The Carpenter's Project

A Testimony to the Grace of Jesus Christ

2011-05-17T09:50:00.006-04:00

My Testimony
My parents faithfully took our family to our local church gatherings most Sunday mornings (United Methodist Church). I spent my pre-teen and most of my teenage years thinking that Christianity was essentially a moral code that I obeyed to love God and be admitted to heaven when I died. I was pretty good at keeping the rules that people would measure to see if I was a “good Christian.” I was even admired among my peers in high school because of my good religious behavior. But, in hindsight I was just a Pharisee with no desire for the glory of God, no real grasp of the gospel.

I entered Mercer University in 1997 to study engineering. I had other desires as well as I went into college, evil desires to throw off the moral chains that had been holding me. I was ready to experience the lusts of the world. Thankfully, God had other plans for my life. Because of my love for playing the guitar, I was asked by a classmate from high school who was involved with the BSU worship team to play with their band. This put me under some good teaching once a week. With eclectic atmosphere at Mercer, I was hearing differing beliefs from Baptists, Presbyterians, and Methodists, and I did not know where I stood. God was very gentle to me as He changed the direction of my life. What started happening was that I had a burden to go deeper with God. I actually interested in the things of God, in studying the Bible and knowing Jesus. I started a study of Romans with a friend and began understanding the gospel. At that time I also met the wonderful lady who is now my wife. She taught me how to pray and have personal devotions (something I had never done before!). I started going to her church gatherings, Mabel White, and was shocked at the spiritual life in the corporate gatherings. That too was something I had never experienced.

My Understanding of The Gospel
Even in the four years, my understanding of the gospel has grown much. I am realizing how deep my religious “rule-keeping-for-righteousness” roots go. My pastor, Keith Watson, has committed to having the gospel of Jesus be central to every sermon, believing that the gospel is not only something we believe for justification, but that which also sustains us as believers until we are at last glorified. This weekly saturation in the gospel has helped to give me a much better understanding of the gospel.

I understand the gospel to be that God has come in the flesh as Jesus, who lived a sinless and perfectly righteous life, yet was crucified and died, but was raised to life having born the curse for the sin of man, and will give his righteousness to our account simply because of our believing and trusting in Him, and will bring us to dwell with God for eternity. This gospel is to be proclaimed to the whole world and disciples are to be made for the glory of God. I also believe that as we call people to believe in this gospel, we are to call them chiefly to the enjoyment of God for eternity.

The Gospel's Affect
The most notable change in me since my conversion to the gospel has been in my desires. Whereas before my conversion I did good things, it was not done joyfully, but rather under compulsion to be admired by my peers and to earn God’s favor. Now, however, I see God at work in me, giving me His desires and a love for His glory and renown. More broadly, the gospel is affecting every area of my being: how I am a husband and a father, an employee, a neighbor, a steward, and a citizen.

My Calling
After college, I had occasional opportunities to teach adult Sunday school classes. I really began to enjoy teaching in 2006. I credit this enjoyment to a better understanding of the supremacy of Christ in all things and understanding of expositional preaching/teaching, which I have gained mostly through John Piper’s ministry. So, through this teaching I sense God’s call to teach and preach.

As I have had opportunity to preach at the Macon Rescue Mission, God has further clarified my calling to teach and preach. Through my seminary experience, especially in a course called "Pastoral Counseling," I have had an increased desire to shepherd the flock of God, spurring us on toward treasuring the gospel of Christ.

Good Friday & a Prophecy Fulfilled - For my Jehovah's Witness (Watchtower) readers

2010-04-06T22:53:00.007-04:00

Jehovah speaks in Zechariah 12 about bringing salvation to the house of Judah and bringing judgment upon their enemies. In 12:10 Jehovah says this: "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn."

Then in John 19:37 we are told by the inspired author that this prophecy in Zechariah 12:10 is fulfilled. Here is the verse in context:

John 19:31 Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away. 32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. 35 He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe. 36 For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They will look on him whom they have pierced.”
So the crucifixion of Jesus, the piercing of his side rather than the breaking of His bones, fulfills what Jehovah spoke of Himself in Zechariah 12:10. The only way I see for this to be possible is if Jesus is Jehovah. This is a plain and simple look at a prophecy and its fulfillment. May God grant us all eyes to see and humbly submit to His word.
The good news is that Jesus has done what we could not do - he lived perfectly, satisfied God's wrath and hatred toward sin by his death on the cross (Galatians 3:13), and he has been raised in a glorified body. This is for our good! It brings us great joy, to have fellowship with God through the Spirit now, and enables us to enjoy God for eternity, all by trusting Jesus to be righteousness for us, gifting righteousness to us by his free gift (Romans 5:1-11). This is good news! Hallelujah!

The 567 Cafe - An Interview with Keith Watson

2009-10-12T15:59:00.006-04:00

In an effort to give our Missional Community group a better understanding of what is going on with our church's cafe, "The 567 Cafe," I am posting the first half of a report I wrote last semester for a class. The aim of the report was to first report on an attempt at cultural engagement, and to follow that up with an analysis of the attempt. So, what follows is the report, which is based largely on an interview I conducted with Pastor Keith. Enjoy!

New City Church downtown (NCCd), of which I am a member, states that “we exist to see the gospel transform everything within our reach… ourselves, our church, our city, and the world.” In April of 2008, the 567 Café became a very public expression of this mission. Located at 567 Cherry St., Macon, Georgia, the café provides a venue for musicians and artists to present their work on Friday and Saturday nights while providing coffee and other refreshments to the patrons.

In an interview on August 1, 2009, Keith Watson, pastor of NCCd said to me the following when asked what the goal of the 567 Café is.

The ultimate goal of the 567 is the same as the mission of our church: to see the gospel transform everything within our reach. The 567 is a tool that, primarily through the relationships we develop there, the gospel can go forward. Our goal primarily is gospel-transformation in people who work, live, or play in downtown Macon.

Another benefit that has been observed by the church in having the 567 Café is that the members can form new relationships with people whom they would not contact otherwise. The setting is an easy place to have conversations that lead to discussing the church, the gospel, and Jesus. Secular artists, musicians, and patrons often ask questions about why a church would provide such a venue in the downtown area. In short, the café serves to help people live missional lives.

New City Church downtown is committed to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. NCCd also holds that faith in Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation. The church is a theologically conservative evangelical church which believes in the authority, inerrancy, and infallibility of Scripture. A more complete list of theological beliefs can be found at the church’s website: www.newcitydowntown.org/about_new_city.

Part of the reason NCCd gathers in downtown Macon (and thus the 567 Café is in downtown Macon) is that other churches have left the area, and most of the churches who are still there are not engaging the culture with the gospel. Thus, the 567 Café seeks to be for the good of the city, and the advancement of the kingdom and the gospel.

In addition, downtown Macon has a fairly rich music history and a music scene that seems to be reviving. Keith expounded on how the 567 Café took on its current form.

As a part of the revitalization efforts of downtown, NCCd wanted to involve the visual arts and music. In talking with musicians and others who were downtown, NCCd found that the only places to listen to music were bars. There were no listening rooms. It was just loud bars filled with smoke. We could meet a need in that musicians are looking for a place to play. Macon needed its own residents to see good things happening downtown. The space just fit all of that. It fit our needs and the
needs of the city. That’s contextualizing what we do.

I asked Pastor Keith how he sees the 567 serving to establish a counter-culture rather than a sub-culture. Here is how he answered:

Our hope and goal is to celebrate good things that God has created. God created us to be creative people like he is creative. I believe that’s a part of being created in his image. So we celebrate the creativity of the people in our city. We do so in an environment that is generally clean and safe for family and where we can come with our wife and children. It’s an environment that is good for the musicians as well.

What we do at the 567 is counter-cultural in two ways. It’s counter-cultural in the secular world because we’re a place that celebrates the artists and their creativity. This is very counter-cultural because in the other venues that those artists play, it’s not about the artists or their art; [rather] it’s about them bringing money to the facility. So we’re counter-cultural there in that we truly celebrate them and the gifts that God’s
given to them.

The 567 is also counter-cultural in church culture because we’re not running from our community and our culture. We’re engaging it and celebrating what is good.

When asked to share some of the things that have shown him that God’s hand is really involved in this ministry, Keith shared the following.

