I feel like I need to respond to this, so here goes. The way I want to do this is by answering a couple of journalistic questions and hopefully not be belligerent in the process. I’ve made a lot of friends across a lot of lines and territories as God has led us in ministry. Some of my best friends, I respectfully disagree on a lot of things. The main thing truly is Jesus and, as Alistair Begg says, “Our job is to make the main things the plain things and the plain things the main things.”  At the end, I will provide a long list of websites that I visit for media on a weekly and sometimes daily basis.

Question 1 |  ”Who do you follow?” (Is that the only church you follow?)

I would answer that in this way: I am following Jesus with all that I have; heart, mind, soul, body, passions, resources, actions, and temperament.   In areas of weakness, I want to be stronger.  In areas of doubt, I want clarity.

When I was 6 years old, I sat up at night with my brother and my cousin and I tried to open the scriptures to these guys, who were 2 and 3 years younger than me, and explain what the Bible was saying.  At 31, the best I understand the goal of preaching, it’s still that: Unpack (or explain, exegete) what the Bible, God’s word, is saying.  I have had bits and pieces of Bible college.  I only have an associates degree and personally, I carry a lot of shame for that (may God help me accurately place the accolade where it belongs, namely, on Him!).

At 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, etc. years of age, I have attempted in some capacity to take the Bible and explain what it means to whoever God has set in front of me that will listen.  Sometimes it has been very small crowds, sometimes the crowds were so big I could not see from the stage where the room ended; but the constant has been open the Book, say what it says.

Because I’ve had a passion for Biblical education, more than that, to know God’s words and God’s mind on multi-various things, I’ve sought out those who it seems that are trying to do the same thing and are doing it with excellence.  I’ll have to admit, I stumbled upon the very first Bible teacher that I ever began listening too.

I was 19 years old working as a janitor at a factory.  I had a 10 minute break at 8a, 10a, and a 30 minute break at 12:30p for lunch. One morning during the 8am break, I turned on the radio and was flipping through the stations when I heard a man with an interesting accent preaching an expository sermon from the gospel of Luke.  I didn’t have a clue what an expository sermon even was at the time, but something about the Bible being opened appealed so greatly to me!  The man was alive, impassioned, and on fire with the unction of the Holy Spirit yet he was preaching an intelligible, carefully thought out sermon.  In 19 years of life growing up in a small Pentecostal church,  what I got out of the preaching week after week was, as honestly and as humbly as I know how to be, very frustrating.  Men in the pulpit would proof-text time and time again and it seemed as if they were intentionally trying to set passages of scripture at odds with each other.  What complicated matters even more for me then, a young believer at 16, 17, 18, and 19, where the Bible spoke out on matters, they would not speak out.  It seemed more like these guys were taking a poll of the room, giving rank to individuals along the way, and then forming a conclusion on where they thought they needed to be to sustain employment.  Those are very harsh words, but they are true of my experience growing up.  I mean no disrespect upon the men who attempted to labor in the pulpit and maybe that in and of itself is one of the driving factors in me: I do not want to be a preacher who doesn’t preach the Bible by preaching the Bible.

Question 2 | This segways into the next question: “Why do I listen to so much preaching and Bible teaching?”

I fell in love with my high school sweet heart at 18, married by 21, and our first child by 22.  For the little ladies in the back doing the math, as they say, we were married for 7 months when my wife Alexis became pregnant with our son Jayden!  We began serving on staff 468 miles from our hometown at 23, in Bible college for a semester at 24, back to Alabama in the shipping department and volunteering at a church by 25, and then our adventure in the UMC began Fall that same year (05′-10′).  I served 5 different UMC’s in 5 years.  One of those was a 2 1/2 year engagement as Youth Pastor while I simultaneously served the last year of that stint as the Pulpit Supply Pastor at a smaller UMC.  From there I was a Youth Director and then the Youth and Worship Pastor at 2 different churches.  What a ride!  We have lived in 4 different states in 10 years of ministry, one of those states on two different occasions.  My wife still loves me, and boy do I love her!!!  Our two boys love us and respect us and our youngest son meets me at the door with hugs!

