I read, recently, of a Church where the pastor and probably all of the 30 or 40 Staff Members have no Bible College or Seminary training. Where the leadership is learning as they go and where The Bible is viewed more as theory than settled truth.
Individuals are challenged to figure out for themselves what it means. Their worship is not focused on the sovereign, holy majesty of the ineffable God Who rules over the affairs of men, but rather the needs, attitudes and interests of those who attend.
It's man-centered and contemporary.
It's laid-back and "real."
It's populated by seekers, observers and hangers-on.
And the conservative messages presented are not propositional. They do not propose a response from the hearer. Rather they are offered as information, personal testimony and suggestions for serious thought. Folks are left to decide for themselves what these words mean "To Them."
The music is loud and emotionally intense. The environment more like a Night Club or Concert Hall than a Cathedral. And no one cares how anyone dresses or what they might believe.
Oh, and they have 5000 people gathering every Sunday to experience this form of church.
It's a sham and a hoax. But it satisfies the human heart's desire for worship. It's just not the Bible idea of Church. It's an expression of will-worship. And at least one person who attends regularly has said that should the pastor leave, the whole thing would collapse.
Of course, this is not the story of all churches. There are still groups of Christians who gather in the name of Jesus to humble themselves before God and worship in spirit [with their spirit, not with sensual expressions] and in truth [the way God prescribes, rather than their own ideas].
What of them? They are generally smaller, and getting even smaller, and they're membership is aging. The Youth-Culture is not interested in Bible Doctrine nor in submission to God. Maybe because their heart is far from Him.
I say that, not judgmentally, but because these free-wheeling, contemporary mega-churches are not known for preaching The Gospel of Repentance from sin and Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. And because the human heart, in it's natural condition, cannot understand spiritual things [I Cor. 2:14], nor are they interested [Rom. 3:11-12]
Friday, May 29, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
It's Starting To Make Sense
I learned a new word this week: panentheism. I may have seen it before and just thought it was misspelled. You see pantheism is the philosophy/ belief that God is all (or everything). Native religions tend to be pantheistic.
But panentheism is the belief that God is IN everything. The importance of this word is found in the Battle for Truth. You see, this pagan concept may be in your Church. It may also be that you espouse it, in your spiritual walk.
It is NOT a Bible idea. But it certainly explains why certain changes and doctrines are not only popular, but fiercely defended.
Panentheism says that nothing is so secular (absent of God) that it cannot be made sacred. Why? Because God is IN everything. He is in ungodly musical forms if we just add God-words. He is in unholy behaviors or environments if we simply sanctify them by our own motivations.
And He is in the worldly, secular, human worship forms, sanctified by he word "church" or "worship."
The list is not endless, for true believers. We have limits. But for others, it is.
Occultist and prophetess, Alice Bailey, writes: "The Christian Church in its many branches can serve as a St. John the Baptist, as a voice crying in the wilderness, and as a nucleus through which world illumination may be accomplished."
The blending of occultic ideas and methods with Chritianity (which has been part of mainstream church for 40 years) will provide the vehicle for spreading and instilling New Age consciousness.
Churches will still have Christian trappings, use the same vocabulary, but asked specific questions about traditional Christian doctrine, New Age answers would be given.
The Word-Faith Movement, Seeker-Sensitive Movement, Contemporary Worship Movement and the Emerging / Emergent Church Movements are the major players. But Christendom, at large, has been captured by this philosophy.
It satisfies the human heart that wants God, but on it's own terms.
But panentheism is the belief that God is IN everything. The importance of this word is found in the Battle for Truth. You see, this pagan concept may be in your Church. It may also be that you espouse it, in your spiritual walk.
It is NOT a Bible idea. But it certainly explains why certain changes and doctrines are not only popular, but fiercely defended.
Panentheism says that nothing is so secular (absent of God) that it cannot be made sacred. Why? Because God is IN everything. He is in ungodly musical forms if we just add God-words. He is in unholy behaviors or environments if we simply sanctify them by our own motivations.
