islam" was presented.  Nor would most go beyond the quotation to actually read the entire speech in which the quote is contained.  All that most will know is that the Pope used "Mohammed," "evil," and "inhuman" in a sentence and join the lynch mob.

Ironically, as Muslims enter the streets in protest in Gaza, we have the Rosie O'Donnell comments making news in our country.  While I did read an  article where Christians were encouraged to contact ABC and request an apology, I did not see any news stories of Christians entering the streets crying "death to lesbian haters of Christianity.  Start the Crusades!!"  Nor were any governmental leaders standing before parliaments or voters making an issue of the comments.  But I'm sure object lessons such as that would be lost on Rosie and those in the studio audience that gave uproarious applause to her uninformed comments.

Then there is the hypocrisy of their outrage when the discussions have been going on worldwide about the journalists who converted to Islam in the presence of Allah and AK-47s.  But then, to identify hypocrisy, the world must believe and practice reason, which it currently does not.  The Muslims are in a perfect position for such a time as this, when talking points and propaganda convince people of another's position. 

Sadly, that is not only true in the world, but in the church as well, where reason and logic in the handling of God's Word from the pulpit is in short supply as well.  Yet all I hear from Islamists is the old country preacher saying when realizing his position was rather flimsy:  "Weak point, yell and slam fist on pulpit here."  Muslims worldwide have no theological basis to defend their ongoing desire to convert the world to Islam, so they continue to yell the weak points contained in their propaganda and rhetoric.  And men pleasers worldwide walk by, shake their hands and say "good points, that message really touched my heart." 

I had not posted in awhile, so I thought since I had this written up, I would post for any interested.  This is a message I gave at church last night for the Weds. night Bible Study.

July 25, 2006

Luke 10:25-37

 

Apart from the Spirit of God, the fact that, as much as it depends on us, we are shut out from the kingdom of God is not a message that sinful man is ready to accept.  Built into our sin natures is the idea that we can make ourselves acceptable to God to the point that He welcomes us into heaven with open arms because we happened to be born, tried our best to do good, then died.  This is the basic tenet of every religious system on earth other than Biblical Christianity.

 

This attitude was pervasive in Judaism as well during the time of Jesus’ ministry. Christ often encountered religious leaders who were arrogant enough to think that they could trap the Lord of glory with their probing questions.  Of course, they did not accept Him as the Christ, or Lord, or the Son of God and were fully convinced that eventually He would be revealed as just another false teacher making a claim to be the Messiah.  Tonight, we are going to look at one of these encounters in which Jesus answered a few questions asked by a lawyer with the story we refer to as “The Good Samaritan.”

 

To start off, let’s consider the backdrop of this story.  Given the hero of the parable we are about to consider, it is interesting to note that just a few verses back Jesus and his followers have an interesting encounter with the Samaritans.  Back in 9:51-56, Luke records a key turning point in Jesus’ ministry, whereby in v. 51 he is said to be “determined to go to Jerusalem.”  Wishing to go through Samaria, Jesus sent messengers ahead to make arrangements for him to stay there, but they did not receive Him, because he was traveling toward Jerusalem. 

 

Reading between the lines, it was just another slap in the face to the Samaritans that Jesus was headed toward Jerusalem, just  another dismissal of their claim that Mt. Gerizim was the proper place to worship God and that Messiah would arrive at that place.  James and John wanted to call down fire from heaven to consume the Samaritans, but instead the Lord rebuked them.  More on that later.

 

Also, encounters such as these are becoming more frequent as tension between the religious establishment representing Judaism and Christ was growing.  Of course, we know that this tension built until the boiling point was reached and eventually exploded into the day that they crucified our Lord.