So do I still need to tell you why I listen to so much preaching and Bible teaching?  I lost my breath just writing that last bit!  There have been a lot of things that I have had to unlearn.  I grew up in a very rigid environment.  If you stubbed your toe and expressed pain, somehow that meant you lost your salvation! If you did anything wrong, it somehow meant that God was unhappy with you and Jesus was no longer your Savior.   I never got that; still don’t.  It’s just not in the Book.

It hit me at 19 reading and studying through 1 Corinthians: “If I can earn or add anything to my salvation, or my justification, then Jesus was the biggest waste of time and the greatest waste of the most precious resource in all of history!  (I say “resource” in the respect that God the Trinity gave God.)

Interestingly enough, the same year I began trekking with a Bible expositor was the same year I learn that Christ’s atoning work on the cross can never be matched and should never be compared to the wretchedness that I have to offer.  The hymn writer puts it this way (and I learned this from Begg): “Because the sinless Savior died, my guilty soul is counted free, for God the Just is satisfied to look on Him and pardon me!”  Amen! Yes! It’s all about Jesus!

Fast forward to 2004 was the first year that I was able to attend The Basic’s, a conference for Pastor’s at Parkside Church, where Alistair is the Pastor for Preaching.  Albert Mohler and Sinclair Ferguson were there.  I thought my head was going to explode with all that these men were pouring out; I surely did not retain near what I would’ve liked too.  I took notes as fast as I could type on my 3 times handed down laptop pc, but the moments were so special!  There was in the preaching and in the singing of the 600+ men assembled a sort of Holy reverence that I had not yet experienced in all my years as a pentecostal.  God was Soverign and Jesus is to be in awe of, loved, honored, and followed is what those moments impressed most upon my heart.

I listen on average to somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 to 12 hours a week of preaching and Bible teaching.  I listen to unlearn.  I listen, track back, and re-listen.  I listen to learn.  I listen to see how the preacher made it from point “a” to point “b” in the text.  I’ll turn off a preacher when he preaches an idea rather than what the text in front of him is saying.

Here’s the long list in chronological order of when I stumbled upon Alistair that morning in 1999:

Alistair Begg

John McArthur

Chipp Ingram

Ron Hutchcraft

John Piper

Mark Driscoll

Matt Chandler

Francis Chan

Mark Dever

C.J. Mahaney

R.C. Sproul

and lately, Rick Warren

I would have to add that through Begg’s ministry, I have been encouraged to read the most. Here are some of the men I have read:

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “Lectures to my Students”

Ministry network sites that I visit often are:

The Resurgence

Acts 29

The Gospel Coalition

Together for the Gospel

Conclusion | 

The way I’d like to end this is really simple.  If you’re a young guy feeling the Holy Spirit press a call on you for ministry, particularly to preach His words, then listen and learn all you can.  I’ve heard Alistair along with several other men say that a college degree is not a pre-requisite for the pulpit.  But at the same time, they would all agree that God’s words have been delivered to us via a Book and the Book is to be studied diligently with your knee’s on the ground tenderly awaiting the aid of the Holy Spirit to give wisdom for understanding.  Lastly and as a warning, God’s Words are not to be trifled with.  James tells us that those who teach will be held to a higher accountability than those who do not.

Why do we meet?

What makes us, the church, different than any other meeting?  Why do we come together for meetings?  What keeps us coming together?  What is to be done when we do come together?

Last week in worship, we had a Q&A session during the final 15 minutes of our time.  We answered almost 1/5 of the questions that were texted in.  Some of you really liked the Q&A.  Some of you think that the Q&A should be the thing we do after we sing together.  I want to take a minute and respond to that.

