Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ. » Evangelism

Bisagno On Extending the Gospel Invitation

Mark — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:49:50 +0000

One of the books assigned to read for one of my classes is Pastor’s Handbook by John R. Bisagno which offers a lot of practical advice. The advice is mostly pragmatic seemingly from a consequentialist perspective. That is, Bisagno writes from experience with little Scriptural support for his advice. Bisagno’s advice is not intrinsically good or bad, right or wrong, but at times questions arise when experience seems to be his authority.

Bisagno offered an interesting perspective on extending the gospel invitation during corporate worship. I am not convinced the reasoning in the advice given about extending the invitation is logically consistent. What follows are some observations about Bisagno’s reasoning on the invitation.

While many forms of invitation may be extended, every sermon should be marked by an appeal to persuade the hearer to make a response to what he has just heard.¹

While I agree with sharing the gospel in the sermon, Bisagno assumes every sermon is preached to the unbeliever rather than the body of Christ gathered to worship. In 1 Corinthians 14:23, Paul indicates the church gathering and explains the proper use of speaking in tongues in case unbelievers come into the service indicating the worship service is primarily a time for believers.

The physical expression of that response is important. It might be filling out a card, raising a hand, moving to an inquiry room, coming forward, or some other means, but it is important that the hearers be afforded the opportunity to make a tangible expression of their response. Everyone our Lord called to follow Him, He called publicly. He called Zacchaeus to come down out of the tree; He called Matthew to get up from his revenue table; He called Peter and Andrew to leave their fishing boats. A physical expression of the intent of the heart was always called for.²

A reason is not given for why a physical response is important. For Baptists, the ultimate physical response will be seen in public baptism. It is true that Jesus called people publicly to follow Him, however, Jesus call was more in the form of the Great Commission, while He was going, rather than during a worship service. Also, Scripture does not give any indication that the physical responses to Jesus’ calling was necessary other than the responses being a consequence of their physical location at the time.

It’s not that He needs our public stand as much as we need it. And the world needs the testimony and encouragement of our public profession of faith. For that reason I am most comfortable with extending a public invitation that calls for respondents to come to the front of the church and stand before the pulpit, although there are other acceptable ways.³

A public testimony is certainly encouraging to the body. Is such a testimony equally encouraging to the world? I’m not so sure for the world often criticizes Christians for their testimony being the beginning and end of one’s expression of faith. The world often hears a testimony rather than the gospel. The world often hears a testimony rather than seeing a life changed from the gospel.

The reasoning gets more interesting as Bisagno continues.

The invitation of our Lord must never be extended in the flesh without the powerful touch of the Holy Spirit. It must never be manipulative, high pressure, overly extended, embarrassing, or confusing.⁴

Agreed! However, Bisagno gives some interesting instructions on how to carry out the invitation.

One of the most important ingredients in the public invitation is the manner in which it is begun. A smooth transition from sermon to invitation is best accomplished with the help of background music and prayer. I finished every sermon by asking the people to pray. Immediately the praise band, organ, choir, or ensemble began to play or sing. A soloist should never sing during the invitation. It draws attention from the pulpit, the focal point of the invitation.⁵

A smooth transition makes sense as that is simply part of good public communication even though the Holy Spirit can use any gospel presentation regardless of the smoothness of transitions. I’m not sure why the best transition involves background music as some might see that at manipulative. Since Bisagno used Jesus’ examples of using a public invitation should we assume that Jesus also used background music or something to set the mood? Obviously, I’m being rhetorical, but to warn against manipulation and point to the power of the Holy Spirit while purporting background music with careful instruction to not use a soloist certain seems inconsistent. Can the Holy Spirit not work in the gospel with a soloist or without background music? I believe both of those items are missing from the gospel presentations in Scripture.

