Saturday, October 25, 2014

POCKET GUIDE TO LOGIC & FAITH BY JASON LISLE – BOOK REVIEW

A Pocket Guide To Logic & Faith – Discerning truth in logical arguments. By Dr. Jason Lisle. Answers in Genesis, 2011. 94 Pages.


I have often thought it would be fun to carry a little buzzer that I could push when someone makes a fundamental mistake in reasoning”


Read my complete book review here.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Beautiful Sounds

Together for the Gospel Live II was just released this week, so here are a couple links that I can't help sharing.  These two albums, Together for the Gospel Live 1 and 2, have been a special blessing to me since I stumbled on them.  Sovereign Grace already writes amazing, Christ-exalting songs, but these two albums are particularly good!  I think these recordings are special because they are simple...nothing but one piano and thousands of voices singing praises to our Lord.  Some songs are classics that need to stick around for a few MORE centuries, and others are more contemporary compositions.  They send chills up and down my spine.  Maybe it's a little bit like heaven?

Listen to the entire albums here:
Together for the Gospel Live
Together for the Gospel Live II

And download my most recent (well, for the last year or so) favorite song for FREE here:
All I Have is Christ

Enjoy folks! :)

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Man A Nothing

Oh LORD,

                                 I am a shell full of dust,
but animated with an invisible rational soul
                    and made anew by an unseen power of grace;

Yet I am no rare object of valuable price,
                                 but one that has nothing and is nothing,
although chosen of thee from eternity,
        given to Christ, and born again;

      I am deeply convinced
                            of the evil and misery of a sinful state,
                                                        of the vanity of creatures,
                                                                but also of the sufficiency of Christ.

When thou wouldst guide me I control myself,

When thou wouldst be sovereign I rule myself.

When thou wouldst take care of me I suffice myself.

When I should depend on thy providings I supply myself,

When I should submit to thy providence I follow my will,

When I should study, love, honour, trust thee, I serve myself;

I fault and correct they laws to suit myself,

Instead of thee I look to a man's approbation,
             and am by nature an idolater.

                             LORD, it is my chief design to bring my heart back to thee.

Convince me that I cannot be my own God, or make myself happy,
nor my own Christ to restore my joy,
nor my own Spirit to teach, guide, rule me.

Help me to see that GRACE does this by providential affliction,
for when my credit is good thou dost cast me lower,
          when my riches are my idol thou dost wing them away,
                      when pleasure is my all thou dost turn it into bitterness.

Take away my roving eye, curious ear, greedy appetite, lustful heart;
show me that none of these things
can heal a wounded conscience,
or support a tottering frame,
or uphold a departing spirit 
then take me to the cross
and leave me there.

Man A Nothing 
- from - The Valley of Vision

Boring Bluegrass Song

Just kidding!!!!  Here's a good excuse to start listening to Christmas music RIGHT NOW!  Just cause you can't help it...



YEAH BLUEGRASS!!!!

Monday, November 5, 2012

Election Thinkings (Part 2) - God Decides

Well, the election is tomorrow and I have yet to publish the second part of my "Election Thinkings." So...here it is! I don't intend to build a huge logical case, but I do have a few points that will be mentioned without much consideration for order. Last time I presented an issue. ONLY ONE! There are many issues, but I think that the issue of abortion can be used as a litmus test for the validity, and godliness of our voting standards.



1. We cannot compromise just because there is no such thing as a perfect candidate.
Obviously, we are dealing with human government. Government is flawed, but it is also God-ordained! Rom. 13:1 - "The powers that be are ordained of God." We can't have any delusions about a perfect candidate because a perfect candidate does not exist. However, as mentioned before, there are "non-negotiables." Some issues cannot be bent. To bend is to give evil a foothold in issues that only God has the right to control (i.e. abortion). I do not believe that a "pro-death" candidate can be approved by a believer.

2. We are responsible for the candidates we elect.
Christians live for more than politics. We aught not let politics keep us awake at night or effect our walks with God! We can walk with God and serve Him in America or in Communist China. To a certain extent the political environment is irrelevant to righteous living. One thing that Christians should be concerned about is responsibility. That's why Christians should care about voting, because it is a responsibility we have been given.

 Not only are we called to take care of our responsibilities, but we are responsible for the actions of people we put in office.  Christians cannot distance themselves from politician's actions.  God will hold those responsible who vote for a pro-death candidate.