 

So, Jesus is headed toward Jerusalem to fulfill the purpose of His ministry and the religious leaders in that place have had just about enough of his teaching and preaching.  Our text, starting in Luke 10:25, says “And a lawyer stood up and put him to the test, saying ‘Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” Now, this was not a lawyer practicing civil or corporate law, or defending accused criminals.  This is an interpreter and teacher of the Mosaic Law.  And, we are told that his question is not designed to find an answer to something that he does not already know.  He is putting the Lord Jesus on trial (ASV, made trial, ESV & NASB, put him to the test, KJV says tempted) with this loaded question.  Literally, A.T. Robertson notes in his Word Pictures that the lawyer is asking “By doing what shall I inherit eternal life?” 

 

Hopefully, we know the answer to this question, and I’m sure with an indignant tone we would inform this poor fellow that there is no amount of “doing” that will allow him to inherit eternal life.  But that is not how Jesus responds.  Rather, he somewhat flatters the gentleman and asks for his opinion:

 

“And he said to him, ‘What is written in the law?  How does it read to you?’” (v. 26)

 

What a wonderful example that the Lord Jesus provides here of “always being ready to make a defense to everyone that ask you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence.”  (I Pet 3:15, NASB)  And the lawyer gives a perfect response:

 

And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."  And he [Jesus] said to him, "You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live." (Luke 10:27-28 NASB) 

 

Jesus could do nothing but commend his answer for it is the same one recorded by Matthew (cf. Matt. 22:35-40) when scribes and Pharisees brought the same question to Jesus.  Who knows, perhaps this lawyer was present then and took note.  And Jesus points out that he has answered his own question in the process--“do this and you will live.”

 

There is the standard, keep the two greatest commandments and one can earn eternal life on their own merit.  But the lawyer seems to have encountered a problem having to do with the idea of loving his neighbor and wants to raise the question of who exactly is his neighbor so that he might “justify himself” and live:

 

“But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, ‘And who is my neighbor?’” (v. 29)

 

Isn't that just like an expert in the law, always looking for loopholes or ways out according to the letter of the law, at least when it is to their advantage to do so.  Of course, when it is more advantageous to apply the spirit of the law, then the lawyer uses that approach. 

 

And again, this was not really a question from the lawyer, for there was a prevalent teaching among the devout Jews that one’s neighbors were the righteous.  The wicked--tax collectors, prostitutes, Gentiles, and especially Samaritans--were to be hated as enemies of God.  Of course, they had Scripture to back them up:

 

Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?  I hate them with complete hatred; I count them my enemies.  (Psalms 139:21-22 NASB)

 

That takes us into this story that Jesus tells with the intent of illustrating to the inquisitor who is his neighbor:

 

Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him and went away leaving him half dead.  And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.  Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.

 

But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast and brought him to an inn and took care of him.  On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you .'

 

Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?"  And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."

(Luke 10:30-37 NASB)

 

One of the first things that stands out in this story is that the injured person is left anonymous.  Jesus points very specifically to the other four characters--the priest, the Levite, the Samaritan and the innkeeper.  But for the beaten, dying man, a generic term.  In other words, this could be anyone.  It could be a Jew or a Gentile.  It could be a leper.  It could be, well, you or I.  And I think this was intentional because of the main point Jesus is making with this story.

 

Next, we see the well-known actions of the priest and Levite.  If we were doing a dramatic presentation of this story, booing of the villains would be in order at this point.  Of course, the most likely excuse these two would point to is that helping this beaten, naked man that would possibly even appear dead to them would result in seven days of ceremonial uncleanness (cf. Numbers 19:16).  Also, the priest and Levite may be fearful that they would be next if they stopped to help.  After all, this road from Jerusalem to Jericho was known as “the Way of Blood” because of the violence that was commonplace due to the terrain and proximity to the desert that made hiding and escape easy for the thugs that frequented the road.  Add to that the religious elite’s view of “sinners,” and this priest and Levite may have even justified themselves by figuring that this man’s condition had come because of his own wickedness.

 

But, do any of these reasons justify the actions, or inaction, Jesus described?  While the priests and Levites surely would have provided their Scriptural support, I have a passage to share as well:

 

My people, remember now what Balak king of Moab counseled and what Balaam son of Beor answered him, and from Shittim to Gilgal, so that you may know the righteous acts of the LORD."