We should be cautious at the extremes of both an invitation too long and one too short. Don’t be afraid to sing more than two or three verses. If God is moving, let it go on.⁶

What constitutes an invitation being too long or too short? How does one discern if God is moving or not? How long were Jesus’ calls to those that Bisagno mentioned earlier?

Conversely, don’t extend the invitation beyond the movement of the Spirit of God. Don’t preach during the invitation, and do little, if any, ongoing exhortation. Let the Holy Spirit do His job; you’ve already done yours. When you sense He is finished, close the invitation. Don’t underestimate the power of a militant invitation. Songs like “Stand Up for Jesus” or “Onward Christian Soldiers” can stir the heart to respond.⁷

Again, how does one know when the invitation time has been extended beyond the Holy Spirit’s movement? How does one sense God is finished? While Bisagno warns against exhortation, he does advise readers to use stirring music. Using stirring music may not be direct verbal exhortation, but it is a device to try to persuade people. It seems that using such music would be trying to help the “Holy Spirit do His job.”

The traditional “come forward” invitation is powerful. Who could ever forget seeing hundreds and thousands stream down the aisle in a Billy Graham crusade? I want to be clear that I think it is still the best way. There’s a certain power and inspiration, a sense that “I am doing the right thing,” as others come to Christ, that makes it more conducive to come forward. ⁸

It seems that the gospel should be lifted up as the main point of what is powerful in any invitation (Rom. 1:16). Bisagno previously mentioned letting the Holy Spirit do his job, but also speaks to the power of walking the aisle. The self-congratulation that “I am doing the right thing” is to focus on the wrong person. Regardless of whether or not anyone comes forward, faithfulness to the gospel message of the Jesus Christ should be the measure of whether or not the right thing was done.

As Baptists continue the plight to get back to the Bible, it is clear that in some Baptist circles tradition still rules. Of course, we all have traditions, yet the desire should be to hold those traditions and the reasons for them based on the word of God as best we can.

For what it’s worth…

Mark
__________________

Bisagno, John R. (2011-09-01). Pastor’s Handbook (p. 209). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid., 210. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid., 210. ↩
Ibid., 210. ↩
Ibid., 212. ↩

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2012. | Permalink | 7 comments | Add to
Post tags: altar call, Bisagno, pragmatism

Is Tim Tebow a Religious Hypocrite?

Mark — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:38:43 +0000

In his article, “Tim Tebow Trivializes Religion” Bill Press uses Jesus’ words in Matthew 6:5 to call Tim Tebow a hypocrite. ¹ In light of Press labeling Tebow a hypocrite he also wishes that Tebow would “STFU”.² Press, a Roman Catholic, attended a Catholic university and earned a degree in theology.³ The 71 year old Press, then, would be considered an older more learned man than Tebow who, it seems, should have some wisdom to share.

Did someone say hypocrisy?

In Matthew 5, Jesus did say:

“And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. (Matthew 6:5-6 ESV)

Press’ rhetoric is simply proof-texting. Several chapters later Jesus’ public prayer of thanks is recorded.

[Jesus] took the seven loaves and the fish, and chaving given thanks he broke them and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. (Matthew 15:36 ESV)

Press may want to reconsider his use of Scripture against Tebow. He may want to read Ephesians 5:4 for himself which is about foolish and filthy talk.

Press continues.

Broncos quarterback Tebow’s not only a Christian. He wants everybody to know he’s a Christian. He brags about it, constantly. He wears Bible verses on his face. He kneels in prayer after every touchdown. And he thanks his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for every win.

Is it wrong for Christians to want people to know they are Christians? Did the memo get misplaced? If anything, too many Christians may unintentionally (or intentionally) hide that they are Christians. Is Tebow really bragging about being a Christian or is he just truly thankful and unashamed?

Tebow wearing Bible verses on one’s face is too much for some. How about kneeling in prayer? Maybe that is too much too, but the type of actions Tebow is doing already existed within the NFL culture. Players do all kinds of things after a touchdown or a good play. Here in Atlanta the “Dirty Bird” dance started several years ago, but much is not made of these kinds of celebrations. Should Tebow not thank the Lord for victory? He also thanks his team. What will really be telling is Tebow’s public response after losing.