Many people have been skeptical of the church being downtown and us doing this cafe thing for music. There have been a number of people who have been sitting back and watching to see whether we were real and genuine. I had a conversation at Bragg Jam last week with a female musician whose lyrics indicates that she’s got Christian background, but you can also hear in her lyrics that something has happened that really hurt her. She walked away from the church several years ago. Well she’s played at the 567 Cafe several times. We have developed a relationship through talking with her about her music and about her playing at the cafe and through serving her while she’s at the Cafe (by helping her get set up and torn down). That developed that relationship so that when we were at Bragg Jam, she and I sat down while one of the musicians was playing and had a thirty minute conversation about religion, church, and the gospel. We’re supposed to meet again for coffee just to talk more. But she was obviously very excited. She said she has not found anyone in the last several years who she felt that she could talk openly and honestly to about her hurts in the church and
religion. So there’s one.

This was I think the tenth year of the Bragg Jam music festival. This was our [the 567’s] second year as a venue and this year we were the only non-alcohol-serving venue at Bragg Jam. We had rave reviews from a lot of the people who played there and who visited there for music. After Bragg Jam, because of the 567 and because our people serve at Bragg Jam, there were some conversations as they were planning for next year’s Bragg Jam. [We talked about NCCd] providing help to them, create a couple
of more venues that were family-friendly, and even having Christian music. One of the ideas was to maybe do some gospel music to bring black and white together-maybe even to bring a couple of the church choirs together as one of the acts. So all of that, to me, is a hint of redemption that is coming through Bragg Jam, which was a pub crawl only two years ago. The only way that that conversation was taking place was because of the 567 and our people serving in the city. So that is a huge success.

City Watch [a Neighborhood Watch for a sixteen block area surrounding the 567 Café] is a result of the 567 because people saw that we were serious about our city and loved our city and wanted to be a part of revitalizing our city. That led to conversations about what we could do about security and other issues downtown. That led to City Watch, which pays a part of Patrick’s monthly income. So that was a big thing directly connected to the 567.

There have been tons of gospel conversations with unbelievers… and on and on.

New City’s efforts have been met with some skepticism from those outside the body. The common misunderstanding was that it would be a “church café” for “church people” with “church bands.” It was thought that the 567 Café would simply be against the things that go on in the city.” The Church in downtown Macon has not generally celebrated with the culture. It has been completely isolated in its own world, following more of Niebuhr’s “Christ Against Culture” model. So, the apprehension was brought about because people expected the 567 Café to be the same.

Ambition - To Preach the Gospel Where Christ is not Known

2009-10-12T08:36:00.004-04:00

This is shaping up to be a great conference. It will be put on by Acts 29 in Louisville, KY November 10-11. It serves as one of their "boot camps" for those who want to be church planters within their network, but is also open to the public.

From the website:

Simply knowing how to plant and lead a church is not enough. Knowledge
must come hand-in-hand with God-given ambition. The Apostle Paul responded
to God’s call to make the gospel known among the Gentiles with zealous
determination. Paul, empowered by the Holy Spirit, made it his ambition to
take the gospel to those who did not have it even if it cost him
everything. He proclaimed the gospel, gathered believers into churches,
established elders, and discipled believers; and he did all this with zeal and
passion. In the hope of this type of ambition overflowing in the Church,
we would like to invite you to the Acts 29 Network Ambition Boot Camp,
November 10-11, 2009, which will focus on planting and leading churches with
God-given ambition.

Get more info on speakers, breakout sessions, cost, etc. here.

2009-09-19T00:07:00.005-04:00

The Lord seems to have been showing me two things to seek lately: humility and joy. The call to humility has come primarily through reading C.J.Mahaney’s book Humility: True Greatness. This book is a great quick read that I highly recommend. If you prefer an audio version (as I do), he preached a two sermons at a conference around 2000 that are available at the Sovereign Grace Ministries website. These audio files were the basis for the book. In the back of the book, C.J. Mahaney gives a list of suggestions on how to fight pride and cultivate humility.

The call to seek joy came as a friend, Jonathan Rowe, noted how recent parenting struggles have been robbing me of joy. He was exactly right, and I hadn’t even noted it really. So, I picked up Piper’s book Desiring God, flipped to the back where he has an appendix titled “How then shall we fight for joy?” This also is a list of sorts, with numerous Scriptures given showing the basis for his suggestions.

So, one thing I noticed in comparing the two lists is some real overlap. Much of the guidance for cultivating humility has to do with seeing God in the Scripture, and that is also the chief means of finding joy in Christ. And it makes sense, doesn’t it, that as God humbles us, we have necessarily seen true greatness in the person and work of Christ, and in that seeing of the gospel we have great joy!

Here are a few things that stick out:
· (Mahaney) “Practice the spiritual disciplines (prayer, Bible study, worship)
· (Mahaney) “Seize your commute time to memorize & meditate on Scripture”
· (Piper) “Realize that the battle is primarily a fight to see God for who He is.”
· (Piper) “Meditate on the Word of God day and night.”
· (Piper) “Learn to preach to yourself rather than listen to yourself.”

And a quote found in Desiring God from George Muller of Bristol:

I saw more clearly than ever, that the first great and primary business to which I ought to attend every day was, to have my soul happy in the Lord. The first thing to be concerned about was not, how much I might serve the Lord, how I might glorify the Lord; but how I might get my soul into a happy state, and how my inner man may be nourished… I saw that the most important thing I had to do was to give myself to the reading of the Word of God and to meditate on it.

Finally, note that Piper’s whole book is expanding on why the following are true:
· The chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever
· God is most glorified in us, when we are most satisfied in Him

Contextualizing the Gospel

2009-08-15T20:50:00.002-04:00

In his chapter titled "Contextualization: True and False," Lesslie Newbigin discusses the following:

The need for contextualization

Historic struggles with contextualization

Culture is in missionaries and in the Bible

The church re-contextualizes the gospel in new cultures

When cultural demands are placed on newly-evangelized cultures by missionaries

Evidence that the gospel is embraced by a newly evangelized people

Overcontextualization (false contextualization)

True contextualization

Here is one of my favorite portions, which is under the "True contextualization" heading as I have outlined the chapter above:

I am saying that authentic Christian thought and action begin not by attending to the aspirations of the people, not by answering the questions they are asking in their terms, not by offering solutions to the problems as the world sees them. It must begin and continue by attending to what God has done in the story of Israel and supremely in the story of Jesus Christ. It must continue by indwelling the story so that it is our story, the way we understand the real story. And then, and this is the vital point to attend with open hearts and minds to the real needs of the people in the way that Jesus attended to them, knowing that the real need is that which can only be satisfied by everything that comes from the mouth of God (Matt. 4:4). As we share in the life, and worship of the Church, through fellowship, word, and sacrament, we indwell the story and from within that story we seek to be the voice and the hands of Jesus for our time and place. [Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, p. 151].

He continues shortly thereafter on p.152, showing how we might fail.

I am thus again stressing the priority of the gospel as the message, embodied in an actual story of what God has in fact done, is doing, and will do. Christian theology is a form of rational discourse developed within the community which accepts the primacy of this story and seeks actively to live in the world in accordance with the story. It can fail by failing to understand and take seriously the world in which it is set so that the gospel is not heard but remains incomprehensible because the Church has sought security in its own past instead of risking its life in a deep involvement with the world. It can fail, on the other hand, by allowing the world to dictate the issues and the terms of the meeting. The result then is that the world is not challenged at its depth but rather absorbs and domesticates the gospel and uses it to sacralize its own purposes. ... True contextualization accords to the gospel its rightful primacy, its power to penetrate every culture and to speak within each culture, in its own speech and symbol, the word which is both No and Yes, both judgment and grace. And that happens when the word is not a disembodied word, but comes from a community which embodies the true story, God's story, in a style of life which communicates both the grace and the judgment. In order that it may do this, it must be both truly local and truly ecumenical. Truly local in that it embodies God's particular word of grace and judgment for that people. Truly ecumenical in being open to the witness of churches in all other places, and thus saved from absorption into the culture of that place and enabled to represent to that place the universality, the catholicity of God's purpose of grace and judgment for all humanity. [Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, p. 152].

