Nothing in Particular

I Have Moved!

2008-03-27T22:13:00.000-07:00

I have just moved my blog over to http://theveilaway.com/pretiosaegratiae/. It's still under construction, but hopefully will be up and running soon (including more posts!).

Justification: A Reformed Analysis of the Catholic Perspective

2007-10-30T15:51:00.000-07:00

In honor of Reformation Day and Challies's prompt for his Reformation Day Symposium, I figured it would be worth posting this paper I wrote for a class a few weeks ago as a comparison/contrast assignment. The primary focus in my writing of this paper was to clarify the Catholic understanding of Justification in light of the Reformed view, because I believe that we Protestants are often far to ready to write Catholics off as works-righteousness pagans. There is some merit (no pun intended) to that claim, but it is misconstrued nonetheless. Here I hope to clarify what the Roman Catholic position is upon this subject and show some of the logic behind their conclusions. This paper is not meant to be a comprehensive examination of justification and the more exegetical issues; I am simply looking at the theological systems of thought in a more general sense. While I encourage people to look at Catholicism more fairly, I by no means want people to get the impression in my conclusion that the there is no difference between the Reformed and Catholic understanding of the gospel or that the difference is minimal. Sola fide must be upheld for grace to truly be free.

*As a note, the numbers in the citations from the Catechism of the Catholic Church indicate paragraph numbers, not page numbers.

The doctrine of justification is the doctrine most central to Christianity, and it is that which divides the Reformed from the Catholic. For centuries now, theologians have argued over the correct interpretation of this doctrine, yet today very few Christians understand it or to even give it fair consideration. As a result, Protestants in particular have often dismissed Catholics as essentially non-Christians. When given fair view, however, Catholicism holds commendable similarities to Protestantism, particularly on the role of grace in justification. However, fundamental, uncompromising differences remain between the Reformed and Catholic when the Catholic doctrines of infusion and justification by faith are scrutinized carefully and explicated alongside the Catholic understanding of grace.

The concept of justification cannot be defined without first understanding the arguments that Catholics and Reformed have for their particular views, for it is the interpretation of what it means to be justified that separates Catholics from Reformed. While both agree in their definition that to be justified means one will be saved from condemnation to hell, beyond this definition there are some, but not many, agreements, although perhaps more than many Christians realize. However, as will be shown later, these agreements are relatively superficial.

In 1999, the Lutheran World Federation came together with the Catholic Church in an ecumenical attempt to find some of these commonalities and formed what they call the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification as their statement of what they discovered (Aune 9). Out of the formation of this document came several points of agreement, the key statement of which was, “Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works” (Truemper 35).

Along with this summary statement came seven other main points of agreement that David Truemper quotes:

(1)We confess together that all persons depend completely on the saving grace of God for their salvation….(2)We confess together that God forgives sin by grace and at the same time frees human beings from sin’s enslaving power and imparts the gift of new life in Christ….(3)We confess together that sinners are justified by faith in the saving action of God in Christ….(4)We confess together that in baptism the Holy Spirit unites one with Christ, justifies and truly renews the person. But the justified must all through life constantly look to God’s unconditional justifying grace….(5)We confess together that persons are justified by faith in the Gospel ‘apart from works prescribed by the law….(6)We confess together that the faithful can rely on the mercy and promises of God…. (7)We confess together that good works—a Christian life lived in faith, hope, and love—follow justification and are its fruits. (35-36)

Many of these points would surprise most Protestants, excepting perhaps point number four, with which many Protestants would in fact disagree. The general conception among Protestants is that Catholics believe in merited salvation or that works are the means to achieving one’s salvation. This misconception needs to be dispelled or reevaluated, for it is an inaccurate representation, although perhaps not without a tiny bit of truth. According to Catholic doctrine, works are meritorious only in that they earn rewards in heaven (Matt. 5:12; 10:42). The intention of the Catholic affirmation of works is to “emphasize the responsibility of persons for their actions, not to question the character of those works as gifts, and far less to deny that justification always remains the unmerited gift of grace” (Wood 48). Susan Wood quotes Saint Augustine: “What then is the merit of man before grace by which merit he should receive grace? Since only grace makes every good merit of ours, and when God crowns our merits, He crowns nothing else but His own gifts” (Wood 49).

Clearly, the Catholic Church does not deny salvation by grace alone but rather affirms it. However, one must ask how the Catholic Church understands grace and applies it to their practice of doctrine. Also, one must examine the Roman doctrines of faith and its relation to salvation and then what qualifies as a “work,” or meritorious action. When the distinctions in these definitions are elucidated and then applied, then it is possible to better understand the Catholic and Reformed doctrinal differences. A good place to begin this analysis is with the doctrine of sola fide.

Sola fide, or the doctrine of salvation by faith alone, is the doctrine upon which the church stands or falls, according to Luther, and is also one of the key biblical doctrines upon which the Church split in the Reformation (Sproul 18). Now, the question of what faith itself is would require far more discussion than will fit into this paper, which is why the role of faith in salvation will be the focus of debate here. The Reformed doctrine of faith alone maintains that man is justified by God’s grace, which is received through faith, and that works play no part in salvation whatsoever (Eph. 2:8-9). Rather, works are the fruits or result of saving faith. It would even be incorrect to say that one is saved because of his faith, for that makes faith a merit or condition for faith. Faith is the instrument of justification, rather than the condition of justification. As Joel Beeke puts it,

We are not saved for believing, but by believing. In the application of justification, faith is not a builder but a beholder; it has nothing to give or achieve, but has all to receive. Faith is neither the ground nor substance of our justification, but the hand, the instrument, the vessel which receives the divine gift proffered to us in the gospel. (Beeke 62)

The Roman Catholic position also holds to justification by faith, but its meaning is nuanced. First of all, Catholics deny that justification is by faith “alone.” MacArthur quotes the Council of Trent’s declaration, “If anyone says that by faith alone the sinner is justified, so as to mean that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema” (11).

Secondly, the Catholic Church uses the word “by” in a different sense than the Reformers did. Catholicism believes that the instrumental cause of justification is in the sacrament of baptism primarily and also secondarily in penances (Sproul 122). R.C. Sproul quotes the new Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy” (122-123). Accordingly, what Rome means by justification “by faith” is that justification is accompanied by and inseparable from faith, but it is not the sole instrument in justification; also important for justification is the rite of baptism. The most important thing to note is that clearly that baptism and faith are conditional requirements for justification, for one is not justified until one has undergone the rite of baptism in one’s faith. Therefore, justification is conditioned upon man’s actions.

The Roman Catholic idea of baptism in justification brings one back to examine more closely their understanding of grace. Grace is, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life” (1996) . God’s grace also “depends entirely on God’s gratuitous initiative, for he alone can reveal and give himself. It surpasses the power of human intellect and will, as that of every other creature” (Catechism 1998). Therefore, as was already stated, they do not believe that works merit salvation or grace. Catholics hold that their "works," such as baptism, are a result of grace, and the result of baptism is even more grace.

This understanding of grace may sound very much in line with Reformed thinking, which holds that salvation depends completely on God’s grace, until one considers it in light of the Catholic belief in free will. The Catechism says and quotes the Council of Trent:

Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent: ‘When God touches man’s heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight’. (1993)[1]

Here, it is clear that man does have some power to affect his salvation, for while he cannot move toward justification, he does have the ability to reject it. The Catechism also clarifies that “since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification…and for eternal life” (2010). So when the Catholics say that justification rests in God’s grace, they mean that God initiates the conversion by His grace in spite of man’s free will and that afterwards it is up to man’s will to merit grace by not sinning, although one must remember that not sinning still remains an act of grace in itself. [2]

The Reformed understanding, on the other hand, maintains that God’s grace is always active in the believer’s life and is irresistible through and through. God is not merely the initiator of grace but also the constant sustainer. The Christian relies on God’s sustaining grace for justification and for sanctification, and he cannot do anything to merit his salvation. John Calvin quotes St. Augustine on God’s effectual grace over man’s will:

Were man left to his own will to remain under the help of God if he chooses, while God does not make him willing, among temptations so numerous and so great, the will would succumb from its own weakness. Succour, therefore, has been brought to the weakness of the human will by divine grace acting irresistibly and inseparably, that thus the will however weak might not fail. (Sproul 142)

The reason for this difference between the Reformed and Catholic comes in part from either side’s understanding of the relationship between sanctification and justification. Catholicism believes that justification is a life-long process that occurs simultaneously with sanctification. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “The Holy Spirit is the master of the interior life. By giving birth to the ‘inner man,’ justification entails the sanctification of his whole being” (1995). The Council of Trent also held that justification is a process that lasts not only over the course of this life but also into the next life or through purgatory (MacArthur 9). As justification is a continual process and requires continued perfection to the end, it is possible to lose one’s justification by committing a mortal sin or rejecting God’s grace. On mortal sins, the Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us—that is, charity—necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart…” (1856). [3]

The Reformed position, in contrast, understands justification to be a single occurrence in the life of the believer. James White quotes the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith on this: “God doth continue to forgive the sins of those that are justified, and although they can never fall from the state of justification, yet they may, by their sins, fall under God’s fatherly displeasure” (65). Justification is a one time event, not a continual process; once one is justified, one is always justified. White also quotes Charles Hodge’s definition: “[Justification is] an act, and not, as sanctification, a continued and progressive work” (68). Justification, for the Reformers, is the act by which man is counted as righteous; sanctification is the process of becoming holy and is evidenced by one’s good works. Sanctification is a gradual, life-long process; justification is not.

At the very root of the distinctive aspects between Catholics and the Reformed view lie the Catholic and Reformed views of what justification does to and for the Christian. The words used to describe the distinct doctrines are infusion and imputation.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes the justifying grace of Christ as “the gratuitous gift that God makes to us of his own life, infused by the Holy Spirit into our soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it. It is the sanctifying or deifying grace received in Baptism” (1999). In another place, “Justification detaches man from sin which contradicts the love of God, and purifies his heart of sin” (Catechism 1990). In other words, justification for the Catholic means “to make righteous” or to have one’s soul purified in and of itself so that there remains no sin whatsoever. As a result, God will judge one as a righteous and worthy person because one actually is righteous. However, no one can deny that man still sins in spite of his faith. If man commits a sin, then that sin blemishes his soul, like cookie crumbs on a child’s face after stealing from the jar. Therefore, when one sins, one falls out of his state of justification since he is justified by the perfect condition of his soul. This explains why The Catholic Church believes that one can lose one’s salvation.
Contrarily, the Reformed view of justification is often described by the phrase, “simul iustus et peccator,” which is the Latin for the idea that man is simultaneously saved and a sinner (Truemper 38). What this means is that man is not justified by being perfect and holy in and of himself; rather, man is justified by Christ’s Righteousness that is imputed to him while man is yet sinful and deserving of condemnation (Romans 4:5). This understanding is called imputed righteousness or forensic justification (Sproul 95). On this idea of imputation, James White quotes Hodge in saying,

[Imputation] does not produce any subjective change in the person justified. It does not effect a change of character, making those good who were bad, those holy who were unholy. That is done in regeneration and sanctification…[;] it is not a mere executive act, as when a sovereign pardons a criminal, and thereby restores him to his civil rights, or to his former status in the commonwealth…[;] it is a forensic, or judicial act, the act of a judge, not of a sovereign (68).

Hodge clearly affirms that justification does not change the person himself, but that “it simply alters his relation to the law” (White 114). Luther illustrated this famously with his analogy of the dunghill. White paraphrases it this way:

[Luther] likened our sinful state to a dunghill: ugly and offensive, it has nothing in and of itself that would be pleasing to anyone, let alone to God….We are foul and repulsive in our sin….Justification…is like that first snowfall of the approaching winter…that covers everything in a blanket of pure white….What was once foul is no longer. The smell is gone. The repulsive sight is gone. All is white and clean and pure (119-120).

It is seen, however, that the person remains filthy on the inside under the snow. Christ’s righteousness is a covering that makes one appear righteous in God’s eyes.
The question that remains is how this idea of imputation relates to the doctrine of sola fide, which the Reformers were so insistent upon in the face of great opposition. In other words, why is imputation by faith alone such an important issue? Both Catholic and Reformed views see Christ’s grace alone as the center of the gospel. Is anything else important?

The answer to these questions rests upon the careful distinctions that were made earlier and the implications that can be drawn from them. The important notion that separates the Reformed view from the Catholic is ultimately that of conditionality and focus, not to mention Scripture itself. Catholicism understands justification to be the result of meeting different conditions. The first of these conditions is the rite of baptism conducted in or with faith. The second of these conditions is the maintenance of one’s status as a righteous person by not sinning, mortally especially and also venially (Catechism 1855-1856). Although the Catholic claims that all works toward justification are the result of God’s initiating grace and therefore cannot be called meritorious, the fact that justification is conditional upon man’s actions seems to strongly imply that salvation is indeed merited in some sense. To put it in negative terms, if one does not do the necessary things (i.e. baptism in faith and refraining from sins), then one can lose or perhaps never achieve the position of justification. When one includes the Catholic doctrine of free will in this critical examination, then the claim that salvation is not merited really appears to be nothing more than a game of semantics, for if man acts or does not act based upon his own free will, then it is truly up to him, rather than God’s effective mercy and grace, to determine if he shall be justified. James White comments, “The focus moves away from the perfection of the work of Christ on behalf of the believer to the maintenance of a state or condition. The glory for salvation itself is divided between the Savior and the saved, for the work of the one only makes it possible for the other to engage in ‘self-salvation’” (116).

The Reformed perspective believes that there are no conditions for justification but the free grace and mercy of Christ, which is conferred to man by means of faith through the working of regeneration. Although anyone who is Reformed will affirm this, it is often forgotten what the exact role of faith is in justification. It is most important to remember that, as B.B. Warfield put it, “The saving power of faith resides thus not in itself, but in the Almighty Saviour on whom it rests….It is not, strictly speaking, even faith in Christ that saves, but Christ that saves through faith” (White 109). This understanding of faith leaves no room for a conditional aspect to justification.

There is an irreconcilable dichotomy between the Reformed view of free justification and the Catholic understanding of conditional justification. Nevertheless, the Roman Catholic position remains commendable in that it does hold Christ to be the ultimate reason for our justification, and that it is only because of God’s grace that man is able to perform the necessary actions for justification. For this reason, Protestants should not conclude that Catholics are beyond salvation, although perhaps Catholics may be rarer for it. The Catholic gospel, although compromised, can still be used to spread the message of salvation by grace in Christ. Ultimately though, it is not for man to judge who is saved and who is not, for it is not man who justifies but God. The Apostle Paul affirms this fact in Romans 8:33, where he says, “Who then shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies” (Holy Bible).

Footnotes:

[1] See also paragraph 2002 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “God's free initiative demands man's free response, for God has created man in his image by conferring on him, along with freedom, the power to know him and love him. The soul only enters freely into the communion of love. God immediately touches and directly moves the heart of man. He has placed in man a longing for truth and goodness that only he can satisfy.”

[2] See also paragraph 2011 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men.”

[3] See also paragraph 1861 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.”

Works Cited

Aune, David E, ed. Rereading Paul Together: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives on Justification. Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2006.

___________. “Preface.” Rereading Paul Together: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives on Justification. Ed. Aune. 9-20. Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2006.

Beeke, Joel R. “Justification by Faith Alone: The Relation of Faith to Justification.” Justification by Faith Alone: Affirming the Doctrine by Which the Church and the Individual Stands or Falls. Ed. Kistler. 53-105. United States: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1995.

Catechism of the Catholic Church. Vatican.va. Copyright © Libreria Editrice Vaticana. 18 October, 2007 .

Holy Bible, English Standard Version®. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. All rights reserved.

Kistler, Don, ed. Justification by Faith Alone: Affirming the Doctrine by Which the Church and the Individual Stands or Falls. United States: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1995.

MacArthur, John. “Long before Luther: Jesus and the Doctrine of Justification.” Justification by Faith Alone: Affirming the Doctrine by Which the Church and the Individual Stands or Falls. Ed. Kistler. 1-22. United States: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1995.

Sproul, R.C. Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification. Grand Rapids: BakerBooks, 1995.

Truemper, David G. “Introduction to the Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification.” Rereading Paul Together: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives on Justification. Ed. Aune. 29-42. Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2006.

White, James. The God Who Justifies. Minneapolis: BethanyHouse, 2001.

Wood, Susan K. “Catholic Reception of the Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification.” Rereading Paul Together: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives on Justification. Ed. Aune. 43-59. Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2006.

Two Must-Reads

2007-06-06T11:20:00.000-07:00

Well, it has certainly been a long time since I have posted. This last month has been one of the busier months of my life, and I just haven't had the time. So by now I would imagine I've lost all of my readership, not that I ever had much anyway.

