Satan the Scriptures and Sound Doctrine (Part 2)

I decided to use the text of Matthew 4 for my most recent Awana council lesson. I really want the children (as well as adults) to get a better grasp of the Bible. But not only that, I want children and adults alike to know more reasons why we should know and love the Bible. And in an attempt to do that, I wanted to show that Satan knows the Scriptures well and he intentionally uses, abuses, and confuses them in an attempt to draw us into sin.

In order to illustrate this, I decided to look at Matthew 4 while cross-referencing it with Genesis 3. It seems to me that Satan accurately quotes the Psalms when he tempts Christ in Matthew 4 while he totally distorts and confuses God’s Word when he tempted Eve in Genesis 3. I believe that this gives us a glimpse of two different tactics that Satan uses when he attempts to deceive believers and non-believers alike who may have some knowledge of the Bible.

When dealing with Eve, the devil mis-referenced what God had told Adam in the previous chapter. Adam was commanded not to eat from only the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Satan’s question to Eve implied that God had restricted her enjoyment from the whole garden. But what makes the situation even worse is that Eve herself apparently didn’t know God’s command. She communicated that they had been commanded not to eat or even to touch that forbidden tree. And I cannot find a reference in Genesis 2 where God instructs Adam not to touch the tree, only not to eat from it. When you combine the fact that Satan twisted God’s words and cast doubt on what God had said with the fact that Eve didn’t know what God had indeed said, you have a recipe for confusion and sin.

I don’t think that this attack method is limited only to Eve’s singular situation. We can see so many people in modern Christendom (especially the emergent church) who want to converse about theology but usually they ask the same question from the garden, “has God indeed said…?” And more often than not, these conversations call into question the very explicit and foundational teachings of the Bible; the exclusivity of Christ in salvation, eternal punishment for the ungodly, and substitutionary atonement to name a few. Furthermore, proponents of the same types of “new” or “generous” orthodoxy (which many times is not orthodox at all) try to use Jesus’ words as the trump card to all other Scripture in an unfair way. If I were to say to some adherents to more emerging and inclusive theology that the Bible condemns homosexuality (which it does in Genesis, Leviticus, Romans, and Corinthians – among other places), the common retort is that Jesus didn’t say a word about homosexuality, therefore it must be acceptable. It is true that Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexuality that is recorded in the gospels or Acts, but He also didn’t say anything against raping your neighbor’s daughter. Is it fine to rape your neighbor’s daughter? Absolutely not! And the reason that it is not acceptable to rape is the same reason that it is not acceptable to have homosexual relations. The Bible clearly condemns rape and homosexuality regardless of the fact that Jesus didn’t comment on either. Don’t allow Satan to trick you with the logic used in this type of an argument and be led astray from the truth as so many of our contemporaries inside of Christendom are.

I actually think that it is easier to deal with this type of attack as opposed to the second of Satan’s revealed tactics. If someone, anyone, uses a Scripture to condone some action or belief but after simply looking up the verse I can tell that it has been violently altered (changed words, inserted words, removed words, etc.) so as to fit the promoted views, that is an easy enough Scriptural attack to deal with and then move on. But when ravenous false teachers quote Scripture to justify heresy or sin, it becomes a problem that is more difficult to deal with when they are not overtly changing and editing the wording of that verse. When tempting Christ, Satan accurately quoted (as far as I can tell) the words from Psalms 91:11,12 but he applied them in a completely unbiblical way. Jesus meets this attack head on and quotes Deuteronomy 6:16 declaring that no one puts God to the test, and this stops Satan in his tracks. In other words, no matter what Psalms 91:11,12 say, if you apply that in a way that contradicts the rest of the Bible, you’ve got your application all wrong.

Since no one has insight equal to that of Christ, I gave the children some advice to use in situations where something is being said or taught that just seems wrong but the person speaking seems to be accurately quoting a bible verse. The advice (I believe it originally came from the ministry Stand to Reason) is that Christians should not read a Bible verse. Don’t read a Bible verse? The point is not to tell people to ignore the Bible. The point is to admonish Christians not to read one single verse, but instead to read the context of that verse so that we can better discern the meaning of that specific verse. Sometimes that may mean reading only the paragraph or two surrounding the verse and sometimes you may need to read the whole chapter or more. And other times, you may just need to read other verses (and their context) that seem to say the same thing or something different in order to begin to grasp the overall meaning of what the particular verse in question has to say.

The single defense against false teaching is the same thing that is necessary for promoting true teaching and theology; The Word of God. Only by knowing what the Bible says and what God means by what He said in the Scriptures can we rightly understand anything about God. It is important to know and understand what God has spoken to us because without it, believers are almost as helpless as a blind man in a maze. We’re “almost” as helpless because believers have the Holy Spirit indwelling us in order to help us, but without the Word of God we don’t have anything solid by which to judge our feelings and thoughts or the teaching of others.

The Sound My Brain Made When It Melted…

One of the blessings of my job, other than the primary benefit of taking care of my family and allowing my wife to stay home with our kids, is the fact that I have the liberty to listen to pretty much whatever I want throughout the course of my day. For the first few years, my regular diet of audio intake was Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, and Joe Soucheray. In other words, I listened to a lot of conservative political talk radio. However, after the election of 2004, I became less and less satisfied with the content of the programs. My views on social, political, and moral issues are still very much the same, but I became increasingly unable to listen to Medved and Prager be very openly inclusivistic as it relates to their views on religion and God.

My growing dissatisfaction with political talk (of any stripe) came about because of a few contributing factors. The major one is that during that time my only real desired topic of conversation was quickly becoming Christ, the gospel, and the Bible. Again, not that politics are unimportant, but I felt that my time and energy would be used more effectively if they are not consumed by politics. Furthermore, I have a theory about general conversation and people’s willingness to listen at all. I believe that everyone in every relationship (whether it is a long time friend or someone you just met) has a certain degree of conversational “capital” that you can choose to spend in conversation with that other person. In other words, normal social niceness will allow you to bring up a subject or talk about things for a certain length of time even when the hearer is opposed to what they are hearing. So, if I used my conversational capital primarily discussing budgetary issues, immigration, the war in Iraq, abortion, poverty, taxes, or any other important issue (and they are important political and social issues), I would not have any left to spend on talking about the gospel, Christ, salvation, and eternity.

So while this transition in my own thoughts was occurring, I found a talk radio program called “Talk the Walk” on a local AM Christian station. This program had many focuses, but primarily it was on the proclamation of true doctrine (Theology Thursday’s), calling out false teachers (False Teacher Tuesday’s), and evangelism (Witness Wednesday’s). I came to greatly enjoy this show, even if I did not always agree 100% with the host or guests. But then, about two years ago, the program started to change a bit. I didn’t know why, but I believe in January of 2006 the program was taken off the air, and a newer show that is much less critical of modern Christendom has taken its place. “Talk the Walk” morphed into “Way of the Master Radio” that still has the same goals as the previous show, but with a different name and a sharper focus, primarily, on evangelism but without losing doctrinal clarity or calling out false teachers when they pop up.

However, this is not an article about Way of the Master Radio, but it is focused more on AM 980 KKMS and the show “KKMS Live – with Jeff and Lee”. “KKMS Live” was the show that replaced “Talk the Walk” on AM 980 KKMS and I didn’t listen to it a lot at first because the style was a bit different from what I was used to. My first real exposure to Jeff and Lee was at a John MacArthur conference in mid January of 2006, and I had no adverse thoughts about them because of this experience. However, since then, I have heard snippets and segments of their program and I have become increasingly uneasy with some of the programming choices that they are making and some of the theological views that they choose to give air time to in order to promote them. This was no where more profoundly evident than when I heard them interviewing Tony Campolo.