A culturally diverse community of believers serves to ensure we don't make God in our own image

2009-08-10T20:47:00.004-04:00

I think you will agree with me that it is a real danger for us to start thinking we have the not only the truest understanding of who Jesus is, but also that our understanding is complete. Though we are justified and counted as righteous as Christ in the Father's eyes, we are fallible. So, how is our understanding of who Christ is to be protected from leading us off down the wrong path? I think God provides at least three graces to keep us (or move us back) on the right path: 1) the Holy Spirit speaks to us through the Scripture; 2) people of long past cultures speak to us through their writings; and 3) people of contemporary cultures for community with us, so that we and they alike can be mutually edified in our pursuit of faithful living.

It is this third means that Lesslie Newbigin addresses as follows:

The way in which any Christian perceives God's revelation in Christ and in the whole biblical story will be shaped tby the culture through which that individual was formed. It is a simple fact that Jesus has been and is portrayed in an amazing variety of portraits from the Byzantine Pantocrator through the medieval crucifix and the Jesus of the sacred heart to the blue-eyed blond of American protestantism and the Che Guevara freedom fighter of liberation theology. For some writers it seems obvious that Jesus can be portrayed in any guise that is (as they would say) "meaningful" for them and their contemporaries. But "Jesus" is not a name to which we can attach any character we like to imagine. Jesus is the name of a man of whom we have information in the books of New Testament interpreted (as they must be) in the light of the books which were Jesus' own scriptures. The Jesus of whom the New Testament writers bear witness is not an inaccessible figure. Our varying perceptions of him - and of course they will vary because we are culturally different people - have to be checked in some way that all our claims to perceive reality have to be checked. we have to share them with others who perceive Jesus with the different lenses furnished by their different cultures. [Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, pg. 192-193].

So, a culturally diverse community of believers serves to ensure we don't make God in our own image.

How diverse is your community? Mine isn't great, but I will say that it is getting more diverse. God's mission is aimed at a VERY diverse world, and as we become more missional, our community is likely to become more diverse. Lord, help us be a part of transforming everything within our reach - ourselves, our church, our CITY, and the WORLD!

Cultural / Societal Transformation by the Gospel - Newbigin

2009-08-06T07:22:00.003-04:00

From Lesslie Newbigin's book The Gospel in a Pluralist Society on pgs. 232-233.

If the gospel is to challenge the public life of our society, if Christians are to occupy the "high ground" which they vacated in the noontime of "modernity," it will not be by forming a Christian political party, or by aggressive propaganda campaigns. Once again it has to be said that there can be no going back to the "Constantinian" era. It will only be by movements that begin with the local congreation in which the reality of the new creation is present, known, and experienced, and from which men an women will go into every sector of public life to claim it for Christ, to unmask the illusions which have remained hidden and to expose all areas of public life to the illumination of the gospel. But that will only happen as and when local congregations renounce an introverted concern for their own life and recognize that they exist for the sake of those who are not members, as sign, instrument, and foretaste of God's redeeming grace for the whole life of society.

My Belly-Button Window

2009-05-22T20:12:00.005-04:00

If you're like me, you probably never think much about your belly-button... until this week.

The Bible shows us in Romans 5 that we are born under the curse of sin, passed down to every person in every generation since Adam. We don't choose to be born under this curse, it just is what it is, because God designed the universe in such a way that the sin of parents would be passed on to their children. The curse means that we will surely be dead spiritually ("for in the day that you eat [the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil], you will surely die"). Adams sin made us all sinners. We have no choice in the matter - WE ARE BORN DEAD.

Until recently, I had never thought of belly-buttons as a scar. But, this shows us a very important thing: being human means we are certainly going to be scarred. We must have oxygen to live in the womb, and the only way for us to get this is via the umbilical cord. And the umbilical cord does us no good once we are born - it must be cut, clamped off, and fall off. And that means there will have to be a scar.

This illustrates original sin for us: we are scarred before we even know who our parents are. And we are destined to be scarred be the very fact that we are human.

NEVERTHELESS!!!

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s gdisobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous." (Ro 5:18-19, ESV)

All the healing we need for our scars, to redeem us out of the curse and bring us the greatest happiness we could ever have has been accomplished through the one man's righteousness. We have perfect righteousness gifted to us simply by faith in that one man - Jesus.

I never thought my belly-button would be my teacher...

Gospel Parenting - Questions from an almost Four year old

2009-04-21T07:08:00.003-04:00

I read the creation account in The Jesus Storybook Bible (Sally Lloyd-Jones) last night with Elijah. The boy had his thinking cap on again.

Me: "Before God made anything, there wasn't anything except God, and He had a plan to send Jesus."
Elijah: “Dad, who made God?”
Me: “Nobody bubba, God has always existed.”

Later on after the creation of the animals, leading up to Adam and Eve:
Elijah: “Daddy, why did God make Adam first, not Eve?”
Me: “I think God wanted to establish an order bubba, that men would be leaders [in the family].”

And I’m not sure where this last one came from…
Elijah: “Why did God make Satan?”
Me: “Well,… because God wanted to show his wrath against evil and sin I think.”

I didn’t expect to have to think that hard that late in the day!

Immensity and Omnipresence vs. Pantheism and Panantheism

2009-03-27T10:03:00.008-04:00

Since the Bible teaches that God is omnipresent, are we to then take a pantheistic view of God, or a panantheistic view of God?

To frame this post, let’s start with some definitions. In his book Systematic Theology, Louis Berkhof defines immensity as follows: "That perfection of the Divine Being by which He transcends all spatial limitations and yet is present in every point of space with His whole Being. It has a negative and a positive side, denying all limitations of space to the Divine Being, and asserting that God is above space and fills every part of it with His whole Being. The last words are added in order to ward off the idea that God is diffused through space, so that one part of His Being is present in one place, and another part some other place." [p.60-61].

He goes on to say that omnipresence and immensity can be regarded as synonyms, but that whereas immensity emphasizes God's transcendence, omnipresence emphasizes His immanence ("denotes that He nevertheless fills every part of space with His entire Being" [p.61]).

Pantheism denies the transcendence of God, saying that the essence of the universe is the very being of God [p.61]. Panantheism is defined at wiki.answers.com as follows:

It is the belief that God's physical body is the universe and everything in it,
and that God also transcends this universe. Existence is a part of God, but God
is larger than existence. It is similar but different to pantheism, which says
that the universe IS God in totality. It is also a belief in a genderless God,
and God as the creator.

Now for the analysis. Though there are some common elements, God’s immanence/omnipresence should not be confused with pantheism or panantheism. Immensity and omnipresence hold that God is both transcendent and present in creation at every point with His whole Being. Pantheism holds that all of creation is all of God, and thus God is “spread out” throughout the universe as matter is spread out. Pantheism says that there is no more to God than the universe, so He does not transcend the universe. Omnipresence does not conflict with the transcendence of God; that is, omnipresence holds that God is not bound by space and time. Solomon, after building the temple of the LORD, said the following in 1 King 8:27:

"But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven
cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have built!”

Pantheism is thus forced to say that God is always becoming, always changing as the creation takes on chang. However, in the Bible, God reveals Himself as never changing (Exodus 3:14; Hebrews 1:11,12; James 1:17).

So, what about panantheism? Those who believe in panantheism will at least have the transcendent attribute of God. However, they throw in the belief that the universe is God’s body. This cannot be reconciled with the Bible, for it clearly states in the second commandment that the Israelites were not to make any carved images of Him. If the image they made was (part of) Him, there would be no reason for God to make such a demand. Similarly, God would not have opposed those who “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles” (Romans 1:23).

This is not to mention the fact that the Bible never speaks of God having the universe as His body. The Bible is the supreme revelation God has given us about Himself. Yes, the creation does tell us something of God, of His invisible attributes (eternal power and divine nature) can be seen in what has been created, but the problem is that we cannot rightly understand what it is telling us because of the sin nature in us. So, this means that we are utterly reliant upon the revelation God gives us of Himself in the Scripture. So, since the Scripture never says anything about God having the universe as His body, such a view has no authoritative basis.

On Prayer and the Sovereignty of God

2009-01-24T22:31:00.004-05:00

I find myself in the midst of a crisis which calls for MUCH prayer. It reminds me of events not too long ago when we were pleading to God for the lives of our boys on three different occasions. In all three of those situations, we were powerless to do anything, and God was all we needed and could ask for.

So, this is a similar situation for some friends of ours - I know what they are feeling right now - desperation for God to do a good work and thereby glorifying Himself. There are a number of people praying for them. Why? Because we all believe that God listens to the prayers of His saints and may act upon them.