And He is in the worldly, secular, human worship forms, sanctified by he word "church" or "worship."
The list is not endless, for true believers. We have limits. But for others, it is.
Occultist and prophetess, Alice Bailey, writes: "The Christian Church in its many branches can serve as a St. John the Baptist, as a voice crying in the wilderness, and as a nucleus through which world illumination may be accomplished."
The blending of occultic ideas and methods with Chritianity (which has been part of mainstream church for 40 years) will provide the vehicle for spreading and instilling New Age consciousness.
Churches will still have Christian trappings, use the same vocabulary, but asked specific questions about traditional Christian doctrine, New Age answers would be given.
The Word-Faith Movement, Seeker-Sensitive Movement, Contemporary Worship Movement and the Emerging / Emergent Church Movements are the major players. But Christendom, at large, has been captured by this philosophy.
It satisfies the human heart that wants God, but on it's own terms.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Law & Grace
Periodically, on the Bible Forum, we get calls and/or comments regarding the Christian's responsibility to obey The Law. Some insist we follow Law, others can't see how the Ten Commandments become unimportant just because we're Christians, while others want us to follow The Torah.
The issue is one of Law v. Grace. A subject clearly discussed and settled in the New Testament. As early as Acts 15, the young Church took up the issue: do Gentiles have to come under The Mosaic Law in order to be saved? The clear and resounding answer was NO!
They made the point that even Jews had been unable to keep the law and that under no circumstance was law going to make anyone righteous. Therefore, why bind Gentiles to something even Jews couldn't do?
Later, Paul made it clear that Christians live by a new law (governing principle): the law of the Spirit of life, which made us free from the law of sin and death. (Rom. 8:2-3) Because Jesus Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. (Rom. 10:4)
Salvation is NOT by The Law! But, what about the moral requirements? Can we simply ignore the Ten Commandments?
The answer is No. But what are the Ten Commandments? Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love God with all our heart -- this sums up the first 5 commandments. And that the second is like unto the first: to love others above ourselves -- this sums up the second 5 commandments.
Beyond that are a myriad of New Testament standards, Christians are to live by. None of which makes us righteous. Jesus simply said that if you love Me, you'd do the things He commanded.
The Law was given to Moses, to guide a rebellious and unregenerate people. When Jesus lived according to that Law, He fulfilled it's moral requirement. And when He died the sacrificial Lamb of God He fulfilled it's spiritual requirement. There's nothing left. The Law is fulfilled. It no longer serves any purpose.
According to the Book of Hebrews there is now a better priesthood and a better covenant (Heb. 7-10). The point is made that if the first could have done the job there would be no need for the second. But, since there is a second, the first has been done away with. Mosaic Law is for the Abrahamic Covenant. Christians are under The New Covenant, as will redeemed Israel, one day.
It is judaizers (those who mix law and grace) who constantly seek to drag Christians back under some form of law. And they were condemned in the New Testament in the strongest language.
Israel continues to live under some elements of the Law, however. Those portions that identify them as a peculiar nation of people. Feasts and celebrations of God's love and provision.
But for those who are declared righteous by God, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, there is only love for Him, which is illustrated by our obedience to the things He has commanded.
The issue is one of Law v. Grace. A subject clearly discussed and settled in the New Testament. As early as Acts 15, the young Church took up the issue: do Gentiles have to come under The Mosaic Law in order to be saved? The clear and resounding answer was NO!
They made the point that even Jews had been unable to keep the law and that under no circumstance was law going to make anyone righteous. Therefore, why bind Gentiles to something even Jews couldn't do?
Later, Paul made it clear that Christians live by a new law (governing principle): the law of the Spirit of life, which made us free from the law of sin and death. (Rom. 8:2-3) Because Jesus Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. (Rom. 10:4)
Salvation is NOT by The Law! But, what about the moral requirements? Can we simply ignore the Ten Commandments?