Tony has written a book recently (honestly I don’t know or really care what the title is), and he appeared on this show in order to promote this book. I will mostly quote what Tony had to say as my critique and the subject of contention that I have with the show and its hosts. In his book, Tony apparently talks a lot about different forms of prayer, and he encourages practicing them. One of the forms is called Lectio Divina, and Tony explained what that type of prayer is,

“Take a passage of Scripture, read it. Now close the Bible; be still and let the Spirit of God apply what you have just read to your own personal existential situation. Go to the Scriptures and there are two ways of reading them. One is the scholarly way. “What did Paul mean when he wrote these words? How do the people in the social context who receive these words understand them?” That’s’ the scholarly way, but there is another way of reading Scripture in which you read some Scriptures and say, ‘Ok Holy Spirit, what do you want to say to me through these verses?’ We see the Scriptures as a vehicle through which God speaks to us, not in generalities, but to our individual needs. I am sure you have met people who have said, ‘I was going through a very difficult time and I was reading some Scripture and suddenly a verse that I had read over 100 times spoke to me in a way that it had never spoken to me before. And suddenly it addressed my need; at that hour it was exactly what I needed to hear from the Lord. That’s called Lectio Divina.”¹

After hearing this, to their credit, one of the hosts of KKMS Live voiced a concern that using this type of prayer would and this type of studying technique with the Scriptures would lead to misunderstanding the meaning of the text. I think that this was a valid question to raise, and it gave me hope that the hosts would stand firm against such inductive and subjective methods of Scripture interpretation. Tony responded by saying the following,

“I think that there is that danger, that’s why in this book, we establish certain parameters to make sure that you do not end up with pure subjectivity and end up interpreting the Scriptures in a way that suits your own purposes rather than see the Scriptures as an instrument through which God wants to speak to you in your situation. Now we all know that you can read the same passage of Scripture 10 different times, 10 different months, and every time the same Scripture will speak to you, probably every time it will say something else to you. I’m sure you’ve had that experience?”

When Tony asked this question, both of the hosts gave rather affirmative responses. Now this concerned me, and I was beginning to get rather irritated with this entire program and the dialogue that was going on here. But before I could even catch my breath, Tony kept steamrolling along the same thought line.

“But we always have to be careful; is what God is saying to us through the Scripture in harmony with His will, and there are certain ways of dealing with this, and we feel that John Wesley, and we talk about John Wesley in this book a great length, told us how to be careful so that we don’t end up with subjective interpretations that end up being quite heretical. One of the ways is this; that we must always read the Scripture and ask ‘how do those in the Christian community to which I belong understand these verses?’ To share what I just learned from these Scriptures with bro & sis in the faith is a very important thing. Because if I am out of line, they will correct me. The Scripture sys test the spirits to see whether they be of God. And this is one of the ways that you test; namely you ask brother or sister [summarize what you read and what it “said to me”], and wait for ether correction or affirmation from your brother or sister. The second thing to do is to ask whether, in the tradition of the church, the church has been around for 2,000 years and people have been interpreting Scripture for 2,000 years, is this in harmony w what the church leaders, the fathers & mothers of the church have said about this passage of Scripture over the years. Is it in harmony with that? ‘Check with tradition’ says Wesley. The third thing is; be reasonable. Is this a reasonable understanding of these verse? These are very very important things to do because otherwise we end up with pure subjectivity."²

I don’t think that I’m being too critical of Mr. Campolo here if I think that his method for validating his understanding of the Scriptures is way off. This method may well be good enough for the Roman Catholic system or any other system that holds up tradition as equal to Scripture, but not for someone who claims to be protestant and evangelical. He didn’t once mention that we need to check our understanding of a particular passage against the rest of the council of Scripture. Would it be reasonable to think that Tony was implying this type of Scriptural authority when he indicated that the steps for vetting ideas were to ask other Christians, to check the tradition of the church, and to see if the conclusion is reasonable? I don’t think so at all. It is not nearly the same as stating that the Bible is the single authority for all things pertaining to God and our Christian life. Honestly, he sounds more Episcopalian than evangelical with his readiness to bow to reason and tradition.

One other thing came out in his comments that truly troubled me. He made allusions to what the Bible is, what Scripture is, a few different times, but none of them was more revealing than when he advocated viewing the Scriptures “as an instrument through which God wants to speak to you in your situation.” I do not believe that I am playing a game of semantics when I say that this view of the Scriptures that he articulated is very dangerous, and I believe that the danger is evident in what he further went on to advocate. Let me, clearly and for the record, state that the Holy Bible, the Scriptures, is the container of the objective message from God but it is not an instrument for communicating a subjective message from God.

The differences in what I have said and what Tony Campolo has said are not minor. With Campolo’s interpretive method, it would be very possible (and likely) that based on (selected) comments and thoughts from some of the church fathers as well as utilizing modern reason along with the thoughts of other like-minded Christians that one could conclude that Christ isn’t God or that He isn’t the only way to God. Furthermore, other blatantly universalistic conclusions could be arrived at using this same hermeneutic. Consequently, this type of inductive interpretation is dangerous and deadly to the soul.

But, unfortunately, the madness didn’t stop. Campolo went on talking and now moved on to the second prayer type called centering prayer.

“Centering prayer is an ancient practice, and I think Jesus was into it. He said, when you pray – it’s ok to pray publicly with a lot of words - but if you really want to pray go into a closet and shut the door; that is go where there are no distractions; go where there is nothing around you to pull you away and then center down, focus. And the Hebrew Bible says, to meditate upon His word. To those who wait upon the Lord. I wake up in the morning before I have to, I did it this morning, before the alarm went off I was up, and I say the name ‘Jesus’ over and over again. And people say, ‘it sounds like vain repetition.’ Call it anything you want, there’s something about that name. It drives back dark things; it gets rid of the extraneous thoughts; I have to put things out of my mind, because the minute I wake up my head starts spinning with all the things that are waiting to be done. I have to drive them out and create what the celtic Christians called ‘the thin place’. An atmosphere that is rarified with nothing which I am conscience, save His presence. And in the quietude, and the stillness of the morning, I simply surrender and wait for Christ, wait for the HS to flow into me. In Isaiah 42 we read, ‘they who wait on the Lord shall renew their strength.’ And I ask the listeners, when was the last time you waited for the Lord to flow into you? When was the last time you were quiet and still and just surrendered and said, ‘Christ Jesus, come in, flow into my being, saturate my personhood.’ And then the next verse says, ‘and in stillness He will come into you.’ What a wonderful that we are taught in the Scriptures."³

Again, before I look at what was said, I must again note that the KKMS Live hosts responded in verbal affirmation of what Campolo just said. The truth of Scripture records that Jesus had long prayer times and that He often went away from people to pray, yes, but that doesn’t come close to saying that He was doing “centering” prayer. Furthermore, if centering prayer is emptying one’s mind of nothing save “His presence”, how could He do that if He was the one trying to pray in this way? It makes me want to retch when I hear Jesus’ habits being interpreted as doing centering prayer. That conclusion is only at all possible to come to if you go looking through the Bible for vague references to something that might have been centering prayer.

Also, I think that Campolo’s dismissal of the “vain repetition” (cf. Matt 6:7) objection shows a downright disregard for Scripture. To be fair, whether “vain repetition” is referring to this specific type of meditation or if it is referring to using a lot of big and dramatic words while praying, Campolo dismisses the objection outright! I’m not certain of the specific meaning of this text, but judging from the context it seems to be specifically referring to the quantity of words, perhaps these are in a vain display of intelligence in an attempt to show the severity of a need, as opposed to repeating one word over and over. And if that is the interpretation of this text in Matthew, I still would have a hard time finding anything in the Bible relating to prayer that indicates that we are to repeat one word over and over and over and over in an effort to be aware of nothing “save His presence”. Plus, the taught model for prayer from Jesus to the disciples was not one of emptying or not thinking about stuff, it was praying first and foremost for the supremacy of God, but then the prayer includes things that are in daily life like the provision of daily bread, requesting forgiveness for current sins, and from deliverance from temptation, and this is the exact opposite from a clearing of the mind.

“There is a kind of conversation with God where you say nothing and you hear nothing, but you just sense yourself being connected with Him and He being connected with you; flowing into your being, saturating your personhood. That’s what centering prayer is all about.”⁴

When he described centering prayer this way, I just about lost whatever sanity I still had left at this point. First of all, how do you have a conversation if no one says anything? I don’t even think that an emergent could understand that or pull that off. Secondly, what does it feel like to “sense” being connected with God in that way? And what does it feel like when God flows into you? What does “saturating your personhood” even mean? I have no idea what he just said. This is ridiculous. And this is supposed to be a way to converse with God? How can we do this and be confident that we are connected to God when we have no way to “test the spirits” to see if the feeling we’re getting is the saturation of my personhood by God Himself or just the leftover bodily reaction to the mocha I had this morning.

