“I cannot help but stop for just a moment and remind us that it is not a gospel that does not explain to men and to women and to children why they’re under the wrath of God. Don’t tell me that you’ve preached the gospel to someone when you have not followed the apostolic example and explained, first and foremost, that we all stand justly condemned before a holy God. If you have not proclaimed that, you have not proclaimed the gospel.” - James White, 2008 John Bunyan Conference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82_3HVNqsTc 2:34 ff.

The Correlation Between Election, Grace, and Sin

Over the past few days, I have been listening to John Piper preach out of Romans 8, specifically referring to Romans 8:28 and the following verses, and he has dealt a lot with what it means to be “called”. It was really enjoyable for me to hear these messages where the issue of predestination, or election, was specifically dealt with. While I am sure that the thoughts that I am having are nothing new to the theology of election or the debate between Calvinists and Arminians, they did seem cause the issues of election and grace to come into sharper focus for me than they had previously been.

In an effort to continue on the same line of thinking as my previous article concerning what was recently said on the Bible Answer Man regarding the host’s characterization and rejection of the doctrine of election, which is historically held by Christians who emphasize a completely sovereign view of God in salvation (modernly known as Calvinists), the issue of man’s role in the salvation process, specifically regarding our depravity, has been embedded on my thoughts. I have been thinking a lot about this, not because I find it enjoyable in and of itself to examine just how rotten I am, but it is enjoyable because I want to understand myself and magnify God’s glory, power, and beauty in my salvation and my ongoing sanctification.

If, in an attempt to get a broad and biblical view of the ideas pertaining to election, grace, and salvation, we begin to think about the nature of sin and mankind’s state in sin, I think that we will naturally and logically come to the necessary conclusion that election, the predetermined and sovereign choosing of individuals to be saved by God, is a central and indispensable part of the gospel of salvation by grace that the Bible teaches.

The doctrine of sin, in a nutshell, says that the first and only sinless man who was created by God, freely chose to sin in rebellion against God’s revealed command and authority. This rebellion resulted in such a cataclysmic backlash from God, and neither Adam nor Eve, I think, had any way to comprehend this magnitude (if any at all) of God’s retribution prior to their sin, nor did they posses any lexicon that would enable them to express the reality which immediately followed their plunge into sin. And because it was such an egregious affront to God when mankind sinned, that is why we are all actually and literally dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1, 5).

The physical, mental, and emotional components of every natural man’s being were condemned to suffering, deterioration, disease, and death following Adam’s sin. This physical death occurs, either gradually or without warning, after a period of life, whether long or short in duration. However, contrasted to that, we see the initial and perpetual state of man’s spirit as being dead. The spirit does not experience life in any real sense before dying, for it is dead from the point of its very creation.

The bible does not show man as simply being wounded in a sinful condition and therefore able to move closer to God. No. The bible clearly says that no man seeks after God (Romans 3:12) and all men’s hearts are wicked (Jeremiah 17:9). This paints a bleak picture for man, not only is he dead, but he doesn’t want to seek after God. I don’t want to gloss over the fact that man’s state is ‘dead’ too quickly, because it seems to me that if we genuinely deal with what it means to be spiritually dead, it will clear up a whole lot of problems and objections before they can gain any traction.

The word translated into the English word “dead” is the Greek word the Greek word nekroV (nekros) which literally means “dead” or “inanimate” and is used to describe a dead body or a corpse. In fact, I did a quick survey of the use of this word in the New Testament, and out of the 131 times that it is used, only a small amount of that time (I believe around 10 times) is this word used figuratively. For instance, “the guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men” (Matthew 28:4) and, “for this brother of yours was dead and has begun to live, and was lost and has been found” (Luke 15:32).

The vast and overwhelming majority of the time that this word is used, it is explicitly referring to exactly what we, in our modern context, would refer to by using the words “dead” or “corpse”. Furthermore, I am provoked to study the use of this word and the concepts surrounding it further because it seemed that virtually every time that someone was first described as dead and subsequently as alive, it was stated very clearly that it was God who resurrected them. This may seem (and it may well turn out) to be nothing of magnificent importance to the discussion over election, but I believe that if we are taught and come to understand that when God physically raises someone from the dead that he or she plays absolutely no part in it, why would there be any difference when it comes to God’s and life giving act and spiritual resurrection of people?

Even on the surface of God’s resurrecting and life giving work, there is no circumstance where a cooperative effort between the dead and the life giver is present. For example, Jesus commanded Lazarus to live by saying, "Lazarus, come forth." (John 11:43) Christ didn’t meet Lazarus half-way. He didn’t offer to resurrect Lazarus as well as other friends or relatives of His that may have died during His lifetime. Christ didn’t ask Lazarus if he wanted to be alive again. He chose to resurrect Lazarus and Lazarus was made alive. My whole point in belaboring this story and the fact that men are dead in sin is that if we are dead, then we are unable to do anything spiritually positive.

In other words, dead men can’t choose life…because they’re dead. Lazarus couldn’t and neither can anyone who is only spiritually dead. A person’s dead spirit does not have the ability nor the desire to make itself alive.