There’s only one thing wrong with that. By dragging God into every football game, Tebow makes a mockery of Christianity – and trivializes religion. The truth is, God doesn’t care who wins an election, a bingo game, or a football game. Sorry, Tebow, Jesus is not a Broncos fan.

Are there a parts of life into which Christians shouldn’t drag God? Are there parts of life from which Christians should exclude God? Scripture does tell us to do all things for God’s glory (1 Cor. 10:31) and to hold every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor. 10:5). By my estimation, Tebow is not trivializing religion or making a mockery out of Christianity, but upholding Christianity as the true religion that it is. God may not care who the particular winner of a game or an election is, but God does sovereignly work all things together for good for the believer (Rom. 8:28). We do not know God’s divine purposes in who ultimately wins or losses.

Now, if you’re one of the silly millions of Americans who loves Tebow’s in-your-face kind of Christianity, consider this. What if he were a devout Muslim, who bowed to Mecca after every touchdown and shouted “Allahu Akbar?”
Somehow, I don’t think we’d be celebrating him as a national hero.

How exactly is Tebow’s expression of Christianity anymore “in-your-face” than everything else that is celebrated about American celebrities? Ironically enough, Press is paid to talk, write and think (?) about various aspect of American culture yet does not realize that what Tebow is doing is very much a part of said culture. Americans have a plethora of celebrity gossip and other garbage with which to pollute their minds, so a few moments of Tebow’s display of faith isn’t going to hurt anything. His display of faith may be refreshing for some and may even have some positive effects.

And Mr. Press, if a devout Muslim shouted “Allahu Akbar” after every touchdown maybe that would allow us to have honest dialogue about Islam in this country. While such a celebration may not be to my liking I would not deny him the right to do so. My question to you is -

If a devout Muslim did shout “Allahu Akbar” after every touchdown would you write a similar article criticizing him?

I am not sure who is celebrating Tebow as a national hero since he gets plenty of criticism both about his faith and playing ability. There is something refreshing about Tebow’s public display of faith even if I, and others, don’t agree with all of his methods. ⁴

I’m not sure that Tebow’s talk about Jesus is the real problem for people like Press. Press’ own hypocrisy is not what clouds his view. The real problem may be just as Jesus Himself stated.

“and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.”(Matthew 10:22 ESV)

_______________________

Press, Bill. Tim Tebow Trivializes Religion ↩
Liberal Talker Bill Press To Tim Tebow: “S.T.F.U.”, That is “Shut the F-explictive Up” ↩
Wikipedia. Bill Press: Religion ↩
Ethics: Pastor Opposes Tim Tebow Preaching ↩

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | 17 comments | Add to
Post tags: Bill Press, NFL, Tim Tebow

Preaching On Sin and Responsibility

Mark — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 17:46:52 +0000

Sin and responsibility may not be the most comfortable topics about which to talk or preach. No one really wants to consider that they are responsible for something they did i.e. sin. It is much easier to blame sins on someone else as if they some how caused the sin and, therefore, avoid personal responsibility. It is much easier to compare one’s sin to another person’s much worse sin in order to minimize sin and personal responsibility.

Is taking personal responsibility of sin minimized because of the way sin is expressed at times from the pulpit? Is the sinner a victim of sin or a perpetrator? Is it all Satan’s fault?

When thinking about preaching on sin and responsibility one approach that seems popular today is that the sinner is the no-fault victim of their sin. The sermon isn’t usually worded in such a straight forward victim-hood manner, but an illustration is used in which the sinner plays the part of the victim.