For over a month now I had been meaning to post on two books I read. The first is, The Life and Diary of David Brainerd. I remember beginning this book a couple years ago, but I never got past the first 30 pages. At that time it just didn't hold my interest, although now I don't know why. Now, having read the whole thing, I can say that it is one of the best books I have read, and I think it is a must-read for any Christian. As you follow this man's thoughts through his trials, you cannot help but be struck by the incredible humility that he had, and how conscious he was of his sin. He was active in seeking repentance before his God. I would say that this is one of the most convicting books I have ever read. As I read through it, I kept asking myself why I don't have the same mindset, why I don't feel as strongly about the abhorrence of sin, and why I don't go to God immediately in fervent prayer like Brainerd did. This man was a great and godly example to Christians today; his piety is something that anyone can learn from. Besides his piety, his faith had incredible and concrete results as he persevered in ministering to the Indians and to the other frontier colonies. It is really amazing to read about how God used this man.

The other book I recently read was, The God Who Justifies, by James R. White. This book is another must-read for anyone who claims to be a Christian, because this book examines the doctrine that separates Protestant Christianity from Roman Catholicism. It is one of the foundational doctrines that defines the true Gospel. I enjoy reading, but there are very few books that I enjoy enough that I cannot wait to read the next and every chapter of; this was one of those. The entire book was very good; better than I expected, really. The first half of the book is spent defining the doctrine and giving a historical context. The larger half of the book is spent in exegesis of key passages that have defined justification. He does a wonderful job in all of this by putting it in simple and understandable words, for the most part. I must say that my understanding of different grammatical terms is somewhat lacking, but those can be researched and understood with little effort. Simply put, read this book, whether you think you understand this doctrine or not.

God is God

2007-04-30T10:54:00.001-07:00

When you say to men "God is God"
They seem to see the truth and nod.
And when you say "He can do anything"
They will surely like that orthodox ring.

But when you say "HE chose"
Their minds begin to close.
For they have learned by rote,
Mankind has the deciding vote.

It matter not what Scriptures say;
Modern man must have his sway.
"Let God be God but not over me!"
In every man Adam shouts his plea.

For in each man there speaks a voice,
"Thank you, please, I'll make my own choice.
Let God be God and do what I say.
If He won't, then I won't play."

Then he boasts and appeals to reason,
"I chose God and I'm not teasin'."
"Reason will answer," men declare,
"We chose Him, that makes Him fair."

Some never learn that they've got it wrong;
They just keep singing that tired old song.
Reason wins over every decree.
God does not decide they all agree.

"He has no rights over man's clay.
We saved ourselves on a lucky day.
This is the pride of Adam's whole race,
"We need just a little of thy divine grace."

And that pretty much tells man's story;
If he needs little grace, he gets much glory.
Except that Truth just keeps on repeating,
"Don't you know My grace you're depleting?"

So, my friend--

When you learn your opinion to shun,
You'll probably find an "election" you've won.
You'll hear, far above reason's noise and din,
A voice, "My will too needed to be born again."

-Kenneth D. Johns
Election: Love Before Time

Lamentations 3

2007-04-08T18:46:00.000-07:00

The book of Lamentations is one of those books that people often like to pass over and is often forgotten, unlike the gospels or Genesis, for example. Today I was struck by it though, much unlike in the past. Chapter 3 in particular was amazing to me, because that is where the message reaches its climax. Up until verse 22 of chapter 3, the poem discusses all of the horrible things that have and are happening to Israel in the exile, how God has caused such horrible afflictions on his people. In light of all of this, the subject turns from these troubles and sorrows rather suddenly to praising God for his unceasing, steadfast love. In spite of all these sufferings, the author holds fast to God, not hating him or appealing to him in the least disgruntled manner. His response is one of devotion and trust in God's sovereign will. It is hard to comprehend, even from our modern point of view, in which few experience troubles that are able to even begin to compare to those of the author of this book. People often say that "theology" is not a very applicable science and show little interest in the "deep" stuff, as if there was such a thing. I would strongly disagree, and here is a prime example of how theology is crucial. This man understood his God, and his own place in the world in contrast to his God.

Great Is Your Faithfulness
I am the man who has seen affliction
under the rod of his wrath;
he has driven and brought me
into darkness without any light;
surely against me he turns his hand
again and again the whole day long.

He has made my flesh and my skin waste away;
he has broken my bones;
he has besieged and enveloped me
with bitterness and tribulation;
he has made me dwell in darkness
like the dead of long ago.

He has walled me about so that I cannot escape;
he has made my chains heavy;
though I call and cry for help,
he shuts out my prayer;
he has blocked my ways with blocks of stones;
he has made my paths crooked.

He is a bear lying in wait for me,
a lion in hiding;
he turned aside my steps and tore me to pieces;
he has made me desolate;
he bent his bow and set me
as a target for his arrow.

He drove into my kidneys
the arrows of his quiver;
I have become the laughingstock of all peoples,
the object of their taunts all day long.
He has filled me with bitterness;
he has sated me with wormwood.

He has made my teeth grind on gravel,
and made me cower in ashes;
my soul is bereft of peace;
I have forgotten what happiness is;
so I say, "My endurance has perished;
so has my hope from the LORD."

Remember my affliction and my wanderings,
the wormwood and the gall!
My soul continually remembers it
and is bowed down within me.
But this I call to mind,
and therefore I have hope:

The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases;
his mercies never come to an end;
they are new every morning;
great is your faithfulness.
"The LORD is my portion," says my soul,
"therefore I will hope in him."

The LORD is good to those who wait for him,
to the soul who seeks him.
It is good that one should wait quietly
for the salvation of the LORD.
It is good for a man that he bear
the yoke in his youth.

Let him sit alone in silence
when it is laid on him;
let him put his mouth in the dust--
there may yet be hope;
let him give his cheek to the one who strikes,
and let him be filled with insults.

For the Lord will not
cast off forever,
but, though he cause grief, he will have compassion
according to the abundance of his steadfast love;
for he does not willingly afflict
or grieve the children of men.

To crush underfoot
all the prisoners of the earth,
to deny a man justice
in the presence of the Most High,
to subvert a man in his lawsuit,
the Lord does not approve.

Who has spoken and it came to pass,
unless the Lord has commanded it?
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
that good and bad come?
Why should a living man complain,
a man, about the punishment of his sins?

Let us test and examine our ways,
and return to the LORD!
Let us lift up our hearts and hands
to God in heaven:
"We have transgressed and rebelled,
and you have not forgiven.

"You have wrapped yourself with anger and pursued us,
killing without pity;
you have wrapped yourself with a cloud
so that no prayer can pass through.
You have made us scum and garbage
among the peoples.

"All our enemies
open their mouths against us;
panic and pitfall have come upon us,
devastation and destruction;
my eyes flow with rivers of tears
because of the destruction of the daughter of my people.

"My eyes will flow without ceasing,
without respite,
until the LORD from heaven
looks down and sees;
my eyes cause me grief
at the fate of all the daughters of my city.

"I have been hunted like a bird
by those who were my enemies without cause;
they flung me alive into the pit
and cast stones on me;
water closed over my head;
I said, 'I am lost.'

"I called on your name, O LORD,
from the depths of the pit;
you heard my plea, 'Do not close
your ear to my cry for help!'
You came near when I called on you;
you said, 'Do not fear!'

"You have taken up my cause, O Lord;
you have redeemed my life.
You have seen the wrong done to me, O LORD;
judge my cause.
You have seen all their vengeance,
all their plots against me.

"You have heard their taunts, O LORD,
all their plots against me.
The lips and thoughts of my assailants
are against me all the day long.
Behold their sitting and their rising;
I am the object of their taunts.

"You will repay them, O LORD,
according to the work of their hands.
You will give them dullness of heart;
your curse will be on them.
You will pursue them in anger and destroy them
from under your heavens, O LORD."

Good quote to think on

2007-03-31T12:23:00.000-07:00

Men are never duly touched and impressed with a conviction of their insignificance until they have contrasted themselves with the majesty of God.

–John Calvin

Why just reading It isn't enough

2007-03-21T17:09:00.000-07:00

Really good post here at Pyromaniacs on how to read Scripture. It is in address to why people can read the Bible quite diligently and yet not understand it or learn anything. A large part of the problem, at least for many people I think, is what centuri0n says in the comments below.

The problem, if I may diagnose here, is that we have grown up in a culture where we have learned the Bible by AWANA and not by reading it as if it were literature. We have a fragmented view of Scripture...

I believe he also mentioned there is going to be another article following this one to discuss that.

Not quite...

2007-03-07T10:21:00.000-08:00

This is the reason ski jumping is done on snow.

I think it's hilarious.

Chaos and God's Providence

2007-02-28T16:24:00.000-08:00

Today, over at Triablogue, "Peter Pike" wrote the below article. They've been busy discussing the problem of evil with several atheists, and this is in its official context a response to things said there (I cut out the intro paragraph and the last sentence from the quote, which would be confusing without having followed Triablogue). Besides the theodicy, I like the basic point of this article because it makes a very good point about God's Providence and the current state of the world. Things happen in the world because of how God has planned it to be, and it could not be any other way. If the smallest thing was outside of his control, just try to imagine where the world would be today. This is something that not many people grasp within the realm of theology. It is good to think on and remember. God's Providential control makes sense.

The Chaos Theory was popularized in the late 1980s and early 1990s by non-fiction authors such as James Gleick (Chaos: Making A New Science, 1988), as well as fictional works like Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park. We’ve also seen the concepts in various movies, like The Butterfly Effect, named for a concept straight out of meteorologist Edward Lorenz’s computer weather models. Although exaggerated, the concept is that if a butterfly flaps its wings in China, in six months the weather in New York will be different from what it would have been (the exaggeration is merely on the length of time, not on the fact that there would be a difference).

In reality, this echoes back to a concept that humans have known for some time. For instance, in the parable that most school children know, we’re told: “For want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for want of a shoe, the horse was lost; for what of a horse, the rider was lost; for want of a rider, the battle was lost; for want of a battle, the war was lost; for want of a war, the kingdom was lost.” Ultimately, losing the nail caused the loss of the kingdom.

In essence, therefore, the chaos theory is built on the fact that small variations in the initial conditions of a complex system will cause, over time, extreme variations. For the purposes of this argument, we will look strictly at the nature of weather as applied to history.

Since weather is a complex system, then it is true that a butterfly flapping its wings will alter weather over time. This is due to the fact that certain air molecules will collide with other air molecules that would not have been touched without the movement of the butterfly’s wings. Over time, these small changes build up, until the end result is vastly different from what it would have been. Thus, we know that if we sneeze, we have changed the weather at some point in the future from what it would have been. Unfortunately, we do not know how the weather is changed. In essence, it’s like shuffling a deck of already shuffled cards. We know that the outcome is changed by the extra shuffle, but we do not know how it has changed.

When dealing with time, specifically in the aspect of time travel, we often run into paradoxes. For instance, most of us have heard the problem of a man going back in time and accidentally killing his grandfather before his father was born. Since his father was never born, it means that the original man was never born either. But if the original man was never born, then he never existed to go back in time to kill his grandfather. Which means that his father was born, and the man did exist to go back in time to kill his grandfather, etc.

But the aspect that is overlooked is the fact that one does not need to go back in time and actively kill one’s grandfather for this to happen. If someone went back in time, the very fact that he existed in that time changes the very weather from what would have happened, just as surely as a butterfly’s wings changes the weather. The difference now, however, is that those in the future can see the effects. That is, it’s like someone who has been dealt a hand of cards going back in time and shuffling the deck before it’s dealt. He now can see that the cards handed are different. And those differences not only can add up to various extreme differences, but invariably must.

Weather can often be fatal. We just had fatal tornadoes in the news, and a fatal cold snap. Frosts and draughts are responsible for great quantities of lost food, which can lead to famines. Even if these changes do not occur immediately, simply “popping” into existence in a previous time will cause those events to be different. Famines that occurred before now don’t, whereas times that had no famines now receive famines.

Couple this with the idea of people meeting and falling in love, and you can see where the paradox can come back into play. Suppose that you go back in time a sufficient distance such that your popping into existence has sufficient time to alter the weather globally in minute ways. If your grandfather is killed by a draught before your father was born, you have the same problem as if you actively killed him. In the same way, if someone else did not die in a famine, becomes a love rival to your grandfather, and your grandmother marries him instead of your grandfather, you are left with the same dilemma. (Indeed, it is actually even more of a dilemma that that, since the individual sperm cell containing your father’s DNA requires a very narrow time frame in which sexual activity could have occurred.)

Now, the purpose of this argument is not to show problems with time travel! It is to demonstrate the vast, complex intricacies of our climate. All of these things had to have happened exactly as they did happen in order for us to be where we are today. And that is where the problem of evil comes into play in this argument.

If Adam and Eve had not sinned, we would not be here today. None of us would. Theoretically, other people may be here in our place; but one thing we know of for sure is that none of us would be. Likewise, if Cain had not murdered Abel, then Abel would have existed in order to change the weather just as surely as a butterfly's wings. All these little “insignificant” details add up over time.

Thus, in order for the world to be at this exact point in history that it current occupies, everything that preceded today cannot have been otherwise.

One final thing to note: the world as it currently exists is not final. It is still moving forward toward an ultimate goal: the goal that God has in place. Logically speaking, if that ultimate goal is the supreme good, then our current world of evil is a necessary step to gaining that goal. As such, in order for God to achieve His highest good, this would be the only means by which He could attain that goal.

What is Your Theological Worldview?

2007-02-15T13:25:00.000-08:00

Here is just a fun little quiz I found. I'm just glad it gave me the closest result; you usually can never tell what kind of results you will get. I wouldn't necessarily call myself "evangelical". I most certainly do take the Bible very seriously. I do hold to TULIP, although I am by no means "sceptical" (is that a British spelling?) about possibilities of universal atonement or resistible grace(that's an ambiguous statement; does it mean I am skeptical about whether it does, or about whether it doesn't?). Also do not believe the most important the Church can do is spread the Word, although that is very important. The most important thing the Church can do is seek to glorify God and encourage each other in doing that (I would argue that spreading the Word is more of a subcategory within that purpose, not that it is a completely separate activity). I really don't like the way that is stated either: "hear how they can go to heaven when they die." As if the gospel was about getting to heaven. What the gospel is about is worshiping God for the precious gift of life God has given to man because of His amazing grace. It is about bringing more glory to God through the salvation of his chosen people, not about getting to go to some diamond encrusted gold-covered place where we have cool crowns and supposedly never cry; that is a very shallow understanding--indeed, a complete misunderstanding--of the biblical message of salvation. So, other than that, I agree with the results. At least I didn't get Pentecostal, or anything else, as my top result.

You scored as Reformed Evangelical. You are a Reformed Evangelical. You take the Bible very seriously because it is God's Word. You most likely hold to TULIP and are sceptical about the possibilities of universal atonement or resistible grace. The most important thing the Church can do is make sure people hear how they can go to heaven when they die.

Reformed Evangelical

82%

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan

75%

Neo orthodox

68%

Fundamentalist

61%

Classical Liberal

50%

Emergent/Postmodern

43%

Roman Catholic

39%

Charismatic/Pentecostal

32%

Modern Liberal

14%

What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com

Spurgeon on God's Providence

2007-02-14T11:10:00.000-08:00

One thing that God does seems to contradict the next thing; but it never really does so. It is a great truth, though hard for us to grasp, that Providence is one. Just look at the case of Joseph. God has it in his mind that Joseph shall be governor over all the land of Egypt: how is that to be done? The first thing to be done is that Joseph’s brethren must hate him. O, say you, that is a step backward. Next, Joseph’s brethren must put him in the pit. That is another step backward, say you. No, it is not: wait a little. Joseph’s brethren must sell him; that is another step backward, is it not? Providence is one, and you must not look at its separate parts. He is sold; he becomes a favorite; so far, so good. That is a step onward. Anon, he is put in a dungeon. Wait and see the end; all the different parts of the machinery are one. They appear to clash; but they never do. Put them all together. If Joseph had not been put in the pit, he never would have been the servant of Potiphar; if he never had been put in the round-house, he never would have interpreted the jailor’s dream; and if the king had never dreamed, he would not have been sent for. There were a thousand chances, as the world has it, working together to produce the exaltation of Joseph. Providence is one: it never clashes.

Beyond the Bounds: Open Theism and the Undermining of Biblical Christianity

2007-02-07T17:26:00.000-08:00

Having now read Beyond the Bounds, I must say that it is a very good book. It is, in essence, a critique of Open Theism. It would be difficult to summarize the book, because it covers a very wide range of topics, each covered by a different author (and because I am lazy). There are quite a few very good authors, I might add, many of which you are probably familiar with. As a whole, it is a very thorough read. It is also well documented, to give the reader greater understanding of the opposing view and to prove that there are no straw men; footnotes are on almost every page, documenting more sources than I've ever seen in a book before. In fact, a sum total of 194 other books are cited in it! So, rather than try to describe everything within the book, I will instead direct you to look at the table of contents and see for yourself, or just read the book! Open Theism is destructive to Christianity, and this book shows it in a very methodical manner, refuting it with Scripture. I definitely recommend it.