From the Old Testament: When Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, saw that Moses alone single-handedly judged between the children of Israel’s questions from sun up to sun down, he told Moses that was a problem.  In a sense, that’s what Q&A is.  Was Moses’ job to judge between the people’s problems all day long or was Moses’ job to proclaim the words of God that he obtained when he met with God outside of the camp and on the mountain?  You can read this account in Exodus 18.

From the New Testament: In Acts, we see that some of the widows who were supposed to be cared for with daily provisions of food were getting left out.  The Apostles were, at that time, taking care of the daily distribution of food and when the complaints started coming in, they realized that this was a credible problem that needed a solid solution, and what they did was earth shattering.  The Apostles appointed a group[1] of seven men to handle the daily distribution, stating that they were to place their focus on the more important things of prayer and the study of the word.[2]

One more from the NT:  Jesus was tempted by Satan in the wilderness with bread after 40 days of fasting.  Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.”

Which is most important: The pressing needs and questions of the day, meal time, or God’s word?  Should a church meeting look like the Dr. Drew Show which focuses on people and their issues with a witty, intelligent host or should the church gather to worship God by singing to Him and repeating what He has said?

On the flipside of the coin, we do see examples from both OT and NT where a priest, Apostle, pastor, or church planter, like Paul, does take the time to answer the people’s questions that make their way to him.  One example is 1 Corinthians.  Paul spends a large portion of the letter answering various questions.  Another example is when people came asking of Jesus.  Jesus didn’t ignore them, but rather, He lovingly took the time to point them to the truth.  Taking time to answer questions during worship is not a bad thing, but it’s not “The Thing” either.

• “The Thing” is God’s words:

“For You have exalted above all things Your Name and Your Word. (Psalm 138:2)”

•  God’s words are the only ones that make us new:

“And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. (Romans 12:2)”

• God’s words are the only ones that are able to fix us completely:

“For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)”

• God’s words are the only words that lead us to salvation:

“But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. (Galatians 3:22-24)”

(And)

“But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. (2 Timothy 3:15-16)”

•  The job of the God-exulting, God fearing, gospel preaching, Christ following Christian preacher is too:

“In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: Preach the word. In season and out of season, rebuke, exhort, and encourage your people with long suffering (great patience) and sound doctrine (careful teaching). (2 Timothy 4:1-2)”[3]

(And)

“And all the people gathered as one man into the square before the Water Gate. And they told Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses that the LORD had commanded Israel. So Ezra the priest brought the Law before the assembly, both men and women and all who could understand what they heard, on the first day of the seventh month. And he read from it facing the square before the Water Gate from early morning until midday, in the presence of the men and the women and those who could understand. And the ears of all the people were attentive to the Book of the Law. And Ezra the scribe stood on a wooden platform that they had made for the purpose. (Nehemiah 8:1-3)”

True story. I just met a black guy named Billy at the Sam’s Club fuel pumps in Jackson, TN. We got to talking about life and church for a minute and he said to me that not too long ago he was talking to another white guy who was a pastor at a church here in Jackson about his church. He said that he asked the pastor if any black people went to his church and the pastor responded, “We have a lot of important people at our church with a lot of money and if any of your kind came to our church, it would run them off.”

I was blown away. Even if the guy was lying, which I don’t suspect he was, it’s sad that his impression of “white churches” is that way. What’s worse is that Billy seemed to recall the pastor’s words verbatim. I told Billy that apparently that pastor had not read the book of James and that was a ridiculous thing to say. I also told him that the pastor with his church full of white, wealthy, elitist could all go to hell with their money. I meant that.

God, save us from being like that.

At the core of who Charlie B was, he was a man of the Bible and it didn’t take him long to take you to the scriptures if you went by to visit him at his downtown office.  The guy’s office was full of accolades, awards, and accomplishments that flooded his wall, but the thing he kept on his desk were pictures of his wife and family along with a Bible in his top drawer for quick reference.