For example, an illustration may be given where a person finds himself in a burning building with no way out. The person is afraid, helpless and trapped inside by no fault of their own. The message to the person in the pew is that they are a victim of this burning building. The building, of course, represents their sin. Jesus may then be rightly presented as the only Savior who can rescue them.

But what does this approach to sin express to the sinner about responsibility and repentance?

A better illustration of a person trapped inside a burning building would be that the person is a rebel sinner who started the fire. Scripture tells us, “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:23 ESV). The sinner is a rebel against God who commits and is responsible for their own sin which, without Jesus, earns him death.

The sinner is trapped in a burning building because that is where they want to be in an effort to get away from the authorities (who represent God). The sinner has, in essence, taken himself hostage with his own sin as he destroys the building with fire. And he loves it. Jesus arrives on the scene to rescue the rebel. Only Jesus, the living water, can put out the destructive flames of sin for all who turn/repent of their sin and trust in Him.

When thinking about sinners being guilty perpetrators of sin one’s understanding of the gospel and sinfulness before God is affected. There is also a clear measure of grace and humility that shines through in the gospel when it is presented to at-fault, guilty sinners. Trusting the gospel’s power in evangelism to convert the rebel sinner is also encouraged when it is understood that the sinner is not a victim for the sinner does not save himself.

As for Satan, he is not a cuddly baby in a costume luring innocent victims to rebel against God and people should not walk away believing they are such victims.

Thoughts?

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | 5 comments | Add to
Post tags: punishment, responsibility, sin, victim

The Gospel in the Liquor Store

Mark — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 19:15:42 +0000

The following true story is about a seminary student sharing the gospel in a liquor store. The student is an acquaintance and the story is shared with permission. This is all that will be revealed of this student.

One of the most divisive disagreements among conservative Christians is the subject of Christians drinking alcohol. Tim Challies highlighted and commented on some of the recent disagreements about Christians and alcohol.¹ Challies provides a big picture view of the subject with a caution to younger Christians to use their freedom wisely when it comes to alcohol.

I pray the following story is received as portraying the wise use of circumstances involving a Christian buying alcohol.

The Gospel in the Liquor Store

The seminary semester was starting soon and one student knew they would have to sign an agreement they he would not drink alcohol while enrolled as a student. Being a good Baptist he did not want to violate a signed promise. He is also believes that Christians have the biblical freedom to drink alcohol in moderation. Nevertheless, he knew he may not be able to enjoy a glass of beer for another year or so depending on his seminary circumstances.

The student decided he would stop at a liquor store on the way home and buy two beers until who knows when. Upon entering the store he asked an employee if they sold a certain brand of beer. The store carried the brand so the student grabbed two of bottles. The employee, busy stocking the shelves, was standing close by and asked the student about the beer he just picked up because he had never heard of it. The employee was a man in his mid-50′s.

The conversation lasted about 20 minutes and gist of it went something like this…

Employee: I’ve never tried that kind of beer before. Does it make you feel really good?

Student: Well, I don’ t drink for that feeling. I enjoy the taste and getting drunk is something from my past life.

Employee: So do you just get a nice buzz then?

Student: Well, I don’t do that either. Believe it or not, I’m actually a seminary student. I’m a Christian now and those things you asked about are in my past now.

Employee: So, you used to get drunk, but you don’t anymore? Do you miss it?

Student: I don’t miss it at all. The good news of Jesus has actually set me free from even desiring to get drunk or get a buzz. Do you know what the good news is?

Employee: Yeah, I was raised Catholic. I know all of that stuff.

Student: Do you consider yourself to be Catholic now?

Employee: Nah, Catholics have all of those rules and stuff to follow. I can’t keep up with them all and that’s not what makes you right with God.

Student: So where are you now with God? What is your relationship with God today?

Employee: Oh, I believe the Jesus Christ alone is the only way to heaven. He is the one and only Savior. Nothing I can do can save me. It’s all Him.