I don’t want to minimize making your requests known unto God – we should do that – but we need these other kinds of praying as well: Lectio Divina and I am also mentioning this other kind of praying which is called centering prayer. And there is a third kind that we mention in this book, and it’s the prayer of examine and I do this when I go to bed. I put my head on the pillow and I examine the day from when I woke up until that moment, and I think of all of the good things that I have done, all of the ways in which God moved through me and blessed other people; all the ways in which I did His will, and I thank God for them. Paul writes in Philippians 4:8, “and finally my brothers and sisters” and I could easily read ‘at the end of the day brothers and sisters’, ‘whatsover things you have done that are good, whatsover things you have done that are profitable, whatsover things you have done that are of good report, that are excellent, think on these things.” And the next verse is ‘and then continue to do them.’ Then I go over the day a second time and I remember all of the ways in which I failed God, all of the ways in which I sinned, and I repent, and I ask God’s forgiveness. But I dare not do the second thing until I’ve done the first thing. So often, all Christians ever do is confess their sins and do not recognize the wonderful things that God has done in them and through them. Hence, they end up very depressed because if all you do is concentrate on the negative, you will end up as a negative person. The prayer of examine requires that we do both of those things.”⁵

It is one thing to examine your day and praise God for how you’ve been used as a vessel to glorify Him, but it is quite another to mangle Philippians 4:8 to do it. I’m sorry, but “Finally my brothers and sisters” is not the equivalent of saying “at the end of the day”. “Finally” is not in reference to a time or date, but in reference to the conclusion of Paul’s letter. But even more than that, the text doesn’t say think on these things “that I’ve done” or “that you’ve done”. It says “think on these things” with no specification as to the person doing them. I tend to think that he’s referring to the good things, and specifically the best way to think on them is to go to God and to His Word and think on what He has done.

As to Campolo’s comment that confessing sin leads one to be negative because you’re only focusing on the negative, I must heartily disagree. I do attempt to confess my sin, as much and as often as I can, and it doesn’t leave me depressed. Why? My focus is not solely on my many and dire failures. My focus and my mind are fixed on the mercy of God. This does not leave me depressed, it leaves me thankful and in awe of Him because He saved me and loves me.

Well, it wouldn’t be fair to not mention that once Campolo was done with this part of his monologue, one of the hosts of KKMS Live responds by saying, “very good, very interesting.” Honestly, I don’t know what would be considered “good” about the content of what he was saying and the content of the book he was pushing. I’m not sure whose decision it was to push this book and give Campolo this platform, but all I can say is that wherever the blame lies, it is a bad sign for a Christian radio station that has included so many faithful Bible teachers.

I have no knowledge as to the motives of either of the hosts for why they were so inviting to Tony Campolo or to his dangerous and sub-Christian ideas of prayer and the Scriptures. That being said, I find it difficult to understand how the two hosts of KKMS Live can “amen” John MacArthur and seem to make overtones to really enjoying his preaching as well as other men like him and then turn around and be warm and fuzzy to a guest who promotes spiritual practices that are exact opposite of so much of what men like Dr. MacArthur have been teaching.

Whether the hosts have little or no discernment concerning the difference in the teachings of a Campolo and a MacArthur, or whether they don’t see a problem with the practices encouraged by Campolo, or if they do see a problem with the practices and do understand the difference between him and MacArthur type teachers but still gave a warm and welcoming environment for him to plug his book I don’t know. Regardless of the real reason for this kind of dichotomy, this does speak well for KKMS as a station, KKMS Live as a program, or Jeff and Lee as discerning and wise Christian “leaders”.

As a side note, this wasn’t the first time that Tony Campolo was a guest on this radio program. He was on near the end of 2006, and I listened to that show too. The thing that made me the saddest concerning that interview when I compared it to the recent one was that both hosts disagreed and brought up points of debate with Tony Campolo regarding his views on the Palestinian people, the state of Israel, social justice, and other conservative political issues. This was shocking and saddening because they were more passionate about the state of Israel and the government’s place in helping the poor than the clear problematic statements about the Word of God and about prayer. Not that the issues of modern Israel and poverty are not something to have biblically motivated thoughts about, but the disparity in passion and conviction between the two subjects was woefully concerning.

(Oh, and by the way, my brain made a gurgling sound when it melted.)

---

¹ Tony Campolo on “KKMS Live with Jeff and Lee” November 26, 2007. http://www.kkms.com/blogs/JeffandLee/11560256/

² Ibid.

³ Ibid.

⁴ Ibid.

⁵ Ibid.

“Bond-Servants”

Yesterday was a very exciting day for me. God granted me the privilege to preach my first sermon in my new series on Philippians at the same time as he has allowed me to have my first opportunity to preach during the Sunday morning worship service. The reason why I have chosen the book of Philippians, similar to the other books that I have taught through in Sunday school, is that I am not very familiar with the book of Philippians and the Truths that are held in its pages. So, teaching and preaching through this book will both be a great catalyst for my own learning and it will provide an opportunity for me to share what I am learning.

Also, I believe that it is best to not pick-and-choose topics or individual texts on somewhat of a random basis when preaching, but instead to work through the whole counsel of God. That way, it is much more likely that the preacher or teacher will have to deal with texts and truths that might be difficult, unpopular, and uncomfortable, but are nevertheless vital for our learning. Not that I am able to deal with all of the Scriptures and everything there, my skills and time in relation to exegesis and general Bible study as well as the available platform for teaching are somewhat limited. This causes me to not be able to go as slowly or as deeply as I would like to.

“Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus…” (Philippians 1:1)

The term “bond-servants” is used very often in the New Testament as a self descriptive statement of some of the Biblical authors. The Greek word translated as “bond-servants” is douloV (doulos), and it is a word that refers to common servants. One of the notable things about this designation of people in the first century is that a bond-servant is someone who is owned by another. A bond-servant can rightly be understood as a slave.

This reality creates a problem for modern understanding, especially in the United States, because whenever the term “slave” is used, our cultural history draws us back to the enslavement of black Africans in the United States, and the horror and heinous sin that this institution was. But in order to understand what it means to be “bond-servants of Christ Jesus” and the beautiful truth that this description helps to illustrate, we must be willing and able to look past our own pre-conceived ideas of slavery in our own time and look back to what it meant to Paul and the other writers of the New Testament when they attributed it to themselves. Paul, Peter, James, and Jude all use this word as a description of their relationship to Christ in the opening of their various epistles.

The hideous evil of treating someone as an animal and controlling their body, actions, and very life against that same person’s own will and desire (the very picture of slavery in America) was the American expression of the institution of slavery. However, the slavery of the Christian to the Lord Jesus Christ is a capturing of the believer’s will, affections, and desire so that his body, actions, and very life are single-mindedly focused on serving and loving his Master. In other words, man enslaves and commands the body but cannot capture the will; God’s grace enslaves the man’s will and, consequently, also commands his actions.

Christ’s work in salvation is so glorious, lovely, so profound and precious to the believer that his changed heart, will, and mind then freely bend the knee to Christ’s commands. Paul elaborates on this truth later in his discussion of his own precarious position in prison when he wrote, “For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.” (Philippians 1:21) Furthermore, in the third chapter of this book, he gives more detailed reasons for why his mind and heart have been so drastically changed.

“⁷ But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. ⁸ More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, ⁹ and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, ¹⁰ that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; ¹¹ in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.” (Philippians 3:7-11)

To be a Christian is to be a slave to righteousness. Paul describes this slave relationship in his letter to the Romans where he says,

“¹⁶ Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? ¹⁷ But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, ¹⁸ and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. ¹⁹ I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification.” (Romans 6:16-19)

Show me a member of our fellowship, or any fellowship, who claims the New-Birthright of a child of God (cf. 1 John 3:1-2,10) but is not and has not been growing in holiness and obedience to Jesus Christ, and I will show you someone whom I have deep concerns for. This is not concern that this person might be a “backslidden” believer nor that they are a “carnal” Christian, but it is a concern as to the reality and genuineness of their faith and whether or not this person is saved or whether they are unsaved, in their sins, and going to hell!

So, as I understand it, all Christians are truly bond-servants to Christ Jesus. Don’t mistake me – not all Christians are obedient to the same degree, some are more mature and others are less mature, but all are growing in maturity which is evident through their increased obedience and conformity to Christ. I am convinced, based on the testimony of Scripture, of the fact that all believers are in an ongoing process of sanctification (cf. 1 Thess 4:3, Rom 8:29-30). Sanctification is the process of growing in holiness, and I believe that the proof of this reality is growing obedience to God through conformity to the commands of His Word.
span style="font-size:85%;">

Awana Memories and S.H.A.R.I.N.G.

A few weeks ago saw the final installment for this year’s Awana program at ABC. This year began with some difficult decisions and changes, we had a few major setbacks come from out of nowhere during the middle of the year, but we ended well.