News from Iraq

2007-02-01T18:06:00.000-08:00

This is obviously very British humor...excuse me, humour.

Some things are just too funny to ignore....

2007-01-31T19:01:00.000-08:00

This evening I came across the blog entitled, "Tom in the Box." I highly recommend it. It is satirical blog; hilarious and yet unoffensive humor for theologians.

Psalm 51

2007-01-28T12:22:00.000-08:00

Create in Me a Clean Heart, O God
To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet went to him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba.

Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy
blot out my transgressions.
Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin!

For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified in your words
and blameless in your judgment.
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being,
and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart.

Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean;
wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
Let me hear joy and gladness;
let the bones that you have broken rejoice.
Hide your face from my sins,
and blot out all my iniquities.
Create in me a clean heart, O God,
and renew a right spirit within me.
Cast me not away from your presence,
and take not your Holy Spirit from me.
Restore to me the joy of your salvation,
and uphold me with a willing spirit.

Then I will teach transgressors your ways,
and sinners will return to you.
Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God,
O God of my salvation,
and my tongue will sing aloud of your righteousness.
O Lord, open my lips,
and my mouth will declare your praise.
For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it;
you will not be pleased with a burnt offering.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.

Do good to Zion in your good pleasure;
build up the walls of Jerusalem;
then will you delight in right sacrifices,
in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings;
then bulls will be offered on your altar.

Luther on Justification

2007-01-20T11:16:00.000-08:00

There is no such thing as merit; but all who are justified are justified for nothing (gratis), and this is credited to no one but to the grace of God....For Christ alone it is proper to help and save others with His merits an works. The works of others are of benefit to no one, not to themselves either; for the statement stands: "The just shall live by faith" (Rom. 1:17). For faith grounds us on the works of Christ, without our own works, and transfers us from the exile of our sins into the kingdom of His righteousness. This is faith; this [is] the Gospel; this is Christ.

-Martin Luther

Letter to a Christian Nation

2007-01-16T11:50:00.000-08:00

Recently I borrowed the little book Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris, the popular atheist writer. There was nothing particularly noteworthy about the book, but I would like to make a few comments about the focus of the book.

The basic goal behind the book is to talk to Christians (although I can't imagine who would actually pay him money for it) and cause them to more closely examine their beliefs, ultimately attempting to point out inconsistencies with what Sam supposes their belief systems to be. He seeks to point out how the Christian claim of morality is utterly inconsistent with their political views and with what the Bible supposedly says. His reasoning is flawed though, and it becomes apparent very early on. He bases his understanding of "morality" on doing good for humanity; that is the essence of what he understands to be good. So he proceeds throughout the book attacking Christianity on this basis, pointing out how this and that does not work because it ultimately doesn't further man's benefit or gain, which is assumed to be a matter of multiplying and gaining knowledge, or something like that.

Later in the book, he lists and examines the classical Ten Commandments. Incredibly, he completely dismisses the first few commandments (The first three, if I remember correctly; cf. Exodus 20:1-7), claiming that they have nothing to do with morality. He then looks at the last commandments as being the list of rules from which Christians derive their moral rules. He is wrong.
The first commandments are the basis of Christian morality. What Sam does not understand is that without the first commandment, Christianity has no morality. Christianity is not about being nice to people, it is about glorifying God. God's holiness is the foundation and sustaining force behind Christianity, indeed behind all of everything. The presupposition behind Sam's understanding of Christian morality is that man must be benefited for it to be legitimate; in actuality, it is based upon God's holiness and doing what God has defined as bring glory to Himself. This is something that no atheist can understand without the work of the Holy Spirit.

Sam's argument against biblical Christianity is completely negated by his premise. It is not, however, against the many more prevalent forms of liberal Christianity that are growing in America. Liberal Christianity is hard to define, especially without offending people...but essentially any organization that only gives lip service to God and Christ; it succumbs to more postmodern ideals in which you can believe and do what you want, and the church isn't as concerned about your spiritual life as it is with how you feel. This comes in far too many forms to define or make a clear cut case for in this post. It is this that deserves the criticism, and I agree with Sam in that sense on many points. I am not talking about hypocrites; all Christians are hypocrites, albeit they don't claim to be perfect either, which is a common misrepresentation among society. However, these criticism should rightly cause Christians to be more self-conscious.

That is the essence of his book. Against biblical or traditional Christianity, his claims have no place, and what was written as a polemic becomes little more than a frustrated rant without reason. However, if placed in the context of other forms which he has certainly experienced, I can understand and even agree with many of his points.

Contemporary Worship and Old Hymns

2007-01-04T11:06:00.000-08:00

As in all covenants, there are two parties to the covenant of grace. God speaks and delivers; we respond in faith and repentance. And yet, faith and repentance do not constitute “our part” in this covenant in the sense of providing some of the grounds for our participation in it. God even grants faith and repentance. And yet God does call us to respond, to grow in grace, and to persevere to the end. The triumphant indicative concerning God’s action in Christ establishes a safe foundation on which to stand as we seek to obey the divine imperatives. That’s why worship is dialogical: God speaks as we respond.
That is the form we find in the psalms: God’s wondrous works in creation, preservation, judgment, and redemption are extolled, and it is only then that it makes sense to respond, whether in confession, praise, thanksgiving, lament, or whatever else might be appropriate to the divine activity that is announced. Unlike the psalms themselves, many of the hymns and praise choruses of the last century and a half have become increasingly human-centered. This is why I am always somewhat nervous when people argue for the “old hymns” as opposed to the “new choruses.” Often, “old hymns” means romantic gospel songs written between 1850 and 1950, songs that exchanged object-centered praise (God and his saving work in Christ) for subject-centered praise (we and our spiritual activity). A classic example is “In the Garden,” in which the pattern of the psalms (concentration on God’s wondrous works on behalf of his people) is exchanged for sentimental individualism. Shifting attention from the objective person and work of Christ to the subjective person and work of individual believers, many of these hymns that can still be found in abundance in evangelical hymnals could be sung with gusto by a Unitarian, and some of the most loved were in fact written by Unitarians.
Even with contemporary praise choruses that versify or paraphrase a psalm, the response section of the text is often separated out from the indicative section, which proclaims who God is and what he has done. Thus, the focus of worship these days seems to be on what we are doing, how we are feeling, and how we intend to respond: “I just want to praise you”; “We will lift you up”; “Let’s just praise the Lord”; “I am joyful, “ etc. But his is to separate the law from the gospel, the imperative (what we are to do) from the indicative (what God has already done, is doing, and will complete for us I Christ). Vagueness about the object of our praise inevitably leads to making our own praise the object. Praise therefore becomes an end in itself, and we are caught up in our own “worship experience” rather than in the God whose character and acts are the only proper focus.

-Michael Horton
A Better Way

"Lucky for us...."

2006-12-26T18:56:00.000-08:00

This is the response to my article published in my school paper a month ago. You can find the previous article here.

By Valerie Byrd and Brianna Gillick (editors)
Senior evolutionist "Suzy"(not real name) argues there is no existence of a higher power. She proclaims the scientific theory rather than the supernatural.
Grimm has replaced the former evolutionist writer, senior "Bob", because sometimes perspectives change. Next issue will detail his change of heart.

By "Suzy"
A print shop explodes and leaves a nasty mess that is scattered for a million miles. After investigating the area, one can find a book that resulted from ink particles dropping onto paper. The ink shop scenario fails in its first attempt to make a comparable analogy.
If you were to take that same print shop and make infinite copies and tell one to explode every second for the next 13.7 billion years, a book would form. Somewhere in those infinite explosions, the conditions would be right to allow for millions of years of ink settling, which eventually produces a book. It would be a tedious slow process, but the desired outcome would form.
This scenario is much like our universe and the prelude to our planet. Here is a quick overview of the process. For a more in-depth explanation, see the Sept. 4, 2006 of TIME magazine.
Every atom and particle that exists was originally smashed together in a ball smaller than an atom. In that infinitesimally small space, friction caused the temperature to skyrocket, while the resulting explosions were constantly held in by the intense gravity. Eventually, the conditions mounted to a point where the gravity couldn’t contain the explosions, and the atoms were released in every direction.
The atomic particles started out as a cloud of hydrogen (and some helium) after the explosion. The cloud, which is a nebula, resembled a fog. Some areas were slightly denser, and others were a less compact.
The denser areas of hydrogen had stronger gravity than the sparse regions, since everything has its own gravitational field. The dense clouds accumulated more matter and eventually formed the first starts, when the gravity and friction became strong enough again. They were so huge that their lives were extremely short. The fires that burned on these starts forced hydrogen and helium atoms together to make more complex elements in a process called proton-proton. When these stars died, the supernovas that ensued threw the heavier elements into the hydrogen cloud.
Once the old stars died, newer stars burst into existence almost immediately. Most of these resemble our sun, and more formed each second. The numbers went from millions to trillions and beyond. Infinite stars exist in the universe, some with the right conditions.
About six billion years ago, our sun formed, starting out small, white, and insanely hot. Space junk (atoms, particles, etc.) started to orbit this new star. Larger particles in orbit collected mass as they moved through the dust cloud circling our sun. The closer spheres that were created consisted of molten rock and other elements, but as the sun cooled to the yellow star it is today, these satellites also cooled.
Lucky for us, Earth orbits in the sun’s habitable zone. Billions of years of the right conditions led to the first microorganisms. These organisms formed from the same elements as the world around them, ordered in the perfect atomic sequence millions of years ago. Adaptation and evolution over those millions of years took us from microorganisms to humans.
This is a simple version, but it is up to you whether you wish to believe the scientific approach.
The creationist last issue decided to cite thermodynamics to disprove the big bang. In thermodynamic theory, the second law states something cannot be responsible for its own creation. This poses a huge question: what made God?

My initial response to this is that "Suzy" has failed to address what I had stated in my article. She does give a more thorough explanation of what the Big Bang Theory is, but I believe that it does not absolve my point about the Second Law of Thermodynamics and how chaos cannot lead to greater order. That is what I understand initially at least, I am willing to admit that perhaps I am missing a point in there and am going to do more thinking and reading on it before I begin any sort of thorough reply.
Other than that, it is clear that she is ignorant as to the idea of God and the creationist position, as is seen by her closing question. I can give an answer to that without any "qualms." Her question is like asking "To whom is the bachelor married?" The definition of God is that He is the "uncreated creator." God is uncreated; nobody created Him. God is not something of the ancient Greeks ideals or some pantheistic idea. God is not merely something that can affect nature or small parts of it. He created everything! That includes the universe and all of its constituent parts, including physics and chemistry and biology. God created everything, ordered everything, and maintains everything. Without Him there is nothing. It is not something that we as human beings can hope to comprehend, and that is what is so awesome about Him! There is no chance, only God's sovereign Providence. God is an awesome God. That is my short answer...

Christ's Righteousness and Why We Gather

2006-12-20T14:32:00.000-08:00

We cannot be justified merely by being forgiven: That would still leave us without the perfect righteousness that God’s justice requires. In Christ, the greater Adam and the true Israel, God’s justice is fully satisfied. Our Lord’s thirty-three years of loving his Father with all his heart, soul, and strength, and his neighbor as himself, is the basis for our acceptance before God. So in a real sense, we are saved by works—but by our covenant head’s works, not ours. Because he fulfilled the covenant of works, we inherit salvation through a covenant of grace.
It is in this context that we talk about the ‘covenant renewal ceremony.’ Whenever we gather for public worship, it is because we have been summoned. That is what ‘church’ means: ekklesia, ‘called out.’ It is not a voluntary society of those whose chief concern is to share, to build community, to enjoy fellowship, to have moral instruction for their children, and so forth. Rather, it is a society of those who have been chosen, redeemed, called, justified, and are being sanctified until one day they will finally be glorified in heaven. We gather each Lord’s Day not merely out of habit, social custom, or felt needs but because God has chosen this weekly festival as a foretaste of the everlasting Sabbath day that will be enjoyed fully at the marriage supper of the Lamb. God has called us out of the world and into his marvelous light: That is why we gather.
-Michael Horton
A Better Way

    In the quote above there are two ideas which I believe are very important to understanding Christianity. The first is that being forgiven is not enough in of itself. God does not just forgive us, that would accomplish nothing. This idea is often lost in the pragmatic easy-believism of what has been labeled as contemporary Evangelicalism. The gospel is often cheapened to the "forgive and forget," "ask and receive," and "ask Jesus into your heart" truisms, which ultimately have lead to the reductionist theology of merely requiring God's forgiveness to be saved. Conveniently left out of the "gospel" is often the understanding of what God's justice truly requires, which is eternal damnation. For God to merely "forget" about our sins or pardon them without requiring some sort of propitiation would be to essentially renounce His own deity and perfection. God requires that our sin be punished. If God were to merely forget about what was before required, where would His sovereignty be? Sometimes we forget that our sin is more than just a bad thing...it is a blemish, or offense to God, who is deserving of all praise. God's holiness does not allow imperfect people in His presence; it is impossible because that would be contradictory to the very meaning of holiness. The only way for sin to be wiped out is for the payment to be made. This payment was made by Christ, who came to save his people from their sins. But what does that mean?
    "Christ died so that we could believe in him and be saved. Jesus died for my sins. Jesus saves. What would Jesus do?" are common statements. But what do they mean unless one understands the incomprehensible fact of his atonement!? A conviction of personal sin, and an understanding of God's holy wrath is necessary to even begin to realize how wonderful Christ is. God requires an eternity in hell of everyone, it is the inescapable truth. However, Christ has obviated this by taking it upon himself, suffering in the most unimaginable way possible in order to satisfy God's justice. That is the gospel.
    The second point is as Horton says in the second paragraph, this is why we gather. The church is a community of believers, of God's people. Many people do not understand or consider why they go to "church" every Sunday. For many it is an obligation or social custom. This is wrong. Our understanding of the purpose of the church is directly linked to our gospel. We do not just meet because we are a bunch of people with something in common and we feel like. We meet because God has called us to it and blessed us with this unique community which should encourage and support our faith and relationship with God the Father through His son.

One Year Later...

2006-12-16T10:25:00.000-08:00

Today is the one year anniversary of my blog. Nothing special really, though I am somewhat surprised to have kept with it this whole year. I must say that many hours have been wasted on it, but many other hours I believe have not been a waste. It's a way to reflect on particular points and it gives me motivation sometimes. I can't really say that all of the content posted is especially wonderful (i.e. posts like this one), though I have been trying to actually put stuff here that can be considered worthwhile, hence the material that was not actually written by me. In this next year I think I will probably not post as frequently, maybe. I know that sounds decisive. So rather than continue writing about absolutely nothing right now, I am going to go start writing a paper, but first I want to leave a quote by Cicero I like because it makes a point about a universal characteristic of humanity which is rather humorous and yet true. It is just a little something to ponder.

What he sees often, he does not wonder at, even if he does not know why it is. If something happens which he has not seen before, he thinks it is a prodigy. -Cicero

God's Gifts to Men

2006-12-06T10:25:00.000-08:00

We have insisted that God is free, that He can govern the course of nature in accordance with His will; and it is an important truth indeed. But many men make of it the only truth, and in doing so they make shipwreck of their faith. They think of God only as one who can direct the course of nature for their benefit; they value Him only for the things that He can give.
We are subject to many pressing needs, and we are too much inclined to value God, not for His own sake, but only because He can satisfy those needs. There is the need of food and clothing, for ourselves and for our loved ones, and we value God because He can answer the petition, "Give us this day our daily bread." There is the need of companionship; we shrink from loneliness; we would be surrounded by those who love us and those whom we can love. And we value God as one who can satisfy that need by giving us family and friends. There is the need of inspiring labour; we would be delivered from an aimless life; we desire opportunities for noble and unselfish service of our fellow-men. And we value God as one who by His orderings of our lives can set before us an open door. These are lofty desires. But there is one desire that is loftier still. It is the desire for God Himself. That desire, too often, we forget. We value God solely for the things that He can do; we make of Him a mere means to an ulterior end. And God refuses to be treated so; such a religion always fails in the hour of need. If we have regarded religion merely as a means of getting things--even lofty and unselfish things--then when the things that have been gotten are destroyed, our faith will fail. When loved ones are taken away, when disappointment comes and failure, when noble ambitions are set at naught, then we turn away from God. We have tried religion, we say, we have tried prayer, and it has failed. Of course it has failed! God is not content to be an instrument in our hand or a servant at our beck and call. He is not content to minister to the worldly needs of those who care not a bit for Him. The text in the eighth chapter of Romans does not mean that religion provides a certain formula for obtaining worldly benefits--even the highest and most ennobling and most unselfish of worldly benefits. "If God be for us, who can be against us?"--that does not mean that faith in God will bring us everything that we desire. What is does mean is that if we possess God, then we can meet with equanimity the loss of all besides. Has it never dawned upon us that God is valuable for His own sake, that just as personal communion is the highest thing that we know on earth, so personal communion with God is the sublimest height of all? If we value God for His own sake, then the loss of other things will draw us all the closer to Him; we shall then have recourse to Him in time of trouble as to the shadow of a great rock in a weary land. I do not mean that the Christian need expect always to be poor and sick and lonely and to seek his comfort only in a mystic experience with his God. This universe is God's world; its blessings are showered upon His creatures even now; and in His own good time, when the period of its groaning and travailing is over, He will fashion it as a habitation of glory. But what I do mean is that if here and now we have the one inestimable gift of God's presence and favour, then all the rest can wait till God's good time.