He was so familiar with his Bible.  It was one of those deals where he would quote a scripture and then open to the page the scripture was on without even looking it up.  He just flipped to it.  And there was no trickery there either.  I’ve seen Charlie B quote OT, NT, Psalms, Proverbs, Epistles, it didn’t matter.  He’d take you there with one flip of the page.

I love that guy.  I’m so thankful for his Godly, practical influence on my life.  He seemed to just believe in you and he was one of those guys that made you better than you actually are.  Rest in peace Charlie B, we’ll be singing the wisdom of Heaven one day!

by John Williams

THEO 230 – CZS

November 15, 2011

This essay is a two part paper dealing both objectively and subjectively on the topic of salvation from two required reading text. The first text is Alistair McGrath’s “Theology: The Basics.1” The second is Dr. Yung Chul Han’s “Transforming Power.2” We will lay the texts side by side for comparison, make some observations, and offer conclusions.

Part 1: Looking objectively at McGrath and Arrington’s work on Salvation

Both authors begin by giving a brief definition of what salvation is. McGrath says, “A central theme of the Christian message is that the human situation has, in some way, been transformed by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ” (McGrath, p. 81). Han’s compilation exhibits French Arrington’s work, “The Doctrine of Salvation,” where Arrington says, “Soteriology signifies all that God has done to set us free from the bondage of sin and guilt in order to bring us to the glorious condition of blessedness that Christians enter when Christ returns from Heaven” (Han, p. 21).

1.a | McGrath – Theology: The Basic’s

First, we will deal with McGrath’s section on salvation. It appears that McGrath unpacks his views on salvation under five major headings: Pauline Images of Salvation, the Problem of Analogy, Theories of Atonement, Sin, and the Redeemed Life. We shall look at these in order, one at a time.

McGrath recognizes four images of salvation from Paul’s epistles: salvation itself, adoption, justification, and redemption. He describes salvation using the terms healing and liberation. Adoption, according to McGrath, means that the believer will share in the inheritance of Jesus Christ. Justification is said to mean that the believer stands acquitted before God in Christ for his or her sinfulness. Lastly on this point, McGrath observes that redemption is secured for the believer, as depicted as a prisoner of war being liberated from their capture.

In the author’s second point, The Problem of Analogy, he goes to some length to point out that analogies are more concise than exhaustive. As an example, he writes of salvation being defined in terms of a ransom. A ransom depicts someone being liberated, a fee paid, but paid to whom? And in that third part, Mcgrath points out a crucial problem with trying to exhaust an analogy.

The third point that McGrath moves onto is in the Theories of Atonement. McGrath expounds upon the theories of atonement with three equally weighted sub-points: The Cross as Sacrifice, The Cross as Victory, and The Cross and Forgiveness. But first, McGrath points out that the word “Atonement” is not a word we use in everyday vernacular. He breaks down the word, “at-one-ment” meaning all that Jesus did upon the cross puts the believer essentially at one with God.

Drawing upon the early church father, Augustine, McGrath relays the cross as sacrifice: “A true sacrifice is offered of every action which is designed to unite us to God in holy fellowship” (McGrath, p. 88). McGrath affirms in his second sub-point that, “The New Testament that God has given us a victory through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (McGrath, p. 90). In expounding upon the point of the cross and forgiveness, McGrath sums up this great mystery with a couple of lines from Mrs. Cecil F. Alexandria:

“There was no other good enough
to pay the price of sin;
He only could unlock the gate
of Heaven and let us in.”
-There is a Green Hill Far Away

McGrath’s final two major points on our subject of salvation deal with sin and the redeemed life. “Sin,” writes McGrath, “is thus the antitheses of salvation.” He goes onto say, inadvertently quoting the scriptures, that sin is something that separates humanity from God (“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” -Romans 3:23).

Lastly, McGrath ends his thoughts on salvation with the idea of the redeemed life. McGrath sums this idea up in two parts, by saying that the redeemed life is one that us ultimately to imitate Christ and conform to Christ.