3. God is sovereign over life.
God is not only sovereign over who the leaders will be (Rom. 13), but He is also sovereign over life.  Job chapter 1 makes this pretty clear.  Human beings have NO RIGHT to control life.  If one candidate is going to kill 100 babies and the other is going to kill 1,000 (those are exaggerated small numbers) then neither of them can be approved by a conscientious believer.  The temptation is to think "I should vote for the lesser of two evils because that saves 900 babies."  That is not a consistent thought process.  Let me illustrate...
Suppose there is a young couple who find out that they are going to have twins.  Everything is going along fine, and they are excited about starting a family.  One day there are some complications with the pregnancy and the husband rushes his wife to the hospital.  After an agonizing wait the Dr. come out and addresses the husband. "I'm sorry" the Dr. says "There is no way that I can save your wife and the two babies." 
The husband is crushed, but the Dr. continues,  "However, I can save your wife and one of the babies if we terminate one of the fetuses."
All of the sudden the husband is faced with a choice.  Does he choose to kill one person to save two others?  At least only one person dies instead of three! 
NOOOOO!!!  Human beings do not have the right to make that call.  We cannot decide who lives and who dies.  God controls the death of sparrows (Matt. 10:29) and He certainly controls the death of people.  In this case, the morally right thing to do is step out in faith and trust God for the life of all three people.  Yes, the situation is impossible!  Yes, it's a hard decision to make!  Perhaps God will be gracious and save the mother and both the babies.  Maybe all three of them will die.  Whatever happens is in God's hands.  From a human perspective this seems like a horrible gamble.  The Husbands DUTY is to make a decision that leaves God in control of life.
Back to politics.  Blow that example up 1,000 or 1,000,000 times and consider it in terms of national policy.  One candidate stands for policies that will kill millions of babies.  The other stands for policies that will kill fewer babies.  The fact is...there ARE candidates who are completely pro-life!  Sure, humanly speaking, it is impossible for them to win.  But since when were Christians commanded to stand for something or someone that appears more likely to win?  Since when were we called to compromise Biblical principles on the alter of political expediency?  It is our DUTY to leave God in control of life.  That means there is no option to kill one baby to save two lives.  Obama is completely pro-choice.  Romney is "Pro-life with exceptions."  The view that we're saving many babies by voting for the lesser of two evils is a view that fails to trust those infant lives to the sovereignty of God.

Please, consider what is right this election, and along with everything else you do tomorrow, glorify God with your vote!

By the way, I know that there is a lot of confusion about where Romney stands on abortion, so don't take my word for it.  Here is an official campaign ad that makes it pretty clear.


Agree or disagree?  Is anyone voting outside of the media dictated box this year?

Read part 1 - "The Lesser of Two Evils"

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Election Thinkings (Part 1) "The Lesser of Two Evils"


A couple of days ago the vice-presidential candidates for the two major parties debated.  The debate was full of dodged questions, political rhetoric, empty promises, and bad politics.  Many people enjoyed watching it as a duel between good and evil.  Democrats and Republicans each rooted for their candidate and booed the opposition.  Their man could do no wrong and his opponent could only produce gaffes and laughable moments.  Oh yeah, and the moderator was biased.  Only politics can make us complain more than Cornhusker fans when Nebraska was still in the Big 12.  We all feel so good about ourselves while we whine.

Good versus evil?  Was it?  Granted, right now most conservatives see this coming election as a matter of “Better vs. Bad” or “the slow train heading toward a cliff vs. the fast train heading toward a cliff.”  I don’t know how many times I’ve heard the phrase “lesser of two evils,” but it’s almost daily!  Is the lesser of two evils good enough?  

If a person really believes anything then he has to understand something called a “non-negotiable.”  I think a lot of people are willing to bend a little on certain things.  Some things are important and some aren't.  Maybe they are right to bend and maybe they are wrong, but a simple fact stands, true conviction, the non-negotiable, CANNOT be bent!  Part of Webster’s definition of conviction is “the state of being convinced or convicted by conscience.”  So, it is possible for a human being to perform an act that is contrary to their conviction, but is so doing they are sinning against their own consciences.  If Christians have their consciences aligned with God’s standard, then acting against conviction is sin against God!