Now, moving on to grace! The concept of grace as it relates to salvation has been communicated in our contemporary society by using the letters as an acronym stating that grace means, “God’s Riches At Christ’s Expense.” This statement is true, but I do not believe that it is fully true. And the danger of having the contemporarily understood definition of grace embodied in a pop-Christian-culture acronym is that this says nothing about man’s involvement and contribution (or lack thereof) to grace. J.I. Packer articulated the danger of this type of an over-simplification or dumbing-down of a concept or truth, whether the chnage is intentional and devious in nature or if it is innocent and good hearted in nature, when he said,

“A half truth presented as a whole truth is complete untruth.” ¹

Again, it is absolutely true that the grace of God in our salvation is truly God’s (Christ’s) Riches applied to us At Christ’s Expense. However, this statement says nothing concerning how it is then applied to us. The response would be to say that we receive it by grace, and that is true, but again, grace has turned into such a misused word in Christendom that it, sadly, no longer has the specific power of the truth of the full meaning. For instance, Mormons, Catholics, Arminians, and Calvinists all would probably agree with the definition of grace and say that man is saved by grace. But the question that needs to be answered is this; what do they all mean when they say, “grace”? When pressed what they mean, a Mormon would quote 2 Nephi 25:23 in the Book of Mormon which says, “for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

Roman Catholicism, in their New Advent Encyclopedia, breaks down the concept of grace into (at least) two categories: actual grace and sanctifying grace. For this article’s purpose, I’ll deal with actual grace which because they define this grace as a “transient help to act,”²
specifically in the act of believing. This source goes on to state that this grace “is granted by God for the performance of salutary acts”, but coupled with the prior articulation that it is a “help” in the action of faith implies, necessarily, that man, to a certain extent, wills on his own (i.e. not moved specifically by God) to believe.

Arminians would hold that man chooses to receive the forgiveness of his sins in his free will. The Holy Spirit, necessarily, does not push Joe Pagan harder or softer than Doug Christian in their spiritual journeys, but pleads with them equally and the both have an equal ability to respond in faith. If an Arminian would say, in any form, that someone who believes was given more grace or special grace that an unbeliever does not receive, that person would no longer be a true Arminian. John Piper summarized a problem with this type of view (actually, it could be applied to the Catholic and Mormon views too),

...it assumes that ultimately we, in our own will power, provide the decisive, ultimate cause of our faith. That’s the point of that interpretation. That God only foresees people, not resting in God to provide the ultimate, decisive, faith that they need to believe, but producing, on their own, the decisive ultimate ground and cause of their faith.³

Calvinists hold that grace means unmerited favor and that God favors a man (or woman) apart from any of his own works or merits. Man takes no initiating part in his own salvation in and of himself. The part that this man plays, repenting from sin and expressing faith in God, is done through a special working of the Holy Spirit in him that is not present in unbelievers. In other words, God saves a person by giving them the faith to believe as well as the desire and ability to do so.

“ ⁵ In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice. ⁶ But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” (Romans 11:5,6)

It seems to me that the force of the distinction between grace and works is contained in the rejection of the very idea that any works that would be done in concert with God’s saving “grace” betray and contradict grace itself. The Judaizers were notorious for requiring some “works of the law” to be done in concert with faith for the salvation of the sinner. The New Testament categorically rejects this false notion of co-operating with some human work in order to attain salvation. But, even further than that, the New Testament itself describes the faith for salvation as a being gift of God itself (see Jeremiah 32:40; Matthew 16:17; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 1:29; 2 Timothy 2:24-26), and so the faith that man expresses is not, by definition, something that he does apart from God because the faith comes from God.

It seems to me that the Calvinist understanding and exposition of scripture is the only one that consistently holds to the truest understanding of God’s complete and total sovereignty and grace in the salvation of men. Since the term grace has, unfortunately, lost some of its teeth and offense in our culture, I am seriously considering using other terms in conjunction with grace that have not been watered down in order to be crystal clear about the biblical understanding of grace.⁴ There were three words that I believe will, when used in combination with grace, clarify the meaning of grace and hopefully dispel any misinterpretations or misunderstandings of what is meant when I use the term grace. These three words are “apportion”, “impart”, and “lavish”.

Where as both “apportion” and “impart” refer to the bestowing of something one another person (“bestow” was another word in the running), “lavish” seemed to communicate the massive quantity or quality of the gift as well giving the mental picture of dumping the gift on the other person in an overwhelming fashion. Furthermore, if I were to use a word and meaning that is even more contemporary in our society, I would say that God unloads His grace on us. In this context, “unload” is used in the sense of firing a gun’s ammunition at a target or in the sense of someone dumping out of their thoughts and emotions onto a willing, or unwilling, listener. God’s grace is more accurate than a sniper’s bullet, and the sinner on the receiving end of His unloading of grace is less willing to choose grace on his or her own behalf than the target caught in a sniper’s crosshairs chooses to receive the deadly bullet.

Again you may be thinking, “What does this have to do with the doctrine of election?” Well, my goal up until this point has been to articulate two doctrinal stances that most Protestant and evangelical Christians would confess because they are so plainly laid out in the Scriptures. First, man is dead, not wounded and in need of a physician, in his sins. And second, salvation is by God’s lavishing of His grace upon us. I firmly believe that all of my protestant brethren would agree with these statements. The problem, and where the division and disagreement comes from, is that these same people do not maintain a sense of continuity between these confessions of faith and truth with how they relate to one another in salvation.