Does this sound strange for the Almighty Sovereign God to act upon the prayers of His saints? It is not. Do not forget, Greg Wood, that God could have ordained your prayers to be that which God would act upon, thus bringing about His good plan. God ordains the end and the means to get to that end. Do not forget that your prayers show your dependency upon God. Do not forget that prayer is great blessing, the blessing of communion with your joyful heavenly Father. God has not put the universe in motion, given natural laws, stepped back, and said "Good luck!" No, He is involved in every aspect of the creation, but especially that of His moral creatures. We are not alone, we are not hopeless.

This truth of the Sovereignty of God gives me faith in Him, reverence for Him, and love for Him - and I hope that it does for you too. He gets the credit for every good in this world, and I can know that everything is done for the good of His saints (Rom. 8:28). Nothing is meaningless. Further, when God ordains a prayer as His means of acting - that prayer will be effective and nothing can stop Him.

Now come Lord Jesus, strengthen your children and their little child. Let your glory be seen and loved. Let your name be exalted. Defeat the RSV. To you, the only wise God, be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen!

Is Church Membership Biblical? Part 1

2009-01-17T06:52:00.007-05:00

A couple of Sundays ago, the band came over to our house for lunch after the morning service. The topic of church membership came up in conversation. We asked the question, "What is church membership?" A great conversation followed, which showed that people have real concerns about "membership" and what that might communicate to people.

Here I would like to ask the question, "When the Bible speaks of the church, does it ever put forward anything that resembles church membership?" Or restated: "Does God guide His flock in ways that make local church membership a useful means of grace?"

Observation #1
Our church is moving forward in establishing/growing its leadership. We will have our second elder soon, and I am sure there are more to follow. One of the charges given to elders is that they are to pay careful attention to themselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made them overseers, and to care for the church of God (Acts 20:28). So, it seems that a reasonable question for an elder is, "Who is the flock for which I am an overseer?" Obviosly, the elders in Ephesus were expected to understand Paul when he made this statement, and Paul spoke of a particular duty to protect some group of people called a "flock." But, how are these people identified?

So, my observation here is this: The elders are to guard a certain set of people, and by having those people make a commitment to that particular church family, agreeing to come under that elder leadership, this role is fulfilled. You can call that church membership if you want to, but what is needed is knowledge of the flock that is to be guarded. Note that this doesn't give us any indication as to how formal this was (written versus verbal).

Would elders be responsible for everyone who ever darkened the door of one of the church's gatherings? I cannot imagine the answer being yes. Wouldn't they be responsible though for those who wanted their godly shepherding? But you may say, "there was just 'the church' in those days, each city with a set of believers, and so the elders were responsible for all of them. But, would elders in our day be responsible for all of the believers in their city, though they may never come to the elders' particular gathering of believers? I think it is reasonable to say "no." So this seems to indicate that people need to commit to being members of one another, in the sense that we have members of our physical body. People need to come under the leadership of the elders, and entrust to them the right to hold them spiritually accountable.

More reasons for us to be committed to a local church are to come...

Who is at the Center of God's Universe?

2009-01-17T06:37:00.002-05:00

Premise 1: Righteousness is defined as esteeming (through emotions, thoughts, and actions) that which is infinitely worthy of being esteemed.

Premise 2: God is righteous.

Conclusion: God's righteousness means that He esteems Himself most highly in the universe. In other words, God is the center of His own universe. He is the most God-centered being there is, and there is no unrighteousness (e.g. selfishness) in His doing so.

Credits: John Piper gave this definition of righteousness in a sermon on Romans 9. I am sure that Jonathan Edwards said or influenced the conclusion.

Quotes from "God is the Gospel" by John Piper - Part 5

2008-09-17T20:24:00.004-04:00

Here's the next quote I'd like to share that stood out as having great applicability for me...

"The gospel is not a way to get people to heaven; it is a way to get people to God. It's a way of overcoming every obstacle to everlasting joy in God. If we don't want God above all things, we have not been converted by the gospel." - John Piper, God is the Gospel, Crossway, 2005; p.47.

The point here is that our goal in embracing the gospel is not relief from the pain of this world, or to obtain a new body that won't be blind, or to live in harmony with creation, or to reach our full potential as humans, or to avoid hell. All that is secondary at best to being in the presence and enjoying the presence of God in the fullest sense possible.

There are implications for all of us as we interact with those outside of the church as well. When we proclaim the gospel, we must not reduce it to a tool that will give people something trivial they want. We must see deeper into the hearts of unbelievers - below the surface. Their (and our) longings for most things are often just symptoms of a deeper need, and that is what we must help them see. All of our longings and desires are fulfilled ultimately in having communion with Christ. We must help ourselves and outsiders to see that Jesus iswho/what will bring meaning to our life as will exist to glorify the greatness of His Being.

Quotes from "God is the Gospel" by John Piper - Part 4

2008-09-04T13:00:00.001-04:00

In Chapter 2 of "God is the Gospel," John Piper seeks to lay out the biblical scope of what the gospel is. He shows where the following are mentioned as useful in getting a biblical definition of the gospel:

There is a living God (Acts 14:15)

The arrival of God's imperial authority (Mark 1:14, Isaiah 52:7, Romans 10:15)

Jesus: a savior who is Christ the Lord (Acts 8:12, Romans 1:1-3, Luke 2:10-11)

Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures (Mark 10:45, Jeremiah 31:34, 1 Corinthians 15:1-3)

Jesus risen from the dead as preached in my gospel (1 Cor. 15:1, 3-4, 17, 2 Tim 2:8)

The gospel is not good news without the promise of the Spirit (Luke 3:16,18,

The promise of salvation for all who believe (Eph 1:13, Rom 1:16)

What the cross purchased makes the cross good news (Mark 4:23, Luke 4:18)

The good news of peace with God and each other (Acts 10:36, Ephesians 2:14-18)

The good news promises eternal life (2 Tim 1:10)

"In you shall all the nations be blessed" (Gal. 3:8, 16, Eph 3:6

"The gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24, Eph 1:4, 6)

Jesus' death makes God's gospel grace just (2 Cor 8:9, Heb 2:9, Rom 3:25-26)

The grace of the gospel is the ground of every good promise (2 Tim 1:9, Eph 2:8, Acts 18:27, etc.)

-John Piper, God is the Gospel, Crossway, 2005; p.26-36

The chapter then climaxes when Piper concludes the chapter with this:

"If you embrace everything that I have mentioned in this chapter about the facets of the gospel, but do it in a way that does not make the glory of God in Christ your supreme treasure, then you have not embraced the gospel. Until the gospel events of Good Friday and Easter and the gospel promises of justification and eternal life lead you to behold and embrace God himself as your highest joy, you have not embraced the gospel of God. You have embraced some of his gifts . You have rejoiced over some of his rewards. You have marveled at some of his miracles. But you have not yet been awakened to why the gifts, the rewards, and the miracles have come. They have come for one great reason: that you might behold forever the glory of God in Christ, and by beholding become the kind of person who delights in God above all things, and by delighting display his supreme beauty and worth with ever-increasing brightness and bliss forever."

- John Piper, God is the Gospel, Crossway, 2005; p.37-38

One of the things I appreciate so much from any writer or speaker is when they put things in context of the big picture. And one of the things about Piper is that he talks so much about that big picture - that at the center is Jesus, displayed in His gospel, always glorious, always gracious.

Oh that my city, which is steeped in religion, with many people embracing the gifts of God without embracing God Himself - oh that we would see hearts truly transformed by them beholding the true beauty of God in giving the ultimate gift to us - Himself! God, grant us this sight that we so desperately need! Open my eyes to see you more clearly and enable me to rightly treasure you. Amen!

Quotes from "God is the Gospel" by John Piper - Part 3

2008-09-01T16:00:00.005-04:00

At a time when I was asking what the relationship was between the gospel (the central message of the Bible) and the other doctrines I also love, I read this:

"Gospel doctrine matters becasue the good news is so full and rich and wonderful that it must be opened like a treasure chest and all its treasures brought out for the enjoyment of the world. Doctrine is the description of these treasures.

... The gospel is not mainly about being explained. Explanation is necessary, but it is not primary.A love letter must be intelligible, but grammar nad logic are not the point. Love is the point. The gospel is good news. Doctrine serves that. It serves the one whose feet are bruised (and beautiful!) from walking to the unreached places with news: "Come, listen to the news of God! Listen to what God has done! Listen! Understand! Bow! Believe!"