1.b | Excerpted from Han’s Transforming Power – Arrington’s work on Salvation

Now we have come to French Arrington’s work, “The Doctrine of Salvation,” taken from Dr. Han’s compendium entitled “Transforming Power: Dimensions of the Gospel.” Dr. Arrington lays out his work on salvation under three main headings which are: Provision for Salvation, The Application of Salvation, and The Experience of Salvation.

Arrington’s first major heading is “The Provision for Salvation.” Here he speaks on three functions of the cross. He outlines those functions as the cross as the atoning sacrifice, the cross as penal substitution, and the cross as the supreme demonstration of God’s love. Dr. Arrington’s next major heading is “The Application of Salvation.” Here he unpacks the past, present, and future of salvation then goes onto laying out the plan of salvation.

Dr. Arrington’s final major heading deals with “The Experience of Salvation.” It is here that the author goes into describing the ordo salutis comprised of: Calling, Justification, Regeneration, Adoption, Sanctification, and Glorification.

Part 2: Subjectively critiquing McGrath and Han’s work on Salvation

First, please allow me to say that I am a 31 year old undergrad student trying to get take hold of that which has taken hold of me: Jesus Christ. Much thought and deliberation has been given on the critiques that I will now proffer as to why I disagree with some of the premises and suggestions that the two authors have made. Ultimately, it is true that anyone who names the name of the Lord will be saved! Paul, in his letter to the Romans, condenses the criteria for who is saved in an understandable tongue: “…if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9, ESV).

My subjective critique will fall under two major headings, one for each of the authors, and they are: “McGrath, why must you go outside of the text of scripture?” and “Dr. Arrington, I disagree with your exegesis of 2 Peter 1:10.” I will will first deal with McGrath.

2.a | Professor McGrath, why must you go outside of the text of scripture?

All throughout McGrath’s text on salvation, he minors, at best, with the scriptures and majors in the church fathers’ works of antiquity. I, for one, appreciate the help of Origen, Augustine, Athanasious, and Aquinas, but none are the inspired word of God. McGrath immediately leaves The Book when he introduces his section by going to Vladmir Lenin. Why would one do that? Is the text alone insufficient to produce salvation? Why would one pilfer with with the redemptive blood of Christ’s as a “purely secular notion” (McGrath, p. 81) in view of “…a faith as precious as ours… “(2 Peter 1:1, NIV).

I’m sure there is something scholarly about looking outside of the Biblical text, but we are not called, foremost, to works of scholarly applause. In Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, he writes: “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power” (1 Corinthians 2:4-5, NIV).

The tongue of the professor should be a trained one, but it is not too far fetched to believe that the tongue of the apostle was advanced and scholarly in its own right. Yet, the apostle would have us to forsake the place of the common entrepreneurial stoic and philosopher for the all surpassing greatness of knowing Christ and the power of His resurrection. Herein lies the gospel, our salvation, in the whole word of God. First, Christ was the Word preached in the beginning, creating the world and all that is in and outside of it. Next, that Christ’s coming was predicted through in the prophets. Next, that Christ was revealed in the gospels. Next, that Christ was explained in the Epistles. Lastly, that Christ is expected in the Revelation.

Of all the text that McGrath has to draw from, he would have provided a far greater service by being a student of the word. The Protestant Reformation taught us this. One of the catch phrases of Luther’s day was Sola Scriptura, meaning that of all the volumes ever written, the scriptures are the highest authority that the believer of Christ has. This is why the man poured his pen into translating the holy text into the common German vernacular of his day. The words of God are thrown aside when they are not expounded upon. It has been said that when the languages of the holy scripture are lost, the gospel will perish. We must be men of the book rightly dividing the word of truth.

2.b | Dr. Arrington, I disagree with your exegesis of 2 Peter 1:10.