-J. Gresham Machen
What is Faith?

Big Bang Theory: And God said, "Pulleth my Finger."

2006-12-04T11:18:00.000-08:00

This is my first response to the Big Bang theory and some of the statements from the first article. This is my original and unabridged version, not the copy that was published in the school paper, because we had to edit it down in order to fit the allotted space. It still took up a very "large" portion of the newspaper page, which apparently became a real problem after the fact merely because I was not on the newspaper staff. As a result, I will be left with much less room to write in the following articles, which is unfortunate. Anyway, the next article is going to be a reply by "the other side," now written by someone else, which I believe is going to be published sometime within the next couple of weeks. When it comes out I will probably put that up here too.

I also want to offer a quick thanks to those who helped me edit and improve my analysis here. It certainly would not have been near as clear, precise, or thorough without them. If anyone else reads this and finds problems within the reasoning, feel free to comment. Don't bother though if you are merely disagreeing with the conclusion, I realize many people will disagree on that. Here it is:

By Matthew Gerrelts
    In the last opinion issue, my classmate "Bob" made his statement concerning his views in support of the Big Bang Theory. He compared the creationist view to his; describing the creationist perspective as assuming an 800-foot pink elephant is responsible for garden damage clearly left by a rabbit. However cute this analogy might be, it has no relevance to the topic other than to proclaim a most obvious presupposition.
    He also made the point that if two explanations adequately explain a phenomenon, then the explanation that makes the fewest assumptions should be accepted. He of course said this with the implication that the Big Bang Theory is the simplest. This raises two questions: First, by whose authority is the simplest cause always the correct theory to believe? And second, why does he assume the big bang to be the simplest answer to the issue at hand? However, here I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that the first statement is correct. The question that remains is: is the big bang really simpler and more rational?
    The big bang theory states that everything came from a single very dense and small mass of heated particles. This mass then eventually expanded and exploded, forming the universe. The creationist view states that God formed everything according to his own will. I believe a more comparable analogy contrasting the two arguments is that of an exploding print shop and an author: if a print shop exploded, could you imagine the ink particles forming words on a page that make perfect sense, forming a book complete with an index? Or would you hold to the idea that somebody wrote the book? The idea of a book forming in an explosion of ink may sound incredible or unlikely, but the Big Bang is even more incredible.
    The Big Bang essentially went from being a chaotic mass of kinetic energy, to an incredibly fine-tuned, balanced universe with the complexity which humanity is far from being able to comprehend. This does not work according to the second law of thermodynamics, which originally states: Heat cannot of itself pass from a colder to a hotter body. It is also stated in this form: The entropy of an isolated system not at equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value. An isolated system is one that does not interact with its surroundings. The Big Bang, or the material that was there when it happened, was an isolated system; all interaction was with itself and nothing else since nothing else was in existence. All things were created as a result of the big bang.
    The incompatibility with the Law of Thermodynamics becomes apparent when we see that something structured was formed from something that was absolutely chaotic; an explosion. In other words: entropy, or heat, decreased within the closed system. According to the Big Bang Theory, the energy mass was nothing but chaotic; it was a ball of particles and heat, pure kinetic energy and entropy. The amount of entropy within it then decreased, not approaching a maximum value, but rather approached a lower value. How is it then that something incredibly complex and structured, specifically the universe, was formed?
    Besides this incredibility, one can see that this theory does not even begin to explain the origin of the universe. Sure it explains where the very basic elements came from, but it does not explain where the “particles” that created the elements came from. Where did the beginning “mass” come from or what caused it? What caused it to be so small and dense? What caused the increased entropy (explosion) in the matter if it had been at equilibrium? What caused it to not be at equilibrium? These questions simply cannot be logically answered. Here are the facts according to the Big Bang: There was originally a starting mass, which was infinitely dense and infinitely small. Theoretically it was caused by nothing; it was the beginning and the source of everything that is, yet something must have caused it for it to actually be and have happened. It happened, therefore it was caused. If it was not caused by something else, then it must have been self-caused. However, since it is obvious that nothing made of matter can cause its own existence, this does not make any logical sense.
    Really, the Big Bang Theory does nothing to explain the beginning. It is just a desperate attempt to attribute creation to something other than God, yet it is unable to do so without creating serious inexplicable errors within its own system of thinking.
    In order to be fair though, what I have said may not mean anything if there is in fact evidence that can only be explained by the Big Bang Theory. My classmate appears to be rather confident in his assertions, and if he is able, I would ask that he provide his perfectly indisputable evidence, or as he called it, the “rabbit droppings,” for the big bang theory.

Pink Elephants or Rabbits?

2006-12-02T09:07:00.000-08:00

In October I agreed to write a series of articles arguing for the creationist viewpoint for my school paper. There is also an evolutionist arguing his view. We will alternate every month in writing part of our argumentation. Below is the first article, which contains both of our viewpoints and is basically just a statement of those viewpoints more than any argument. In the next few days I'll post the first real article, which I wrote and was published last month. I have changed my combatant's name to "Bob" in case he doesn't really want anybody to know; general courtesy. Interestingly though, I do not believe Bob will be writing again this year arguing for the evolutionist view, because it is believed that he has actually converted to Christianity, which is great. However, somebody else will be arguing in his place and will submit their response to my article sometime this month.
I am not what you might call "big" creationism debater, but I decided to do this because I knew it would encourage myself to really look and understand this things and because I hope that this will actually be read and thought about by other students in the school. I've only just begun to see just how deceived people are to the whole evolution ideal, which honestly, there is no proof for; barely anything that can be considered evidence. The more I look for "proof," the sillier it all sounds. However, it has reached the status of fact for those in secular circles. So hopefully by the grace of God this will open a few minds. And this is my overall purpose, not to "prove" that God created it, that cannot be done "scientifically," but rather that the Big Bang theory and evolution is not all that everybody mindlessly thinks it is. Here it is:

By Valerie Byrd and Brianna Gillick

Two major views exist in regard to how the earth and all its contents came into existence. Senior Matt Gerrelts believes the creationist views, while senior Josh Evans maintains that evolution is more believable.
Creationists say that the universe was formed supernaturally to an almighty being.
Evolutionists assume the Big Bang theory, saying that all matter was concentrated in one area until it began separating. According to this theory the universe is always getting bigger.

Matt Gerrelts

I believe the one and only God created the entire world and universe. god created the earth according to his plan so he could glorify himself. The way he created it was he said "Let it be," and it came into being.
I believe this because the Bible says that is how it happened, and the Bible is the true word of God. I've also never seen anything that contradicts this view well enough for me to believe it.
I don't believe in evolution because it is different from what the Bible says. The biblical version also makes more sense and is much more rational.
The Big Bang Theory also doesn't fit within scientific parameters. For all of creation to come into being from nothing defies all laws of mass and energy.
I have heard the creationist views since I was a kid, but I had never really studied the views and taken them on for myself until the last few years.

Bob

I believe the earth began its expansion about 13.7 billion years ago. I don't believe there is any evidence to suggest that it was created.
The Big Bang theory is the most reasonable explanation for the existence of the universe as we know it.
Of all the major scientific theories regarding the origin of the universe. it is the most reasonable and has the greatest body of supporting evidence.
I do not believe in the creation theory because of the utter lack of supporting evidence for it. Occam's razor dictates that any explanation should be kept as simple as possible; that is, when two or more explanations adequately explain a phenomenon, the explanation that makes the fewest assumptions should be embraced.
You walk into your garden and find that some of your vegetables are chewed. Evidence suggests that it was a rabbit. Do you assume that it was actually an 800-foot-tall pink elephant that left no evidence as to its existence in order to entertain itself (and even left rabbit droppings as a test of faith)? Of course you would not; you would accept the much simpler and more logical explanation.
The Big Bang theory states that basically the universe “began” as a very hot mass of high-energy particles.
As the universe cooled, protons, neutrons, electrons and the first atoms began to form, and then the universe expanded exponentially, forming the universe as we know it today.

I found it ironic that he choose to use a "800-foot-tall pink elephant" to represent God...typically we say the "pink elephant in the room" is the thing that you know is there, but you just don't want to mention it or admit it's there. Anyway, it was certainly and interesting analogy; not one that I would have thought up.

Man cannot ascribe to himself even one single good work apart from God’s grace

2006-11-28T12:32:00.000-08:00

Through ignorance they falsely twist to this purport that saying of the apostle: “I labored more than they all – yet not I but the grace of God which was with me” [I Cor. 15:10]. Here is how they understand it: because it could have seemed a little too arrogant for Paul to say he preferred himself to all, he therefore corrected his statement by paying the credit to God’s grace; yet he did this in such a way as to call himself a fellow laborer in stumbled on this straw. For the apostle does not write that the grace of the Lord labored with him to make him a partner in the labor. Rather, by this correction he transfers all credit for labor to grace alone. “It is not I,” he says, “who labored, but the grace of God which was present with me.” [I Cor. 15:10 p.] Now, the ambiguity of the expression deceived them, but more particularly the absurd Latin translation in which the force of the Greek article had been missed. For if you render it word for word, he does not say that grace was a fellow worker with him; but that the grace that was present with him was the cause of everything. Augustine teaches this clearly, though briefly, when he speaks as follows: “man’s good will precedes many of God’s gifts, but not all. The very will that precedes is itself among these gifts. The reason then follows: for it was written, ‘His mercy anticipates me’ [Ps. 59:10, cf. Ps. 58:11 Vg.]. And ‘His mercy will follow me’ [Ps. 23:6]. Grace anticipates unwilling man that he may will; it follows him willing that he may not will in vain.” Bernard agrees with Augustine when he makes the church speak thus: “Draw me, however unwilling, to make me willing; draw me, slow-footed, to make me run.”

-John Calvin
Institutes of the Christian Religion

God's Power

2006-11-14T14:38:00.000-08:00

Job 12:13-25

"With God are wisdom and might;
he has counsel and understanding.
If he tears down, none can rebuild;
if he shuts a man in, none can open.
If he withholds the waters, they dry up;
if he sends them out, they overwhelm the land.
With him are strength and sound wisdom;
the deceived and the deceiver are his.
He leads counselors away stripped,
and judges he makes fools.
He looses the bonds of kings
and binds a waistcloth on their hips.
He leads priests away stripped
and overthrows the mighty.
He deprives of speech those who are trusted
and takes away the discernment of the elders.
He pours contempt on princes
and loosens the belt of the strong.
He uncovers the deeps out of darkness
and brings deep darkness to light.
He makes nations great, and he destroys them;
he enlarges nations, and leads them away.
He takes away understanding from the chiefs of the people of the earth
and makes them wander in a pathless waste.
They grope in the dark without light,
and he makes them stagger like a drunken man.

When I read this, it just amazes me that people can deny God's control over the world and everything in it.

An Interesting Thought

2006-11-09T18:33:00.000-08:00

Some people read the Scriptures, and they say "I wish I knew so-and-so." Now you ought not to wish such a thing; for if it was good for you, it would be there; and there is as much grace in what God has not put in the Bible, as in what he has put there. If he had put more in it, it would have been our destruction. There is just enough and no more. Do you know how Robert of Normandy lost his sight? His brother passed a red-hot copper bowl before his face, and burned they eyes out of their sockets; and there are some doctrines that men want to know, which, if they could understand them, it would be like passing a red-hot bowl before their eyes. They would scorch men’s eyes out, and their understanding would be completely crushed.... There is a point to which we may go, and no further; and happy is the man who goes as near to it as possible without overstepping it.

My Two Cents About Politics

2006-11-06T04:07:00.000-08:00

Ecclesiastes 10:2

A wise man's heart inclines him to the right,
but a fool's heart to the left.

John Piper is Bad

2006-11-01T11:19:00.000-08:00

I just think this is hilarious.

Reformation Day!

2006-10-31T19:30:00.000-08:00

Today is Reformation Day! I can't believe I almost forgot, I'm ashamed. Anyway, I had to make a post in reference to this holiday, which I believe is much more worthwhile remembering than Halloween. Read more on it at Wikipedia or at this site here.

Halloween Approaches....

2006-10-28T17:39:00.000-07:00

I was planning on writing a nice condensed history of Halloween and some of the customs associated with it, but I have been just too busy to get anywhere with it, and I won't have time in the next couple days either, so instead I'm going to recommend that you read up on it and do some research. I think it's something interesting and good to know, since most people have no idea why they celebrate it or why it exists. Here are some links that I would recommend trying if you are especially lazy in using Google.

History Channel
Halloween Customs
History of Halloween

Other than that, I wanted to post a few pictures from my backpacking trip a few months ago. You can view them HERE. I said awhile back that I would get them up...but I haven't. So now they're up.

God's Goodness and Glory

2006-10-21T08:48:00.000-07:00

That the adorable Jehovah might have left our guilty race to perish in their sin, all intelligent beings must acknowledge. He was not in justice bound to interfere in their behalf. As the righteous Governor of the universe, He might have proceeded to uphold the authority of His law, by executing its penalty upon the disobedient, and thus to give an awful example of vengeance to the intelligent inhabitants of the various provinces of His empire. His goodness did not require that He should rescue His rebellious subject from the misery which they had brought upon themselves, because He had already given of this an ample display in their creation and endowments, and it was still exhibited in the happiness diffused through all the regions of innocence. His glory does not depend upon the manifestation of any particular attribute, but of them all, on proper occasions, and in full harmony. He is glorified when He bestows blessings upon the righteous, and He is not less glorified when He inflicts punishment upon the wicked. The event show that His glory is greater in the salvation than it would have been in the destruction of men. It ought, however, to be considered, that His glory means nothing but the manifestation of His character to His creatures, and that as there was no necessity for such a manifestation, and as it could contribute in no degree to His felicity, it was perfectly voluntary, and might have as well been withheld. The only necessity which can be admitted, is that if He did show Himself to His creatures, the exhibition should correspond with the greatness and excellence of His character. He might had He pleased, not have created a single being to contemplate His perfections. When He did create them, and they dishonored Him, He might have cast them off forever. It was under these circumstances that “God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). The whole arrangement was, therefore, of His own sovereign grace, uninfluenced by human merit. But this conclusion is not only inferable from the facts before you. His entire sovereignty in this whole transaction is expressly affirmed in His word: --“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing [purifying] of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost; which He shed on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs, according to the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5-7).

–R. B. C. Howell
The Covenants

"They are accounted by him as less than nothing...."

2006-10-17T14:31:00.000-07:00

Isaiah 40:10-18

Behold, the Lord GOD comes with might,
and his arm rules for him;
behold, his reward is with him,
and his recompense before him.
He will tend his flock like a shepherd;
he will gather the lambs in his arms;
he will carry them in his bosom,
and gently lead those that are with young.

Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand
and marked off the heavens with a span,
enclosed the dust of the earth in a measure
and weighed the mountains in scales
and the hills in a balance?
Who has measured the Spirit of the LORD,
or what man shows him his counsel?
Whom did he consult,
and who made him understand?
Who taught him the path of justice,
and taught him knowledge,
and showed him the way of understanding?
Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket,
and are accounted as the dust on the scales;
behold, he takes up the coastlands like fine dust.
Lebanon would not suffice for fuel,
nor are its beasts enough for a burnt offering.
All the nations are as nothing before him,
they are accounted by him as less than nothing and emptiness.

To whom then will you liken God,
or what likeness compare with him?

Reading through this passage today made me stop and reread. In proclaiming God's awesomeness it says that all nations are less than nothing. They are not merely regarded as worthless or as good as nothing, they are in fact worse than being nothing. They are detestable, so to speak. They are are of negative value when compared to the Supremacy of God. This same language is used later in Isaiah 41:24, which says "Behold, you are nothing, and your work is less than nothing..." Our works are less than nothing to God. They are not good, or even merely neutral; they are terrible and wholly disgusting without God. We would be better off if we did not exist! We truly cannot compare to God and His righteousness; it is the impossibility of impossibilities. Without the power of Christ's righteousness imputed through his death and resurrection, given to us through the Spirit and received by grace through faith, we are not acceptable before God and never can be.