Student: Man, that’s great! So you believe the Jesus died on the cross for sinners and rose on the third day so everyone who believes this has their sins forgiven and has a right relationship with God? You believe that Jesus righteousness becomes ours through faith and that our good works contribute nothing in the way gaining acceptance into God’s Kingdom?

Employee: I believe that.

Student: I believe that too and it’s had a transforming affect on my life. As the Bible says, I am a new creature in Christ which is why I’m free from drinking beer in order to get drunk. I may not be able to have another beer for a year or so.

Employee: Wow! Really? Why not?

Student: Well, I’m Baptist. (smile) And I’m about to start seminary and the school has every student sign an agreement that they will not drink alcohol while attending.

Employee: That’s crazy. Drinking is not a sin.

Student: I know, I know, but that’s their rules. The good thing is that alcohol is not an important part of my life. Like I said, the gospel changed me and my desires. Just like I don’t need to eat quarter pound cheeseburgers, I don’t need to drink beer either. But I’m free to do both.

Employee: I hear you. I think it might be hard not to have just one beer for over a year.

Student: Since you said you believe the good news of Jesus let me ask you something. What does your life look like in light of believing in Jesus?

Employee: (Somewhat ashamed) It doesn’t really look all that good.

Student: Would you like it to be better? Do you have any Christian friends or a church that you could attend?

Employee: Nah, I don’t have anything like that.

Student: Would you agree that having those kinds of Christian relationships are important? Christians are supposed to be there for each other and encourage one another in our walk with the Lord. What do you think?

Employee: I agree. I know you’re right. I need to find a church to go to.

Student: Well, I’m part of XYZ Baptist church just a few miles down the road. You’re always welcomed to join us and I will certainly look for you so you won’t feel like a stranger.

Employee: You know. I’m getting the chills right now from this whole conversation.

Student: Why is that?

Employee: I’ve been thinking about God and my life lately. You just show up here and we talk about all of this stuff.

Student: Providential, huh?

Employee: Yep! I know it’s God working.

Student: Yeah?

Employee: Yep. I’ve always believed that God is in control of everything. My Baptist grandparents always taught me that God is in control of everything so I trust God and just go on and not worry. When I was serving in the military I trusted God through some hard times. I just prayed and gave it to him and didn’t worry.

Student: Awesome! So if you trust that God brought us together will you trust that He is also the one inviting you to church?

Employee: Yeah, I’m going to make it over there to see you all. I’m telling you, this whole thing is giving me chills.

Student: I’ll be praying for you and looking for you then. If I don’t see you I may come back and check on you, okay?

Employee: Yeah, that’s fine. Nice meeting you. Take care.

Student: You, too. See you soon. God bless.

My acquaintance had an insightful thought as he drove home from the liquor store. He wondered who would share the gospel with this employee, and those like him, if so many Christians dogmatically and unbiblically shun alcohol as if the substance itself along with drinking it is inherently sinful. I agree. Abusing alcohol is a sin problem, not an alcohol problem, just as with any other thing that is sinfully abused.
_________________________

Challies, Tim. Christians and Alcohol ↩

What Would You Ask TD Jakes at Elephant Room 2?

Mark — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 15:35:18 +0000

The announcement T.D. Jakes participation at Elephant Room 2 (ER2) has generated much digital ink in the last week. I’ve shared some of the trouble I have with Jakes participation.¹ Other Christians have provided more thorough responses than I explaining their concern over James MacDonald inviting T.D. Jakes.² Note that no one is disputing that MacDonald can host whoever he wants at ER2 even while disagreeing with him.

It is, however, too soon to know for sure whether or not ER2 will take place as scheduled. Anything can happen, right? Outside of Jakes withdrawing or having his invitation withdrawn the event will most likely happen though. I wonder if someone like Mark Dever were to withdraw if that would shake things up? Personally, I lean toward Dever withdrawing, but I would also love for Dever to ask pointed, biblical questions of Jakes about the Trinity. This brings me to the question at hand.