Conviction applies to voting in two ways.  What do the candidates actually hold as conviction, and what does a voter hold as conviction?  If a voter truly holds a conviction, is it possible to vote for someone who does not hold that conviction?  Have you compromised your own conviction (or proved you never truly believed it) if there is a conflict?  I believe that Christians can choose ONE ITEM that they actually believe with “I’d rather go to the fiery furnace” passion and use that as a yardstick by which to measure a candidate.  True conviction does not bend!

So, what issue should we choose?  Which one will lend some clarity to the situation?  Last week's debate dropped that issue in our laps.  The moderator asked a question. “This debate is, indeed, historic. We have two Catholic candidates, first time, on a stage such as this. And I would like to ask you both to tell me what role your religion has played in your own personal views on abortion.”  Everyone sitting near me at this point let out a collective “oooohhh!”  This was a good question!  This is a question that begs an answer that is held with conviction!  What does the candidate actually believe?

Biden’s answer shouldn’t surprise anyone.  He can somehow reconcile his “pro-life” personal faith with a “pro-choice” political platform by letting other people make up their own minds.  In other words “I wouldn’t kill my own kids, but everyone else should be able to kill theirs if they want to.”  

Paul Ryan’s answer made me groan.  Honestly, I think Biden is more consistent.  Ryan began with a compelling argument for life beginning at conception and then proceeded to say, “All I’m saying is, if you believe that life begins at conception, that, therefore, doesn’t change the definition of life. That’s a principle. The policy of a Romney administration is to oppose abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.” AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!  I wanted to scream!  Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE!  It is really that simple!  You cannot make ANY exception and actually believe something.  It is a classic case of political expediency.  Romney had abortion issues in the past, but attempts to appear pro-life now, while Ryan holds a high personal view, but is willing to bend it a little so he can be vice president.  That, ladies and gentlemen, is not conviction!  Both parties are weak, ungodly options.

So, here’s where we get back around to “the lesser of two evils.”  That phrase is pretty accurate.  Only maybe we should take out the “lesser of” portion of the phrase.  If we only pull one issue out of the pot – abortion - both options are EVIL.  It’s doubtful that either party would actually do something about abortion if they were able.  Everyone is to busy with wars and dollars and storms and parties to get around to abortion.  But Romney/Ryan’s empty campaign promises are informing us that part of their plan is to keep killing babies.  We have no right to be surprised if they get into office and they kill babies.  That’s what they said they would do!

To be continued…

What do you think about our options this election cycle?
Do those "minor exceptions" push the Romney/Ryan ticket past the non-negotiable line?

Read part 2 - "God Decides"

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Found: God's Will - Book Review

This book is rather short and concise (61 pages) and it's appropriate that a review of it bear the same qualities.

Buy it, borrow it, or steal it and read it!  

There it is...short, sweet, and to the point.  Really though, this book is not anything new, but John MacArthur does an extremely good job of clarifying what the will of God for a believer's life is.  The book is built around six simple principles about revealed will of God.  All of them are very clear in Scripture and lay the foundation for answering that famous question "What is God's will for my life????"  


Principle 1 - God's wants men to be saved. (2 Peter 3:9)
Principle 2 - You must be filled/yielded to the Spirit. (Eph. 5:17-18)
Principle 3 - You must be practically pure. (1 Thess. 4:3-7)
Principle 4 - You must be submissive to authority. (1 Peter 2:13-15)
Principle 5 - You must be willing to suffer. (1 Peter 5:10, 4:19)
Principle 6 -  "Do whatever you want."  (Psalm 37:4) 

Of course, principle six assumes that the first five are true in your life and your desires are actually God's desires.  Good stuff!

Let me know your thoughts about the will of God!  What other things should be in consideration?

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Netenyahu at the U.N.

This is a must watch video for any believer who is interested in the Middle East.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu couldn't be much simpler as he presents his plea for the world to draw a "clear red line" on the Iranian nuclear program.  There's even a diagram in case some world leader might not understand that Iran is close to bombing Israel.  Netenyahu is a classic example of a Romans 2:17-29 Jew.  He claims the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob while putting his hope in the progress of man.  The Prime Minister's focus is misplaced, but his speech puts the reality of the conflict in simple terms.  Bible believing Christians have a lot of interesting stuff to keep their eyes on!  The video is thirty minutes long, but it's better than thirty minutes of news you might watch anywhere else!

"Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer for Israel is, that they might be saved.  For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.  For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God...I say then, Hath God cast aside his people? God forbid...God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew." - Romans 10:1-3, 11:1-2

Do you think the US will back up Israel's position?  Are we foolishly overlooking the threat?

Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Ephesians 3:14-21

Just for fun. :)

Ephesians 3:14-21 - 1894 Scrivener Textus Receptus

14 - τουτου χαριν καμπτω τα γονατα μου προς τον πατερα του κυριου ημων ιησου χριστου
15 - εξ ου πασα πατρια εν ουρανοις και επι γης ονομαζεται
16 - ινα δωη υμιν κατα τον πλουτον της δοξης αυτου δυναμει κραταιωθηναι δια του πνευματος αυτου εις τον εσω ανθρωπον
17 - κατοικησαι τον χριστον δια της πιστεως εν ταις καρδιαις υμων
18 - εν αγαπη ερριζωμενοι και τεθεμελιωμενοι ινα εξισχυσητε καταλαβεσθαι συν πασιν τοις αγιοις τι το πλατος και μηκος και βαθος και υψος
19 - γνωναι τε την υπερβαλλουσαν της γνωσεως αγαπην του χριστου ινα πληρωθητε εις παν το πληρωμα του θεου
20 - τω δε δυναμενω υπερ παντα ποιησαι υπερ εκ περισσου ων αιτουμεθα η νοουμεν κατα την δυναμιν την ενεργουμενην εν ημιν
21 - αυτω η δοξα εν τη εκκλησια εν χριστω ιησου εις πασας τας γενεας του αιωνος των αιωνων αμην

Ephesians 3:14-21 - Isaac Translation Beta

14 - On account of this I am bending my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 - Out of whom every family in heavens and on earth is being named,
16 - That He would give to ya’ll, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man,
17 - Christ to have an abode/be at home in your hearts through faith;
18 - in order that ya’ll, in love having been rooted and having been grounded/established, may be able to grasp/understand with all the saints what the breadth and length and depth and height,
19 - And to know the love of Christ that is surpassing knowledge, in order that ya’ll may be filled into all the fullness of God.
20 - Now to Him who is able to do above over-and-above above all that we are asking for ourselves or are conceiving, according to/in proportion to the power of the one who is active in us,
21 - To Him the glory in the church in Christ Jesus into all the generations of the age of the ages. Amen.

Greek scholars, nosemopes, and others, did I miss anything?


Wednesday, July 25, 2012

A Biblical Theology of the Church - Book Review



I recently finished reading A Biblical Theology of the Church as an assignment for my summer internship.  The book is well done and sparked my thinking on a couple of issues.  Of course, I didn’t agree with everything and other readers are sure to disagree with even more, but it is a profitable read nonetheless.

A Biblical Theology of the Church, by editor Mal Couch, is an excellent resource examining the theological underpinnings of the church from a dispensational perspective.  Anyone who has plowed through Chafer’s Systematic Theology and been disappointed by the brief chapters on Church doctrine and polity will find that this book addresses many of the topics that need to be discussed.  The introduction states that the book’s purpose is to examine “the doctrine of the church as revealed in Scripture” and to “reexamine the doctrine of ecclesiology.”  As is the case for most of Mal Couch’s books, he is simply the editor while the content consists of articles by excellent dispensational authors such as Arnold Fruchtenbaum and Thomas Ice.

The book begins with two chapters that lay the groundwork for a dispensational understanding of the Church.  Honestly, it was these two chapters that excited me most about Couch’s book because they handled the dispensational aspects of the Church very carefully and biblically. 

After establishing the framework in which to understand the Church, following chapters discuss a wide range of topics from spiritual gifts to women in the church, from the rapture to missions.  Most chapters are simply good exegesis of fundamental passages to establish good theology.  For example, a chapter entitled “How Christ Treats the Church: Ephesians 5:22-32” begins by clarifying that the primary application of the passage is “how husbands are to love their wives” and then proceeds to dig out the doctrine about God that is revealed through the passage.

Two weaknesses that I found were a liberal stand on divorce (in the discussion of qualifications for elders) and what I consider to be too strong of a stand on elder rule.  Couch’s (or whoever was the author of this chapter) conclusion on the issue of divorced elders is that the text in 1 Timothy is disallowing polygamy and states “This interpretation would certainly open the door for restoration, no matter what issue led to a past divorce.”(pg. 176)  His stand on elder rule becomes so strong that congregations are denied the responsibility of choosing their own leaders.  I indirectly deal with this issue and give a little of my perspective  about Ecclesiology in a blog I posted in 2011 entitled “Church: It ain’t that complicated folks!”