A King's Heart in the Hand of God

2006-10-10T13:46:00.000-07:00

When he writes, “In his hand the Lord holds the king’s heart as streams of water, and turns it wherever he will” [Prov. 21:1], Solomon actually comprehends the whole genus under a single species. If any man’s will has been released from all subjection, this privilege belongs above all to the kingly will, which in a measure exercises rule over others’ wills. But if the king’s will is bent by God’s hand, our wills are not exempt from that condition. On this point there is a notable saying of Augustine: “Scripture, if diligently searched, show that not only the good wills which he has made out of evil ones and directs, once so made by him, to good actions and to eternal life are in God’s power; but so also are those wills which preserve the creatures of this world. And they are so in his power that he causes them to be inclined where and when he will, either to bestow benefits, or to inflict punishments—indeed by his most secret but most righteous judgment.”

-John Calvin
Institutes of the Christian Religion

The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World

2006-10-06T13:29:00.000-07:00

As I briefly mentioned in my last post, I had the wonderful opportunity to go to the Desiring God Conference in Minneapolis last weekend. This year's title was "The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World." To put it shortly, it was great. It was one of the greatest things I have had the opportunity to do. All of the speakers were great, the music was some of the best I have heard (lyrically speaking), and it was simply an amazing experience. And, the best part is that the sermons are now available for download or just for listening online here. I highly recommend that you listen to these messages. All of them are good and definitely worth your time. I'm going through them again now, and I doubt it will be the last time I listen to these messages. There was simply too much truth to process and comprehend in that short weekend.

The conference was, as the title might suggest, a response to the Postmodern mindset that has recently become so popular among "Christians." It is something that is becoming more detrimental to Christianity as time passes. The Emergent Church is one example of this. It is far more influential than just a bad doctrine in a local church though. It is a mindset, a secular humanism mindset, that affects people's thoughts. It is a subtle thing unless you make yourself aware of it, because it may sound good on the outside, and it is. But doctrinally and Biblically it undermines Christ and everything he ever did. Unless one is doctrinally sound and Biblically grounded, they will never know or understand the problem.

So, listen to them. The titles include all those with the "Supremacy of Christ", then there is the "Conversation with the Pastors," and the "Speaker Panel." All of which are good. If you only have time for one or two, I would recommend the messages by David Wells or Voddie Baucham as a first priority. Mark Driscoll's was the most capturing and entertaining(though I hope that's not why you want to listen to it), and he did have some great things to say, but I would not recommend listening to his without hearing what the other's said about him in the Speaker Panel and Piper's sermon. Driscoll was a "balance" to the views presented, not in the theological sense as much as methodological. He was considered more "liberal" or less fundamental in his view of how we should evangelize and be "in the world but not of it." The joke between Piper and Driscoll was pretty funny, as were many other things said during the weekend. On that note: If you listen to Wells' message you will hear him say "I don't know how you are going to sign that." Laughing ensues, and if you're wondering, he is speaking to the sign language interpreter that they have there...for deaf people, obviously.

Anyway, it was a very beneficial, God-centered experience and I'm planning on going next year...and I can hardly wait.

P.S. Oh yeah, here are some pictures taken by the real photographer there. Just scroll down after clicking on it, there are a few pages of pics.

Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott

2006-10-02T18:42:00.000-07:00

At the Desiring God Conference this weekend, about which I will talk more later, David Wells gave an analogy comparing our present time to a chess game. He spoke of a chess game, in which there comes a point where the game becomes "locked," or a point where the essential winner announces that the end is inevitible. No matter what the other player does, he will lose and the winner shall win. The disadvantaged player is still able to make a few moves, but all are futile, they will do nothing to change his bound situation, he will lose and his opponent is already determined to win. This is analagous to our time here on earth. We are observing a "locked" chess game between God and Satan. God has given Christ up to die as a propitiation for his people's sins, he has essentially played the last move, the game is up, the end is determined and nothing is going to change it. What we are seeing now is the devil making his last futile moves, desparately hoping to win, though he knows it cannot happen. This does not imply that Satan ever had a true chance to win. The point is that we are sealed in Christ's all powerful grace, and nothing can remove us from that. Through Christ we will persevere to the end.

This is the hymn/Psalm from which Wells derived the title of his book "Above All Earthly Pow'rs," which was the inspiration behind this year's Desiring God Conference theme. It really would be a perfect theme song for this conference; I love this song.

A Mighty Fortress is Our God
From Psalm 46

A mighty fortress is our God, a bulwark never failing;
Our helper He, amid the flood of mortal ills prevailing:
For still our ancient foe doth seek to work us woe;
His craft and power are great, and, armed with cruel hate,
On earth is not his equal.

Did we in our own strength confide, our striving would be losing;
Were not the right Man on our side, the Man of God’s own choosing:
Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is He;
Lord Sabaoth, His Name, from age to age the same,
And He must win the battle.

And though this world, with devils filled, should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph through us:
The Prince of Darkness grim, we tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure, for lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.

That word above all earthly powers, no thanks to them, abideth;
The Spirit and the gifts are ours through Him Who with us sideth:
Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also;
The body they may kill: God’s truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever.

-Martin Luther

McDonald's Reaches Africa

2006-09-28T18:11:00.000-07:00

Reminds you of America, doesn't it?

Augustine's Confessions

2006-09-26T14:28:00.000-07:00

Recently I read and wrote a brief review on The Confessions of Saint Augustine for my Humanities I class. I have received a request to post it on my blog so that it may be read also. Because of its length, and the skinny columns we are alotted on blogger, I decided to put it on a google web page instead to make it easier to read....plus it looks more snazzy. So here is a link to it: Book Review. Keep in mind that I wrote it for a class, so its a bit formal. And in case you're wondering about the last few paragraphs, the assignment was to include some paragraphs discussing our reaction and how the literary work is important to the Humanities, not to mention the "detailed" summary which takes up the large portion of it. I didn't include half of the details on his life because the paper would have been much longer than I had time to write or my Professor had time to read, therefore there is much left out. I really did enjoy this book, Augustine's love for God is beyond obvious on every page. He truly saw where man's place was, and where God's place was, in creation. Augustine's prayer to God truly was "Grant what You command and command what You will."

Bridge of Hope

2006-09-23T14:20:00.000-07:00

Just a couple days ago we received an advertisement/invitation in the mail for a new ministry that is about to start up. I scanned the card so you can see.I saw the front side first.

My initial reaction to this: I hope this is a joke.
Then I turned it over to the other side.

My reaction to this: Wow, it's worse than I thought.

Now, I have no problem with doing a church service in front of a T.V. screen, but there are many things wrong with this picture. The first problem is the focus of the "church". Notice that neither God nor Jesus is mentioned absolutely nowhere in either picture. Nope, their enticing banner is: "A refreshingly new way to do church...and life." Um, ok, so what are you about? Just getting through church? Surviving that one incredibly long hour? Yep, this church has something new in store for you, its like drinking a can of coke after being in a dry desert for days! It's "refreshing"!

Then you might notice the paragraph below for an elaboration on the leading phrase. Going to their church is about getting more from life than the routine and mundane. Notice the sneaky implication that other churches are boring and mundane. That makes my blood boil, but I will refrain from being vitrolic. As if church was boring! If one's heart is where it should be, focused on God, church is the most wonderful experience on earth! and it doesn't matter whether you are singing the slowest hymns, sitting on rock benches, or listening to the most monotonous preacher ever! With a statement like that I would hardly believe that they even talk about God with the slightest sincerety.

The next enticement is that they having a band playing music that "you will love." Ok, great, that's wonderful, since I always go to church to listen to our great worship team. Before you know it, they'll have U2 in there to get people to come to their morning services! Right along with that goes the next statement, "Your kids will have fun..." Um....is this an amusement park? it sounds freakishly like an ad from one.

At the end they add on, "your heart and mind will be encouraged..." Ok, in complete seriousness, that's great. But that is not the purpose of a church, nor should it be what our focus is. True Christians do indeed find encouragement in Scripture (Rom. 15:4)and from the Church (Heb. 10:25), but that is not why one goes to church, it is but an effect of meeting. We go to worship God, learn about God, and fellowship with our fellow Christians with God. It also seems to be that the defintion of "encouragement" in this flyer is quite different from the Biblical encouragement, which speaks of being encouraged to become more Godly, not just feel better. Biblical encouragement includes rebuke and discipline...I would highly doubt that would be thinkable in this Church.

I'm not going to waste time on their first topic "7 Keys to Healthier Relationships" other than to say that it is most obvious that the focus is not on God. It sounds more like a self-help or dating-help seminar. It's about how to make one's life better, not about how to know God or understand scripture.

If you go to their website, it will become very apparent to you that this is all running on the Purpose Driven Movement, which I'm not going to talk about now. And on the surface the website may not appear all that bad, except for everything is about finding our purpose in life, and, oh yeah, connect with God too. Whatever "connect" means...It's not about "knowing God," which would be getting close and personal, it's about plugging in or calling Him up on the phone. You know, we just want to, "connect," "meet," say "hi", not really become intimate friends. And if you think i'm being picky or am trying to make a case out of nothing there, all I have to say is that it's those "little" things in language that make the difference in meaning and communication of intent.

I would pray for this "church" if it can be considered such, and that God would work in it to accomplish something better than they seem to have in mind. The focus is clearly off of God, though they might include him, he is there only as a "helping hand". The problem is what I wrote about a few weeks ago here. Pray for them, that God would work His amazing grace in them to a greater understanding and better focus.

How High Art Thou in the Highest!

2006-09-19T16:01:00.000-07:00

What is it in the soul, I ask again, that makes it delight more to have found or regained the things it loves than if it had always had them? Creatures other than man bear the same witness, and all things are filled with testimonies acclaiming that it is so. the victorious general has his triumph; but he would not have been victorious if he had not fought; and the greater danger there was in the battle, the greater rejoicing in the triumph. The storm tosses the sailors and threatens to wreck the ship; all are pale with the threat of death. But the sky grows clear, the sea calm, and now they are as wild with exultation as before with fear. A friend is sick and his pulse threatens danger; all who want him well feel as if they shared his sickness. He begins to recover, though he cannot yet walk as strongly as of old: and there is more joy than there was before, when he was still well and could walk properly. Note too that men procure the actual pleasures of human life by way of pain-- I mean not only the pain that comes upon us unlooked for and beyond our will, but unpleasantness planned and willingly accepted. There is no pleasure in eating or drinking, unless the discomfort of hunger and thirst come before. Drunkards eat salty things to develop a thirst so great as to be painful, and pleasure arises when the liquor quenches the pain of the thirst. And it is the custom that promised brides do not give themselves at once lest the husband should hold the fight cheap unless delay had set him craving.

We see this in base and dishonourable pleasure, but also in the pleasure that is licit and permitted, and again in the purest and most honourable friendship. We have seen it in the case of him who had been dead and was brought back to life, who had been lost and was found. Universally the greater joy is heralded by greater pain. What does this mean, O Lord my God, when Thou art an eternal joy to Thyself, Thou Thyself art joy itself, and things about Thee ever rejoice in Thee? What does it mean that this part of creation thus alternates between need felt and need met, between discord and harmony? Is this their mode of being, this what Thou didst give them, when from the heights of heaven to the lowest earth, from the beginning of time to the end, from the angel to the worm, from the beginning of time to the end, from the angel to the worm, from the first movement to the last, Thou didst set all kinds of good things and all Thy just works each in its place, each in its season? Alas for me, how high art Thou in the highest, how deep in the deepest! And Thou does never depart from us, yet with difficulty we return to Thee.

-Saint Augustine
Confessions

Every Sin is a Deadly Sin!

2006-09-13T11:13:00.000-07:00

Would that they might ponder what that saying of Christ means: “Whoever transgresses one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, will be esteemed nobody in the Kingdom of Heaven” [Matt. 5:19]! Are they not of this number when they dare so to extenuate the transgression of the law as if it did not merit the death penalty? But they ought to have weighed not simply what the law commands but who it is that commands. For in every little transgression of the divinely commanded law, God’s authority is set aside. Do they deem it a small matter to violate his majesty in anything? Then, if God has revealed his will in the law, whatever is contrary to the law displeases him. Do they fancy God’s wrath so feeble that the death penalty will not immediately follow? And he has clearly declared this, if they could take it upon their hearts to listen to his voice rather than to becloud the clear truth with their senseless subtleties. He says: “The soul that sins shall surely die.” [Ezek. 18:4, 20] Likewise the passage just cited: “The wages of sin is death” [Rom. 6:23]. What they confess to be sin because they cannot deny it they nevertheless contend is not moral sin. But because they have heretofore indulged too much in their own folly, let them at least for once learn to become wise. But if they persist in their ravings, we bid them farewell. Let the children of god hold that all sin is mortal. For it is rebellion against the will of God, which of necessity provokes God’s wrath, and it is a violation of the law, upon which God’s judgment is pronounced without exception. The sins of the saints are pardonable, not because of their nature as saints, but because they obtain pardon from God’s mercy.

-John Calvin
Institutes of the Christian Religion

Messin' With Sasquatch

2006-09-09T19:51:00.000-07:00

I don't care much for Jack Links, but this commercial is one of my favorites!

Great Are the Works of the LORD

2006-09-07T16:31:00.000-07:00

Psalm 111

Praise the LORD!
I will give thanks to the LORD with my whole heart,
in the company of the upright, in the congregation.
Great are the works of the LORD,
studied by all who delight in them.
Full of splendor and majesty is his work,
and his righteousness endures forever.
He has caused his wondrous works to be remembered;
the LORD is gracious and merciful.
He provides food for those who fear him;
he remembers his covenant forever.
He has shown his people the power of his works,
in giving them the inheritance of the nations.
The works of his hands are faithful and just;
all his precepts are trustworthy;
they are established forever and ever,
to be performed with faithfulness and uprightness.
He sent redemption to his people;
he has commanded his covenant forever.
Holy and awesome is his name!
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom;
all those who practice it have a good understanding.
His praise endures forever!

Tortured for Christ

2006-09-04T19:10:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I read the autobiography of Richard Wurmbrand, Tortured for Christ. It was truly one of the most convicting stories I have read. Wurmbrand's mentality and heart for Christ is something incredibly scarce, if even in existence, among Western Christians today. The faith of the persecuted church is something beyond human comprehension, beyond my comprehension, but I pray earnestly to God that I should have faith like they do.
In this quote Wurmbrand speaks about him and other Christians that were persecuted and tortured in prisons for years.

God is “the Truth.” The Bible is the “truth about the Truth.” Theology is the “truth about the truth about the Truth.” Christian people live in these many truths about the Truth, and, because of them, have not “the Truth.” Hungry, beaten, and drugged, we had forgotten theology and the Bible. We had forgotten the “truths about the Truth,” therefore we lived in the “the Truth.”...We could not think anymore. In our darkest hours of torture, the Son of Man came to us, making the prison walls shine like diamonds and filling the cells with light. Somewhere, far away, were the torturers below us in the sphere of the body. But the spirit rejoiced in the Lord. We would not have given up this joy for that of kingly palaces.

Some lost everything, others lost seemingly more, but they were sustained by God's grace through the worst of trials, and hundreds gained Christ through their witnessing. I speak in the past tense, but that is in reference only to Wurmbrand's personal story. Thousands of Christians are persecuted daily that we never hear of. It is a present reality that we rarely think about or dwell on. It is a continuing story, not of some other world, but all around us. It is in humanity a tragedy, but in Christ it is a miracle, a working of grace and power unlike anything else seen in the world today.

Lukewarm Christianity

2006-09-02T07:51:00.000-07:00

What a multitude of fair-weather Christians we have in this age! Many Christians resemble the nautilus, which, in fine, smooth weather, swim on the surface of the sea, in a splendid little squadron, like the mighty ships; but, the moment the first breath of the wind ruffles the waves, they take in their sails, and sink into the depths. Many Christians are the same. In good company, in evangelical drawing-rooms, in pious parlors, in chapels and vestries, they are tremendously religious; but, if they are exposed to a little ridicule, if some should smile at them, and call them Methodist, or Presbyterian, or some name of reproach, it is all over with their religion till the next fine day. Then, when it is fine weather, and religion will answer their purpose, up go their sails again, and they are as pious as before. Believe me, that kind of religion is worse than irreligion.

Hannah's Prayer

2006-08-28T12:15:00.000-07:00

1 Samuel 2:1-10

And Hannah prayed and said,

"My heart exults in the LORD;
my strength is exalted in the LORD.
My mouth derides my enemies,
because I rejoice in your salvation.