- John Piper, God is the Gospel, Crossway, 2005; p.22

In the chapter titled "The Gospel - Proclamation and Explanation"

So, this explanation helps to reinforce a proper understanding of how we are to rightly interpret the Scripture. It is all about explaining the gospel. That is the true beauty of a teaching of the Scripture - it's explanation of the main message of the Bible. For instance, the beauty of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit is seen when that doctrine shows how the Holy Spirit and His gifts serve the make the gospel seen by God's children in conversion, sanctification, and glorification. The true beauty of our ecclesiology is seen when the church is the redeemed bride of Christ - redeemed by his blood, by the GOSPEL. The gospel truly does make every doctrine beautiful. But if we go off on tangents with our doctrine, removing the centrality of the gospel it is meant to explain, we cause that doctrine to lose its life-giving source.

Quotes from "God is the Gospel" by John Piper - Part 2

2008-08-15T21:41:00.003-04:00

The critical question for our generation—and for every generation—
is this: If you could have heaven, with no sickness, and with all the
friends you ever had on earth, and all the food you ever liked, and
all the leisure activities you ever enjoyed, and all the natural beauties
you ever saw, all the physical pleasures you ever tasted, and no
human conflict or any natural disasters, could you be satisfied with
heaven, if Christ were not there?

And the question for Christian leaders is: Do we preach and
teach and lead in such a way that people are prepared to hear that
question and answer with a resounding No?

- John Piper, God is the Gospel, Crossway, 2005; p.15

Quotes from "God is the Gospel" by John Piper - Part 1

2008-08-05T21:58:00.004-04:00

Have you ever had the experience where you thought you understood a thing until something happened that caused clarity to burst on the scene like never before? It's like you were sitting there trying to read by the dim light of the moon in the middle of the night and all of a sudden the sun is at full noon.

Well, that is the experience I've had with just about every John Piper book I've picked up, and God is the Gospel is no exception. I like the book so much, I'd like to post some quotes from it for your edification. The main thrust of the book will come out in the quotes, and the complete book is available to read for free online here and can be downloaded as a pdf. You can of course purchase a hardcopy there as well.

The gospel is the good news of our final and full enjoyment of the glory of God in the face of Christ. That this enjoyment had to be purchased for sinners at the cost of Christ’s life makes his glory shine all the more brightly. And that this enjoyment is a free and unmerited gift makes it shine more brightly still. But the price Jesus paid for the gift and the unmerited freedom of the gift are not the gift. The gift is Christ himself as the glorious image of God—seen and savored with everlasting joy. [John Piper, God is the Gospel, Crossway, 2005; p.14]

More to follow...

"Brands" of the Gospel?

2008-07-18T22:59:00.004-04:00

Oohh... for those with weak stomachs - BEWARE!

I read an article on Joel Osteen and how his prosperity message is fairing in an economic downturn. Surprising really.

So, here is a brief excerpt, the part you may not want to read...

"... there is no denying that his message, and his marketing of that message, is getting out to the world while so many other pastors are preaching to empty pews. Osteen dismisses the notion that he has watered down the Scriptures to win over worshippers. “It’s who we are,” he says. “The accessibility of my message doesn’t bother me a bit. Look, we deal with people who are fighting cancer, fighting to save their marriages, dealing with the death of loved ones. I don’t think they need to be beaten down. And I think the success of the message in the marketplace is because we are optimistic, encouraging.” Phil Cooke, a longtime colleague and the author of Branding Faith, says, “Oprah has a brand, Nike has a brand, and Joel Osteen has a brand. Joel has made his brand the inspiration brand.”

Pardon me, but since when did we get to own the gospel of Jesus Christ and profit from our "brand?" "But didn't Paul call it his own gospel" you say. Let's see it in context:

Romans 16:25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

2 Timothy 2:8 Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

So, in both occurances of "my gospel" (the closest thing I can find to a "brand" of the gospel), Paul mentions preaching. This is significant because what it shows us is that Paul is describing what he personally preached - the good news (gospel). Never is it used in such a way as to be distinct from other (true) gospels (as if there were any other gospel, Gal 1).

Further, Paul was in fact one of the first to carry the gospel message to the non-Jews. Ephesians 3 talks about how the good news was entrusted by God to Paul to take to the Gentiles - a fairly novel idea at the time. So in a sense, he did have something unique, but unique in who he delivered it to, not in content.

Galatians 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant [2] of Christ.

Why do some "Christians" feel the need to follow another gospel? Maybe they've never heard the true gospel - that Jesus emptied himself of all of His glory as God to take on humble human flesh, that He died a horrible death on the Cross to be a substitute in our place because of the idolatry we do, and that He is going to fully restore all things in this creation to a glorious state.

Or, maybe they just don't like that Gospel.

Your thoughts? Any Rev. Feel Good fans want to chime in?

Can the "End" Justify the "Means?"

2008-07-06T23:08:00.003-04:00

I've had this thought lingering in my head for probably a year now, so it's time to air it out.

If someone were to ask me to define "God," my answer might include this (among other things): "He is the only Being in all of what exists who justifies the means He uses by the end which He designs." In other words, it seems to me that God, in pursuing His own glory and in seeking to make His people happy in Him by making His glory known to them, can do anything He pleases to that end because He is the only wise and Sovereign. He had the Son murdered (God designed the means) and gets glory for it (the means serves the ultimate end). With respect to the cross, He is just (His end - His glorious character being known) and the justifier of the ungodly (the means for obtaining praise was the unthinkable - the ungodly treated by holy God as though godly).

This puts gladness in my heart toward Him! He is so far above me, yet so kind toward me. My means could never be justified by the end they serve - I think the reason for this lies in the fact that I do not know God's hidden will; I only know His revealed will.

How wonderful it is to rest in the arms of the One ruling over the universe, governing exactly what happens to me, suprised by nothing.

Patriotic Sundays

2008-07-06T22:51:00.002-04:00

Is there a place for the church to hold a "worship service" commemorating those who put their lives on the line for our national freedom? Is it appropriate to celebrate the blessings God has given us through this country as a part of the "worship service?"

Find out my brother's thoughts at Wipe the Sleep from My Eyes.

Gospel Parenting

2008-06-20T23:49:00.003-04:00

A conviction of mine is that I should not be raising my children to be the best little moralists they can be. I think we very well may be born with the tendancy to think that we earn the approval of those in authority over us (parents, God, etc.) by being "good." Further, I think this is at odds with the way we truly find favor with God according to the Bible.

My question is, "How do I raise my children so that their mind is not bent on being moral in order to earn my favor and God's favor, but they know of my favor and God's favor that is simply given to them? How do I help them have a gospel mindset? Can I help them base their behavior on the relationship God has granted (or hopefully will grant) to them rather than behave thinking they are earning a relationship with Him?"

I can do any number of things in order to reinforce the "religious" mindset that makes them little moralists trying to make me love them. For instance, I could act as if I didn't love them when they misbehave. I could let my 3 year old's responsibility chart get filled up without any comments and probing questions which make sure he knows this does not make me love him more but that I already love him really big.

So, the question I try to put before myself each day in parenting for the glory of God, in trying to raise gospel embracing children is, "What can I do to properly convey the good news of the grace of God to my children?" Here are a few things:

1. Embrace the gospel myself. I need to probe the depths of the gospel myself, each day, to fight my own religious tendencies (I mean those propensities I have to think of myself as meriting God's gifts or my faith).

2. Being sensitive to situations/circumstances that could lead my children to think they are earning love, and explaining why it is not so.

3. Intentionally reinforce the truth that God's love can never be any greater for us, and nothing we do can every make us purer and more loveable than what we have already through Jesus' righteousness given freely to us. I find that asking a question like, "Do you think I will love you more if you are obedient?" is a good way to find out what my children are thinking in a situation. I also try to pray with them when they sin, helping them ask God for forgiveness and thanking Him for it. This would be a good opportunity to ask, "do you think God stopped loving you when you sinned?"

4. Spurgeon urged parents to teach their children first to trust in God, and secondarily to love Him. The reason being that loving him carries with it the idea of "doing something" to earn God's love, whereas trusting God (having faith in God) makes Christ the center and Giver to the undeserving.