The difficult changes that we had to navigate through this year included changing the location, the night, and the leadership of the entire Awana program. However, when I think about this last year in Awana, it is a lot of the positive things come to mind, whether I think of the clubbers, leaders, or the parents of the children involved it doesn’t matter, I have been blessed on all fronts. Some of the most encouraging ways that others have blessed me this year are related to the areas of service, spiritual growth, and spiritual sensitivity.

First of all, it is no secret that all three of our Awana directors were not directors last year. In fact, neither Jon nor Susan had ever even worked in Awana before. I say this to both of their credit. Jon had shown an interest in participating in previous years, but because of the mid-week meeting time, he was never able to participate. One thing that really impressed me about his heart for this type of ministry was when he asked me what we did and when we did it for our program in order that he could pray for us at those times. That blew me away, and it still is a source of encouragement.

Susan had a bit of a different reason for becoming the director of our youngest club members (preschoolers). Our carry-over leadership from the previous year became disgruntled or unhappy with something (I have no clear idea of what it was), and quit one Sunday night after the program. So, we had one week to scramble and find some committed leadership to fill in the gap, and Susan jumped in and really did a fantastic job.

Both Jon and Susan responded to an urgent and critical need in our body, and the Lord has used their willingness to serve and love for children greatly this year, and I have personally been blessed by them on numerous occasions.

Secondly, in the area of spiritual growth I wanted to make two comments. Perhaps the key factor that can make our Awana program shine, except in the semi-rare case of a committed and personal initiative by the individual clubber, is the parental involvement. As a leader, It is very easy to figure out which parents spend time working with their children on their Awana verses. For that, parents, I am truly grateful, and I think that your children will only thank you more as they grow older. Another key factor is the involvement and growth of the individual leaders. Now since I spend the majority of my time working with T&T and I have been able to witness those leaders more closely, I have two thoughts relating to two leaders; Ed and Dan. I remember hearing Ed’s testimony, being present at his baptism, and approaching him to serve in Awana three years ago. Let me just say that whether it is taking charge of the section time or boldly leading the club in prayer, Ed has shown growth in spiritual maturity and a willingness to lead this year. Similarly, I asked Dan to lead a council time this year. In reality, I badgered him until he relented and put together his first ever lesson for Awana. I was (and am) so proud of Dan for stepping out, putting a good deal of preparation into his lesson, and boldly delivering it to the clubbers. Dan gained a valuable experience that he said will help him next time. Both of these men blessed me in their very distinct, but vitally important, ways of service and faith.

Now, if I were to try and sum up what my main goal or primary point was that I was trying to instill in the children this year, I would use the acronym of S.H.A.R.I.N.G.. It is true that you could accurately describe my focus as being on the Ten Commandments, but teaching on them was not the end goal in mind.

S – Show sin By Using the Law.

The whole lesson series on the Ten Commandments could fit into this letter of the acronym. It might seem a bit excessive to spend so much time on only one point when there are six other parts to the whole goal, but there is good reason to do that. The Bible calls the law the tutor that leads us to Christ (Galatians 3:24). Paul also said this, “I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COVET.’” (Romans 7:7)

In other words, we cannot know what sin is or see the sin in ourselves if we do not know the law because “sin is lawlessness.” (1 John 3:4) Once this is established, the rest of the message of the gospel flows comes somewhat more smoothly. When I went through the Ten Commandments with the children, my goal was not to talk about worshiping a golden calf as idolatry or robbing a liquor store as a form of theft. Because if I had done this, these “good” church kids would have tuned me out thinking that this doesn’t apply to them because they would never do that stuff. So I talked about budging and cheating on a test as forms of stealing. Budging in line is stealing someone else’s place and cheating is stealing someone else’s answers.

It was after one such lesson that a child blessed me with her spiritual sensitivity. After the lesson when the leaders and clubbers were dispersing, Grace, a shy fourth-grader, timidly approached me to ask a question. Grace’s question was, essentially, to ask if it was covetous to want something for her birthday. I was very blessed and impressed by this question. I was blessed because it showed that she had understood the lesson about coveting enough to apply it to her own life in a way that I had not described. I was blessed because it is such a sweet thing to hear a child (or anyone for that matter) examining everyday normal life in an effort to determine what is pleasing to God. This was truly a joyful experience and a highlight of the year for me. It was exactly this type of personal application of the Law of God that was my goal for the children.

H – Humility Before God’s Law is the Only Acceptable Reaction.

There are only a few different ways that one can react to the correct teaching and direct application of God’s Law to one’s life other than with an attitude of ambivalence. The first reaction is pride or self-righteousness, and this is the most common reaction, by far. These people react to the Law of God by saying that they are good people even after being shown to have broken the Law of God and therefore are lawbreakers. This self-righteousness can show itself in that this person refuses to admit that they’ve broken any commandments (i.e. “I’m perfect”). The other way is after admitting that they have sinned, they are confident that the good that they will accomplish will outweigh or take “atone” for any of their own sin.

Even after the Law has been used properly, to the best of the ability of the preacher, there is no guarantee that everyone will have a humble attitude. This is why it is a blessing to know what Paul taught us that regardless of the variety of workers, it is God and God alone who has the responsibility of enabling or causing the growth of a believer.

“⁵ What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one. ⁶ I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. ⁷ So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.” (1 Corinthians 3:5-7)

The response that we want and that we desire in others is one of humility, or, as Jesus put it, being poor in spirit (Matthew 5:3). It is exactly this humble attitude of acknowledgement and personal ownership of sin that shows that the hearer has truly understood their crime and their impending punishment.

“But He gives a greater grace. Therefore it says, "GOD IS OPPOSED TO THE PROUD, BUT GIVES GRACE TO THE HUMBLE." (James 4:6)

If the person displays an acceptance of the pronouncement of guilt as well as the personal responsibility and ownership of it, then we can begin to share the Good News. I have heard Todd Friel say on many occasions that once the ground work of the Law has been laid, then when we proclaim the gospel using John 3:16, we do it with power and conviction and enthusiasm. Because grace without the reason for grace, or a sacrifice without the need for a sacrifice doesn’t make any sense.

A – Accept the Truth of the Gospel with A Child-Like Faith
– A Child-Like faith

“¹⁶ But Jesus called for them, saying, ‘Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.’ ¹⁷ ‘Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.’” (Luke 18:16,17)

First of all, I must say that I agonized over using “accept” in this part of the acronym. I realize that “accepting Jesus” is the common way to refer to the appropriate response to the proclamation of the gospel, but I am not convinced that it is the best word to use. Personally, I like the word “receive” because it is the word that seems more often to be used in the Bible (i.e. Luke 18). Unfortunately, “sharing” is not spelled “shrring”, so I had to “make due” with what I had.

Using the concept of childlike faith was not a matter of making my message fit my audience, the older I get; the more I see the necessity of just that kind of faith. One of the chief things that is different between children and adults relates to skepticism, mistrust, and unbelief. Children (using my own experience as a father) are very inquisitive, but this is not really a different trait from adults. The difference is that if a child trusts someone, they will accept an answer that is given and move on. For instance, when my son asks me why he can’t go out into the street to pick up some “treasures”, I simply tell him that it is dangerous and that he could get very hurt doing so. My son believes what I say, and we move on.

This same pattern, a question asked by the child (which may have been precipitated by a direction or correction from a parent) and is then answered with a statement by the parent, seems to be the formula for how children learn and understand things about the world. The child has no knowledge of gum disease or tooth decay, but we teach them to brush their teeth. They most likely haven’t seen gross tooth decay or even been to a dentists’ office, but they take their parent’s word to be true. We must humble ourselves to the preaching of the gospel and come to it as helpless and ignorant children placing our faith in the tested and true Word of our Father in Heaven.

R – Repent of Sins.

However controversial this concept may be inside of modern Christendom, this step of repentance is both a natural response to understanding, receiving, and believing the gospel, plus it is also the mandate and testimony of scripture.

"The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel." (Mark 1:15)

⁷ So he began saying to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? ⁸ "Therefore bear fruits in keeping with repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham for our father,' for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham. ⁹ "Indeed the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; so every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." (Luke 3:7-9)

Repenting of sins is the turning from and forsaking the old fleshly life, habits, and desires that so defined us before being saved. One of the chief objections to this doctrine of repentance is that it seems to be a “work” and the gospel is clear that we are saved by grace and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9). This objection is very easily dealt with because repentance (as I see it) is always the response of the one who is being saved. In other words, repentance doesn’t save you, but this repentance is the evidence that you have truly been saved.