The answer is No. But what are the Ten Commandments? Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love God with all our heart -- this sums up the first 5 commandments. And that the second is like unto the first: to love others above ourselves -- this sums up the second 5 commandments.
Beyond that are a myriad of New Testament standards, Christians are to live by. None of which makes us righteous. Jesus simply said that if you love Me, you'd do the things He commanded.
The Law was given to Moses, to guide a rebellious and unregenerate people. When Jesus lived according to that Law, He fulfilled it's moral requirement. And when He died the sacrificial Lamb of God He fulfilled it's spiritual requirement. There's nothing left. The Law is fulfilled. It no longer serves any purpose.
According to the Book of Hebrews there is now a better priesthood and a better covenant (Heb. 7-10). The point is made that if the first could have done the job there would be no need for the second. But, since there is a second, the first has been done away with. Mosaic Law is for the Abrahamic Covenant. Christians are under The New Covenant, as will redeemed Israel, one day.
It is judaizers (those who mix law and grace) who constantly seek to drag Christians back under some form of law. And they were condemned in the New Testament in the strongest language.
Israel continues to live under some elements of the Law, however. Those portions that identify them as a peculiar nation of people. Feasts and celebrations of God's love and provision.
But for those who are declared righteous by God, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, there is only love for Him, which is illustrated by our obedience to the things He has commanded.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Dear Mr. Obama
Our president is going about the world making sure everyone knows that the United States is NOT a Christian nation.
And while that may be true today, in terms of our history it is a serious misstatement.
Those who discovered this continent and each group that emigrated to "The New World" came with a religious zeal. They came with the words of Jesus ringing in their ears, to evangelize the world. Others came from religious persecution or under Charters by kings and queens who also saw their Christian responsibility in propagating The Gospel.
From the Mayflower Compact to the early documents of these new civil societies, along with the personal writings of those who fashioned our government, the message is clear: These people saw themselves fulfilling God's purpose in establishing these colonies and this nation.
Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence and at least 21 signers were either committed Christians or Deists: men who believed in a Sovereign God Who ruled over the affairs of men. It was their faith in God and their understanding of His purposes that drove them.
Numerous others, who decorate our historical landscape, were men who believed in and relied upon The Christian's God. Men like Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, George Washington, John Jay (1st Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court), Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, James Monroe and many others.
Alphonse deLamartine, 19th century French literary figure and poet, bemoaning the French condition, wrote:
"Open the history of America, the history of England, and the history of France; read the great lives, the great deaths, the great martyrdoms, the great words at the hour when the ruling thought of life reveals itself in the last words of the dying; and compare.
“Washington and Franklin fought, spoke, suffered, always in the name of God, for whom they acted; and the Liberator of America died, confiding to God the liberty of the people and his own soul."
While great French figures speak only of glory and selfish accomplishments.
“The republic of these men without a God has quickly been stranded. The liberty won by so much heroism and so much genius has not found in France a conscience to shelter it, a God to avenge it, a people to defend it against that atheism which has been called glory. All ended in a soldier and some apostate republicans travestied into courtiers.
An atheistic republicanism cannot be heroic. When you terrify it, it bends; when you would buy it, it sells itself. It would be very foolish to immolate itself. Who would take any heed? The people ungrateful, and God non-existent! Away with atheistic revolutions!”
So, Mr. President, think about the history of this great country you represent to the world and try to forget your own bias. Just tell the truth as it is, not as you want it to be.
And take a lesson from history: The search for glory without God will end in despair and the destruction of liberty.
And while that may be true today, in terms of our history it is a serious misstatement.
Those who discovered this continent and each group that emigrated to "The New World" came with a religious zeal. They came with the words of Jesus ringing in their ears, to evangelize the world. Others came from religious persecution or under Charters by kings and queens who also saw their Christian responsibility in propagating The Gospel.
From the Mayflower Compact to the early documents of these new civil societies, along with the personal writings of those who fashioned our government, the message is clear: These people saw themselves fulfilling God's purpose in establishing these colonies and this nation.
Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence and at least 21 signers were either committed Christians or Deists: men who believed in a Sovereign God Who ruled over the affairs of men. It was their faith in God and their understanding of His purposes that drove them.
Numerous others, who decorate our historical landscape, were men who believed in and relied upon The Christian's God. Men like Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, George Washington, John Jay (1st Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court), Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, James Monroe and many others.
Alphonse deLamartine, 19th century French literary figure and poet, bemoaning the French condition, wrote:
"Open the history of America, the history of England, and the history of France; read the great lives, the great deaths, the great martyrdoms, the great words at the hour when the ruling thought of life reveals itself in the last words of the dying; and compare.
“Washington and Franklin fought, spoke, suffered, always in the name of God, for whom they acted; and the Liberator of America died, confiding to God the liberty of the people and his own soul."
While great French figures speak only of glory and selfish accomplishments.
“The republic of these men without a God has quickly been stranded. The liberty won by so much heroism and so much genius has not found in France a conscience to shelter it, a God to avenge it, a people to defend it against that atheism which has been called glory. All ended in a soldier and some apostate republicans travestied into courtiers.
An atheistic republicanism cannot be heroic. When you terrify it, it bends; when you would buy it, it sells itself. It would be very foolish to immolate itself. Who would take any heed? The people ungrateful, and God non-existent! Away with atheistic revolutions!”
So, Mr. President, think about the history of this great country you represent to the world and try to forget your own bias. Just tell the truth as it is, not as you want it to be.
And take a lesson from history: The search for glory without God will end in despair and the destruction of liberty.
Friday, May 1, 2009
NASA's Billion Dollar Gambit
It should be clear by now that the world is divided between those who believe in God and those who don't. It takes a number of forms, but the really big money is in the world of science.
The Issue? Evolution v. Design. Or, more specifically, how the universe began? Has it always been here? That's the Steady State Theory. Or did it have a beginning? That's the General Relativity Theory.
No reputable scientist believes The Steady State Theory any longer. Einstein and host of others have demonstrated, beyond doubt, that the universe had a beginning.
But how did it begin? The accepted answer these days is The Big Bang Theory. There is credible evidence, from a number of sources, that the universe is expanding from a theoretical beginning point. The heavenly bodies are not expanding to fill up the universe. Rather, the universe is expanding.
But every result requires a cause, according to science. If it's a natural cause, it needs a natural beginning. Some sort of natural material must be present BEFORE the Big Bang. Of course that means there is time and space BEFORE the beginning, which is not simply confusing but impossible.
If the cause is outside the natural, that's the definition of supernatural. And, of course, that's what the "Law of Causality" says:
Everything that had a beginning, had a cause
The universe had a beginning
Therefore the universe had a cause
Agnostic Astronomer, Robert Jastrow, in his book: The God of The Astronomer, wrote: "astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world."
In this battle, the stakes are high. The Bible's assertion of God as The First Cause cannot stand without destroying the materialist's entire world.
So, NASA is spending a billion taxpayer dollars to find anti-matter in space. They're sending up a rocket to pursue the theory that The Big Bang ocurred when matter and anti-matter collided.
Of course, like grabbing a tiger by the tail, NASA has not indicated what they will do with this anti-matter, should they find it. Putting it in a container would bring it in touch with matter and there would then be an explosion, destroying both.
But, regardless of the outcome, the question will remain: Where did the anti-matter come from?
Stay tuned.
The Issue? Evolution v. Design. Or, more specifically, how the universe began? Has it always been here? That's the Steady State Theory. Or did it have a beginning? That's the General Relativity Theory.
No reputable scientist believes The Steady State Theory any longer. Einstein and host of others have demonstrated, beyond doubt, that the universe had a beginning.
But how did it begin? The accepted answer these days is The Big Bang Theory. There is credible evidence, from a number of sources, that the universe is expanding from a theoretical beginning point. The heavenly bodies are not expanding to fill up the universe. Rather, the universe is expanding.