"There is none holy like the LORD;
there is none besides you;
there is no rock like our God.
Talk no more so very proudly,
let not arrogance come from your mouth;
for the LORD is a God of knowledge,
and by him actions are weighed.
The bows of the mighty are broken,
but the feeble bind on strength.
Those who were full have hired themselves out for bread,
but those who were hungry have ceased to hunger.
The barren has borne seven,
but she who has many children is forlorn.
the LORD kills and brings to life;
he brings down to Sheol and raises up.
The LORD makes poor and makes rich;
he brings low and he exalts.
He raises up the poor from the dust;
he lifts the needy from the ash heap
to make them sit with princes
and inherit a seat of honor.
For the pillars of the earth are the LORD's,
and on them he has set the world.

"He will guard the feet of his faithful ones,
but the wicked shall be cut off in darkness,
for not by might shall a man prevail.
The adversaries of the LORD shall be broken to pieces;
against them he will thunder in heaven.
The LORD will judge the ends of the earth;
he will give strength to his king
and exalt the power of his anointed."

On God's Self-Revelation

2006-08-25T11:06:00.001-07:00

I know this may come as a shock to some Christians, but Scripture was not given so that we could live happy lives. It is God’s revelation of Himself, so that we might know Him and glorify Him. Of course, joy is a byproduct of the work of the Holy Spirit, but it isn’t the point.
-Tom Pryde

I think this is one of the foremost problems in today's Christianity. Christians forget why they believe what they believe. They get caught up in their busy lives, depression, and working through the daily frustrations, and then they go to church or read the Bible in order that they may have some comforting message or verse to hear that will make everything okay again. The modern Christian, especially in the evangelical realms, forget that Jesus is not an antidote, he is not a medicine or a cure for our problems. The Bible is not the ultimate solution book and guide to happiness, it is none of these things. However, this is the mindset that many people, indeed probably every Christian, at one time or another, slip into when going to God for help. It is a gross distortion of the purpose of Scripture, which was not sent with the sole purpose to make people happy.

Now, this is not to say that a Christian should not find happiness and joy in studying Scripture and in serving God. A true Christian will definitely find joy in anything that glorifies God. But that joy will be a by-product, something that results from first seeking God and His glory. We should not seek happiness in the sense of the word, but in God. Not from God, but in God. I think the difference really becomes clearer as we remember what Scripture is, God's divine revelation of Himself. It was written to mankind so that we should be pointed back to God and would glorify Him in His great holiness. When we see this to be true, and seek after God with our entire being, true joy will naturally take place. But if one only seeks that God should make them happy, they will find none in the end.

Note on quote: The quote above is from Pastor Pryde's blog, Neofundamentalist.

The True Mode of Prayer

2006-08-22T08:14:00.000-07:00

Allow me to refer you to the 13th verse of this chapter [Exodus 33], where Moses speaks unto his God—“Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, show me now THY WAY.” Moses asked a less favor before he requested the greater. He asked to see God’s WAY before he prayed to see his GLORY. Mark you, my friends, this is the true mode of prayer. Rest not content with past answers, but double your request and go again…We are most of us too slow to go to God. We are not like the beggars who come to the door twenty times if you do not give them any thing. But if we have been heard once, we go away, instead of coming time after time, and each time with a larger prayer. Make your petitions longer and longer. Ask for ten, and if God gives them, then for a thousand, and keep going on until at last you will positively get faith enough to ask, if it were proper, as great a favor as Moses did—"I beseech thee, show me thy glory."

Dwight's Bear Attack Advice

2006-08-03T15:36:00.000-07:00

Just some good advice for backpackers....

The Freedom of the Will

2006-08-01T08:18:00.000-07:00

I finally completed The Freedom of the Will by Jonathan Edwards a few days ago, and it was very good. It was definitely the most difficult book that I've read up to date, mostly because of Edwards' writing style. Edwards uses very long run-on sentences with more semi-colons than any other writer, or so I would imagine. Once one "gets around" the language, you begin to see the clarity of his argument. I will need to read it again to comprehend it more entirely, but from the majority of it that I could grasp, Edwards' philosophy is flawless or near it. He is very complete in his thinking, but I would not recommend this book to anybody not familiar with the Arminian ideas/arguments or the entire free-will concept. More than a little base knowledge is definitely a requirement to have any comprehension. Otherwise I would recommend it to anyone.

Now I imagine someone is wondering about the title of the book...considering the fact that Edwards argues against any "freedom of the will" or "liberty". The actual title is much longer. The full title is, "An Inquiry Into The Modern Prevailing Notion Of That Freedom Of The Will Which is Supposed To Be Essential To Moral Agency, Virtue and Vice, Reward And Punishment, Praise And Blame." I imagine that people thought it was just too long-winded to be on every book cover and therefore shortened it. I like those long titles though...it's a title and synopsis of the book's topic in one, very handy if you're trying to decide what to read by looking at titles. Anyway, the real title gives a much better understanding of what the book is about. Edwards discusses the will's freedom from the Arminian view as they have presented it, and shows it to be completely illogical. He shows that the liberty of the will is not necessary to the things described in the title, and he does it very well.

God's Determined Will

2006-07-29T06:26:00.000-07:00

If God's will is steadily and surely determined in every thing by supreme wisdom, then it is in every thing necessarily determined to that which is most wise. And, certainly, it would be a disadvantage and indignity to be otherwise. For if the Divine will was not necessarily determined to that which, in every case, is wisest and best, it must be subject to some degree of undesigning contingence; and so in the same degree liable to evil. To suppose the Divine will liable to be carried hither and thither at random, by the uncertain wind of blind contingence, which is guided by no wisdom, no motive, no intelligent dictate whatsoever, (if any such thing were possible,) would certainly argue a great degree of imperfection and meanness, infinitely unworthy of the Deity....It is no more to God's dishonour to be necessarily wise, than to be necessarily holy. And if neither of them be to his dishonour, then it is not to his dishonour necessarily to act holily and wisely....One thing more I would observe, before I conclude this section; and that is, that if it derogates nothing from the glory of God to be necessarily determind by superior fitness in some things, then neither does it to be thus determind in all things; from any thing in the nature of such necessity, as at all detracting from God's freedom, independence, absolute supremacy, or any dignity or glory of his nature, state, or manner of acting; or as implying any infirmity, restraint, or subjectiong. And if the thing be such as well consists with God's glory, and has nothing tending at all to detract from it; then we need not be afraid if ascribing it to God in too many things, lest thereby we should detract from God's glory too much.

-Jonathan Edwards
The Freedom of the Will

Amazing Grace

2006-07-26T14:44:00.000-07:00

Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found;
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears relieved;
How precious did that grace appear
The hour I first believed!

Through many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace hath brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promised good to me,
His Word my hope secures;
He will my Shield and Portion be,
As long as life endures.

Yea, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease,
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, Who called me here below,
Will be forever mine.

When we’ve been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun,
We’ve no less days to sing God’s praise
Than when we’d first begun.

-John Newton

Wisdom and Knowledge

2006-07-21T18:32:00.000-07:00

Wisdom is the right use of knowledge. To know is not to be wise. Many men know a great deal, and are all the greater fools for it. There is no fool so great a fool as a knowing fool. But to know how to use knowledge is to have wisdom.

The Necessity of Doctrine

2006-07-10T17:32:00.000-07:00

...But some reply, "Such-and-such a doctrine need not be preached, and need not be believed." Then, sir, if it need not be preached, it need not be revealed. You impugn the wisdom of God, when you say a doctrine is unnecessary; for you do as much as say, that God has revealed something which was not necessary, and he would be as unwise to do more than was necessary as if he had done less than was necessary. We believe that every doctrine of God's Word ought to be studied by men, and that their faith should lay hold of the whole matter of the Sacred Scriptures; and more especially upon all that part of the Scripture which concerns the person of our all-blessed Redeemer.

Jeremiah 51:15-24

2006-06-30T10:20:00.000-07:00

"It is he who made the earth by his power,
who established the world by his wisdom,
and by his understanding stretched out the heavens.
When he utters his voice there is a tumult of waters in the heavens,
and he makes the mist rise from the ends of the earth.
He makes lightning for the rain,
and he brings forth the wind from his storehouses.
Every man is stupid and without knowledge;
every goldsmith is put to shame by his idols,
for his images are false,
and there is no breath in them.
They are worthless, a work of delusion;
at the time of their punishment they shall perish.
Not like these is he who is the portion of Jacob,
for he is the one who formed all things,
and Israel is the tribe of his inheritance;
the LORD of hosts is his name.

"You are my hammer and weapon of war:
with you I break nations in pieces;
with you I destroy kingdoms;
with you I break in pieces the horse and his rider;
with you I break in pieces the chariot and the charioteer;
with you I break in pieces man and woman;
with you I break in pieces the old man and the youth;
with you I break in pieces the young man and the young woman;
with you I break in pieces the shepherd and his flock;
with you I break in pieces the farmer and his team;
with you I break in pieces governors and commanders.

"I will repay Babylon and all the inhabitants of Chaldea before your very eyes for all the evil that they have done in Zion, declares the LORD.

I have just finished going through the book of Jeremiah, and one thing I must say is that God's sovereignty and control are incredibly apparent everywhere in the book. Over and over God says "I will do this" or "this shall happen". One cannot deny that God is ever there, working through all the situations, and that He is in control of everything.

Daniel 4:28-37

2006-06-23T10:16:00.000-07:00

Nebuchadnezzar's Humiliation

All this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar. At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, and the king answered and said, "Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?" While the words were still in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, "O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. And you shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will." Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles' feathers, and his nails were like birds' claws.

Nebuchadnezzar Restored

At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever,

for his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
and his kingdom endures from generation to generation;
all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
and he does according to his will among the host of heaven
and among the inhabitants of the earth;
and none can stay his hand
or say to him, "What have you done?"

At the same time my reason returned to me, and for the glory of my kingdom, my majesty and splendor returned to me. My counselors and my lords sought me, and I was established in my kingdom, and still more greatness was added to me. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, for all his works are right and his ways are just; and those who walk in pride he is able to humble.

This is one of my favorite examples of God's complete Sovereignty and amazing Grace found in the Bible. Here we see one of the most powerful rulers of the ancient world brought to absolutely nothing, just as God promised him. As a result of his pride, Nebuchadnezzar had his pride brought low to an incredible degree. And then, God restores him and gives him back everything, showing his grace and mercy to this now humble ruler. This work of God here should be absolutely amazing to anyone, for no one on earth could dethrone a King as Nebuchadnezzar, and then restore him back to his complete power after seven years of living as a crazed maniac animal. All God had to do was speak the command, the promise, the word, and it happened.

1 Corinthians 1:18-25

2006-06-19T16:17:00.000-07:00

For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,

"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,

and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart."

Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

This piece of scripture is infinitely and obviously true. Christ's death on the cross was the most unpredictable and incredible event in human history. It defied all human reason and logic. It amazed the Gentiles, and left the Jews stupefied. It shook the earth's foundations, and shattered hell's hopes. It fulfilled the law, and defeated death itself. It is the most amazing and wonderful thing that has ever occured on earth, yet it is still ultimately incomprehensible to us.

Not only then, but even now, the world remains confused and befuddled by Christ's death. It does not see the truth, nor is it willing to acknowledge it. Why? Because it is beyond the world, Christ's death is beyond the world's comprehension without the light of the Holy Spirit guiding it. And because the world cannot understand it, the world, in it's pride, refuses to allow it. The pride of man refuses to acknowledge the fact that there is something beyond its comprehensibility. Man attempts to dismiss and convolute the truth in any way it can imagine. The world changes, convolutes, and even simply denies the obvious fact so that it must not be held accountable to it. Ignorance is bliss, and the world loves it, though it can only escape it for so long. In the end, however, the truth will prevail, and the "bliss" felt from ignorance and denial will become regret. Only by God's grace will man even begin to comprehend the cross, and by God's grace alone will they also be saved.

The Chief of Affections

2006-06-09T18:04:00.000-07:00

For love is not only one of the affections, but it is the first and chief of the affections, and the fountain of all the affections. From love arises hatred of those things which are contrary to what we love, or which oppose and thwart us in those things that we delight in: and from the various exercises of love and hatred, according to the circumstances of the object sof these affections, as present or absent, certain or uncertain, probable or improbable, arise all those other affections of desire, hope, fear, joy, grief, gratitude, anger, &c. From a vigorous, affectionate, and fervent love to God will necessarily arise other religious affections; hence will arise and intense hatred and abhorrence of sin, fear of sin, and a dread of God's displeasure, gratitude to God for his goodness, complacence and joy in God when God is graciously and sensibly present, and grief when He is absent, and a joyful hope when a future enjoyment of God is expected, and fervent zeal for the glory of God.

-Jonathan Edwards
Religious Affections

"Faith doesn't ask whether good works are to be done..."

2006-06-04T12:14:00.000-07:00

Faith is not that human illusion and dream that some people think it is. When they hear and talk a lot about faith and yet see that no moral improvement and no good works result from it, they fall into error and say, "Faith is not enough. You must do works if you want to be virtuous and get to heaven." The result is that, when they hear the Gospel, they stumble and make for themselves with their own powers a concept in their hearts which says, "I believe." This concept they hold to be true faith. But since it is a human fabrication and thought and not an experience of the heart, it accomplishes nothing, and there follows no improvement.

Faith is a work of God in us, which changes us and brings us to birth anew from God (cf. John 1). It kills the old Adam, makes us completely different people in heart, mind, senses, and all our powers, and brings the Holy Spirit with it. What a living, creative, active powerful thing is faith! It is impossible that faith ever stop doing good. Faith doesn't ask whether good works are to be done, but, before it is asked, it has done them. It is always active. Whoever doesn't do such works is without faith; he gropes and searches about him for faith and good works but doesn't know what faith or good works are. Even so, he chatters on with a great many words about faith and good works.

Faith is a living, unshakeable confidence in God's grace; it is so certain, that someone would die a thousand times for it. This kind of trust in and knowledge of God's grace makes a person joyful, confident, and happy with regard to God and all creatures. This is what the Holy Spirit does by faith. Through faith, a person will do good to everyone without coercion, willingly and happily; he will serve everyone, suffer everything for the love and praise of God, who has shown him such grace. It is as impossible to separate works from faith as burning and shining from fire. Therefore be on guard against your own false ideas and against the chatterers who think they are clever enough to make judgments about faith and good works but who are in reality the biggest fools. Ask God to work faith in you; otherwise you will remain eternally without faith, no matter what you try to do or fabricate.

Now justice is just such a faith. It is called God's justice or that justice which is valid in God's sight, because it is God who gives it and reckons it as justice for the sake of Christ our Mediator. It influences a person to give to everyone what he owes him. Through faith a person becomes sinless and eager for God's commands. Thus he gives God the honor due him and pays him what he owes him. He serves people willingly with the means available to him. In this way he pays everyone his due. Neither nature nor free will nor our own powers can bring about such a justice, for even as no one can give himself faith, so too he cannot remove unbelief. How can he then take away even the smallest sin? Therefore everything which takes place outside faith or in unbelief is lie, hypocrisy and sin (Rom 14), no matter how smoothly it may seem to go.

-Martin Luther,
Preface To Romans

Words of Wisdom

2006-05-26T14:03:00.000-07:00

"It takes years to build up trust, and it only takes suspicion, not proof, to destroy it."

"You shouldn't compare yourself to others - they are more screwed up than you think."

"Never, under ANY circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night."

"And when God, who created the entire universe with all of its glories, decides to deliver a message to humanity, HE WILL NOT use, as His messenger, a person on cable TV in a bad suit, with a bad hairstyle."

"Never lick a steak knife."

"The main accomplishment of almost all organized protests is to annoy people who are not in them."

"A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person."

"You can't hide a piece of broccoli in a glass of milk."

I hope that these will be helpful to you...

Psalm 33

2006-05-14T14:36:00.000-07:00

Shout for joy in the LORD, O you righteous!
Praise befits the upright.
Give thanks to the LORD with the lyre;
make melody to him with the harp of ten strings!
Sing to him a new song;
play skillfully on the strings, with loud shouts.

For the word of the LORD is upright,
and all his work is done in faithfulness.
He loves righteousness and justice;
the earth is full of the steadfast love of the LORD.

By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,
and by the breath of his mouth all their host.
He gathers the waters of the sea as a heap;
he puts the deeps in storehouses.

Let all the earth fear the LORD;
let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him!
For he spoke, and it came to be;
he commanded, and it stood firm.

The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to nothing;
he frustrates the plans of the peoples.
The counsel of the LORD stands forever,
the plans of his heart to all generations.
Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD,
the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!
The LORD looks down from heaven;
he sees all the children of man;
from where he sits enthroned he looks out
on all the inhabitants of the earth,
he who fashions the hearts of them all
and observes all their deeds.
The king is not saved by his great army;
a warrior is not delivered by his great strength.
The war horse is a false hope for salvation,
and by its great might it cannot rescue.

Behold, the eye of the LORD is on those who fear him,
on those who hope in his steadfast love,
that he may deliver their soul from death
and keep them alive in famine.

Our soul waits for the LORD;
he is our help and our shield.
For our heart is glad in him,
because we trust in his holy name.
Let your steadfast love, O LORD, be upon us,
even as we hope in you.