I'm no expert on parenting, but I find guidance in the Word. I don't think I've ever come to a parenting situation needing some help and found no answer when I ask, "Is there a parallel parenting situation between our Heavenly Father and his children in the Bible, and how does He handle the situation?"

What are your thoughts? Have you found other ways to parent by the gospel? Soon I hope to write some on missional parenting (parenting to give our children the mindset of a missionary).

An Objection to Exclusivity: Response Part 4

2008-05-24T23:32:00.001-04:00

Objection four was as follows...

"Could the people of God during the times recorded in the Old Testament (B.C) have even believed in Jesus? They could not even be saved if Jesus is the only way, but the New Testament itself says they are in heaven."

This is a good question also. After all, since Christians push so strongly that Jesus is the only way to be reconciled to God (i.e. to be saved from God's eternal wrath), why didn't he make himself known way before he did so that all the people before his time could believe in him?

Let's start the response by looking again at what the book of Hebrews has to say about this matter of faith.

Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation."

Romans 4:1 "What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.'”

Romans 4:20 [Still speaking of Abraham] "No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21 fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. 22 That is why his faith was 'counted to him as righteousness.' 23 But the words 'it was counted to him' were not written for his sake alone, 24 but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25 who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification."

Clearly, these Scriptures say that it is faith that enabled salvation for the people of the Old Testament, and Romans 4:3 makes it clear that the faith is in God. Further, Romans 4:20 makes it evident that Abraham's faith in God was in the promise of God - that God "was able to do what he had promised".

Now, we might ask, "What has God promised to us in these days since Jesus' incarnation?" Simply what has been revealed to us in Scripture, namely that He has promised forgiveness of sins to all who believe in the work Jesus did on the cross - that Jesus' death alone is the means of forgiveness.

But, apparently, God required faith during Old Testament times too, and the required faith was in the promises he had given. Did they say the name Jesus or an equivalent in another language? Not exactly, but we now know that Jesus and Yahweh (one of God's names throughout the Old Testament) are one and the same God, so technically they did have faith in Jesus, but without all the details of what would happen on the cross. As history continued, more and more began to be known about what the Christ would do, and thus mankind became more accountable for believing each revelation.

One other thing I feel is important to mention is that Jesus' death was absolutely necessary for the people of the Old Testament to be saved. I won't go too deep into this, but the Old Testament saints had to wait for Jesus' resurrection to be in the presence of God (Ephesians 4:8-11, Luke 23:39-43). Observe the following:

Hebrews 9:24 "For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

Hebrews 10:1 "For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. 2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? 3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins."

To sum up then, Jesus took away the possibility of condemnation from the faithful people in the Old Testament times - a condemnation they deserved as a result of their sin. By "faithful people" I mean those that believed the promises coming from the one true God, who we now know is Jesus himself. Some people who lived prior to Jesus indeed had faith in Jesus, but did not have the complete revelation as we now do. We are now responsible for believing very specific things about Jesus, his work on the cross, his subsequent resurrection, and his bodily ascension to the right hand of the God the Father.

An Objection to Exclusivity - Response Part 3

2008-04-02T02:58:00.000-04:00

Here again is the third of four parts to my friend's objection:

If we're ever going to move toward world peace, we have to quit this "my view is better than your view" stuff and realize we're all moving toward the same goal. In other words, exclusivity is out, and inclusivism is what we really need.

The overwhelming mood in our culture today when it comes to worldviews and morals seems to be one of pragmatism and relativism. By that I mean it is often said by those in step with the current philosophical mood that "what is true for you may not be true for me." Now, what my friend is saying is not that exactly, but it is related. I understand that the main emphasis in my friend's mind is probably that we would be better off without biggotry, condemnation of those who are of differing worldviews, etc., and I agree with him strongly on that.

However, I have come to realize that what is said by the in-vogue philosophers cannot hold its own water. If a person claims that anything is able to be true and untrue at the same time, they are not listening to themselves. Why? Because, their statement must include itself (is their sentence both true and untrue?). For example, if I say "there is nothing that is totally (absolutely) true," I am contradicting my own statement, for I am saying essentially "I (truly) know (absolutely) that there are no absolutes." See what I mean?

Now, that's the extreme relativism position. My friend however is not at that extreme, but is instead saying "one worldview is no better than another," or "one person's opinion of what is true is no better than anyone else's." In some circumstances that may be so, but not always. An opinion, or even an entire worldview, is simply an attempt at stating the truth. So, here's the obvious: If the person correctly states the truth, their opinion or worldview is correct (true); otherwise, the opinion is false. If one person's opinion is that an Aluminum Alloy has a higher ultimate strength than that of 4340 steel, another person of the opposite opinion can be shown to be right through simple tests. This is just one instance in which two opinions not always equally true.

So is the same true in "non-scientific" matters? Of course. Take for instance emotional states. If one person claims to have been emotionally wounded by a comment someone made to them, and the someone is totally unaware of the pain they caused, the pain is real, not true for one and not the other. Rather, one person is simply oblvious to the facts.

Therefore, one cannot simply say that all worldviews are equally valid because they are all just opinions of the truth at some level. Some opinions are true to the facts, others are not. Further, I would say that it is more reasonable to say that all the religions of the world (including those held by only one individual) have a better chance at being wrong than it is to say that all of them are equally true. Why? Because they contradict one another on the major points. Not on what is right and wrong morally so much as on the issues of "who is God and what is He like?" "who are we?" "why are we here?" "how do I obtain fellowship with God?"

Now the question is, "Do the claims of the Bible measure up with the facts?" If so, then it is true that Jesus is the God-man who has done everything man needs in order to have fellowship with God forever, and the only way man can obtain that fellowship is by accepting the free gift by simply believing (not blindly, but based on what they know) -- no work to be done, no morals to be followed, no penance to be paid, etc. If it doesn't measure up to the facts, then let's just call it a lie and find out what the truth really is - let's stop trying to make each other feel good about believing lies by saying "that's great for you, but it's not for me."

Truth really matters to world peace (and I'm not even going to talk about peace in the context of eternity). A religion that promotes forced conversions is not peaceful, but a God who teaches his followers by example to lay down his life for others is promoting peace. The God who utters no objection when He is being slaughtered by His own creation is exemplifying love and promoting peace. But, let's not take a naive approach to promoting peace and general welvare by ignoring whether or not what we promote is based on truth. If our goal is simply to get all the people of the world to the finish line well fed, clothed, with decent shelter (general welfare) and dieing of natural causes (peacfully), we are a pitiful creature. Where is the meaning in that life? I would say that is not peace, but some perversion of it and that it is instead nearly sinister. Thankfully, I think we are something far greater, and have a wonderful role to play in the universe.

An Objection to Exclusivity: Response Part 2

2008-03-26T02:41:00.000-04:00

I phrased the second part of my friend's objection to the exclusivity of Christ in this way: If God is Love as the Bible claims, how can he condemn anybody that did not have a snowball's chance in Hell to believe in Jesus?

Recall that he felt it was "ridiculous" that Christians would think that everyone besides Christians will have no righteousness on which to stand before God, and will thus be eternally separated from the all righteous God. So, this Part 2 was not something my friend said explicitly, but it is at least one of the arguments for "why might exclusivity be 'ridiculous?'" and/or "how can Christians be consistent in saying 'some people will be damned' while also saying God is love?'"

First, two fundamentals for understanding God's love:

I. God's love is by necessity first for Himself, and only when that is so can He truly have love for mankind. I won't go into this much now (unless someone asks me to), but simple reason will enable you to understand I believe. If God did not first and foremost love the greatest thing in all of existance, then He would not be doing things perfectly - and a being that does not do things perfectly is certainly not the true God. So, if God did not love Himself first and us secondly, but instead "loved" us in some other order, it would be a tainted and imperfect love, not the love of God. All this just to say that whatever we call love in this ponderance must be first loving toward God, then secondly loving toward people.

II. God is not love to the exclusion of or at the expense of His own holiness, righteousness, justice, or glory. Rather, He is truly love, truly holy, truly righteous, truly just, and truly glorious because He is all of these to the greatest degree all the time. So, it is not the love of God that would make all men clean of their sins without somehow executing the just penalty (on someone or something) for those sins as well.