"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (John 3:36)

The obedience here is to the full message of the gospel. Satan himself believes the truth about God – he knows that God is real, that Jesus is the Christ, and he understands the atonement and yet neither Satan nor his fallen angels are saved. This type of mental understanding doesn’t save the redeemable either; one must have the full faith that is evidenced by a changed life.

“5 I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.” (John 15:5,6)

In short, repentance is a tangible process by which our lives are brought into an increasing alignment with God and His holy standard.

I – Indwelling of the Holy Spirit

Once the gospel has been preached, and the individual has responded in faith and repentance, the Holy Spirit now indwells the believer.¹ There are many different facets and important points to make about the significance of the Spirits’ indwelling the believer, but for this lesson, I simply focused on the fact that eternal life has been granted to the believer at this time. This is something that cannot be lost. The hope of the believer is that we will be united with Christ in glory and be released from this state of war, turmoil, and suffering.

² This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? ³ Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? ⁴ Did you suffer so many things in vain--if indeed it was in vain? ⁵ So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?” (Galatians 3:2-5)

N – Neglect Your Old Self; Take Up Your Cross

“²⁴ Then Jesus said to His disciples, ‘If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. ²⁵ For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.’” (Matthew 16:24,25)

Christ made the demand on all of His disciples that they must forsake all that they had known and treasured in favor of Him and Him alone. Another way of articulating this concept is as the continuation of a lifestyle of repentance. In other words, we must continually be forsaking our old nature, warring with the sin that we are aware of, and running to Christ and following in His commandment of love and obedience.

One of the things that we see in the parable of the soils (Matthew 13:3-9,18-23) as well as in the text above is that the Christian life is not one of care-free or struggle free life, but it is one of battle and relentless striving for Christ and against the flesh. It is those inside of Christendom who are wooed away from Christ by money and possessions or who back away and forsake the name of Christ because of the threat or reality of persecution who testify in and of themselves that they were never born again because the testimony of their lives is not one of forsaking all in favor of Christ.

G – Go Into All the World and Make Disciples

¹⁹ "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
²⁰ teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:19,20)

The goal is never just to get someone to be saved and end there. The end goal is for that same person to be obedient to Christ, and having the mind of Christ this same person will obey Christ’s commission to all believers to preach the gospel in order to “seek and save that which is lost” (Luke 19:10).

“¹⁴ How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? ¹⁷ So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.” (Romans 10:14,17)

---

¹ I would say that these three things happen almost simultaneously, but if you were to press me, I would say that the individual is regenerated first and then responds in repentance and faith to the proclaimed gospel. Even though this is the logical way that the steps would occur in time, I don’t believe that we can parse them out like that and that is why I think that they occur virtually simultaneously.

Memorizing Scripture

Ok, I know that I have had a lot of videos lately on my blog, and I really don't want to have my blog turn into a primarily into something where I just link to other stories or post videos from others. I wasn't going to add another one for a while...but then I saw this one. This is a longer video, but if you love God's Word, you will not mind the length.

Aparently, this gentleman memorized Hebrews 9 and 10. But not only did he memorize it, but he worked with the text to be able to deliver it in a passionate and compelling way as oppsed to a static recitation.

Truly, I think you will be blessed by watching (or even just listening to this). If nothing else, I hope that you are edified by it and encouraged to memorize scripture yourself.




source: fide-o

Jesus and Justification

In my recent studies and conversations concerning justification I have come across a few bible stories that seem to show Jesus declaring someone as being forgiven. In other words, people were justified prior to the death of Christ. And the reason why I have contemplated this issue from various different angles lately is that this is such an important doctrine. It is this doctrine upon which the reformation exploded from. The understanding that at one moment in time, a sinner goes from being judged by his or her own deeds and unrighteousness, but now this same sinner is judged on the basis of Christ’s deeds and righteousness as He perfectly fulfilled the law of God. This singular event of being declared righteous on the basis of the righteousness of Christ Jesus is very different from other theological views that espouse a process of justification.

Before I go further, let me briefly illustrate why this is so vital. 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” If we, in the sense of process justification, become righteous over time (over time is implied and stressed in these frames of thought) by being righteous, then this verse means that Christ also became sin by being sinful.

"’In Him’, don’t miss those two last, little, explosive, words. What this teaches is that because of our union with Him, because we are ‘in Him’, we become righteous [in] the same way Jesus became sinful. How did Jesus become sinful? Did He become sinful by sinning? No, nor do we become righteous by doing righteousness. He became sinful by having God recon to His account my sin, and I become righteous by having God recon to my account, His righteousness. And if that isn’t the best news in all the world, I don’t know what is because I know that in this life, both biblically and experientially, I’m not going to ever arrive at a point where I would qualify to be accepted by God. Ever! Therefore I must have the qualification from another, and it is His. And then the question is, ‘How do I get it?’ And the answer is ‘In Christ!’ United to Jesus, my sin is on Him, his righteousness is mine, and do you then see how huge this issue is? [Do you see] how important being ‘in Christ’ is? Union with Christ is not a throw-away, minor doctrine; it is at the center [of our doctrine]."¹

Let us not miss the scale of how important this doctrine is. This truth of justification as an event where the sins of the sinner are imputed to Christ and the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the sinner is the difference between complete biblical grace in salvation and every other human and demonically contrived religious system of works righteousness. This doctrine of justification is, to use a colloquialism, a hill to die on.

The story of the paralytic who was lowered through the roof of a house where Jesus was teaching and performing miracles is one of the more famous of His miracles. This account can be found in Matthew 9:1-8, Mark 2:1-13; and Luke 5:17-26, and one of the reasons that it is probably so famous is due to the extraordinary length that the paralytic’s friends went to in order that he might be placed before Jesus. The point that all three of these gospel writers seem to be making with this story has less to do with the actual healing of the paralytic but is primarily focused on Jesus’ ability to forgive the sins of men.

In all of the accounts, the man is lowered down through the roof and then Christ proclaims that this man’s sins are forgiven. The account goes on to show that Jesus shows the validity of His first statement by commanding the man, “get up, pick up your pallet and go home.” (Mark 2:11) The interesting thing is that this man was declared to be forgiven. We know that it is only on the basis of Christ’s (then future) atoning work on the cross that this is possible and that this atoning work covers all sins, this man’s justification was pronounced to all who heard, but most especially for the benefit of the Pharisees.

Another story of the healing and forgiveness of Christ, that is somewhat less well-known, is the story of the ten lepers that is found in Luke 17:11-19.² These ten lepers came to meet Christ, but stood at a distance (as was customary with lepers). They then requested mercy from Jesus, and He responded by telling them to go and show themselves to the priests and “as they were going, they were cleansed.” (Luke 17:14) However, the point of this account is not primarily about the ten lepers who were cleansed, but about the one who was thankful. Only one leper came back to offer thanks to Jesus after he noticed that he had been cleansed of his disease. The account ends by saying, “And [Jesus] said to him, ‘Stand up and go; your faith has made you well.’” (Luke 17:19) The phrase “has made you well” literally means “has saved you.”³ Christ said that this man was saved, not that he had to become saved or that he would progressively become better in order to attain this salvation, but that he was saved by Christ in that moment. Furthermore, once we are saved, we possess eternal life (John 3:15,16; 3:36; 1 John 3:15; 5:11-13). And, by definition, eternal life cannot end, so you will not ever lose the salvation that Christ purchased and gave to you.⁴

On a quick side note, I think that one of the other very interesting characteristics of these two accounts of Christ saving men is that they both have another thing in common. Both stories tell us that these men were saved, that they had their sins forgiven, and both of them omit any indication that these men came seeking this outcome. Their primary goal seems to have been what the others seeking Jesus were, and that was to be healed of sickness or other physical ailments. Jesus declares that these men were saved, and it is not based on their request or their seeking Him for salvation. It seems to be an argument for the delight of God to save whosoever He wills to save, and it is not ultimately dependant upon man to seek to be saved by God.

The final account that I want to deal with today is also found in the gospel of Luke. It is the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican and how they prayed in the synagogue (Luke 18:9-13). The first interesting note is that Luke prophases the parable by saying that it was addressed to a certain group of people, “who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt” (Luke 18:9). Jesus goes on to show how the self-righteous Pharisee compared himself to heinous sinners, even to the tax collector who was praying at the same time, and thanking God that he was not like them. However, it was the lowly sinner’s attitude in that he beat his breast and cried out for God to be merciful that Christ showed His approval for when He said, “I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other.” (Luke 18:14) It was not the self-righteous attitude or actions of the Pharisee that find favor with God, it is just the opposite. It is the fact that the sinner knows and understands completely that there is absolutely nothing that he can do to please God, and that he stands totally condemned by his own actions.