Short Exegesis of Romans 1:18- Romans 2

2006-05-12T19:59:00.000-07:00

Rom 1:18-23 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. ¹⁹For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. ²⁰For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. ²¹For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. ²²Claiming to be wise, they became fools, ²³and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Notice the first verse (18)- It has announced the main idea and theme of what Paul is writing about, that is, God’s wrath and judgment. He sates that God’s wrath is revealed or is released on ungodly men. Then the passage continues by discussing and describing how, why, and what these ungodly men are. They glorified themselves over God and did not honor him (vs. 21-23). Essentially, Paul is describing them as worshiping something other than God, which is idolatry and sin, which are synonymous terms as all sin is idolatry.

Rom 1:24-27 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, ²⁵because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. ²⁶For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; ²⁷and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. ²⁸And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

Notice this passage is in the past tense…. Paul is talking about past events, of which the effects are clearly seen at that time and today. Continuing with that idea, vs. 24-28 describe a physical, earthly, result of their sin. That is, God gave them up to and allowed them to live in their most sinful desires. The words in this passage are all negative; there is nothing condoning about the description at all. The activities described are sinful. They are described as: impure, dishonoring, lies, contrary to nature, shameless, error, debased, and over all can be said to have exchanged the truth of God for a lie and are worshiping the creation rather than the Creator. There is nothing good at all about these activities; they are contrary to God and are against His way and truth; it is sin. Anything that is not intended to glorify God in a Biblical manner is sinful. There is absolutely no hint of uprightness or Godliness in any of the ideas described, which are all sinful acts, in this passage.

Rom 1:29-32 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, ³⁰slanderers, hater of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, ³¹foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. ³²Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

As one continues on through to verse 32, it becomes even more explicit in what is meant by the preceding verses. The persons whom Paul is discussing has not changed. The “they” referred to in verse 28-32 is the same “they” as in verses 19-27. He is still describing the same group of people, that is, the ungodly and unrighteous. Verse 29-32 is a conclusion, a repeated amplification of the facts in verses 21-23. 21-23 states the condition of the people, verses 24-28 states the result of their actions, and then 29-32 concludes the idea expressed at the beginning of the passage. Paul repeats the idea to amplify and clarify exactly what happened and what makes up the sinful state. They, these people, “were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice.” There is no denying that nothing they are doing is right or even “ok.” They are wholly sinful.

A very important phrase in this passage is, “…God gave them up…” Seen in verses 24, 26, and 28, this phrase begins the description of the result of the sin. As a result of their sin, God gave them up to the earthly consequences of it. Because they did not honor God, He gave them up to a debased mind and they exchanged natural relations for the unnatural, to the impure lusts of their hearts, and to exchange the truth of God for a lie. All of these consequences are said to be “impure” and “debased,” there is no righteousness whatsoever. And…“Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”

Looking past chapter one into chapter two, there should be at least three major questions asked. Who is chapter one talking about? Who is chapter two addressed to? What does Paul mean when he says that we are not to “judge?”

To answer the first question, one must look at the whole of scripture to see that chapter one is in fact in reference to all men…. all the ungodly men that is. Romans 3 and many Psalms reveal that no one is righteous, nobody seeks God, and all deserve death as a result. Since no one seeks God and all are unrighteous, Romans 1:18-32 is in fact in reference to all men in their natural depraved self. Only by God’s grace are we freed of that bondage and become able to be or do otherwise in any way. This fact is also supported and makes sense of chapter two.

Romans 2:1- Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things.

Paul begins by telling “man” that he has no excuse to judge. Paul’s audience is pointed at the whole of mankind, not Christians, here. This is very crucial to understanding the passage, because if it was aimed at the righteous Christians the context and connotation would be quite different, though not as extreme as some would like to make it. Paul is speaking to “every one of you who judges.” (vs. 1)

Rom 2:2-11- We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who do such things. ³Do you suppose, O man — you who judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself — that you will escape the judgment of God? ⁴Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? ⁵But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. ⁶He will render to each one according to his works: ⁷to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; ⁸but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. ⁹There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, ¹⁰but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. ¹¹For God shows no partiality.

The “judgment” Paul does not imply that we actually have the ability to judge at all. There are two kinds of judgment, the first being God’s holy and righteous judgment, the second being man’s judgment on others, which is generally a prejudiced judgment of human preference or ideal. Man is in fact in capable of righteous judgment because of his own sinful, fallen, and finite nature. Notice the “therefore.” It is always in reference to a preceding thought or idea. If one looks at the entirety of the passage in chapter one and any of the verses following verse 1 of chapter 2, they will find that this passage’s subject is entirely about God’s perfect and holy judgment on the unrighteous. Therefore Paul’s point that comes in verses 1,3,5, etc… We cannot judge because we are unworthy of judging, as we are also imperfect, just as they are. It would be hypocritical because we, man, are also among the unholy, imperfect men and women. We are not to judge, not because they are right or we should leave them alone, but because it is not our position to condemn men to hell. Only God, using Himself as the standard of judgment, which is perfect holiness, has the right to and does choose whom to condemn to eternal damnation.

This command to not judge does not imply that we are truly able to judge in this sense either, because we most certainly cannot. So why does Paul give us this command then? It is to demonstrate the entire point of this entire passage, and the show the point or purpose of the entire Biblical message! It is not a list of dos and don’ts at all. The purpose of this passage it to contrast man, in his ungodliness, to God, in His perfect Holiness and glory! The command’s purpose is not to instruct us in our judgment of others as if we actually could, but to show that we are too depraved to do so, and that only God is righteous enough to do so! The whole idea and purpose is to illustrate God’s perfect judgment and law upon us.

"...the carnal mind is enmity against God..."

2006-05-04T19:11:00.000-07:00

Rom 8:7- "...the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." (KJV)

“…. observe how strongly the Apostle expresses it. ‘The carnal mind,’ he says, ‘is ENMITY against God.’ He uses a noun, and not an adjective. He does not say it is opposed to God merely, but it is positive enmity. It is not black, but blackness; it is not at enmity, but enmity itself; it is not corrupt, but corruption; it is not rebellious, it is rebellion; it is not wicked, it is wickedness itself. The heart, though it be deceitful, is positively deceit; it is evil in the concrete, sin in the essence; it is the distillation, the quintessence of all things that are vile; it is not envious against God, it is envy; it is not at enmity, it is actual enmity......But the crime may seem to be worse when we think of what God is. Let me appeal personally to you in an interrogatory style, for this has weight with it. Sinner! why art thou at enmity with God? God is the God of love; he is kind to his creatures; he regards you with his love of benevolence; for this very day his sun hath shone upon you, this day you have had food and raiment, and you have come up here in health and strength. Do you hate God because he loves you? Is that the reason? Consider how many mercies you have received at his hands all your life long! You are born with a body not deformed; you have had a tolerable share of health; you have been recovered many times from sickness; when lying at the gates of death, his arm has held back your should from the last step to destruction. Do you hate God for all this? Do you hate him because he spared your life by his tender mercy? Behold his goodness that he hath spread before you! He might have sent you to hell; but you are here. Now, do you hate God for sparing you? Oh, wherefore art thou at enmity with him? My fellow creature, dost thou not know that God sent his Son from his bosom, hung him on the tree, and there suffered him to die for sinners, the just for the unjust? And dost thou hate God for that? Oh, sinner! is this the cause of thine enmity? Art thou so estranged that thou givest inmity for love? And when he surroundeth thee with favors, girdeth thee with mercies, encircleth thee with loving kindness, dost thou hate him for this? He might say, as Jesus did to the Jews, ‘For which of these works to ye stone me?’ For which of these works do ye hate God? Did an earthly benefactor feed you, would you hate him? Did he clothe you, would you abuse him to his face? Did he give you talents, would you turn those powers against him? Oh, speak! Would you forge the iron and strike the dagger into the heart of your best friend? Do you hate your mother, who nursed you on her knee? Do you curse your father, who so wisely watched over you? Nay, ye say, we have some little gratitude towards earthly relatives. Where are your hearts, then? Where are your hearts, that ye can still despise God, and be at enmity with him? Oh! Diabolical crime! Oh! Satanic enormity! Oh! Iniquity for which words fail in description! To hate the all-lovely-to despise the essentially good-to abhor the constantly merciful-to spurn the ever beneficent-to scorn the kind, the gracious one; above all, to hate the God who sent his son to die for man! Ah! In that thought, ‘The carnal mind is enmity against God:’ there is something which may make us shake; for it is a terrible sin to be at enmity with God. I would I could speak more powerfully, but my Master alone can impress upon you the enormous evil of this horrid state of heart.......An enemy may possibly make himself a friend; but enmity cannot. If it be but an adjunct of his nature to be an enemy, he may change himself into a friend; but if it is the very essence of his existence to be enmity, positive enmity, enmity cannot change itself. No, there must be something done more than we can accomplish….I tell you, sirs, if you change yourselves, and make yourselves better, and better, and better, a thousand times, you will never be good enough for heaven, till God’s Spirit has laid his hand upon you; till he has renewed the heart, till he has purified the soul, till he has changed the entire spirit and new-made the man, there can be no entering heaven. How seriously, then, should each stand and think.”

Charles H. Spurgeon

"Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Thy Word"

2006-05-01T17:09:00.000-07:00

   Lord, keep us steadfast in Thy Word;
   Curb those who fain by craft and sword
   Would wrest the Kingdom from Thy Son
   And set at naught all He hath done.

   Lord Jesus Christ, Thy power make known,
   For Thou art Lord of lords alone;
   Defend Thy Christendom that we
   May evermore sing praise to Thee.

   O Comforter of priceless worth.
   Send peace and unity on earth.
   Support us in our final strife
   And lead us out of death to life.

-Martin Luther

Job 9:1-20

2006-04-29T09:23:00.000-07:00

Then Job answered and said:

"Truly I know that it is so:
But how can a man be in the right before God?
If one wished to contend with him,
one could not answer him once in a thousand times.
He is wise in heart and mighty in strength
— who has hardened himself against him, and succeeded? —
he who removes mountains, and they know it not,
when he overturns them in his anger,
who shakes the earth out of its place,
and its pillars tremble;
who commands the sun, and it does not rise;
who seals up the stars;
who alone stretched out the heavens
and trampled the waves of the sea;
who made the Bear and Orion,
the Pleiades and the chambers of the south;
who does great things beyond searching out,
and marvelous things beyond number.
Behold, he passes by me, and I see him not; he moves on,
but I do not perceive him.
Behold, he snatches away; who can turn him back?
Who will say to him, 'What are you doing?'

"God will not turn back his anger;
beneath him bowed the helpers of Rahab.
How then can I answer him,
choosing my words with him?
Though I am in the right, I cannot answer him;
I must appeal for mercy to my accuser.
If I summoned him and he answered me,
I would not believe that he was listening to my voice.
For he crushes me with a tempest
and multiplies my wounds without cause;
he will not let me get my breath,
but fills me with bitterness.
If it is a contest of strength, behold, he is mighty!
If it is a matter of justice, who can summon him?
Though I am in the right, my own mouth would condemn me;
though I am blameless, he would prove me perverse."

“Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.”

The Bondage of the Will

2006-04-26T17:34:00.000-07:00

I must say that I have thoroughly enjoyed reading The Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther, though it took me far longer to complete than I anticipated. The first thing I noticed in this book is Luther's incredible devotion to, and unshakable confidence in, the Word. He is so confident in his interpretations of it that he comes across as arrogant at times. I believe though, that he was just that honest about his faith and would feel it wrong to hide what he believed in any degree. He has a very "colourful" vocabulary at times, and says things that people these days would never say openly out of "politeness." Politeness might be a good virtue, but many times I must admit Luther's fearless bluntness make a point far clearer. Luther had a very subtle sarcasm that I found hilarious.
It is not a joke book though, by any means. It is a heavy read in which Luther proves that he was one of the greatest theological minds in history. Even those wanting to side with Erasmus, in all honesty, would have to admit that Luther takes Erasmus's "sleepy-headed ideas" and "empty words" and proves them to be exactly such. He takes Erasmus's proclamation of, "Victory is mine!" and turns it right around. I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in theology and is willing to take the time to carefully consider what Luther says and study it for themselves.

Ephesians 2:1-10 (Part 2)

2006-04-17T18:34:00.000-07:00

Ephesians 2:4-10 ⁴But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, ⁵even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—⁶and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, ⁷so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. ⁸For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, ⁹not a result of works, so that no one may boast. ¹⁰For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Verses 1-3 have already established that man is sinful and will do nothing to save himself. Alone, those verses carry no hope, only condemnation. Then, verse four begins with “but,” indicating that there is some exception to the rule coming. Because God is rich in mercy and love for us, even when we were dead in our sins, has saved us.

Remember that “us” in this passage is referring to Christians, and not the unregenerate. Verse five tells us that God has “made us alive together with Christ”. Before, we were dead. Now, we are alive. This is a biblical analogy of the difference between the unregenerate and the regenerate. Before we were “made alive” we were “dead”. Looking back at verse one, “dead” has not changed its meaning. A dead man essentially has nothing; he cannot walk, talk, or move at all in any way. He most certainly cannot bring himself back to life or save himself; he is dead! But God has made us alive; he has brought us and given us life. Notice also who is active and who is passive in these verses. God is the one performing the action, we are the object of the action; we are the one that is receiving the action giving. God is the one who loves us and makes us alive; God is not just the Giver of Life, but the Maker of Life. He creates spiritual life within our mortal bodies, a place where true life had never been before.

We have been made “alive together with Christ.” This indicates our connection with Christ. Those who are saved have been made alive together with Christ; when Christ was “made alive,” or rose from the dead, so were they. His resurrection from the grave was their resurrection from being spiritually dead in sin. According to the New Testament, Christians have an intimate connection with their savior. We die with him (Rom. 6:5, Gal. 2:20), we are resurrected with him, we suffer with him (1 Peter 4:13), and we share his glory (Rom. 8:17, Rev. 3:21). We do not connect with Christ in these ways in a physically literal sense, but spiritually. Christ’s death at the cross was our death to sin. When he died there, we died spiritually with him; and he has given us new life in his resurrection.

The syntax of the end of verse five is often passed over and not considered in depth. It says this, “…--by grace you have been saved--.” The hyphen indicates a break in thought, a side note, but is nevertheless extremely important to the message here! Just before this insert we are told that we have been “made alive together with Christ.” First Paul tells us that we have been made alive with Christ; because of Christ we have been made alive, as he is our savior. Then Paul immediately after that, it is by grace that we have been saved. This is parallel construction. Christ and grace are in essence synonymous; Christ is God’s grace imparted to us. Grace, and only God’s grace, has brought us and can bring us to life from our state of deadness.

Verse six then completes the thought here, that is, of salvation. It states that when we are saved God has “raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” This is the result of salvation: that we will be with God in heaven. And that is because of Christ Jesus. It is within the Atonement and Propitiation of Christ Jesus that we are saved and raised to heaven. Nothing outside of Christ’s Atonement can or will save us.

And why has God done this for us? Verse seven says, “so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” God has done this so that His amazing grace could be made known to us! Now it would be wrong to get the idea that He is making His grace known to us in order to make us happy or please us, as if He would bow down to those whom are most subject to his will (2 Chron. 20:6). God did not create us in order to ultimately serve us and satisfy us. He created us to show His own greatness. He created us for His glory, because it pleased Him (Psalm 115:3, 135:6). He is Holy, and no other can compare to Him (Rev. 15:4).

Verse 8-9, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” Grace is what atones for us, changes us, and saves us. It is the object by which we have been saved, working through faith. By using faith or going through it, grace saves us. Grace is directly in connection with faith and believing. Without faith we would not have grace.

Paul then says, “And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,” In the previous sentence, the parts of salvation were identified. That is; grace and faith. Here, the subject is still salvation. Salvation is a gift from God; anybody who denies this believes that they can achieve salvation themselves, which is simply wrong and stupid. Salvation is not of our own doing, at all. We can do nothing to save ourselves; this describes all parts of salvation, not just grace, and this is the part many have a problem with.

Many, namely Arminians, want to claim that God does give grace, but we have to provide the faith. It is our “free-will” in action. This synergistic view defies verse nine of this passage. Salvation is, “not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” If faith does indeed depend entirely upon our will, free of God, then it is clearly something that we do. It is an action, a decision, and a choice that we make, completely apart from God. There are many points that can be made about why this contradicts scripture, philosophy, and logic, but just a simple response should suffice. Verse eight clearly says that salvation is completely of God, and salvation includes faith. Without faith, there would be no salvation (though it is not itself the primary cause of it). Faith is a work if it is done outside of God’s power, and Paul says clearly that works does not save us.