The Bible clearly and unabashedly uses the terms “predestine”, “foreknown”, “elect”, and “chosen” when referring to those who have been saved by Christ. If we hold to the two biblical principles that I have been laboring to articulate, then when it comes to defining and articulating what the doctrine of election is, what possible optional understandings do we have? If we are elected based upon our own free-will choice of God that is necessarily uninfluenced by God, we then turn the cross of Calvary into a bargaining table where if we bring our choice, then we’re saved. By doing this, we neither maintain the doctrine of man’s deadness in sin nor the complete grace of God in salvation.

For reasons that are eternally glorious to the Holy Trinity, and only the Trinity, God has chosen to lavish some men and women with a special elective love that is only bestowed upon some. None deserve this treatment by God, neither those who are elected nor those who are not elected. Could God have chosen to save all mankind and still have remained the same just and holy God that He is? I assume that He could have, but He didn’t. Could God have chosen to save no one and still have remained the same loving God that He is? I assume that He could have, but He didn’t.

It is not for me to validate God’s plan and method of saving the sinners that He has chosen to save, nor is it my task to come up with articulate ways of expressing the revealed plan of God in salvation so as to make it completely understandable and seen as infinitely benevolent and gracious to all men. That is for the Holy Spirit to do in the heart of the believer. My desire is to attempt, in my feeble way, to show what the Bible says and show that the conclusion of sovereign election in salvation is both biblical and logical. It is for me to read the Word of God, to say what it says, but it is not to make a doctrine more palatable to men by changing what words mean by means of clever speech or imposing debating techniques. The simple and plain articulation of God’s Word is sufficient to validate itself and persuade the heart and mind of one who truly desires to be conformed to the mind of Christ. This conformity is not an easy thing to achieve for anyone, even the elect, to do, and it is definitely not something that is easy to do consistently.

---

¹ Heard on the radio on 3/30/07 WOTMR

² http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06689x.htm

³ John Piper “Foreknown, Predestined, Conformed to Christ” preached on 8/4/02, radio broadcast 3/30/07. This quote came from transcribing the audio of this sermon.

⁴ The “teeth” and “offense” of the idea of grace is profound. It is offensive because man is naturally disposed (because of sin) to want to be master and in control. Grace takes it out of our control. It has teeth because it cuts any cords of man’s contribution, no matter how small or large we might see them, toward his own salvation.

Quote of the Day - Justification: James & Paul

Over the past year or so, one of the issues that has come up a few times between me and my brother-in-law in our discussions is the issue of justification. Specifically, justification as it is related to the arguments in both Paul’s and James’ writings. Some (Roman Catholic’s, various Orthodox churches, and other works righteous systems) use James to argue that man is saved, in some measure, by a concert of faith and works. Protestants and bible-believers of all stripes reject this type of understanding that tramples over the doctrine of salvation by grace.

Going along with that, as well as the theme of election that I have been studying from Romans 8, Jeff graced me with a quote that I will attribute to him, even though he would attribute it to someone else, and so on and so on.

“Paul stresses justification by faith, and James stresses justification of faith. Paul treats of the justification of the man of faith, and James treats of the justification of the faith of the man.”¹

This is a very good and concise way of articulating the different audiences, objections, and objectives that each author is dealing with.

Soli Deo Gloria, Solus Christus, Sola fide, Sola Scriptura, Sola Gratia

---

¹Jeff Buck, in an e-mail to me on Aug 31, 2007 11:52 AM, although he would attribute the framing of this quote to someone else, who also would, no doubt, attribute it to someone else…and on and on.

Good Exegesis and Application from John Piper

“What does it mean (number one) that God foreknew those He referred to in [Romans 8:28)? ‘Because those whom He foreknew,’ what does that mean? Some would say, many would say, it simply means that God foresees who will believe on Him and then He decides what will become of believers. Now there are two assumptions in that interpretation that are wrong, unbiblical, and which make that view impossible to believe. That he simply foresees who is going to believe, on their own, and then decides what the destiny of those believers will be.

Here’s assumption number one that is not true: it assumes that ultimately we, in our own will power, provide the decisive, ultimate cause of our faith. That’s the point of that interpretation. That God only foresees people, not resting in God to provide the ultimate, decisive, faith that they need to believe, but producing, on their own, the decisive ultimate ground and cause of their faith. That is a false assumption. It’s false elsewhere in the NT, because faith is described a gift from of God in Philippians 1:29 and Ephesians 2:8-9 and 2 Tim 2:24 and Matthew 16:17 and Jeremiah 32:40, and other places. Faith is God’s work, it is God’s gift, and not only that, it is shown to be such here in this very context.