What would you ask T.D. Jakes at Elephant Room 2?

While I think the most loving thing to do would be to not have Jakes participate in ER2 maybe some of us on this side of the issue can offer some constructive questions. Contrary to possible opinion, I don’t dislike T.D. Jakes, but I do care about him enough to want him to embrace the second Person of the Trinity, the true Jesus of the Bible.

As I see it, pointed doctrinal questions may ultimately have three effects on Mr. Jakes.

He continues his unclear, uncommitted position on the Trinity.
He clearly shows that he does not embrace the Trinity.
He repents of Modalism and embraces the true biblical God as He has revealed Himself inthe Trinity.

Maybe pointed doctrinal questions can help minimize any negative impact on the Body of Christ, and those outside of the Body, that Jakes appearance might have. Of course, there is no guarantee that any suggested questions would be used by MacDonald, Driscoll or the other participants, but it may give them and the potential ER2 viewers a few things to think about.

In no particular order, here are a few suggestions to which I hope some readers will add their own questions.

What is the gospel?
What is justification?
What is sanctification?
Do you believe in the doctrine of the Trinity summarized as: (1) There is only one God. (2) The Father is God. (3) The Son is God. (4) The Holy Spirit is God. (5) The Father is not the Son. (6) The Son is the not the Holy Spirit?³
Why does the Potter’s House belief statement state that God exists in three manifestations?
In a 2010 interview you stated that you “adamantly” defended Oneness doctrine as a teenager, so should it be understood that you clearly understand the doctrinal differences between Oneness and Trinitarian beliefs?
Why have you seemingly been so unwilling to answer directly about your beliefs on the Trinity in the past?
How important is one’s understanding of the Godhead as it relates to Scripture and the gospel?
Given the significant theological differences, why do you consider both Oneness and Trinitarian doctrine as valid Christian beliefs?
You stated that your views of the Godhead are evolving, would it be prudent to think that one who holds the title “Bishop” should have a more solid position on the Trinity?
Why have you continued to use the title “Bishop” since your views of the Godhead are evolving and the title was given to you by a Oneness group?
You have stated that you don’t want to attack doctrine. Would you consider Paul publicly correcting Peter’s doctrine in the book of Galatians to be an attack?
You have stated that you don’t want to attack doctrine. But aren’t pastors, bishops and elders charged with teaching sound doctrine while rebuking and correcting false doctrine and teachers?
Is the doctrine of the Trinity any more or less important today than it was in the early church?
Do you believe the Jesus was materially wealthy while He walked the earth?

What would you ask T.D. Jakes?

__________________

TD Jakes: Association Lacking Discernment? ↩
A few examples: Carl Trueman’s first, second & third, Thabiti Anyabwile, Nathan Busenitz, Justin Taylor, Tim Challes and Phil Johnson. ↩
As Kevin DeYoung stated in The Doctrine of the Trinity: No Christianity Without It ↩

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | 14 comments | Add to
Post tags: Elephant Room, James MacDonald, Mark Driscoll, TD Jakes, Trinity

Servant Evangelism: Gimmick or Grace?

Mark — Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:29:52 +0000

Steve Sjogren is know for what is called Servant Evangelism which, as I understand it, is a way of doing outreach through acts of kindness in hopes of sharing the gospel. At SermonCentral.com Sjogren has an article titled 94 Servant Evangelism Ideas for Your Church. The ideas he lists are certain good, kind things to do for your neighbors. How should we think about such acts in light of evangelism?

When this topic comes up it reminds me of something I call Amway Evangelism. This involves churches hosting events to draw non-Christians and then at some point unexpectedly springing the gospel on them. I use Amway to describe this approach because in the past Amway reps would try to get people to come to business meetings without revealing they were with Amway until somewhere near the end of the meeting. As I’ve thought about this approach to evangelism I’m not sure whether or not Servant Evangelism may be labeled Amway Evangelism.