Another little annoyance with this book (and with other books edited by Mal Couch) is the fact that the chapters are not attributed to the co-authors.  I don’t know if there was some intent in leaving their names out, but I was sometimes curious who was writing and had no way of finding out.

A Biblical Theology of the Church contains a few items where I objected, but overall presents a good, biblical look at the doctrine and conduct of Christ’s Body.

"That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel" - Ephesians 3:6

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Call to Ministry - John Newton


Here's a little food for thought by John Newton concerning a call to ministry.  It's a little on the long side, but WORTH THE READ!  I found it quoted in Spurgeon's Lectures to my Students.

John Newton's Letters
The call to the ministry
March 7, 1765.
Dear Sir,
Your letter of February 19th came to me yesterday. I have read it with attention, and very willingly sit down to offer you my thoughts. Your case reminds me of my own—my first desires towards the ministry were attended with great uncertainties and difficulties, and the perplexity of my own mind was heightened by the various and opposite judgments of my friends. The advice I have to offer is the result of painful experience and exercise, and for this reason perhaps may not be unacceptable to you. I pray our gracious Lord to make it useful.
I was long distressed, as you are, about what was or was not a proper call to the ministry. It now seems to me an easy point to solve—but perhaps will not be so to you until the Lord shall make it clear to yourself in your own case. I have not room to say so much as I could. in brief, I think it principally includes three things:


1. A warm and earnest desire to be employed in this service. I apprehend, the man who is once moved by the Spirit of God to this work, will prefer it, if attainable, to thousands of gold and silver; so that, though he is at times intimidated by a sense of its importance and difficulty, compared with his own great insufficiency (for it is to be presumed a call of this sort, if indeed from God, will be accompanied with humility and self-abasement), yet he cannot give it up. I hold it a good rule to inquire in this point—whether the desire to preach is most fervent in our most lively and spiritual frames, and when we are most laid in the dust before the Lord? If so, it is a good sign. But if, as is sometimes the case, a person is very earnest to be a preacher to others, when he finds but little hungering and thirstiness after grace in his own soul—it is then to be feared his zeal springs rather from a selfish principle—than from the Spirit of God.


2. Besides this affectionate desire and readiness to preach, there must in due season appear some competent sufficiency as to gifts, knowledge, and utterance. Surely, if the Lord sends a man to teach others—he will furnish him with the means. I believe many have intended well in becoming preachers, who yet went beyond or before their call in so doing. The main difference between a minister and a private Christian seems to consist in these ministerial gifts, which are imparted to him, not for his own sake—but for the edification of others. But then I say, these are to appear in due season. They are not to be expected instantaneously—but gradually, in the use of proper means. They are necessary for the discharge of the ministry; but not necessary as pre-requisites to warrant our desires after it. In your case, you are young, and have time before you. Therefore, I think you need not as yet perplex yourself with inquiring if you have these gifts already. It is sufficient if your desire is fixed, and you are willing, in the way of prayer and diligence, to wait upon the Lord for them—as yet you need them not.


3. That which finally evidences a proper call—is a correspondent opening in Providence, by a gradual train of circumstances pointing out the means, the time, the place—of actually entering upon the work of the ministry. And until this concurrence arrives, you must not expect to be always clear from hesitation in your own mind. The principal caution on this head is, not to be too hasty in catching at first appearances. If it be the Lord's will to bring you into his ministry—he has already appointed your place and service; and though you know it not at present—you shall at a proper time. If you had the talents of an angel—you could do no good with them until his hour has come—and until he leads you to the people whom he has determined to bless by your means.

It is very difficult to restrain ourselves within the bounds of prudence here, when our zeal is warm, a sense of the love of Christ upon our hearts, and a tender compassion for perishing sinners is ready to prompt us to break out too soon—but "he who believes shall not make haste". I was about five years under this constraint. Sometimes I thought I must preach, though it was in the streets. I listened to everything that seemed plausible, and to many things that were not so. But the Lord graciously, and as it were insensibly, hedged up my way with thorns; otherwise, if I had been left to my own spirit, I would have put it quite out of my power to have been brought into such a sphere of usefulness, as he in his good time has been pleased to lead me to. And I can now see clearly, that at the time I would first have gone out, though my intention was, I hope, good in the main—yet I overrated myself, and had not that spiritual judgment and experience which are requisite for so great a service.