The basis for my disagreement is found here:

“’It is wise to make no hard-and-fast distinction between the terms such as “called out,” “elect” and “chosen.” In the Epistles these terms are appropriate translations of the Greek kletoi. For example…Peter apparently uses “calling” and “election” as synonyms (2 Peter 1:10, KJV). God’s purpose and call to salvation include the human response of faith, and therefore God has not arbitrarily predestinated some to unbelief ‘ (Arrington, p. 57).”

Peter writes: “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: For if ye do these things, ye shall never fall” (2 Peter 1:10, KJV). Arrington suggests that calling and election are used synonymously of one another. We will examine this verse by translation comparison, exegetical word study, and, then, why I think Arrington went amiss.

First, here are five parallel texts of 1 Peter 2:10 for comparison:
Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. 3

Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; 4

Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble, 5

Therefore, brothers and sisters, be all the more eager to confirm your call and election, for if you do this, you will never stumble. 6
So, friends, confirm God’s invitation to you, his choice of you. Don’t put it off; do it now. Do this, and you’ll have your life on a firm footing, 7

The ESV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, and even Eugene Peterson’s paraphrase The Message all translate the two greek nouns differently in some variation of calling and choosing. This leads me to ask the question, why be redundant in the same text? It seems like two different thoughts are occurring in the Apostle’s mind. It appears that Peter is relaying here that there are two ideas and that one is built upon the other and now we shall turn to that.

Arrington says that the KJV is rendering the word kletoi as both calling and election. The English-Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament King James Version renders the words separately as klesis (calling) and eklogen (election).

According to the English Standard Lexicon and of the 11 times that word is used in the English NT KJV, klesis is rendered 10 times as calling. The other reference is Ephesian 4:1 where Paul writes, “…walk worthy of your vocation…” (KJV). Election, eklogen, is appears 7 times in the English NT KJV. It is rendered “election” 6 times and once translated as “chosen” in Acts 9:15, “…he is a chosen vessel…” (KJV).

I will conclude with the following thoughts in why I feel that Arrington’s translation has run off course. It is possible that in trying to reconcile his theological framework to the text at hand that he has misrepresented the text in order to preserve his framework. That is problematic for a number of reasons, but I will only address the one that he, himself alluded to. He writes, “God’s purpose and call to salvation include the human response of faith, and therefore, God has not arbitrarily predestinated some to unbelief” (Arrington, p. 57).

It would appear that Arrington is making light of the fact that the scriptures say that some have not been chosen for salvation. If he’s not saying that, then how else is the reader to understand it? This would only lead me to conclude that Arrington’s own theological convictions are, at least in his mind, outweighing the text of scripture. That is an inappropriate exegesis for the text itself delineates that God calls out based on His election.

May I conclude by saying that in both the case of McGrath and Arrington, I have been reminded that one’s personal hermeneutic should not get in the way of accurate exegesis. Thank you and may God bless us as we walk with in the guiding light of the Holy Spirit!

Footnotes:

1McGrath, Alister E. Theology: The Basics. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

2Han, Yung Chul. Transforming Power: Dimensions of the Gospel: Cleveland TN: Pathway Press, 2001.

3 The Holy Bible: English standard version. 2001 (2 Pe 1:10). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

4 New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (2 Pe 1:10). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.

5 The New International Version. 2011 (2 Pe 1:10). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

6 The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version. 1989 (2 Pe 1:10). Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

7 Peterson, E. H. (2002). The Message : The Bible in contemporary language (2 Pe 1:10). Colorado Springs, Colo.: NavPress.

As I’ve been meditating on the doctrines of grace lately and the essential role these mega-Bible themes are playing in a movement in Christianity today dubbed as “New Calvinism,” I’ve gone back about 5 years ago to something a pastor (who shall remain nameless) said.  We were riding through the mountains and he said, “John, my brother (who is a seminary professor) told me that no one would ever come up with the idea of God choosing some for faith outside of really studying their Bible.”  He said that in sort of a condescending way and I really didn’t have an answer at the time out of fear that I’d say the wrong thing and out of respect for the pastor friend.  The last couple of days, as this event has played and replayed in my mind, I’ve thought: Isn’t that the point…to study the Bible?