 

"With what shall I come to the LORD, and bow myself before the God on high? Shall I come to him with burnt offerings, with yearling calves?  Does the LORD taken delight in thousands of rams, in ten thousand rivers of oil? Shall I present my firstborn for my rebellious acts, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?"

 

He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?  (Micah 6:5-8 NASB)

 

The priest was not forbidden from checking on this man, regardless of whether or not he would become ceremonially unclean.  Obviously, from the message of this parable, even the lawyer recognized that the Samaritan showed mercy, whereas the “righteous” such as himself did not.  Further, Proverbs 21:3:  “To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.”  So, clearly Jesus is intending to disagree with the lawyer’s idea of who his neigbor is.  As one sermon writer put it:  "…if you are hung up on the law, then the odds are good you will always find excuses not to love your neighbor."

 

 

Next, without further ado, we turn to the hero of our story, the Samaritan traveler.  To truly appreciate his appearance in this story, we must consider the view that the passing-by priest and Levite--as well as this lawyer--would have of a Samaritan, any Samaritan, and do not be mistaken, the feeling was mutual for the Samaritan.

 

To say there was no love lost between Jews and Samaritans is an understatement.   The Samaritans often taunted the Jews. They rejected all of the Old Testament except the Pentateuch, and they claimed to have an older copy than the Jews and boast that they observe the precepts better.  The Jews repaid them with hatred. They rejected the Samaritan copy of the law and publicly denounced that Samaritans were of any Jewish birth (cf. John 4:12).

 

Because of their defective devotion to Judaism and their partly pagan ancestry, the Samaritans were despised by ordinary Jews. Because the Samaritans were sometimes hostile, and also the fact that a Jew believed that he could become contaminated by passing through Samaritan territory, Jews who were traveling from Judea to Galilee or vice versa would cross over the Jordan river and avoid Samaria by going through Transjordan, and cross back over the river again once they had reached their destination.

 

This hatred had religious, societal and civil consequences for the Samaritan.  For example, the Samaritan was publicly cursed in their synagogues.  He could not serve as a witness in the Jewish courts.  He could not be converted to Judaism as a proselyte and was excluded from the after life.  By the time of Christ, the Samaritans were severely despised by the Jews and to be called a "Samaritan" was to be numbered with the tax collectors and sinners.

 

With that in view, you can see that Jesus’ carefully constructed story to reveal the error of the lawyer was scandalous to the “righteous ones” in attendance.  A dirty Samaritan as the “good guy?”  And, did not Jesus just rebuke the Samaritans himself as he set His face toward Jerusalem?  What is he saying?

 

It should be evident that Jesus did not view the Samaritan as the Jews did.  The Samaritan was able to recognize that his neighbor was someone in need and showed mercy.  He was also someone who could be trusted, as the innkeeper demonstrated.  On the other hand, the Jews were too busy trying to justify themselves to help someone desperate for help.  And Jesus makes it obvious in his final words that the lawyer’s question revealed his true condition as one who did not practice the higher calling of showing mercy in his pursuit of the law as He tells him “Go and do the same.” (v. 37b)

 

In applying these things, let us consider the characters individually.  The lawyer, an expert in the law, should teach us to not even waste our time trying to outsmart the Lord looking for loopholes in Scripture to justify our unrighteous attitudes and deeds.  It is just not a level playing field.  Jesus will always win these debates and will put the inquirer in his place.  Look at what the Lord did to this lawyer, who had intended to put Jesus on trial.  But who ended up on trial?

 

 

Now, before we wag our finger too much at the priests and Levites, we must consider if we try to find excuses, complete with Biblical “support,” to avoid certain types of people.  In the story, the man needing help could be anyone and we should all check our hearts to make sure that we are not trying to explain away our avoidance of certain neighbors.

 

The Samaritan, as we have already noted, placed mercy above sacrifice.  Our personal devotion is very important, but we have not been made saints so that we may be ceremonially clean.  We have been called out to live and deliver the gospel.  Where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more, so we may have no reservations about helping our fellow man when we see him in need. 