Let’s look just briefly so that you can see. You don’t have to go anywhere else but right here in Romans 8:29-30 to see it. Look at verse 30, ‘those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified.’ [ESV] Now think about that with me. Everybody who is called is justified. You know and I know, from the book of Romans, that nobody is justified except through faith. Romans 5:1, ‘therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with God.’ Nobody is justified except they believe in Jesus, but this text says [that] everybody who’s called is justified. Not, ‘some of those who are called are justified’, namely those who choose to be, but everybody who is called is justified which means everybody who is called believes. How can that be? How can you say, ‘everybody is called believes? Aren’t some called who say “no” to the call?’ No! Now I’m rehearsing an old sermon from five weeks ago, so I can’t give it all, but here’s the summary statement. When God calls effectually, it’s like Jesus saying to Lazarus, ‘Lazarus, come forth,’ and he comes forth. Dead men live when God calls. When God called you to Himself effectually, in and through the preaching, the preaching of the gospel is not the effectual call of God. It’s the general call that goes out to everybody. In and through the gospel comes this mighty, ‘Piper, Live,’ and you live, and the cry of the newborn baby is faith. Therefore, this text will not allow us to buy the assumption that foreknowledge is simply a foreknowing of a faith which we produce on our own, without the decisive, ultimate, enabling of God. That’s clear, and therefore this interpretation won’t stand; that foreknowing is simply foreseeing self-wrought faith, it isn’t. It’s seeing God-wrought faith.

Here’s a second assumption that will make that interpretation not work. The interpretation that says all that foreknowledge is, is the foreseeing of human produced faith so that it will then decide what will become of them fails to give the meaning to the word ‘know’ in ‘foreknow’ a broad, biblical meaning that would make more sense out of this text. For example, let me read for you a half-a-dozen texts about ‘knowing’, and you supply the meaning. I might chip in a suggestion as I go along, but it will be plain to you what knowing means, and then keep this text in mind as I read these. In Genesis 18:19 God says of Abraham, ‘I have known him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord.’ Every English translation translates ‘y-da’ as choose, which baffles me, they shouldn’t. That is the meaning, but you ought to translate the word ‘know’ [as] ‘know’ so that people like you can read it and learn the meaning of ‘know’ for Romans 8:29. It’s not good when translators interpret, that’s another issue. In Amos 3:2 God says to the people of Israel, ‘You only have I known among all the families of the earth.’ He knew about all the families, but only chose Israel. In Matthew 7:23 Jesus said to the hypocrites at the judgment day, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness.’ What does that mean? I never knew about you? I never knew you were on the earth? I never knew anything about your life? No. I never knew you, I never made you mine, I never loved you with electing love. Psalm 1:6 says, ‘The Lord knows the way of the righteous, But the way of the wicked will perish.’ He knows about the way of the wicked too. But he knows the way of the righteous in the sense of approving and recognizing and loving. In Hosea 13:5 God says to Israel, ‘I knew you in the wilderness, In the land of drought,’ meaning he took note of your plight and cared for you. And Genesis 4:1 says, ‘Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain.’ That is, he made her his, and knew her intimately and loved her.

If you don’t know that biblical background of the word ‘know’, so much richer than our heady word ‘know’, it will be hard, I think, to put a proper meaning on verse 29. ‘Whom He foreknew,’ cared for, loved, chose, made His own. Because of all those texts I think John Stott and John Murray are exactly right when both of them say, ‘”Know” . . . is used in a sense practically synonymous with “love” . . . “Whom he foreknow” . . . is therefore virtually equivalent to "whom he foreloved.”’ Foreknowledge, is ‘sovereign, distinguishing love’ (John Stott, quoting Murray, Romans, p. 249). It's virtually the same as set your affection on and choose for your own.

So the meaning of the first act of God that guarantees Romans 8:28 is that God foreknows his own people in the sense that he chooses them and loves them and cares for them. All things work together for good for those who love God and are called because they are foreknown.” - John Piper form “Foreknown, Predestined, Conformed to Christ” preached on 8/4/02, radio broadcast 3/30/07.

This quote is a compilation of transcribing (mine) some of the audio to supplement desiringgod.org’s posted manuscript http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/ByDate/2002/98_Foreknown_Predestined_Conformed_to_Christ/

"‘Heaven without Jesus,’ if that is attractive to you, you’re not saved.”

“How many children, now I’m going to be dangerous here but this is a warning to parents, how many children’s testimonies say that they were scared when they heard about hell and wanted to escape and so prayed to receive Jesus? Now, I believe that in His mercy, God works in little children’s hearts often at those moments so that there is more than fear of hell going on. There really is a little seed of delight in God, love for God, love for Jesus. If there isn’t, they’re not saved. To embrace Jesus as a fire insurance policy and not a beloved savior is not salvation. To embrace Him as the forgiver of sins and not to embrace Him as the lover of our soul that satisfies our desires so that we want to be with Him forever as the result of our forgiveness is not salvation.

Do you know why we love to be forgiven? Do you know why we love justification? Do you know why we love escape from hell? Do you know why we love the promise of heaven? Because all of those things do two things. One, they show us the kind of God we have and two they get us there, they get us to Him. That’s why they’re precious. Who cares about forgiveness of sins unless it means reconciliation with our Father who satisfies our souls in relationship? Forgiveness means nothing if it doesn’t produce that. Neither does justification, neither does escape from hell. ‘Heaven without Jesus,’ if that is attractive to you, you’re not saved.” - John Piper

Transcribed from: “All Things for Good” by John Piper, originally preached June 9, 2002; radio broadcast 3/23/07

I've been looking for this quote for a while now...