Romans 12:2 “but do not be conformed by the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind…”

Hebrews 4:12 “For the word of God is living and active sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of the soul and the spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

The point is not a plea for one side of a thought inside the Christian faith, but the point is simply this: God’s word changes us.  We are to study it carefully and diligently, for only in our study will we begin to conceive of the depth of our Creator God’s love for us!

Our ability to truly love and nurture the care of souls hangs on how we understand our God.

with tears, John

R. W. Dale, Nine Lectures on Preaching, the 1876 Yale Lectures (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1877), 127; cited in Stott, Between Two Worlds, 132.

Alexis and I’ve decided to not feed our boys the myth about Christmas and the Easter bunny. We’ve decided to tell our boys the truth about Christmas, the birth and death of Christ, a guy named Nick, and, as much as we’d like, reindeer don’t fly.

I was 7, a late bloomer I guess, when I discovered the truth about Christmas and I was devastated. We were walking through K-Mart at Christmas and my brother, younger than I, dropped the bomb. I remember being so hurt toward my mom for lying to me. While I didn’t question my faith in Christ, at 7, I still remember the thought coming to mind, “So is Jesus real?”

Be honest with your kids. Tell them the truth about Jesus, Christmas, and Easter. Believe, it goes totally against every other wimpy parent around you, but like momma used to say, “If everyone jumped off a cliff, would you?”

Jesus is more than a great ethicist. Jesus said that if anyone would desire to come after Him that he must first deny himself, take up his cross (his death), and follow Him. The ways in which this is lived out are nothing short than whole life altering for the believer. Jesus’ closest followers, His disciples, were having a debate one day over who would be the greatest and Jesus told them that whoever desired to be the greatest must become everyones servant.

On another occasion, Peter, Jesus’ lead disciple, approached Jesus and asked Him how many times he should forgive someone who’d sinned against him. “Should I forgive him seven times?” Peter asked. Jesus replied that he shouldn’t only forgive him seven times but 7 times 70 times in a day for the same offense if that’s what it took! Jesus throws out this ridiculous number of times to forgive a person to illustrate the point that His people’s willingness to forgive should be unceasing.

On the bottom of my job description there reads this little line: “and whatever else is necessary to complete your job duties.” The bottom line is are you going to be self-serving or self-sacrificing, are you going to hoard your wealth for your self or are you going to spend your life for others? When you see a floor that needs swept or a toilet that needs cleaned, are you going to take care of it or call for the janitor?

Discussion question: “Without saying bad things about them, what are some of the positive contributions of Protestant liberalism to the Body of Christ? What can we learn from them? What are some things that led to their appearance on the scene?”

My answer:
“There’s a line in one of the web articles that we were to lead that summarizes the way I’d like to attempt to answer these questions: “The influx of Arminian theology with the Wesleyans inadvertently opened the doors for liberalism by placing more agency in the hands of human beings.”

Some of you had a difficult time with Edward’s sermon “Sinners in the hands of an angry God.” We’re conditioned, in our “fast food, serve it hot, serve it now, and if you get it wrong I will rain my proverbial brimstone on you by calling for your manager” society. God does not owe us anything. He does not owe us salvation. He did not owe me or you, or anyone else for that matter, the propitious atoning work that His Son did for me on the cross.

So I’m not under the notion at all that liberal scholarship has added anything to the Christian faith. When the group of guys lowered their friend through the roof of where Jesus was teaching, it was not the boys physical condition or even state of well-being that led to Jesus’ compassion. It was the young man’s soul that Jesus redeemed. The physical healing is more of an after-thought merely for Christ to say, “Yes I’m Him and Yes, I can do this.”