Verse ten, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

We have been created in Christ to do good works; we were created for the purpose of doing God’s good works. In Christ, we have been made a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17); transformed by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Spirit (Titus 3:5). Before, we were dead, wholly detestable to God in our sin. Now, he has transformed us by His grace into a new creation after the likeness of God in righteousness and holiness (Eph. 4:24). We are God’s workmanship; we could not do it ourselves by any means.

These good works that we were created in Christ for, “God prepared beforehand.” The “good works” referred to are God’s commands and what He has commanded us to do in scripture. God has recreated us to do the good works that he prepared for us before we were made anew “that we should walk in them,” or so that we would do them. God creates all things for His sovereign purpose, which cannot and will not be changed by anything (Malachi 3:6, James 1:17). For if God were to change, He would cease to be immutable; He would cease to be God, which is impossible. God is God.

The First Baptist?

2006-04-13T13:27:00.000-07:00

I've always found the name, "First Baptist" funny. It just doesn't make any sense why a church would call itself the "First Baptist Church," when they obviously were not. Why not then, "Second Baptist" or "The Last Baptist"? After all, the first shall be last and the last shall be first (Matt 19:30, 20:16). There probably is something more to the name than I know, but in an attempt to Google the answer, all I could find was every "First Baptist" church there is with a website...that is thousands. So that didn't help much. If you do have information into the origin of the name that would be great...but until then I'll just wonder.

Ephesians 2:1-10 (Part 1)

2006-04-06T15:09:00.000-07:00

Ephesians 2 is disputed over and interpreted in many ways; some interpret it to fit their own desired meaning, others interpret it correctly. This passage displays salvation and the process a person goes through in order to become a believer, which is why it is many times controversial. It is one of the greatest “mysteries” and most awesome part of God and His relationship with His chosen people.

Ephesians 2:1-3 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-- among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

Ephesians is letter written to the saints in Ephesus, who are faithful in Christ Jesus (Eph. 1:1). In verse one of this second chapter, Paul begins by stating this, “And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked,” He is speaking to all those whom are faithful to Christ and telling them that they at one time were in sin. The descriptive word is “dead”; which Paul then goes on to describe further as: following the world, following Satan, disobedience, living the in passion of the flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and mind, and being children of wrath by nature, just like the rest of mankind. These three verses are overflowing with theology. Paul uses these parallel descriptions to show what he means by “dead in trespasses”; it is a description of the unbeliever.

Before the saints were saved, they walked “following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience.” They did not follow God, they were sinful, and they only pleased Satan. Essentially Paul says here that they served and worshiped Satan, not in a physical act of Satanic worship as one may imagine, but what is the difference between such worship and disobeying God? If one does not follow God, then they can only follow the devil. There is no neutral ground with God. There is no “undecided” box to check. One is either of the flesh or of the Spirit (Rom. 8:1-11). This parallels inseparably with the rest of this passage.

Verse three continues the idea of being “dead” and “following the course of this world” by saying the we all lived at one time in the passions of our flesh; we all lived in sin, following the world. Every single believer was dead in sin and living selfishly for their own sinful passions of the flesh at one time, namely, before they came to Christ. Every single one of those in Christ did not deserve the salvation that came to them. All were sinful; therefore all deserved condemnation (John 3:18). Only those in Christ will have salvation; those that live in the Spirit have life (Rom. 8).

Notice here again the corresponding denotation of the word “dead” in verse one and the descriptions of “living in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and our mind,” in verse three. Being dead in our transgressions is synonymous to our carrying out of our desires and passions in the flesh. This points undeniably to the doctrine of Man’s Depravity. To be “dead” in this passage is to be utterly consumed by our desire for sin and ourselves. When we are dead, our desire and passion is for the flesh; it is the only thing that we will do and accomplish. In the very essence of the idea, we are unable to do anything pleasing to God; that is anything at all. Our desire is for sin and ourselves, and we will never do anything against what we will and desire.

Just as Romans 3:10 says:

“None is righteous, no, not one;

no one understands;

no one seeks for God.

All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;

no one does good,

not even one."

"Their throat is an open grave;

they use their tongues to deceive."

"The venom of asps is under their lips."

"Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."

"Their feet are swift to shed blood;

in their paths are ruin and misery,

and the way of peace they have not known."

"There is no fear of God before their eyes."

It is a clear description of those that are in the flesh. None of them seek God, nor ever will, because it is not within their willing capacity and desire to do so. Those who are of the flesh indeed hate God; they do not fear Him, and therefore do not obey Him.

For Ecclesiastes 12:13 says,

“The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.”

Romans 8:7-8 “For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.”

To be in the flesh is to be consumed by desire and passion for sin and self and we cannot change our desires. No one can change what they truly love and desire. Nobody has ever chosen to love any particular person in a true, deep sense by their own choice. Love happens through attraction to physical beauty and personality. In the same way, a sinner cannot come to be attracted to God, for they already have their desire-and do not desire God at all, in fact they hate God. Nobody who truly hates a person will ever love that same person in a true sense; they are complete opposites. To hate is to completely detest in every way, it is impossible to imagine love taking that place. It is against human ability, our nature. We are enslaved to our sinful desires, our very nature; we cannot control them nor change them, only live by them. This fact demonstrates ever the more God’s amazing power, grace, and mercy, which will be examined later.

The last part of verse three in Ephesians 2 finishes the characterization of the sinner, saying that they are “by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.” In this statement it is revealed to us that our sinful nature, which deserves condemnation, is our nature, “our” meaning all of mankind. Our nature, which is our very essence of being, is worthy of condemnation. We do not warrant God’s wrath because of our first action of sinning, we are objects of God’s wrath because of our nature; our very essence is corrupt and sinful. There is no neutral ground with God; either we are for Him or we are against Him (Matt. 12:30), and nobody is for God in their conception. As in Romans 5, Adam condemned humanity by his sin.

Verse 12,

“Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned”

When Adam sinned, we inherited condemnation. And that is another discussion that will not be argued here and now as many books have been written on it.

Believers in Christ are by no means special in their birth or different in nature in their beginning, from the beginning of their existence they were just as the rest of the sinful world; deserving eternal punishment in hell. They lived in their desires and selfish sin, not desiring anything else and therefore unable to have anything else; they did not want God. Yet now they have become righteous through salvation! Which is explained in verses 4-10 of Ephesians 2.

This turned out to be longer than expected, so today is just Part 1. I will finish and post verses 4-10 another day.

Cops 'n Donuts

2006-04-05T12:08:00.000-07:00

See your tax dollars at work

I found this picture and thought it was hilarious; it's the classic cop stereotype proven true. That's about all I have for today, I'll try to come up with something a little more meaingful later this week.
I'm taking the ACT on Saturday, so that will be fun. Also I have a lot of various assignments and a great need to study certain classes, such as German. So that is what I will mostly be doing in the next two or three days.
One more thing, just because it is soooo "monumental". Today was the only day in this millenium where the time and date were the consecutive numbers of 1-5. At 1:02:03 in the morning on today's date, 04/05/06. Amazing isn't it? Never would have noticed that if someone hadn't told me about it....because I don't really care. Anywhoo, have a good day!

Romans 11:33-36

2006-03-29T17:58:00.000-08:00

I love these verses. In the last few weeks it has come to my attention again and again during my reading and it is a wonderful truth. It is truly comforting to know that our God is beyond us in every way; He does not make mistakes and does not change. God is God. He is completely incomprehensible. If God was comprehensible, then He would be like us; therefore subject to our rationale and to change...and there is no security or assurance in a God that changes his promise.

Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!

"For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?"

"Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?"

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

The Attributes of God

2006-03-24T15:10:00.000-08:00

In the last couple of weeks I read the book The Attributes of God by Arthur W. Pink. Personally, I loved the book. It was by far the best book I've read outside of the Bible, and I would recommend it to anyone. Pink systematically goes through the biblical attributes of God, starting with God's solitariness and ending with the contemplation of God. He discusses God's decrees, knowledge, supremacy, sovereignty, immutability, holiness, power, faithfulness, goodness, patience, grace, mercy, love, and wrath of God also. His whole aim throughout the book is to make God greater and ourselves less; through scripture. It is a relatively short book in comparison to many, but it is very full; he doesn't waste a single word. The only "negative" thing about it was one or two questionable sentences, either he was contradicting himself or I was unable to understand his meaning; I'm not sure. All in all, I recommend this book.

On The Love of God

2006-03-19T14:40:00.000-08:00

Christians today are all about the love of God. They focus on God's incredible mercy, grace, and love for us; but few actually think about what God's love is. The common concept of God's love seems to portray His love as a sympathetic pity or incredible joy. It is regarded more as a special "amiable weakness" in which God feels moved to save or favor us. In all, we reduce God's love to a simple human emotion; which it most definately is not.

1 John 4:8 says "God is love". God is the essence of love; it is more than just an attribute-He is love itself; it is His nature. Also, God is perfect in Himself and is below absolutely nothing. Nothing can change Him or affect Him (Malichi 3:6). From this there are several things that can be known about God's love.

God's love is unaffected and unchangeable; nothing can alter what God loves. His love is eternal (Jer. 31:3). His love is infinite; uncomprehendable (Eph. 3:19). This is quite unlike human emotion by any comprehensible stretch.

Human love is affected by anything and everything. When have people ever chosen whom they desired to love? Our emotions come unexplained and nonunderstandable; we don't control our emotions, they control us. Yes, we can "restrain" our emotions and choose to react or not react in ways, but we don't choose our initial emotional reaction to anything. God chooses His emotions, if it can be said that way. He is controlled by nothing, He is all-sovereign, immutable, holy, and perfect. Therefore nothing is higher than Him that can control His thoughts or desires. He, Himself, controls what His emotions are. He does not "fly into a rage" over a dropped hat, nor love anything because He sees it and thinks it's cute. To do either would mean that God is affected by something higher than His own sovereign choice; if God doesn't choose His emotion, then what does? God's emotion ( if it can be called so) is governed only by His own sovereign choice. God's love is not regulated by passion, sentiment, or caprice; but instead His own holy and pure principle.

God's love is incomprehensible and powerful. It is more than the "friendly nice guy" or even a "fatherly" love that we would like to envision it as, even though this Biblical view is so much more assuring to us. It is a true, unchanging, and powerful love. As Paul says in Romans 8:38-39.

For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Heart Surgery

2006-03-03T13:51:00.000-08:00

Emergency cardiac surgery was required on an unidentified man after he apparently responded to an Altar Call and asked Jesus to come into his heart.

I found this picture awhile ago and found it humorous, but it really made me think; why do we use the phrase "Ask Jesus into your heart"? It has been used for decades as far as I know, or at least since I've been around (which hasen't been too long yet). It isn't a correct metaphor. The metaphor is used to describe how God changes our hearts after we confess to him. This is wrong only in the order they place the elements of conversion. How can we ask God to change our hearts if our hearts don't desire God?! Before salvation, before our hearts are turned toward God, we do not want Him in any situation!

Romans 8:7-8 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. esv

All are of the flesh from the beginning of existence; according to the Biblical doctrine of Orignial Sin. With this in mind: Why would we ever ask God to change our hearts? We wouldn't, won't, can't. We do not see Him. Once God changes our hearts, however, then we are able and always will choose Him. For when one can see how wonderfully awesome He is, who would choose otherwise!?! Our faith and desire for God is because He has changed us to desire Him so. It is part of His wonderful plan of mercy and grace.

Rather than use these misleading "evangelistic tools", we should use doctrinally correct phrases that emphasize God's work in our hearts, and concentrate on our own sinfullness and needed repentance.

Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Rather than use these misleading "evagelistic tools", we should use doctrinally correct phrases that emphasize God's work in our hearts, and concentrate on our own sinfullness and needed repentance. Instead of refering to salvation as "asking Jesus into your heart", why not say "repent of your sins and believe"? People argue that it is too difficult for some people, such as children to understand. Not only do I believe that is not true, I say that it is no excuse for giving doctrinally misleading or incorrect phrases. Phrases as such are not healthy, and that should be reason enough.

Going Hyper-Calvinist?!

2006-02-25T07:54:00.000-08:00

Are you obsessed with Calvinism?? Go here to find the tell-tale symptoms.

Warning: You probably won't find this funny if you aren't a Calvinist. And if you are an Arminian, then don't take this too literally.

Faith and Works

2006-02-22T14:31:00.000-08:00

I have been participating in a particular Sharper Iron thread this last week discussing Total Depravity. I must first say that I was relieved to see something finally worth discussing. Unfortunately there was little actual "discussion". I think the thread is mostly finished now; the cartilage covering the stubborness of some there was quickly worn away by the repeated knocks of those attempting to say something important. For awhile there were some good posts made, which I will be going over again and looking at. The real underlying problem with the whole discussion was understanding of definitions...which seems to be a problem more often than many realize. Non-theological issues always seem to destroy conversations on theology.

The main idea argued by those in the Arminian position (at least on this thread) was that we are unable to save ourselves, we need God's grace to free us from our bondage to sin. However, without our "consent" or belief we would not be saved. Without our self-generated faith, completely apart from God's will, we would not be saved. So in their view salvation is synergistic; God does part, but man has to also do his part to actually become saved.

There are several things wrong with this view. The first is that it denies Ephesians 2:8-10.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

This verse is talking about salvation and how we are saved. It clearly says that we are saved by grace through faith; not of works. Few Arminians would deny what this verse says, instead they would say that faith is not a work; just because we do it apart from God does not make it a work. This idea is a result of failing to recognize or acknowledge the basic Biblical definition of what a "work" is.

If faith comes from God, then it is not a work on our part, because God has done it. If it is of ourselves, without God causing it, then it is a work becuase we have generated it. If we are only saved by our own faith, which is generated by our own selves, then we are saving ourselves. The Arminian denies this because they believe Jesus is what saves us. They believe He is somewhat like a battery or power source that is available to everybody, and we are those that need the power. All we have to do is choose to tap into the power source and be saved. Just one of many many questions to this is: Who is doing the action that saves here? Jesus ain't, he's sitting there providing it; we are the people doing the action that ultimately provides salvation. Without our movement, we would not be saved. It is a work, something done by us. It is not God carrying us to the power source. It is ourselves, moving ourselves, to achieve the power source. It is simply stubborness to deny that faith apart from God's influence is not a work. We are doing something. It may not be the actual source of salvation, but without the action salvation would not occur. It is a work within the process of salvation. And Ephesians clearly states that the entirety of salvation is not of ourselves or our works, but of God and His amazing grace.

There are many many ways to argue this, and without all the arguments (and even with) people will find "holes" as long as they are determined to. I would love to present a fuller argument, but that would take more space than Blogger would even allow, or that I have time for now. Anyway, those are a few of my thoughts on this.

There is one particular verse I have been looking at as a result of this thread, which is 1 Corinthians 12:7-9.

To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of....emphasis mine

I asked for an Arminian interpretation of the passage. And here is a link if you are interested in reading it, just scroll down to post #41. I'm not going to write a rebuttal to it until I have studied the passage more thoroughly, which I plan on doing. I have not studied the passage enough personally to say I have an understanding of the contextual meaning. If I happen to agree with him by the end of my study, then I will write a concurring post. It is now another one of the million things on my list to study and write on. If only I didn't have school to bother with....there is so much in the Bible, I know I will never fully understand even this tiny bit that God has revealed to us. How awesome He is!

Mere Christianity

2006-02-07T13:15:00.000-08:00

I read the book Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis yesterday, so I thought I'd give my short review of it.
First off I would like to give my praise. Lewis is a impressive writer with many important insights. He really knows how to express ideas clearly and cleverly. He can be quite funny (at least to me) and at the same time be completely serious. Not only that but he had great insight to so many things in human "behaviour" and our world today. That is the primary focus of the book. To convince people of and then explain what Christianity is.

Now for criticism: Despite his claim in the prologue to leave the Theology to "experts", I'm afraid that is impossible to do with anything about God that has any worth in reading or hearing. His theology becomes quite apparent not too far into the book. To be short and simple he is an Arminian...he stresses free will and our choice all over the place. Other than that my only complaint is the lack of scripture. I counted 3-4 short quotes from scripture, all of which were without reference-if you haven't heard them before you wouldn't know where they were from. That is something that surprised me greatly about the book, and disappointed me. In his lengthy process of describing what Christians believe (or many), he never gives or shows the basis of Christianity. That is what I am most disappointed about, and I hear that is typical of Lewis, but I don’t know for myself as I haven’t read anything else by him yet. The lack of scripture also surprised me because it is such a highly acclaimed book among Christians.

In summary: I would be careful about recommending this book. I certainly wouldn't recommend the entirety of it to everyone. There are certainly many chapters in the book I would recommend to absolutely anybody. The large portion of his philosophy is sheer brilliance. But large portions of it I would not recommend to most people, in effort to prevent confusion of key doctrinal issues and interpretations...and because it is just philosophy and there is little scripture. Parts of the book I loved, but much of it I was also disappointed at. Nevertheless, I hold Lewis in high respect as a Christian and an author.