It is in these passages that we glimpse one of the great doctrines and truths of all of scripture and redemptive history. This truth is the idea that justification, the once-for-all declaration of the forgiveness of sins and the righteous standing before God, is accomplished on the basis of Christ’s work alone. It is from this great and awesomely glorious truth that we can then see sanctification in its true light. The ongoing process of refining and becoming more Christ-like in our present condition (alive and redeemed, but still living in sinful flesh) is only possible when we are first made right before God.

---

¹ “United with Christ in Death and Life” by John Piper 10/8/2000. I personally transcribed and added the information in the brackets of this transcription.

² It is almost an entirely arbitrary personal accounting of how well known any of these stories are or aren’t. It primarily reflects my own familiarity with these stories prior to looking at them recently.

³ NASB footnotes on Luke 17:19. Also, the Greek word here has the root word that means saved in the sense of salvation.

⁴ There are other arguments for the perseverance of the saints (a.k.a. eternal security) that come directly from biblical texts, but my point is not to articulate those in this article. You can, however, read my thoughts on this wonderful doctrine by reading The Perseverance of the Saints (a.k.a. Once Saved Always Saved).

Baptism

Does the act of baptism save? In some circles of theology the answer is yes, and in others the answer is no. The differences on this issue are a microcosm of the differences on the overall theology of justification.

I hold to the position that the baptism is the act of a Christian who is obeying a command of Christ, and it is a symbolic and public profession of the faith that the believer holds. The act and meaning of baptism is summarized in the doctrinal statement of my church like this, “We believe that baptism is the immersion in water of a believer in Christ into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to show forth by solemn and beautiful symbolism, the believer’s identification with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection, and that it is a Scriptural prerequisite to church membership (Matthew 28:19; Acts 8:36; Romans 6:3-5; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 2:38-41).”¹

Before I go further, I must explain the reason why we hold that baptism (adult baptism by immersion) is a prerequisite of church membership. Jesus sets forth two ordinances, or acts, that are to be observed by all believers for all time, baptism and the Lord’s Supper (communion). The basic reason why baptism is necessary for membership at Ambassador Baptist Church is that baptism seems to be the first act of obedience to the Lord following conversion. All of the leaders, teachers, and other servants in the church must be found to be faithful and devoted servants of Christ. Since baptism is the initial basic command that believers are to obey, one cannot be an obedient servant of Christ if they have not been baptized.

John Piper was asked if you needed to be baptized in order to be saved. His answer was very profound. He said that one does not need to be baptized in order to be saved, but he went on to say that if a person willfully rejects being baptized after they have made a profession of faith, they might not be saved. Not for the lack of baptism, but for the lack of the fruit of baptism. If I reject to follow the command of my Savior, is He truly my savior? So, as much as I must affirm that baptism is not a prerequisite for salvation, the lack of submitting to the command of Christ to be baptized is a clear sign that one is not obeying Him, and this is a sign of an unbeliever.

Another point that I must articulate before going further is which position on baptism I am arguing against here. There are some traditions that embrace infant baptism as a symbol of the new covenant while not making the leap to affirm that one is saved by baptism (infant or otherwise). I do disagree with this understanding of baptism (held by Presbyterians and some other protestant denominations), but it is not nearly as big of a theological issue as the idea of baptismal regeneration held by others.

In my experience, two of the many verses that are brought up when someone is promoting a type of baptismal regeneration are John 3:5 and 1 Peter 3:21. On the surface, both of these verses seem to be saying that baptism is necessary for one to become a Christian.

“Jesus answered, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’” John 3:5

“Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,” 1 Peter 3:21

The first hurtle to jump over is the language barrier. The specific hurtle is with the Greek word “baptizw” that is translated baptize. The word and the use of this word don’t always require or imply a water ceremony, but it has gained that meaning because the Greek word was transliterated into English instead of translated. I deal with this issue in the first part of my pervious article, apostle.

John 3:5 is not a problematic verse when it is tossed in the face of someone who rejects baptismal regeneration. One of the ways that this has been argued in the past is that the baptism by “water” is referring to natural birth and the breaking of the bag of waters of the pregnant woman just prior to delivering her baby. Now, where this argument seems reasonable from a Western European standpoint, it would not have been the way that a first century Jew like Nicodemus. He was a teacher of the Law and any mention of baptism would have brought to mind the various places in the Law where cleansing was symbolized by baptism. One such place is with the story of Elisha and Naaman found in 2 Kings 5. The basic story is that Naaman (a Syrian) had leprosy and he went to see Elisha to be healed. Elisha told him that he needed to go to the Jordan and dip into the water 7 times, and if he did that, he would be healed. After some time, Naaman finally bends his will and humbles himself to go do the foolish act of dipping in the Jordan. Once he comes up the 7th time, the leprosy is gone.

This is not a story of the cleansing nature of water, nor is the point that the act of baptism saves. 1 Kings 5:13-14 show us what was going on in Naaman’s mind and why the humiliation of dipping in the Jordan was initially not acceptable to him. He wanted to do something, pay something, or otherwise have some credit for his healing. But the command of Elisha was to show that the power of God alone is what is able to cleanse a person.

Nicodemus would also have thought of Ezekiel 36 where the sprinkling of water was God’s way of saying that He was going to purify His people form the wickedness and idolatry that they were involved in. It was with not the sprinkling of the water that God would perform this cleansing; it was symbolic language to show the cleaning process of God.

1 Peter 3:21 seems a little more daunting to the Bible student at first, but once it is read in context, you can see that it is not advocating baptismal regeneration. The first key is found in the word “corresponding”, and we must understand to what illustration of Noah and the flood mean.

The story of Noah is found in Genesis 6-9. God was angry at all of humanity for our wickedness and he was going to destroy everyone, but He decided to save Noah. The text goes on to show that Noah and his sons built a very large boat, brought animals and supplies into it, and then Noah and his 7 relatives (his wife and his 3 sons and their wives) got into the ark. God then shut the door and He deluged the planet in a terrible flood that killed the men and animals that were not on the ark.

The question needs to be answered – what saved Noah. The obvious answer is God, but by what method did God save Noah? It was not the water that saved Noah, the water only brought death. Noah and his family were saved by the ark, by being inside of the ark they were protected from the wrath of God that He poured out on the world.

When did God pour out His wrath in order to deal with or judge the sinfulness of humanity? He did this to Christ on the cross. Christ was baptized into God’s wrath on the cross (Mark 10:38, Luke 12:50). We are saved by a baptism, but not the water baptism that the believer undergoes. No, we are saved by being found in Christ who was baptized in God’s wrath for the sins of those who would believe. The question then becomes, how can a man be found in Christ, and the overwhelming answer of scripture is that faith is the vehicle that God has divinely chosen to connect the sinner to the Savior (Acts 15:9; Romans 3:21-27; 4:5-20; 5:1-2; Galatians 2:16; 3:2-15).

---

¹ Constitution of the Ambassador Baptist Church p. 4

learning by studying and teaching

Since late 2004 or early 2005 I have been privileged to teach through Colossians, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Titus, and Jude. It has been a great blessing for me to be able to study these texts with the goal of being able to teach on the important points (a very few of them, at least) of these books to my peers. It amazes me to think about how much I have learned and how much I have grown in my appreciation and love for both the Word of God and for God Himself in this study.

Sometimes, it is a cause of guilt to think that if I didn’t study in order to be able to teach, I wouldn’t have studied as much or as deeply. It’s true. I wouldn’t have had the external motivation or paradigm to encourage me to study well. Along with teaching, this blog has also been an avenue that has encouraged and facilitated further and deeper study of the Word.

But in all reality, I don’t feel guilty that my studies aimed at teaching are what has been the vehicle for my growing in knowledge and understanding. I guess that it is comparable to what the experience of going on a missionary trip (at least a short-term one) is like.

I went to Africa for a 3 week mission’s trip in the summer of 2000. My team’s objective was to engage in evangelism, minister to kids at schools and orphanages, and to help out a local church in various other ways. Before I went, I had heard various people from previous missions trips say that they had gone so that they could be a blessing to the people who they would be ministering to, but, instead, it was the missionaries who came back with an overwhelming sense of God’s blessing and grace and having been ministered to. This was the case with my experience.

One of the most blessing experiences that I was able to do was to purchase a guitar to bring down to Africa in order to use during our trip and then to give it to the local church so that they would have another instrument in their worship services. The leaders of the church expressed gratitude and I am sure that it was (and hopefully is still being) well used. However, I felt overwhelmingly blessed and privileged to minister to them in this way.