I wish you therefore to take time; and if you have a desire to enter into the Established Church, endeavor to keep your zeal within moderate bounds, and avoid everything that might unnecessarily clog your admission with difficulties. I would not have you hide your profession, or to be backward to speak for God; but avoid what looks like preaching, and be content with being a learner in the school of Christ for some years. The delay will not be lost time; you will be so much the more acquainted with the Gospel, with your own heart, and with human nature. The last is a necessary branch of a minister's knowledge, and can only be acquired by comparing what passes within us, and around us—with what we read in the Word of God.

I am glad to find you have a distaste both for Arminian and Antinomian doctrines—but let not the mistakes of others sit too heavy upon you. Be thankful for the grace which has made you to differ; be ready to give a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear; but beware of engaging in theological disputes, without evident necessity, and some probable hope of usefulness. They tend to eat out the life and savor of religion, and to make the soul lean and dry. Where God has begun a real work of grace, incidental mistakes will be lessened by time and experience; where he has not, it is of little signification what sentiments people hold, or whether they call themselves Arminians or Calvinists.

I agree with you, that there is time enough for you to think of Oxford yet; and that if your purpose is fixed, and all circumstances render it prudent and proper to devote yourself to the ministry, you will do well to spend a year or two in private studies. It would be further helpful, in this view, to place yourself where there is Gospel preaching, and a spiritual people. If your favorable opinion of our church should induce you to come here, I shall be very ready to give you every assistance in my power. As I have trod exactly the path you seem to be setting out in, I might so far perhaps be more serviceable than those who are in other respects much better qualified to assist you. I doubt not but in this, and every other step, you will entreat the Lord's direction; and I hope you will not forget to pray for me.

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Let This Mind…


Philippians 2:5-8 - Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

There are so many remarkable things about this passage.  No human mind can grasp the full weight of the fact that the God of the universe, in the Divine person of Christ, was made “a little lower than the angels” and humbled as a man.  Creators are supposed to show themselves powerful over their creations, yet Christ chose to become like His creation. 

However, the fantastic thing about Christ as seen in this passage is not simply His humility.  Humility is great, but it is never an end unto itself.  Humility is for a purpose, and that purpose is living life for another.  It is to give the glory to something else.  It is the submitting of oneself to a higher authority.  Christ, during His life on earth, was the perfect example of humility through His absolute submission to the authority of God the Father and perfect dependence on the Holy Spirit.

Christ was willing, at the will of the Father, to obey by leaving the glory of His own heavenly kingdom in exchange for a humble life on earth.  He was willing to submit Himself to the Father by becoming a man.  Not only a man, but He was humbled as a servant of His own creation.  Christ obeyed the will of the Father all the way to the point of dying on the cross to pay the sin-debt for those who were His enemies.  On the night of His death His prayer to the Father was “not my will, but thine, be done.”

So here we are with the charge to “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.”  What a charge!  Such a state of humility is impossible without the complete empowering of the Holy Spirit and the willingness to yield our own will to God and say “I’ll go where you want me to go…I’ll be what you want me to be…I’ll do what you want me to do.”


Credit to L.S. Chafer for the inspiration and the closing quote.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

And So All Israel Shall Be Saved!

They are scattered: behold them wandering on the face of the earth without a country of their own; they are a people who have been oppressed and downtrodden almost beyond belief: the hand of the heathen and the hand of the so-called Christian hath been very heavy upon them; they have been jeered and hooted at for ages, though they are in truth the very nobles of God, and their ancient lineage is like that of kings. Let us not, however, despair for them. Abraham, their father, was but a heathen when God called him out of a family that had worshipped the seraphs and made him to be a witness of the living and true God, and honored his faith with exceeding great reward.

Doubt not, then, that he can call Israel again from all her wanderings, cleanse her from all her profane traditions and her unbelief, and separate her unto himself to be a holy people, in whom once again his power shall be made known, and made known in such a way that they shall not speak of the ark of the Lord, or the redemption out of Egypt as the chief symbol of their national glory, or the grandest theme of their patriotic song, for a greater redemption and a greater manifestation of the Divine presence shall be in the midst of Israel than the wilderness of Sinai had ever known, or the mountains round about Jerusalem had ever witnessed. God grant it to them, and hasten the fulfillment of the promises in which he has made us to hope.