But every result requires a cause, according to science. If it's a natural cause, it needs a natural beginning. Some sort of natural material must be present BEFORE the Big Bang. Of course that means there is time and space BEFORE the beginning, which is not simply confusing but impossible.
If the cause is outside the natural, that's the definition of supernatural. And, of course, that's what the "Law of Causality" says:
Everything that had a beginning, had a cause
The universe had a beginning
Therefore the universe had a cause
Agnostic Astronomer, Robert Jastrow, in his book: The God of The Astronomer, wrote: "astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world."
In this battle, the stakes are high. The Bible's assertion of God as The First Cause cannot stand without destroying the materialist's entire world.
So, NASA is spending a billion taxpayer dollars to find anti-matter in space. They're sending up a rocket to pursue the theory that The Big Bang ocurred when matter and anti-matter collided.
Of course, like grabbing a tiger by the tail, NASA has not indicated what they will do with this anti-matter, should they find it. Putting it in a container would bring it in touch with matter and there would then be an explosion, destroying both.
But, regardless of the outcome, the question will remain: Where did the anti-matter come from?
Stay tuned.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Christian Patriotism
As we watch our beloved America being swallowed up by governmental totalitarianism and socialist philosophy, what, if anything, is a Christian to do?
Many Christian organizations have sought to force America back to her Christian roots through political activism. A New Breed is preaching a “Kingdom Now” philosophy which has The Church ushering in the Millennium through social activism.
Others are saying that The Bible teaches Christians are to stay out of politics on the basis that Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world and the fact that The Bible characterizes all countries, other than Israel, as “The Nations.” A group that will be judged during the Great Tribulation.
I believe the answer is rooted in the scriptures. Human government is ordained of God. Believers are commanded to “obey them that have the rule over us “ (Rom. 13). In most cases this has meant Kings and Dictators, who make the laws. In our case we are ruled by The Constitution. In America we have no King. No one is above the law.
When unjust men seek to subvert the Constitution, godly men have a responsibility to hold them accountable, by legal means. We would not hesitate to take a neighbor to court, should he erect a fence 20 feet inside our property line. Or continually violate the law in an effort to establish himself at our expense.
The argument that we are not of this world is offered by those who would defend their worldly rights by suing the uninsured motorist who recklessly destroyed their property and/or inflicted serious bodily harm and refused to make it right.
Christians have the right (responsibility) to defend against those who seek to undermine the law of the land....at least to a point.
We dare not violate God’s Word in a vigorous defense of liberty.
We dare not break the law to defend the law.
And we dare not let this earthly pursuit interfere with, or rob us of, heavenly pursuits.
In the end, should the laws change, we would be required to live in harmony with whatever they are, as long as they did not require us to violate God’s Word or our conscience. (Acts. 5:29)
Whatever we do and however far we go depends on the individual, the circumstances and sound reason. As important as this battle may be, it is not to be waged at the expense of our testimony or stability.
Many Christian organizations have sought to force America back to her Christian roots through political activism. A New Breed is preaching a “Kingdom Now” philosophy which has The Church ushering in the Millennium through social activism.
Others are saying that The Bible teaches Christians are to stay out of politics on the basis that Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world and the fact that The Bible characterizes all countries, other than Israel, as “The Nations.” A group that will be judged during the Great Tribulation.
I believe the answer is rooted in the scriptures. Human government is ordained of God. Believers are commanded to “obey them that have the rule over us “ (Rom. 13). In most cases this has meant Kings and Dictators, who make the laws. In our case we are ruled by The Constitution. In America we have no King. No one is above the law.
When unjust men seek to subvert the Constitution, godly men have a responsibility to hold them accountable, by legal means. We would not hesitate to take a neighbor to court, should he erect a fence 20 feet inside our property line. Or continually violate the law in an effort to establish himself at our expense.
The argument that we are not of this world is offered by those who would defend their worldly rights by suing the uninsured motorist who recklessly destroyed their property and/or inflicted serious bodily harm and refused to make it right.