"...while the truth of eternal punishment is the one most objectionable to non-professors, that of God’s sovereign election is the truth most loathed and reviled by the majority of those claiming to be believers."
- A.W. Pink, "The Doctrine of Election"

The Deceitful Heart and Salvation

“I ask them, ‘How do [professing Christians] know that they’re saved?’ Well because they believe! How do you know that you believe? ‘Well I know in my heart of hearts that I am saved.’ The bible says that the heart is deceitfully wicked, Do you really want to trust a heart that can be wicked? Examine yourself. Take the Word of God, and what the Word of God says about a true Christian, and if you fall short of the test, repent. One of the greatest evidences that a person is truly a child of God is that they will be sensitive to the sin in their life. And they will be led to repentance and confession of that sin. If you don’t have a new relationship with sin, you don’t have a new relationship with God.”

The greatest evidence that you’re a Christian is the fact that, right now, you’re in the Word and God’s pointing out to you your sin. We have assurance that we have come to know Him, not just because one time we repented, but we are continuing to repent today. And it is not just that at one time we believed, but that we are continuing to believe today. And it is not just that at one time we walked with Him, we continue to walk with Him today." - Paul Washer

The Plague of Prosperity

Sometimes while we’re watching a bit of television, I will, to the complete annoyance of my wife, flip to the religious channel. I won’t go to just any religious channel – we receive 3ABN (7th Day Adventist), EWTN (Roman Catholic), and TBN. I will usually stop at TBN because, similar to a car accident that you see happening in slow motion, I just can’t look away. I know that there is going to be a lot of mangling and much harm done to anyone involved…but I just can’t look away.

I don’t watch a lot of 3ABN because I weary of their misunderstanding of the Sabbath; the fact that the Sabbath has been fulfilled in Christ, and we find our Sabbath rest in him. Also, the promotion of the annihilationism (God “snuffs” out the condemned, so they will not be punished eternally) as well as the teaching, and I believe that I’ve seen it more than a few times, that worshiping on Sunday is what the Bible speaks of when referring to the mark of the beast. I also don’t watch EWTN because I just cannot handle the devotion to Mary that this channel so saturated with. I mean, there is nothing like hearing titles and powers ascribed to Mary such as Mother of All Peoples, the New Eve, Co-redemptrix, and Mediatrix of all graces, Advocate, and others that make my idolatry “hackles” stand on end.

With all that said, since I am neither a 7th Day Adventist nor a Roman Catholic, I don’t quite feel the need to defend against what is going on there or confront the false teachings in nearly the same way as I do with what is broadcast on TBN. Why? TBN, the Trinity Broadcasting Network, positions itself as the premier place on television for all things Protestant and Evangelical. Virtually all of the preachers that I have ever seen attempt to more closely resemble the model and ideas of Biblical and true Protestant Christianity, even though they quite often do a horrible job of it. For instance, I find it funny (you either laugh or you cry) that one of TBN’s heaviest hitters is a man who denies the Triune nature of God. Call me quirky, but I would have thought that this would be a prerequisite for association, but I guess that’s not the case. Also, I am sure that there are as many charlatan preachers in other movements in and around Christendom, but my focus tends to be more on the assortment displayed on TBN because these are the men and women that are most difficult to distance myself from because they embody much of contemporary American Evangelical Christendom.

One of the most frustrating heresies that is so rampant on this network is that of the prosperity gospel. It is called the prosperity gospel, but it “is really not another [gospel]; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.” (Galatians 1:7) Those who preach this twisted view of Scripture argue that God wants all Christians to be healthy and wealthy to the virtual exclusion of speaking about the cross. And when the cross is referred to, it was done so that we could live an abundant life. What does that mean? Here’s what Joel Osteen says about the cross giving us an abundant life,

“… Not a barely-get-by life, not a life filled with bad habits and addictions, and lack, and mediocrity. No, because of the price He paid, we have a right to live in total victory. I want you to get that down on the inside. Not partial victory, to where we have a good family, we have good health, but we constantly struggle in our finances. That’s not total victory. If God did it for you in one area, he can do it for you in another area. Get a vision for it. Don’t’ get stagnant. Maybe God’s blessed you; you have a good family and a good job, but you’ve had pain in your body for years and years. You used to stand against it, you used to believe that you could be free but now it’s been so long that you’ve decided, ‘This is my lot in life. Joel, I guess this is my cross to carry.’ He has paid the price so that we may be totally free. That means free from bad habits and addictions. Free from worry. Free from discouragement and depression. Free from poverty and lack. Free from low self-esteem. You need to start seeing yourself in the right way. You are not a sick person trying to get well, you’re a well person fighting off sickness. God made you healthy and whole….”¹

This sickening and cheap portrayal of what Christ accomplished on the cross is the same type of stuff that you will hear from the majority of people on TBN. The various preachers will have their own styles and things that they specifically emphasize, but the main heartbeat is health and wealth. Did you notice anything missing? There was no mention of sin at all. In fact, the statement, “God made you healthy and whole” seems to directly deny the doctrine of original sin or, for that matter, any doctrine of sin and depravity at all.

Once in a while you may be fortunate enough to hear Rod Parsely, Benny Hinn, or another prosperity preacher present a pretty clear presentation of the actual gospel (i.e. you’re a sinner, repent and place your faith in Christ for salvation from sin and it’s end result in hell), but these are few and far between. More often than not, the message that is sent out to the world is that Christians can (and should) be wealthy and that we could have all of the stuff that we want. And this is the message that is exported from the United States to other countries labeled as the gospel.