 

The innkeeper, while he has a very small supporting role in this drama, should not be overlooked either.  Sometimes we are called on to come alongside another who is attempting to help others and we become instruments of mercy as well.  Perhaps in doing so, it will require us to go against the grain of the culture around us and come alongside some unlikely bedfellows.  Nevertheless, if it is a choice between helping a needy individual over succumbing to societal pressures and opinions, get involved.

 

Last but certainly not least, there is the Lord Jesus Christ, who is relating some very important principles through this encounter with the lawyer.  We see how he views the Law and those who place it over those whom He created in His image.  We see how he views those who use the Law to attempt self-justification.  His view of Samaritans is his view of Jews is his view of Greeks is his view of man is his view of woman—which is helpless, dead sinners in need.  And when any person is lying on the road, helpless and in dire need of help, He asks us to choose compassion, just as he does when He reaches down and saves our helpless souls.  Amen.

Posted in Theology

An all too common refrain to warn people of the dangers of Calvinism is to create the strawman that Calvinists do not have any reason to pray or evangelize because God has already predestinated everything anyhow.  That charge usually goes hand in hand with the "God doesn't make robots" charge, which some brothers do an excellent job of refuting on this jazzy little website.  First, I am going to take a quick look at Calvinism and prayer.  In my next post, I will discuss why Calvinists practice evangelism.

One interesting note on prayer is that it only makes sense if we think God can do something about what we are asking him to do.  Dare I say that everyone, despite their beliefs about man's will, suddenly calls on God's Sovereignty when they start praying?  Don't we have to believe that God is Sovereign if we ask him to change a circumstance, or to save someone?  It seems if the creature indeed has a free will, no amount of our pleading to God will do any good.  Here is a good example of this idea:

I remember one deacon in my first pastorate who constantly tried to pray from the perspective of his free will theology, but could never do it consistently. Every week he would say, "Lord, I know you love everyone in the entire world exactly alike. You love every person in the USA. You are trying to save every soul in our state. I know you love everyone in the town of Lewisburg (by this time he was talking more slowly). Lord, I know you love everyone living on Third street. You love both of my neighbors." Now about this time, the man would begin to cry and say, "But Lord, they will not listen to the gospel. They will not come to church. Oh, Lord, send your Holy Spirit and convict them. Oh, God, begin to draw them to yourself." The next week it would be the same routine. That dear man never did see that he was constantly forced to acknowledge God's sovereignty before he could pray (the first part of his oration each week was really not prayer, but preaching to me).
http://www.solochristo.com/theology/Salvation/sogip/reisopr2.htm

So why would a Calvinist pray?  Before pointing out the obvious that you can find books, sermons and other writings on prayer that have been written by unabashed Calvinists, I would like to explain the idea of "means," which helps to explain why Calvinists and anyone else who has a Biblical view of predestination and election will take part in the activities of prayer and evangelism. 

God has sovereignly declared that He will use prayer as a means to accomplish His will.  In this act of worship, as we communicate with our Heavenly Father, we get to enter the throne room and get a glimpse at His secret will as those things we pray for do or do not come to pass.  While our prayers do not change the course of history by our power, they do give us insight into the course of history as we pray according to God's will. 

Also, our prayers show our trust in a Sovereign God to do His will.  It makes no sense to pray to an impotent God who can only react to His Creation after deeds have been done.  Finally, it acknowledges the relationship between the Father and the sons of God.  We must share our heart's desire with our Lord, despite his knowing of our heart anyhow. 

Do I know if my prayer for my parents' salvation is God's will or not?  I will, since I have prayed for that to occur, and upon their last breath, the matter will be settled on earth as it already is in heaven.  Of course, my prayer will not cause their election, but it certainly will reveal that to me.  So I pray, "Father, please save my parents."  Then, I bow to His Sovereignty as to whether His good pleasure was to predestine their acceptance into the beloved before the foundations of the world.