Christians have the right (responsibility) to defend against those who seek to undermine the law of the land....at least to a point.
We dare not violate God’s Word in a vigorous defense of liberty.
We dare not break the law to defend the law.
And we dare not let this earthly pursuit interfere with, or rob us of, heavenly pursuits.
In the end, should the laws change, we would be required to live in harmony with whatever they are, as long as they did not require us to violate God’s Word or our conscience. (Acts. 5:29)
Whatever we do and however far we go depends on the individual, the circumstances and sound reason. As important as this battle may be, it is not to be waged at the expense of our testimony or stability.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Global Economics And End Times Prophecy
Revelation 17 is a picture of the political scene, at the end of the age. It is personified as a woman, sitting on a scarlet beast. This beast is the same "beast" of Revelation. 13.
This beast has the power of "the dragon." It has 7 heads and 10 horns. The 10 horns have 10 crowns (authority). One of his heads has a wound that is severe enough to cause death, but has been healed. The people "wonder after the beast."
Revelation 17 says the 10 horns are 10 kings which have no kingdom (now), but receive power as kings one hour with the beast (v. 12).
While the Revelation narrative is symbolic it is not allegorical. These are actual events, yet to be played out on the world stage. But what exactly are we looking at?
I believe this is describing an unholy alliance between a godless religious system (the woman), in league with a despotic, global, political system (the beast), intent on ruling the world in place of the promised Lord Jesus Christ.
In so doing, 10 kings come to power but without kingdoms. How is this possible?
Amsel Mayer Rothschild, a prominent 18th century banker is quoted as declaring, "Let me issue and control the money and I care not who makes the laws." [1838]
The recent G-20 meetings in Europe produced a plan to establish a Financial Stability Board. It's mission will be to regulate all international financial institutions, with authority to regulate all "systemic firms and compensation."
We are watching our President do exactly this, as General Motors was required to fire their CEO and as the president appointed his own man to fill that position.
It would not surprise me to see a Stability Board made up of 10 nations which have global authority, but no political power, only to receive that power in the End Times.
The world's economic power is already concentrated in Roman-style democracies with political leaders working every day to globalize the economy as well as civil laws.
When this happens, what will stop "The Dragon" from taking over? Our commerce is already monitored and controlled through computerized transfers.
What would it take to add a 3-digit prefix to our bank accounts and credit cards, in order to join this global economy?
This beast has the power of "the dragon." It has 7 heads and 10 horns. The 10 horns have 10 crowns (authority). One of his heads has a wound that is severe enough to cause death, but has been healed. The people "wonder after the beast."
Revelation 17 says the 10 horns are 10 kings which have no kingdom (now), but receive power as kings one hour with the beast (v. 12).
While the Revelation narrative is symbolic it is not allegorical. These are actual events, yet to be played out on the world stage. But what exactly are we looking at?
I believe this is describing an unholy alliance between a godless religious system (the woman), in league with a despotic, global, political system (the beast), intent on ruling the world in place of the promised Lord Jesus Christ.
In so doing, 10 kings come to power but without kingdoms. How is this possible?
Amsel Mayer Rothschild, a prominent 18th century banker is quoted as declaring, "Let me issue and control the money and I care not who makes the laws." [1838]
The recent G-20 meetings in Europe produced a plan to establish a Financial Stability Board. It's mission will be to regulate all international financial institutions, with authority to regulate all "systemic firms and compensation."
We are watching our President do exactly this, as General Motors was required to fire their CEO and as the president appointed his own man to fill that position.
It would not surprise me to see a Stability Board made up of 10 nations which have global authority, but no political power, only to receive that power in the End Times.
The world's economic power is already concentrated in Roman-style democracies with political leaders working every day to globalize the economy as well as civil laws.
When this happens, what will stop "The Dragon" from taking over? Our commerce is already monitored and controlled through computerized transfers.
What would it take to add a 3-digit prefix to our bank accounts and credit cards, in order to join this global economy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)