I have heard stories about how the prosperity (or other non-gospel messages) preachers are making their way and having a lot of influence in non-Western countries. I also saw this on a different scale when I went to Africa in the summer of 2000. When I was in Kenya, I saw all of the worst parts of western culture splashed across the city of Nairobi. From Brittney Spears to the latest movies, that is what my Kenyan friends saw and understood about the United States (and the West). The most tragic part of it, though, was when one of the men from the church that I was working with began talking about the very good teaching that he had been hearing over either the radio or television (I’m not sure which). I was still pretty green as it relates to the false teaching that is so prevalent inside of Christendom, but I still asked him who he was listening to. His response gave me no pause at the time, because I hadn’t heard of the man, but he looked at me and said, “Benny Hinn.” I knew that Benny Hinn was a preacher on TBN, but not much more than that, so I didn’t think much more about it until a year or so later. But now that I know the kind of chicanery and horrible teaching that goes on with his ministry, I am so very grieved. I found that the following words from John Piper articulate so much of what this perversion of the glorious and saving gospel of our Lord brings out from my own heart.

“I don’t know what you feel about the prosperity gospel, but I’ll tell you what I feel about it. Hatred. It is not the gospel. And it is being exported from this country to Africa and Asia selling a bill of goods to the poorest of the poor. ‘Believe this message, and your pigs won’t die and your wife won’t have miscarriages. And you’ll have rings on your fingers and coats on your backs.’ That’s coming out of America! People that ought to be giving our money and our time and our lives, instead selling them a bunch of crap called ‘gospel’. And here’s the reason it is so horrible: When was the last time that any American, African, Asian ever said Jesus is all-satisfying because you drove a BMW? Never! They’ll say, ‘Did Jesus give you that? Yeah? Well, I’ll take Jesus.’ That’s idolatry, that’s not the gospel. That’s elevating gifts above Giver. I’ll tell you what makes Jesus look beautiful. It’s when you smash your car and your little girl goes flying through the windshield and lands, like I was with a little girl on 11th avenue two weeks ago, dead on the street, for three hours before the police would let her go, and you say through the deepest possible pain, ‘God is enough. He is good; He will take care of us; He will satisfy us; He will get us through this. He is our treasure. Whom have I in heaven but You? And on earth there is nothing that I desire besides you. My flesh and my heart and my little girl may fail but you are the strength of my heart and my portion forever. That makes God look glorious, as God, not as giver of cars or safety or health. Oh, how I pray that Birmingham will be purged of the health, wealth, and prosperity gospel. Indeed America would be purged. And that the Christian church would be marked by suffering for Christ. God is most glorified in you when you are most satisfied in Him in the midst of loss, not prosperity.”²

It is this kind of false teacher that Peter’s second letter warned us of when we would have teachers in our midst, “will secretly introduce destructive heresies,” and that there will be many who “will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned;” (2 Peter 2:1,2) If this type of perversion does not cause us outrage on behalf of our glorious Savior, then I do not know what will. Will it take persecution and calamity to purge the Christendom in the West of this plague of prosperity and with it unleash the true gospel in it’s glory as testified to by saints with their blood, not their Rolexes? My week and faint heart hopes that God will not send judgment on the church in the West but still purge this infestation from among the redeemed. But my spirit is not so optimistic about the future of Christianity in the West. Christendom may survive and flourish, for a false presentation of Christ is no threat to the devil. But Christianity, wherever the gospel message is pure and Christ is exalted as He should be, I fear will not be unscathed.

May God give us grace and courage now to use what freedoms and resources we have to preach the gospel. And may God give us grace and hope and love for the future for when those freedoms and resources are stripped away from us. May You cause me to cling closer and more firmly to You and Your Word, Lord.

In all things, soli Deo gloria.

---

¹ I personally transcribed the quote from an uploaded video of Joel’s sermon as posted on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di9-PebV634

² http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=29b26cfc46fd9a91ec47

the Doctrines of Christ

"My doctrines! I maintain no doctrines of my own; what I preach are the doctrines of Christ, and for those I will forfeit my blood, and even think myself happy to suffer for the sake of my Redeemer." - Dominicus (a martyr during the reign of Pope Adrian IV [1154-1159])¹

---

¹ Foxes Book of Martyrs, Chapter VI

Papal Persecutions

"Thus far our history of persecution has been confined principally to the pagan world. We come now to a period when persecution, under the guise of Christianity, committed more enormities than ever disgraced the annals of paganism. Disregarding the maxims and the spirit of the Gospel, the papal Church, arming herself with the power of the sword, vexed the Church of God and wasted it for several centuries, a period most appropriately termed in history, the "dark ages." The kings of the earth, gave their power to the "Beast," and submitted to be trodden on by the miserable vermin that often filled the papal chair, as in the case of Henry, emperor of Germany."¹

---

¹ Fox's Book of Martyrs, Introduction to Ch. 4

A Refreshing Article on Leadership

When I was wrestling with the question of eldership and what is the biblical response to an elder who shows himself to no longer be above reproach (Titus 1:6,7) specifically regarding sexual immorality, I sent some messages to various pastors and teachers that I respect. I also made a point to send this question to ministries with varying doctrinal positions (some were more Armenian and some were more reformed) so that I would get sort of a cross section of where different ministries fall on this issue. One of the responses that I received (a very nice and personal one at that) from a leader at a more emergent style church said,

"If there is evidence that character issues that may have contributed to past failings have been addressed and overcome, and if the person has done all he or she can do to repair damage caused by past decisions, our conviction is that the individual may by God’s grace aspire to any ministry he or she is called to."