So, while this charge is common, it really is a strawman argument that is easily refuted.  Calvinists do pray to a Sovereign God who can actually do something about what they are praying about.  Now, I'm sure there are some Calvinists who struggle with prayerlessness (this one included), but then there are also non-Calvinists who do as well, is there not?  The real fallacy with respect to prayer is that one who prays can be consistent with the notion of man's "free will" by doing so.  I would be interested to hear how that would work.

For further reading:
Why Do We Pray For Others' Salvation?
The Sovereignty of God and Prayer by John Piper

Please forgive me for the length of time that has passed since my last blog entry.  I know the death knell for interest in a blog is long periods of silence.  So, lest I get bogged down on an issue I'm not sure how to approach, that being the doctrines of predestination and election, I gotta start somewhere...

I had an opportunity to get a little studying done from Calvin's Institutes on Memorial Day and read through his views on predestination and election.  If anyone is interested, they appear online here

Calvin points out a common complaint with the idea that God would discriminate in election:
To many this seems a perplexing subject, because they deem it most incongruous that of the great body of mankind some should be predestinated to salvation, and others to destruction. (iv.iii.xxii.i)

Some consider this "double predesitination" an ugly blight on Christianity and attempt to explain away this inescapable teaching, but I have yet to hear a really good explanation as to why God must save all if he saves one, and how a Sovereign, all-knowing God does not predestinate both sides of the coin, salvation or destruction. 

In fact, it seems that if he is indeed Sovereign, He must have predestined that any in his Creation that He did not elect to salvation were left to die in their sins.  It seems that once He predestines some unto salvation, then allows the creation of those whom He has not elected, their destruction has been predestined as well.

Calvin turns to the "...posterity of Abraham..." to further advance the idea that God does indeed discriminate in whom He chooses.  But, though he discriminates, it is for His own good pleasure that he does so. 

The separation is before the eyes of all; in the person of Abraham, as in a withered stock, one people is specially chosen, while the others are rejected; but the cause does not appear, except that Moses, to deprive posterity of any handle for glorying, tells them that their superiority was owing entirely to the free love of God.(iv.iii.xxii.v)

Now, the idea of "the free love of God" used by Calvin is the idea that God can love whom He wants and that he may discriminate in how He loves.  It is acknowledged that there is such a thing as loving discriminately by the creature, who certainly loves his wife differently than his mother (good or bad), and his children differerently than his spouse, and his friend differently than a co-worker, and a believer differently than an unbeliever. 

Thus, God, whom man is made in the image of, should not be limited to loving all of mankind indiscriminately.  "Jacob have I love, Esau I have hated."  Oh, how that verse stings those who claim God is "love, love, love."  Yet, that statement has no problems when it is accepted that in some manner, God loves Jacob whereas he hates Esau.  And since Paul points out to the Romans that it is not for what either twin did (cf. 9:10-16), we can live with that, although God is love, and does have the ability to love all indiscriminately at some level, he also has the freedom to discriminately love whom He desires and to differing degrees. 

But notice that Israel was not chosen meritoriously:

The cause which he assigns for their deliverance is, “Because he loved thy fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them,” (Deut. 4:37); or more explicitly in another chapter, “The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because you were more in number than any people: for ye were the fewest of all people: but because the Lord loved you,” (Deut. 7:7, 8). He repeatedly makes the same intimations, “Behold, the heaven, and the heaven of heavens is the Lord’s thy God, the earth also, with all that therein is. Only the Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them,” (Deut. 10:14, 15).(iv.iii.xxii.v)

This is where the rubber meets the road.  Israel was inexplicably loved by God.  When choosing Israel, it is as if a spouse asks their mate "Why do you love me?" and the response is "I dunno, just because."  God loves Israel and it is not based on their number, their good deeds (a rebellious and stiff-necked people), their ability to comprehend God, or any other trait.  It is simple, God loved, He chose. 

So, why does God choose one person unto salvation, yet leave another to destruction?  It is simple, God loved, He chose.