John MacArthur made a comment during his sermon series on Luke 15 (dealing with the parable of the prodigal son) that lasted a period of about 5 weeks. And even with that amount of time, he said that he knew that he would be unable to communicate the whole of what he had learned and gleaned from his long study of the text. I would add, for myself, that my ability to effectively communicate what I have learned is also an impediment that makes the gap wider between what I know and have learned from what is taught to those to whom I teach.

In Sunday school we just went through the Spiritual (you can read about it in my previous article), and I wanted to make an impression on those in my class (and you too) of how important service is in a healthy Christian walk. Not everyone is a pastor or a missionary or any given role in the body of Christ. So I am not suggesting that every Christian should regularly teach a Sunday school class. But I do want to encourage all Christians to serve and to work in your local church. It can be as the sound booth tech, someone who runs the power point, an usher, a deacon, singing special music, or whatever. But serve regularly. And even though I said (and I still mean it) that not everyone can or should be a regular teacher, you can always study hard on something and offer to give a Sunday school teacher a break. If you study really hard, and work diligently in dedicated time, you can come up with a devotional that will be edifying for other believers.

When my brother-in-law and his wife were trying to settle in on which church to attend (they had been alternating between two good ones during their dating and engaged relationship), I was concerned for them. Not because I had any critical doubts about either of the two churches, but because I wanted to stress the importance of service. I think that I gave him 3 things to look for in a church (after the foundational theological issues have been addressed and satisfied), and they were:

• The pastor needs to do good biblical preaching


• The ability and desire to fellowship with peers and non-peers alike


• You need to serve, in some way, and start as soon as you can.

I stressed these 3 things because they hit on three areas of where each individual can grow. Also, you will be ministering to people by being involved in their lives (fellowship), engaging the pastor on what he is preaching about, and ministering to the larger body of Christ in the area that you are serving in.

You may, or may not, have heard that 90% of the work of the local church is done by about 10% of the people. Well, it is so common that it is almost a cliché. However, this seems to be very true. Just imagine the impact that we could have on the world (not to mention the impact that it would have on all of our lives) if the other 90% did the same amount of gospel work that the other 10% are doing. If nothing else, I think that the body would be healthier and more eternally focused.

through the eye of the needle

Have you ever read the Biblical account or listened to the story of the Rich Young Ruler found in Matthew 19:16-26? A young and wealthy man asked Jesus what he would have to do in order to inherit eternal life. Jesus asked if the man had kept the commandments, to which he replied, “Yes.” Jesus then made a shocking statement which is followed by the young man’s heartbreaking (but not shocking) reaction, “’go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.’ But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.” (Matthew 19:21b-22)

I fear that sometimes when we read this account we may have the same reaction that is all too common (at least it was for me) when reading the account of God giving the Israelites Manna. Basically, in Exodus 16 and Numbers 11 we see that the Israelites were grumbling about the food that they were missing in Egypt, so God graciously provided bread (wafers) from heaven that actually tasted like honey (Exodus 16:31) and could be eaten in various ways. The people took God for granted and after a while complained and said, “but now our appetite is gone. There is nothing at all to look at except this manna.” (Numbers 11:6) You can almost hear the “yuck” sound (the sound that you make when you spit something out of your mouth that is detestable to you) at the end of that statement. We look at the Israelites here as ungrateful and disobedient fools, and we are flabbergasted that they would scoff at food that is literally set in front of them by God. In the same way, we are prone to look at the Rich young ruler with disgust and shock that someone would look at God, in the flesh, ask a question about how to inherit eternal life, and then walk away and reject the answer because of money.

My point so far is simply this: Don’t miss the direct application to you and me in the story of the rich young ruler.

What was the stated reason why this young man was unwilling to follow Christ? He had much wealth, and it was a lot to give up. Pastors thunder to their congregations saying that those who have great wealth will have a difficult time with being born again quoting Christ when they say, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." The problem that we have is that when preachers warn against the dangers of wealth, we look around us to see those who have more money than we do to form our understanding of who the wealthy are.¹ When I hear the word “rich” or “wealthy” I think of people like Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Cruise, and other people who are worth billions of dollars. It is true, these people are exceedingly wealthy, there is no question about it. If I am able to think outside of the box and not be so egocentric in my thinking, I may ask the question, “How wealthy am I compared to other people in the U.S.?” That is a good question to ask because then, my definition of “wealthy” then becomes how much money constitutes being wealthy is determined upon those who are above and below me on the economic ladder. Now, I am no economist, but I know that if you make $100,000 per year in the U.S., you are in the top income level, or the upper class, for the whole country. With this in mind while, if you work an average job (where many Americans make between $25,000 - $50,000 per year) as I do, we would see ourselves as in the middle class and let most of the warning of Matthew 19 bounce off of us because, after all, I may not be poor (in the U.S. poverty level), but I am definitely not in the top income bracket either to be considered wealthy.

Let’s take one more step back, for one moment. Why should I only consider those people who live in my community, my state, my country, or western society when gauging how wealthy I am? The last I heard, there are over 6 billion people on the planet, and the US only has about 298 million people living here currently.² Just think about the $25,000 or $50,000 in light of the 6 billion people. We all know that Africa is impoverished. We know that many people in various 3rd world countries live in complete and abject poverty. I went to a web site called the Global Rich List and I was shocked at how rich I am in comparison to the rest of the world.³ For instance, the same $25,000 that would put me at the low end of the middle class in the U.S. would put me in the top 10.8% of all people. If I worked at minimum wage ($5 per hour) for 40 hours per week and made around $10,000 in one year, I would still be in the top 13.31% richest people in the entire world. This means that about 5.2 billion people make less money than a 14 year old working at McDonalds.

Who’s the rich man now?

Make no mistake. If you live in the United States, even if you don’t really “make” or “have” any money, you are still far better off and have more wealth than most people in the world. The poor in our country, for the most part, are provided with good shelter, water, sewer, ventilation, food, along with other essentials. What will you hold onto that, like the rich young ruler, will cause you to discard Christ and His offer of salvation because you love your “stuff” more than Him? If you live in the United States, as I do, you are more than likely among the wealthy, and this warning is applicable to you and me. “If you’ve got clothes on and a full belly, you are wealthy.”⁴

Truly, it may be said that it is hard for an American to enter the kingdom of heaven. It may well be easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for an American to enter the kingdom of God. Let us not be casual about the way that we spend our money nor on the things that occupy our time and attention lest we (who claim allegiance to Christ) play the harlot by giving our affections to objects of less worth than God Himself.

---

¹ There is nothing wrong with being wealthy. Many of the Old Testament saints (including most, if not all, of the patriarchs), but it is undeniable that the Bible gives strong warning against the dangers of having, and trusting, in wealth.

² https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/us.html

³ I am not sure how accurate or up to date The Global Rich List web site (http://www.globalrichlist.com/) may be. However, even if the figures are 10 years out of date or off by thousands of dollars, even the adjusted figures are shocking to say the least. I don’t endorse or support any of the causes that this web site solicits for; I merely chose this site for its usability of the income tool.

⁴ “Magnifying God with Money” by John Piper (Desiring God Radio broadcast 8/9/2006)

standards for believers (part 2)

Because of the fact that the Contenders Sunday school class is made up of young adults, I am not going into great depth and detail on the "practical outliving of healthy doctrine in good works" and developing the "practical examples of what these good works should be"¹ for older men and women as shown in Titus 2:2-4a at this time. That being said, I do want to briefly look at the character traits of the older members the church to have an idea of what we are to aim for.

First of all, "older" refers to physical age (50 or 60 and older) and not spiritual maturity. If you want to read an examination of how we fit into the categories of spiritual maturity, read 1 John 2:12-14. Listen to following the statement about John Wesley when he was an old man:

"At the age of 83 - after having traveled some 250,000 miles on horseback, preached more than 40,000 sermons, and produced some 200 books and pamphlets - John Wesley regretted that he was unable to read and write for more than 15 hours a day without his eyes becoming too tired to work. After his 86^th birthday, he admitted to an increasing tendency to lie in bed until 5:30 in the morning!"²

"Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance." (Titus 2:2 NASU)

• Temperate – or sober who “avoids extravagance and overindulgence.”³
• Dignified – being honorable “behaving with reverent propriety”⁴
• Sensible – “prudent, or sober-minded”⁵
• sound in faith, love and perseverance – having longer life experience, they should be more firm in these matters (see Titus 1:13,14 referring to sound faith)
  

Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, (Titus 2:3-4 NASU)

• Reverent in behavior – “came to refer to that which is appropriate to holiness.” ⁶
• Not malicious gossips – a "slanderer or false accuser" and the word "malicious" is used many times in the NT to describe Satan.⁷
• Not drunkards – ”as to be under the power and mastery of [drink].”⁸
• Teaching what is good – a clear urging to use teaching gifts in a correct way

One key thing to remember is that these character traits don't just start out of the blue. It seems to me that these are traits that a person grows into. In other words, these traits should be evident in younger men and women, but they should grow and mature with age to be "ripe" in you and me when we are old.