I responded to this e-mail requesting a response that used scripture, not just vague concepts that may not necessarily apply to this type of situation. I then received this response,

"As Christians we should attempt to be as forgiving and grace-filled as God, impossible as that might be. But that doesn't mean that our actions won't have unpleasant consequences in our lives here with other people. In the case you're describing, that might mean someone taking a break from church leadership while they deal with the 'fallout' from their actions. They might need to rebuild their reputation with those they feel called to lead. They also might need to do some difficult work on a potential character issue that caused them to stumble. Whatever the situation, though, the prayerful and God-led judgment and discernment of church leaders is necessary."

This response (a) didn't seem to be pulled from exegesis concerning church leadership and accountability or (b) reference a bible verse at all. I was not totally surprised with this response because I know a bit more about that specific church and some of its teachings. I did receive a response from another teacher who is definitely not emergent in ecclesiology where he said this, "An act of adultery would make the man not blameless and would also have a bad reputation. 1 Tim.3:2. Let me say this, if I committed adultery, I would be outta here."

If you are at all familiar with my blog, you will not be surprised to know that I really enjoy the teaching and preaching of John MacArthur. I had written a few articles a while back regarding elders and the requirements to be an elder (elders: qualifications and tasks and more thoughts on eldership), and I am becoming more and more concerned with the church and the leaders who she accepts and allows to preach and teach the word of God. Below are some excerpts from an article that John MacArthur's ministry posted online concerning this topic.

"Some time ago I received a cassette tape that disturbed me greatly. It was a recording of the recommissioning service of a pastor who had made national news by confessing to an adulterous affair. After little more than a year of “counseling and rehabilitation,” this man was returning to public ministry with his church’s blessing.

That is happening everywhere. Restoration teams—equipped with manuals to instruct the church on how to reinstate their fallen pastor—wait like tow-truck drivers on the side of the highway, anticipating the next leadership “accident”. Our church has received inquiries wondering if we have written guidelines or a workbook to help restore fallen pastors to leadership. Many no doubt expect that a church the size of ours would have a systematic rehabilitation program for sinning leaders.

Gross sin among Christian leaders is a signal that something is seriously wrong with the church. But an even greater problem is the lowering of standards to accommodate a leader’s sin. That the church is so eager to bring these men back into leadership is a symptom of rottenness at the core."

"We must recognize that leadership in the church cannot be regarded lightly. The foremost requirement of a church leader is that he be above reproach (1 Timothy 3:2, 10; Titus 1:7). That is a difficult prerequisite, and not everyone can meet it."

When referring to his body, Paul obviously had sexual immorality in view. In 1 Corinthians 6:18 he describes it as a sin against one’s own body—sexual sin is in its own category. Certainly it disqualifies a man from church leadership since he permanently forfeits a blameless reputation as a one-woman man (Proverbs 6:33; 1 Timothy 3:2).

Where did we get the idea that a year’s leave of absence and some counseling can restore integrity to someone who has squandered his reputation and destroyed people’s trust? Certainly not from the Bible. Trust forfeited is not so easily regained. Once purity is sacrificed, the ability to lead by example is lost forever. As my friend Chuck Swindoll once commented when referring to this issue—it takes only one pin to burst a balloon.

What about forgiveness? Shouldn’t we be eager to restore our fallen brethren? To fellowship, yes. But not to leadership. It is not an act of love to return a disqualified man to public ministry; it is an act of disobedience.

By all means we should be forgiving. But we cannot erase the consequences of sin. I am not advocating that we “shoot our wounded.” I’m simply saying that we shouldn’t rush them back to the front lines, and we should not put them in charge of other soldiers. The church should do everything possible to minister to those who have sinned and repented. But that does not include restoring the mantle of leadership to a man who has disqualified himself and forfeited the right to lead. Doing so is unbiblical and lowers the standard God has set. "

"What should you do in the current crisis? Pray for your church’s leaders. Keep them accountable. Encourage them. Let them know you are following their godly example. Understand that they are not perfect, but continue nonetheless to call them to the highest level of godliness and purity. The church must have leaders who are genuinely above reproach. Anything less is an abomination."¹

---

¹ Should Fallen Pastors Be Restored? by John MacArthur (Adapted from The Master’s Plan for the Church, © 1991 by John MacArthur. )

Without holiness...

Christ will be master of the heart, and sin must be mortified.

If your life is unholy, then your heart is unchanged,
and you are an unsaved person.

The Savior will sanctify His people, renew them,
give them a hatred of sin, and a love of holiness.

The grace that does not make a man better than others
is a worthless counterfeit.

Christ saves His people, not IN their sins, but FROM their sins.

Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord.

source

J.C. Ryle on Sin

“We, on the other hand—poor blind creatures, here today and gone tomorrow, born in sin, surrounded by sinners, living in a constant atmosphere of weakness, infirmity and imperfection—can form none but the most inadequate conceptions of the hideousness of evil. We have no line to fathom it and no measure by which to gauge it. The blind man can see no difference between a masterpiece of Titian or Raphael and the queen’s head on a village signboard. The deaf man cannot distinguish between a penny whistle and a cathedral organ. The very animals whose smell is most offensive to us have no idea that they are offensive and are not offensive to one another. Fallen men and women, I believe, can have no just idea what a vile thing sin is in the sight of that God whose handiwork is absolutely perfect—perfect whether we look through telescope or microscope;”<sup>1

1</sup>Holiness: It's Nature, Hinderance, Difficulties, & Roots by J.C. Ryle (page 7)

Never, never neglect the Word of God

The Word will make your heart rich with truth, rich with
understanding, and then your conversation, when it flows from
your mouth, will be like your heart-- rich, soothing, and sweet.
Make your heart full of rich, generous love, and then the stream
that flows from your hand will be just as rich and generous as
your heart.

Above all, get Jesus to live in your heart, and then out of your
heart shall flow rivers of living water, more rich, more satisfying
than the water of the well of Sychar of which Jacob drank. Oh!
go, Christian, to the great mine of riches, and cry to the Holy
Spirit to make your heart rich unto salvation. So shall your life
and conversations be a boon to your fellow man; and when they
see you, your face will be like an angel of God. Wise men will
stand up when they see you, and men will give you reverence.

source

If we were more like Christ!

"It is enough for the disciple that he
be like his master." - Matthew 10:25

When our Lord was on earth, what was the
treatment he received? Were his claims
acknowledged, his instructions followed,
and his perfections worshiped, by those whom
he came to bless? No; "He was despised
and rejected of men." Outside the camp was
his place; cross-bearing was his occupation.

Did the world yield him solace and rest?
"Foxes have holes, and the birds of the
air have nests; but the Son of man has no
where to lay his head." This inhospitable
world afforded him no shelter: it cast him
out and crucified him.

If you are a follower of Jesus, and
maintain a consistent, Christ-like walk
and conversation, you must expect
the same treatment from the world.

They will treat you as they treated the Savior-
they will despise you. Do not dream not that
worldlings will admire you, or that the more
holy and the more Christ-like you are, the
more peaceably people will act towards you.

They prized not the polished gem, how
should they value the jewel in the rough?

"If they have called the Master of the house
Beelzebub, how much more shall they call
those of his household?"

If we were more like Christ, we would
be more hated by his enemies!

It is a sad dishonor to a child of God to be
the world's favorite. It is a very ill omen to
hear a wicked world clap its hands and shout,
"Well done" to the Christian man. When the
unrighteous give him their approbation, he
should begin to look to his character, and
wonder whether he has not been doing wrong.

Let us be true to our Master, and have
no friendship with a blind and base world
which scorns and rejects him. Far be it
from us to seek a crown of honor where
our Lord found a coronet of thorns!

source

Excerpt from "Rahab's Faith"

Many have a 'dead faith' which will ruin their soul.

The faith that will save you is a faith which sanctifies.

"Ah!" says the drunkard, "I like the gospel, sir;
I believe in Christ" then he will go over to the
Blue Lion tonight, and get drunk.
Sir, that is not the believing in Christ that is of any use.
Sir, you speak falsely; you do not truly believe in Christ.

That faith which saves the soul is a real faith,
and a real faith sanctifies men!

You cannot have faith, and yet live in sin.

To believe is to be holy.
The two things must go together.

That faith is a dead faith, a corrupt faith,
which lives in sin that grace may abound.

source

"Unbelievers stumbling; Believers rejoicing"

There are some who stumble at Christ because of his holiness.

He is too strict for them; they would like to be Christians,
but they cannot renounce their sensual pleasures; they
would like to be washed in his blood, but they desire still
to roll in the mire of sin.

Willing enough the mass of men would be to receive Christ,
if, after receiving him, they might continue in their drunkenness,
their wantonness, and self-indulgence. But Christ lays the axe
at the root of the tree; he tells them that these things must be
given up, for “because of these things the wrath of God comes
upon the children of disobedience,” and “without holiness no
man can see the Lord.”

Human nature kicks at this.

“What! May I not enjoy one darling lust? May I not indulge
myself at least now and then in these things? Must I altogether
forsake my old habits and my old ways? Must I be made a
new creature in Christ Jesus?”

These are terms too hard, conditions too severe, and so the
human heart goes back to the flesh pots of Egypt, and clings
to the garlic and the onions of the old estate of bondage, and
will not be set free even though a greater than Moses lifts up
the rod to part the sea, and promises to give to them a Canaan
flowing with milk and honey.

Christ offends men because his gospel is intolerant of sin.
source

Quote of the Day from A.W. Pink

Repentance is the hand releasing those filthy objects
it had previously clung to so tenaciously.
Faith is extending an empty hand to God to receive His gift of grace.

Repentance is a godly sorrow for sin.
Faith is receiving a sinner's Savior.

Repentance is a revulsion of the filth and pollution of sin.
Faith is a seeking of cleansing therefrom.

Repentance is the sinner covering his mouth and crying,
"Unclean, unclean!"

Faith is the leper coming to Christ and saying,
"Lord, if You will, You can make me clean."

The above quote is from A.W. Pink, "Salvation From the Penalty of Sin" and can be found here.