Posted in Christian Living

While not a big fan of choruses, we sang the contemporary praise song "How Great is Our God," in church Sunday, and I found myself humming it as I was responding to someone who seemed to think that God predetermining the identity of the elect somehow makes it all irrelevant.  The Bible, salvation, judgment, all irrelevant if one ascribes sovereignty to God alone in salvation.

Eventually, I just had to read Paul's introduction to his letter to the Ephesians and still found myself humming this chorus, "How great is our God, sing with me, how great is our God...name above all names, worthy of our praise."  What I read was this:

(Ephesians 1:3-14 ESV)  Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places,  even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love  he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,  to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.

In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight  making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ  as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,  so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.  In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,  who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

So, how great is our God?  He chose us, predestinating us for adoption in His Son, before the foundations of the world.  He did not simply identify us as ones who would choose Him.  The verse says he chose us, according to the purpose of his will, for the praise of the glory of his grace.  How great is our God?  Sing with me.

So, how great is our God?  Through Christ's blood we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.  Not by our choice, but according to the riches of his grace.  Come on, sing with me, "how great is our God?"  He lavished upon us, those whom he chose, the riches of his grace, letting us in on the mystery of his will, to let us in on his plan of salvation.  Sing it again, "how great is our God?"

So, how great is our God?  How about obtaining an inheritance, through his predestined will, that the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory.  Then, lest we spoil our inheritance, he sealed us by the Holy Spirit until we acquire possession of our inheritance, to the praise of His glory, or another way of saying it, maybe you've heard it, "how great is our God."

Irrelevant?  Praising the glory of God's grace according to the fulfillment of his predestined will?  I don't think so.  What could be more relevant than knowing that as we live out our days, we have a Good Shepherd who receives all that His Father gives Him, and does not lose one of them, all according to the already determined plan of His Father.  No, that makes me ask and answer the question of the chorus, "how great is our God."  I praise His glorious grace, that me, who gives Paul a run for his money as the chief of sinners, was predestined according to God's plan, and that he carried out that plan.  Because I'm pretty sure, no certain, that if I had to find God and choose Him, I would be lost.  That's how great our God is, the One who overcomes the wicked heart of rebels to turn them toward Himself, to the praise of the glory of His grace.

Amen.

Posted in Current Events

In a NY Times article (free registration required), it seems McChurch is now expanding into McSynagogue.

For example:

A hipster synagogue grows in SoHo, drawing large crowds with its "Torah cocktail parties" in fancy loft apartments and user-friendly prayer services designed especially for the uninitiated.

A group of New York-area congregations, along with others across the country, refashion their synagogues into religious multiplexes on the Sabbath, featuring programs like "Shabbat yoga" and comedy alongside traditional worship.

As I started reading the piece, I thought "this has to be as a result of Warren's Purpose Driven stuff."  Sure enough, as you read on:

"There's a feeling that all the old structures aren't working," said Rabbi Richard Jacobs of Westchester Reform Temple in Scarsdale, N.Y., who was part of a group of synagogue leaders that gathered recently in Los Angeles at the University of Judaism to get advice from the Rev. Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose Driven Life" and the evangelical pastor of Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif., which draws more than 20,000 on weekends.

If this does not sound the alarm that the Purpose Driven series is little more than religious consumerism, what will?  What's next, McMosque?  McMass?  Of course, I do believe that some Roman Catholic churches are already full on board with the Purpose Driven techniques.

Further, it also points out that one does not believe in the power of the message, so one must use manipulation and persuasion techniques to get bodies in the door--bodies with means, since I'm guessing that the poor and indigent are not attending these cocktail parties.  There are mortgage payments to make, rabbi salaries to pay, so, yes, we simply want folks to return to their Jewish roots to worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, right?  Uh huh, sure, and I have a studio loft in Manhattan that I'll sell you dirt cheap.

What is so disheartening is that false religion is turning to so-called "evangelical" churches to solve their numbers problems, and they are responded to in-kind with a method rather than a message.  Paul said "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation for everyone that believes."  Yet, what does Rick Warren provide to lost Jews?  McSynagogue.  What a sad testimony for the American church.