From a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon entitled "A Bright Light in Deep Shades," delivered May 12, 1872

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Have a Dose of Calvin


“it is perverse to measure divine by the standard of human justice”


“But if it is so, (you will say,) little faith can be put in the Gospel promises, which, in testifying concerning the will of God, declare that he wills what is contrary to his inviolable decree. Not at all; for however universal the promises of salvation may be, there is no discrepancy between them and the predestination of the reprobate, provided we attend to their effect. We know that the promises are effectual only when we receive them in faith, but, on the contrary, when faith is made void, the promise is of no effect. If this is the nature of the promises, let us now see whether there be any inconsistency between the two things, viz., that God, by an eternal decree, fixed the number of those whom he is pleased to embrace in love, and on whom he is pleased to display his wrath, and that he offers salvation indiscriminately to all. I hold that they are perfectly consistent, for all that is meant by the promise is, just that his mercy is offered to all who desire and implore it, and this none do, save those whom he has enlightened. Moreover, he enlightens those whom he has predestinated to salvation. Thus the truth of the promises remains firm and unshaken, so that it cannot be said there is any disagreement between the eternal election of God and the testimony of his grace which he offers to believers. But why does he mention all men? Namely that the consciences of the righteous may rest the more secure when they understand that there is no difference between sinners, provided they have faith, and that the ungodly may not be able to allege that they have not an asylum to which they may retake themselves from the bondage of sin, while they ungratefully reject the offer which is made to them. Therefore, since by the Gospel the mercy of God is offered to both, it is faith, in other words, the illumination of God, which distinguishes between the righteous and the wicked, the former feeling the efficacy of the Gospel, the latter obtaining no benefit from it. Illumination itself has eternal election for its rule.
– John Calvin (Institutes of the Christian Religion – Book 3 Chapter 24 Section 17)

Thursday, February 10, 2011

That Foolish Cross

“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” – 1 Cor. 1:18 
What a blessing is Sovereign Grace!  Believers can easily recognize themselves in the later part of the verse “unto us which are saved it [the preaching of the cross] is the power of God”, but the first part is not any less important.  Every believer should see the worthlessness of their own merit in the first clause, “the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness.”
I was once one of those that was perishing and dead in sin.  The Gospel of Christ, His suffering, and victory over death was foolishness to such a one as I.  My wisdom could not fathom the beauty of such a shameful act unless God opened my eyes and SAVED me! 
Thank God that even my faith is a gift of God’s grace!  Without it I would be mocking the foolishness of the cross.  Instead, I am left to marvel at the Grace of the Almighty God.

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Church: It ain’t that complicated folks!


In the absence of something brand new to post, may I present my Pastoral Epistles research paper.

The existence of Church polity is a relevant and Biblical reality. Church government exists because there is a need for it. Obviously there was a need for a certain level of human leadership in the New Testament church, and the need is still obvious in churches today. Problems often arise, however, when the “who” of church leadership is discussed. These problems are very exaggerated in the church when the Biblical principles are really quite simple. The Biblical model of the purpose and role of elders, deacons, and congregation is presented in the New Testament as a simple organization and a call back to simplicity is needful in the organized church.

Elder-ship is a divinely arranged position of leadership in the local church. Scripture indicates that multiple qualified elders were appointed to lead and teach in the early churches. Schofield summarizes the role of these elders when he states,
The elders were to “rule” or “take care of the church of God” (I Tim. 3:4, 5; 5:17); to guard the body of revealed truth from perversion and error (Titus 1:9); and to “oversee” the church as a shepherd his flock (Acts 20:28, where “feed” is literally to “tend as a shepherd”; John 21:16; Heb. 13:17; I Pet. 5:2). 
The requirements for elders that are established in I Timothy and Titus reveal a lot about the responsibilities of elders as well as the high standard that they are to retain. Their pure lifestyle is to be consistent with the message of faith that they teach and a good testimony to the church and people around them. Also, their lifestyles are a witness to their ability to “take care of the church of God” (I Tim. 3:5).

Elders, in regards to their leadership responsibilities, are to always stay within their proper bounds. Their relationship to the congregation is very crucial and Elders are never given license to exercise excessive rule over the congregation. Peter exhorts them to oversee, but “not by constraint.” (1 Peter 5:2) Furthermore, they are not to be “lords over God's heritage” but to be “ensamples to the flock.” (1 Peter 5:3).