Okay, that's the foundation. Now let's suppose that God let someone into heaven that had no faith in God for providing forgiveness for the debt owed by sinners for their sin. If that were to happen, wouldn't God be unholy and unrighteous for saying something different would happen to those people when He inspired the Bible? Wouldn't He be unjust in not getting recompense for the sin? Wouldn't His glory be immensly diminished for having become unjust, unholy, and unholy. In reality, His glory is great for having both protected His own justice (and righteousness, holiness) and provided for the justification (legal term meaning removal of guilt) of sinners. This means is Jesus Christ, for our righteousness can come through faith in Christ's atoning (cleansing) sacrifice.

Now one might ask, "Then does everyone get a chance to have this faith in Jesus? After all, doesn't everyone deserve a chance to hear the good news of Jesus being the way, the truth, and the life and thus avoid the awful eternity of Hell?" Well, regardless of whether we deserve it or not, Romans 1 and Psalm 19 show how it is that everyone does in fact get that chance. These verses say that all of nature around us proclaims the work and attributes of God, so that by them we can come to know Him. They further say that anyone who doesn't know the truth about God (as accords with the Bible) from the evidence in nature has only themself to blame, for it is because they suppress the truth in their unrighteousness that they do not understand.

I actually know a guy who came to know Christ because of the witness of nature, just like these verses say. His name is Dien Nygun, and he started his journey to faith in Christ while in Vietnam with no one first telling him of Christ. He saw nature and knew there was a god, began an earnest search for God, and his eyes were opened to see Jesus as the answer to the longings of his heart and mind.

Couldn't God just force the unbelievers to worship Him and thus keep them in Heaven? It would be unjust of God to force someone to worship Him if they did not want to.

Then couldn't God just teach everybody the truth in Heaven, bring them to faith there, and then not have to send anyone to Hell? Not if He is going to be righteous and tell us the truth in His inspired Bible, wherein He says that some people will be condemned.

Wouldn't a good (loving) God let good people into His presence, including those people who have faith in a different God, or those who have a different faith in the same God? Again, He has said in the Bible, which He inspired, that
1) no people are truly good enough by their own doings, but
2) there is one criterion on which to enter His Heaven - faith in Jesus - our trusting that Jesus' righteousness is credited to us by faith alone. Note that this makes all of the glory God's - for He provides free of charge the goodness by which He accepts people into His presence.

This has not been an exhaustive response and has been written in one sitting (though I've taken a month to write), but I think the foundation has been laid to provide the basis of an answer to most, if not all, of the arguments one might give appealing to God's love and grace. Let me know if I left any gaps.

As an aside, know that faith is not oppressive, but liberating! No longer does a follower of Jesus have to try his hardest to do right and therefore be acceptable. No, instead, one can come to terms with their shortcomings, realize they will never be good enough, and decide to trust that Jesus' goodness will be theirs if only they have faith. God then changes a person's desires so that they desire the things of God more and more, thus progressively becoming more and more like Jesus in the way they think, act, and feel. Gone are the days of "If I do this list of stuff, then God will accept me." In are the days of "Thank you God that you are not basing my acceptance on my merits or lack thereof, but on the merits of Jesus."

An Objection to Exclusivity: Response Part 1

2008-02-28T02:47:00.000-05:00

Here again is the first part of my friend's objection to the exclusivity of Jesus:

The Bible says that "without faith it is impossible to please God." Since non-Christians have faith (though in something different), they should not be excluded from heaven even according to the statements the Bible makes.

I think this is a good question that deserves an honest answer. So, here it goes...

I see a problem with saying "non-Christians have just as much faith in what they believe as the Christian does in what he believes." The problem I think is that it ignores the object of the faith and assumes that the mere possession of faith is all that is necessary to achieve the goal of faith.

First from a simple philosophical perspective, I think everyone would agree that the object of one's faith (or trust) is VERY important. Take for instance two people racing. One is a teenager who is so psyched up about his new Honda Civic that he thinks he's the hottest stuff on the road. The other is an experienced driver in a Lotus Exige S2. The teenager has never heard of a Lotus S2, nor does he care to find out about one. Both are convinced they will win the race, but everyone that cares to honestly compare the two cars should come to understand the Lotus is most likely to win. So, though the teenager had full faith in his car, he loses - the object of the faith matters.

Second, the Bible says that "if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." The meaning would be completely changed if in this sentence “Jesus” was replaced with “anything.” The point is that the Bible here and in many other places claims that the only saving faith is faith that trusts in Jesus Christ as the only means by which a person can be freed from the damnation he deserves because of his sin. So, the claims of the Bible are not that faith is the requirement, but rather that faith in Jesus is the requirement.

A second problem is also apparent to me, and carries what I've said a step further. Without a doubt, all of us respect sincerity, and with the low supply of it these days, we hate to see it not rewarded. So, when we come to the issue of religion, we tend to want to carry that sympathy with us. The religious person who comes to us without pretense or condemnation, expressing genuine concern for what we care about in this world, and being fully convinced of what he/she believes has much more sway with us than the average Joe. After all, that person would make a good neighbor. The problem with this is very similar to what I said above. Nothing I mentioned so far in what that religious person is bringing to us said they have brought us the truth! So, such a person can be ignoring something crucial to the foundations of what gives this life meaning – namely, truth. In other words, the worldview that fails to embrace the truth is incohesive to giving life meaning. See “Why I am a Follower of Jesus” for background on the tests for truth and components needed for meaning. We must bring truth along with sincerity if we are going to transform the world we are in and free mankind from that which binds us. Truth must be real, or we wouldn't be arguing about its existence. Life must have meaning, else my words would not and we are all just “empty bubbles floating on the sea of nothingness.”

So, in conclusion, the object of the faith matters, and that object must be consistent with the truth. I have found (by God's grace) the Bible's claims that Jesus is the proper object of that faith to be not only sincere, but also logically consistent, empirically adequate, and very relevant to my experience. And yes, it still requires faith, but so does any other worldview.

When Missional Dating and Family Traditions Cross with the Crises of this Life

2008-02-18T01:22:00.001-05:00

I know I have been slow in providing responses to the previous post I made, but know that it is because I am treating the objections to Christianity with seriousness and want to give them the attention they deserve - plus I've been busy.

But I can't wait to share this: God is doing some really neat stuff in our midst as we simply try to live out the gospel "as we go" (Matt 28:18). There are two ways that God has let us see His working this weekend.

1) Our family has a Saturday morning tradition of going to Waffle House to have breakfast. We have come to know all the employees there and love them, so it feels like home. In addition, we get to enjoy a delicious breakfast and establish some good traditions for the family. We have been praying for our waitresses for months now, usually asking them if we can pray about anything for them before we say our blessing. This not only brings the power of God into their lives when they may not seek it otherwise, but it gives us a point on which to connect with them the following week.

Well, here is the cool part: Saturday, the waitresses (even the ones that were not waiting on us that particular morning) came to us with prayer requests. We also talked about family issues we've been praying with them about for weeks. It was such a blessing to us to see this!

2) Sunday: What do you get when you have a great waitress that you have befriended over many visits, tornado warnings (for twisters in very close proximity to the resturant), and no power in the resturant? Well, my thinking was we had a good opportunity to talk about why we are at peace in the midst of the storm! So, while her other customers were walking out on her, we got a chance to share about the power of our Sovereign God who works all things for our good. Then we walked out too....... just kidding, we paid.

What a wonderful weekend, not to mention a great gathering with our church family this morning! Would it have happened if we didn't get out into the community, but rather waited on them to come to us first? Nope, not like this anyway! God is so gracious to use us.

An Objection to Exclusivity

2008-02-05T01:55:00.000-05:00

In a recent conversation with a co-worker, he brought up a common objection to Jesus' claims of being the ONLY way to eternal fellowship with God. He worded the objection something like this: For Christians to claim that believing in Jesus is the only way to go to heaven, and to say that even the little boy whose parents raised him Muslim or Hindu or whatever else, who has never heard of Jesus will spend forever in Hell is rediculous. After all, they have just as much faith as the Christian does and are just as convinced that what they believe is the truth.

I really like this guy that told me this, and I really appreciated him opening up to me with his objections to Jesus' claims of exclusivity. I consider it a great priviledge to have had him share his thoughts, and it has helped me to think through the issue again. I will try to give the most honest assessment of the objection that I can. Note that when I say Jesus claimed exclusivity, I mean that he claimed to be "the way, the truth, and the life" that all men must come to in order to be saved from the condemnation of God and allowed into eternal fellowship with the God who is Love.