As for the "application" part of this blog entry...well, there isn't one. The reason is that it seems to me that all of the different descriptive terms used for older men and women are pretty self evident. In the next part of this series devoted to the practical living out of sound theology found in Titus 2, I will tackle the roles of young women and men.

---

¹ Believer's Bible Commentary by William MacDonald p. 2139

² Titus, MacArthur New Testament Commentary by John MacArthur Jr. p.73

³ Ibid. p. 74

⁴ Parallel Classic Commentary on the New Testament compiled & edited by Mark Water p.977, Titus Commentary by A.R. Fausset

⁵ Barnes’ Notes, Electronic Database.[Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft]

⁶ Titus, MacArthur New Testament Commentary by John MacArthur Jr. p. 77

⁷ Ibid. p. 77

⁸ Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Modern Edition, Electronic Database.[Copyright (c) 1991 by Biblesoft] Matthew Henry

quick thoughts on Psalm 1

Anorexia and Bulimia are serious eating disorders. For those of us who have never personally struggled with these disorders, we can never understand the mindset of people who feel compelled to starve themselves or to cause themselves to vomit after eating a meal. Most people don't struggle with these problems, and so this may seem to be a silly problem. The solution to these problems is simple and direct. Eat and don't gag yourself!

Christian, how long has it been since you've read your Bible? Yesterday? Last week in church? A month ago?

How consistent is your focused time reading the Bible? Do you go a long time without reading the Bible and then immerse yourself and try to devour an entire book of the bible, or large chunks at one time?

Do those questions sound similar to anything else? It should. So many Christians are prone to be either biblically bulimic or anorexic while being gluttonous in almost every other area of life (food, entertainment, etc). With problems like this, it is no wonder that modern Christianity is being so diluted and polluted with false teachings.

"He humbled you and let you be hungry, and fed you with manna which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you understand that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the LORD." (Deuteronomy 8:3 NASU)

Moses is comparing the very food that we eat to the very word (in this case, the Law) of God. If we do not feed ourselves regularly with the spiritual nourishment that God has so graciously provided, how can we ever expect to be able to be more than simply "existing" while not growing and getting stronger? One could even wonder that if you could go for days, weeks, or months without much or any time devoted to reading the word of God that you may, in fact, not be saved at all.

That being said, there of course is no spiritual requirement for a specific amount of Bible reading in order to receive or maintain salvation, so lest I appear to be legalistic (adding anything to salvation other than grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone), I will explain what I mean. If we are new creations in Christ and born of the Spirit, shouldn't we desire the Word of God? If I can go through life and pay God and His Word less attention than I do trivial and temporal things, it just might be a good sign of where my heart is (see Matthew 6:19-21). Regardless, if we claim allegiance to the King of kings, we ought to know what he wants us to know.

How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, Nor stand in the path of sinners, Nor sit in the seat of scoffers! But his delight is in the law of the LORD, And in His law he meditates day and night. He will be like a tree {firmly} planted by streams of water, Which yields its fruit in its season And its leaf does not wither; And in whatever he does, he prospers. (Psalm 1:1-3 NASU)

If we immerse ourselves in the Word, we will have the strength to stand in this fallen world. We will also not be deceived by false doctrines because we have no basis on which to refute them (Ephesians 4:14).

standards for believers (part 1)

Paul transitions from talking to Titus about qualified elders (Titus 1:5-9) and false leaders (Titus 1:10-16) to now talking to Titus about Titus (Titus 2:1), and then to speak concerning the rest of the members of the church body (Titus 2:2-10).

concerning Titus (Titus 2:1):

Over and above giving him the qualifications for an elder, Paul is speaking directly to Titus and admonishing him to "speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine." This seems to imply more than just the work of preaching and teaching sound doctrine as a pastor or elder and includes more casual, constant, and daily conversations. It was referring to this type of practical application of sound doctrine that John MacArthur wrote, "The Bible never divorces doctrine from duty, truth from behavior....Those who claim the name of God have always been commanded to live godly lives."¹ Adam Clarke does a good job of pinpointing this concept in his commentary,

"This is a conclusion drawn from the preceding chapter: the Judaizing teachers not only taught a false doctrine, but they led an unholy life; Titus was to act directly opposite; he must teach a sacred doctrine, and the things which become it; he must proclaim the truth, and illustrate that truth. The people must not only be well instructed, but they must be holy in their lives. Principle and practice must go hand in hand."²

I think that it is a good thing to understand was that Titus was not just to speak about the truth of the substitutionary death of Christ on the cross for those who would believe, the deity of Christ, the resurrection, or any number of other key doctrinal issues. The whole point of this chapter is the outward living or action of believers and what it should properly look like in the different demographic groups of believers. Paul makes it very clear that Titus is to speak these things boldly by the fact that Paul reiterates this statement at the end of the chapter, "These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you." (Titus 2:15 NASU)

We also notice that "fitting for sound doctrine" are the types of words that Titus is to speak. The Greek for "sound doctrine" is the same as is used in Titus 1:9 for what an elder is to use in order to refute false teaching and exhort people.

At this point, I think that it is fitting for us to take two small tangents relating to the admonition in this passage.

tangent #1: speech

The first one is dealing with speech. As Christians, what should govern our speech? Or better yet, how should we govern our speech? I would like to suggest a few passages to think about and to help with how to govern our speech.

• Proverbs 4:24 - Do not let your speech be lying
• Matthew 12:34 - What you think about and what you fill your life with will permeate your speech. Also, a frightening reminder that everything ever said will be brought up when God judges.
• Ephesians 4:14,15 - We are to speak truth in love. Not one or the other, but at the same time. Love or compassion should always be present in our conversation. At the same time, it is sometimes necessary to say things that are unsettling in order to make the truth known to someone.
• Ephesians 4:29 - No unwholesome word…. We are not given a “forbidden” list of words, but we are given a more difficult standard to abide by.
• Ephesians 5:3-6 - Our talk must not only be wholesome, but we are specifically instructed to avoid lewd and base talking or perverted joking.
• Philippians 4:8 - This verse captures the idea of the chicken and the egg relating to good speech. The “chicken” must be sound thought on good things so that your speech can be wholesome and edifying.
• Colossians 3:8,9 - This is a specific admonition not to be abusive in our speech.

tangent #2: sound doctrine

I am becoming ever more convinced that one of the bigger problems in the modern evangelical church is the watering down of doctrine or the de-emphasis of teaching, learning, and studying sound doctrine. This is seen in many different areas of the modern church, but perhaps none more clearly than in the idea of church growth or having seeker sensitivity. Seemingly, one of the prevailing ideas and methods of growing large churches is to not teach sound doctrine. If we don't teach the doctrines of the Bible, we cannot truly understand the other doctrines of the Bible. For instance, if I wanted to build my church and only talk about the love of God, and never His terrible wrath, I could not really ever deal with the problem of sin in an honest and biblical way. The problem gets bigger, because if we don't understand sin, we cannot understand the cross. If we don't understand the cross, then the exclusivity of Christ is easier questioned and disregarded³ The focus of church has been sinfully shifted from the glory of God and the fellowship and edification of the saints to be one of evangelism (at best). The idea is to draw unbelievers inside the church and then evangelize them. Unfortunately, it seems like we have seen that we can draw large crowds, but once you have a large crowd it is awfully difficult to preach a message that will undoubtedly offend them and cause them to not return. "Pastors are to concentrate on the spiritual depth of their congregations and allow God to take care of the breadth."³

---

¹ Titus, MacArthur New Testament Commentary by John MacArthur Jr. p. 71

² Adam Clarke's Commentary, Electronic Database, [Copyright (c) 1996 by Biblesoft] by Adam Clarke

³ Because if I'm not that bad, and Christ's death was something other than enduring the full wrath of God that I should have experienced...then any other "divine" system will do just as well as Christianity.

³ Titus, MacArthur New Testament Commentary by John MacArthur Jr. p. 71