The only office besides Elder that is recognized in the Scripture is the office of Deacon. The need for deacons first manifested itself soon after Pentecost as the Jerusalem church was experiencing massive growth. Seven godly men were chosen to take the load off the leaders by ministering to widows and serving tables. Theissen differentiates between elders and deacons by stating, “The elders were responsible for the spiritual needs of the community of the faithful and the deacons cared primarily for the physical needs.”

Deacons, in the Bible, are only ever mentioned dealing with physical matters. Their assigned role certainly seems to be quite distinct from the leadership sort of role that Elders have. Theissen states “The qualifications for those holding this office are similar to those of an elder, except that the requirements concerning the ability to teach and hospitality, though mentioned for the elder, are not required for the deacon. It is safe to say that the requirements for deacon seem particularly appropriate for those handling the material and financial needs of the organization.”

Although not an office, the congregation is the third aspect of a local churches organization. Elders and deacons are Biblical and serve a purpose, but they are not to take priority over the congregation. In fact, it is important to realize that the offices of Elder and Deacon are not necessary for a local church, in its simplest form, to be an entirely legitimate, fully-functioning body. The Biblical definition of church, as Chafer says, “is no more than the assembly of professed believers in one locality.” This can be seen in the New Testament as Paul and Barnabas established churches all over Asia Minor before returning and appointing elders in those churches. This is also consistent with the concept of the church being a body of believers rather than an extremely structured organization and with the role of elders as serving the church rather than lording over it.

Understanding the congregation as the core of the local church is complementary to understanding the place and role of leaders in the church. Leaders need to be a united part of the body. The New Testament testimony is that leaders always seem to have been appointed from within the congregation. They were members of the congregation who were willing to serve and then appointed to specific responsibilities. Deacons and elders are always a part of the congregation, not a distinct clergy class that lords their authority over the people.

The importance of the congregation in governing a church is further seen in the appointment of elders and deacons. Again, Henry Thiessen demonstrates a proper understanding of the relation of Elders and deacons to the church when he says, “Early church government is a combination of the congressional and presbyterial forms. The congregation chose their leaders, and the leaders acted in accordance with the directives and suffrage of the people.”

Too often the organization of church government is overcomplicated to the point of imposing a “new and rigid Leviticus” on the church. The principles in the New Testament contain no such doctrines. A local body of mature believers should be able to function together through like-mindedness and cooperation and appoint godly leaders to be responsible for needs in the church. The organization and government itself should never become the focus of church. Such a focus will only serve to develop animosity and resistance toward what God means the church to be. The local church is a “glorious truth of the unity and fellowship of the one Body of Christ” and should never become a mere human organization that fails to give the ultimate authority and glory to God.


BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications. 1993.
Schofield, C. I. Schofield Bible Correspondence Course. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1960.
Theissen, Henry C. Lectures in Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1986.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Revelation over Reason

To cite the words of many a computer user on the occasion of a new achievement in the digital realm, “Hello World.”

Starting a blog has been on the list of things I’ve wanted to do for a number of years, but I generally lack any inspiration to write intelligently on a consistent basis.  However, this morning I had enough desire to write that I mustered the courage to click the three or four buttons that are necessary to attach a blog to my Google account. 

One obstacle almost killed my fledgling blog before it even took its first flight into the World Wide Web, and that was the process of choosing a domain name.  My brain wanted something timeless, profound, and distinctly “Isaac-ish” but nothing was coming to mind.  Fortunately, I had a quote from Lewis Sperry Chafer’s Systematic Theology floating around in my head (it’s been there for almost two weeks actually) and “Revelation over Reason” became the newest blog name in the blogosphere (at least for the next .00045 seconds).

Since the events of this morning and the birth of a blog I’m continuing to grow more and more fond of both the idea of writing stuff on blogs and the title of my blog.  I need an outlet to write the stuff that rattles around in my head but never becomes ordered enough to be communicated.  Hypothetically this can be a place for me to think things through for my own benefit more than anyone who reads it.  At the same time, the fact that people may read my posts is a good motivation to write thoughtfully, conversationally and well.  Who knows…maybe John Piper will be following me someday…(that was a joke! haha!)

As for the title…Maybe it’s not timeless, profound, “Isaac-ish” (I couldn’t have thought it up) and it probably won’t apply to everything I write.  But hey…It’s what I’m thinking about right now, so I’m happy!

Grace and peace be multiplied.
-Isaac