So the objection has at least four parts, and I'll restate them:

1) The Bible says that "without faith it is impossible to please God." Since non-Christians have faith (though in something different), they should not be excluded from heaven even according to the statements the Bible makes.

2) If God is Love as the Bible claims, how can he condemn anybody that did not have a snowball's chance in Hell to believe in Jesus?

3) If we're ever going to move toward world peace, we have to quit this "my view is better than your view" stuff and realize we're all moving toward the same goal. In other words, exclusivity is out, and inclusivism is what we really need.

4) [Not stated, but related to my friend's objections] Could the people of God during the times recorded in the Old Testament (B.C) have even believed in Jesus? They could not even be saved if Jesus is the only way, but the New Testament itself says they are in heaven.

It will require quite a bit of space to respond well to these four parts of my friend's comment, so I will do it in subsequent posts. In the meantime, how would you address the issue? Do you struggle with some of the same things my friend dislikes about the claims of Christ? I for one have struggled with these things in the past, and the struggling has been fruitful.

Leaps of "faith" in science

2008-01-29T17:49:00.001-05:00

Stand to Reason has a blog entry worth reading. Here is an excerpt which is a quotation of Robert Jastrow speaking. He was an agnostic astronomer:

Theologians generally are delighted with the proof that the Universe had a beginning, but astronomers are curiously upset. Their reactions provide an interesting demonstration of the response of the scientific mind - supposedly a very objective mind - when evidence uncovered by science itself leads to a conflict with the articles of faith in our profession. It turns out that the scientist behaves the way the rest of us do when our beliefs are in conflict with the evidence. We become irritated, we pretend the conflict does not exist, or we paper it over with meaningless phrases.

There is a kind of religion in science...every effect must have its cause; there is no First Cause....This religious faith of the scientist is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces of circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized. As usual when faced with trauma, the mind reacts by ignoring the implications - in science this is know as "refusing to speculate" - or trivializing the origin of the world by calling it the Big Bang, as if the Universe were a firecracker.

For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

Science Isn't All There Ever Was

2008-01-23T15:50:00.002-05:00

What then was there before science, you ask? Prescience, or "foreknowledge." I came across this word for the first time in Martin Luther's "Bondage of the Will." Here's what the Bible says about God's foreknowledge in Romans 8:28-30 ....

"28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified."

Truly, there was (and is) prescience before mankind ever had the chance to embark upon science. How does that hit you? Can you handle the fact that God was knowing before there was even a material world (Eph. 1:4)? Can you handle the fact that science is not ultimate, even in the present? Rather, it is foreknowledge that is ultimate in the realm of knowledge - specifically, being foreknown by God. If He has given you faith to know He is real and to know He can take your sin away - you were and are and always will be foreknown by God's "prescience".

I'm Not Perfect - But I Will be Perfected!

2008-01-18T23:04:00.000-05:00

I will admit it freely, I'm not perfect. I know - tell me something I didn't know already. Well, maybe I will. Maybe you can relate to this too: I want to be a better person than I am right now. If you don't feel that, maybe you're not looking at yourself very honestly, and just go ask your spouse or co-workers if you could be any better.

This past week, our pastor taught on Philippians 1:3-11. It concerns the change that God brings about in our lives after we begin following Christ ("gospel transformation"). Verse 6 says this, "And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ." God is the one spoken of as beginning the good work, and the day of Christ Jesus is when Jesus will return to earth in all of His glory, and He will be the ruler of the earth. This verse promises that my Sovereign God, who breathed spiritual life into me and gave me faith (at the same instant by the way) will most certainly complete the work He has already begun in me. I, and all of God's beloved children, will be perfected.

One of the tough parts of gospel transformation for me has been the waiting. I mean, we have to wait for the completion of that transformation at "the day of Christ Jesus." I so wish sometimes that I could simply take off my old man like I take off my coat (Eph 4:22), and that I would then be done with it. In reality, my sinful nature has received the fatal blow through Jesus' crucifixion and my crucifixion with Him, but it will take the rest of my earthly life for my flesh to bleed out.

Reading earlier this week in Galatians I read, "For through the Spirit, by faith we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness." Eagerly is a good way to describe it - I want it somethin' serious! My hope as the beloved of Jesus, is to be in the presence of our great God and Savior, with my glorified/resurrected and sinless body. Ponder that - just try to imagine that - in HIS PRESENCE! I'm talking unhindered experience of HIS PRESENCE. What a day it will be! What joy there will be, what freedom (from sin, shame and guilty feelings, and freedom to worship recklessly) on that day and every one after it. No more hoping, or waiting, only experiencing and wondering at His infinite glory in ever increasing measure!

LORD, we look forward to your kingdom coming!

Why I am a Follower of Jesus

2008-01-10T22:17:00.000-05:00

I had a conversation with a co-worker yesterday in which he asserted that the main reason I am a Christian is that my parents raised me that way. So, I am asking myself, is that really so? If that is the ultimate reason I am a Christian, then can I really expect anyone to care about the message of the Gospel which I proclaim?

I have several things to say in response to my co-worker's statement.

1) I do think my parents played a role, even a significant one, in me becoming a Christian. They sowed seeds of the Word in me that the Spirit of God used to bring me to Himself, to bring to life my dead heart.

2) I do not think my parents' teaching me about the Bible and taking me to church was any more of a guarantee that I would continue in those ways than is it a guarantee that a person whose parents do not teach them those things will not want to follow Christ later in life.

3) The ultimate reason I am a Christian is the same that for why anyone is a true follower of Jesus; namely, because God loves me and has reconciled me to Himself through His Son Jesus. He opened my eyes to see Him as more beautiful than anything, more desirable than anything, and for the first time, I really wanted HIM. So, when God purposes to reconcile someone to Himself, He cannot be thwarted by anyone or anything, regardless of upbringing, environment, geography, etc. So, no one will be excluded because of what they have or have not been taught, nor because of where they were born and lived. Certainly there are some who have not and will not turn to Christ for their removal of guilt. But, God is Sovereign and brings all of His children to Himself. The preached word is often the means of that happening, and Christ is the only way for that to happen, but some report that God is even bringing people in hostile Islamic cultures to Himself through visions and dreams.

Now, even if I were to grant his assertion, it could not be true that the main reason I am STILL a Christian is because my parents taught me that way. Why you say? Well, I have a hunger for the truth, and have sought to see if the claims of the Bible and of Jesus can be sustained. What I have found is that they certainly can be - beyond any reasonable doubt. Further, I have talked with people of very different worldviews (atheist, universalists, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness), and have not found them to be sufficient in their claims to the truth nor in giving meaning to life.

Ravi Zacharias offers the following as tests for truth, and I have found these to be so helpful. I hope you will too. Any worldview must provide all three in order to be true:

1) Logical consistency - it must not be contradictory to itself. For example, it cannot claim to be all inclusive if it excludes those who are exclusivists.

2) Imperical adequacy - does the evidence support the claims?

3) Experiential relevance - truth maters. Would the claims matter?

Ravi also explains that for life to have meaning, we need
- Wonder
- Truth
- Love
- Security

These are what I find in being a follower of Jesus, and cannot find in other worldviews. They have not passed the tests for truth, and even if they can provide wonder and love, they still lack truth and security in giving meaning.

So, in short, this is why I am a follower of Jesus - purely God's grace - grace has given eyes to see, a mind to ask questions, and a heart to believe. Now how about you? Do you care about truth? Do you want your life to be meaningful? If so, here's a challenge for you, look at Jesus - he's not hiding anything. Ask questions to a Christian who's willing to spend the time with you that it will take to help you get some real answers. I'll even volunteer.

So, why a blog?

2008-01-06T14:36:00.000-05:00

Well, I need a place to begin - so I thought I'd state at least some of the reasons I am starting a blog.

1) I want a place to put down some of my thoughts on theology, apologetics, missional living, etc., and I want that place to be such that other folks can read the blog to critique my thinking as well as to possibly grow in their own thinking.

2) Blogging is a means of communication that my generation is excited about, and I am called to communicate to people the good news that God has done everything through Jesus that is necessary to take away our sin and shame - so it seems like a good match for getting the word out.

3) I tend to think better when I write as opposed to just talking and thinking off the cuff.

4) It would make me so happy to find out that someone has been blessed by the thinking and discussion that will take place here - so I'm doing it for my own joy too!

How often will I write? I guess we'll just have to see, but I hope to write a couple of times per week.