The beginning of Sjogren’s article is quoted below. I’m curious to hear from people who have used this type of outreach (and, or course, those who haven’t).

Servant Evangelism (SE) connects people to people in a natural, easy, low-risk, high grace way.
Who doesn’t like to be given a cold soda on a hot day? Especially by someone who is smiling, happy, and having fun. SE wins the heart before it confronts the mind. A small act of kindness nudges a person closer to God, often in a profound way, as it bypasses one’s mental defenses. The average Christ-follower is willing to hand a stranger a can of soda (low-risk). The high grace is seen in the typical reaction. “Oh, thank you!” “This is so nice!” “I can’t believe this is for free!” And, “Why are you doing this?”
Kindness builds the bridge for the person to receive a touch of love from God. Add an invitation to church or other method of connection—even a simple card with your church’s name, phone number, and times of services—and you’ve reached someone with the love of Christ! (Click here to read the full article and ideas.)

Does this approach come across as a gimmick? Or is this approach a good one for hopefully sharing the gospel? Is Sjogren correct that such acts nudge “a person closer to God”? Though the most important question is – Is this approach biblical?

Thoughts?

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | 12 comments | Add to
Post tags: servant evangelism

Anders Breivik Needs to be Crucified

Mark — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:36:19 +0000

After Anders Breivik went on a killing spree various media sources identified him as a fundamentalist Christian. Many Christians rejected that claim, not only because of his actions, but because of the words he wrote in his manifesto.

I even quoted Breivik’s manifesto in Was Anders Breivik a Christian? to refute the claim that he was any kind of Christian.

Defending the name of Christ in light of those claiming Breivik was a believer was the right thing to do. Yet, in defending Christ many of us missed an opportunity in the moment. Of course, Breivik is still being talked about and he is still alive so there is still time. There is still time to explain what needs to happen to Breivik.

There is time to explain that Anders Breivik needs to be crucified.

I would not expect secular media sources to call for Breivik’s crucifixion. They were the ones trying to tie him to Christianity. It may sound odd for a Christian to say Breivik needs to be crucified, but in light of his violence it seems appropriate. Christianity faced violence very early in its history. An early Christian named Stephen, who many consider one of the first deacons of the church, was stoned to death (Acts 7:59) while speaking of Jesus.

As sad as it was that Stephen was stoned to death there is something fascinating about the account. Present at the stoning was a young man named Saul who approved of Stephen’s execution (Acts 8:1) while he guarded the clothes of those doing the stoning (Acts 22:20). Saul, despite being guilty of killing Christians (Acts 22:4), would later become known as the Apostle Paul who wrote most the the New Testament.

It is the Apostle Paul who will explain what it would mean for Anders Breivik to be crucified.

We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. (Romans 6:6 ESV)

Elsewhere, Paul explains the effects of being crucified with Christ.

I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20 ESV)

My plea is that Anders Breivik needs to be crucified with Christ. That is, he needs to repent of his sins and believe the gospel that Jesus Christ died on the cross taking the punishment for his sins, rising from death unto life on the third day defeating death. Despite Brievik’s murderous actions he can still be forgiven by God. This does not alleviate any punishment for what he did, but he can be made right eternally with God through Jesus Christ.

The message that there is still forgiveness for Brievik is what those in the media using him to sully Christianity need to hear. The very religion blamed for Breivik’s actions is the only one that offers a solution for his actions. It is the only religion to offer peace between Breivik and those Muslims he hates to much.

So the best defense against Breivik being a Christian may ultimately be the offense of explaining that forgiveness is still available to him, and anyone, through the gospel.

For what it’s worth…

Mark

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | No comment | Add to
Post tags: Anders Behring Breivik, Anders Breivik

IMB Missionary Interview for LovingMuslims.com

Mark — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 14:17:55 +0000

The International Mission Board (IMB) of the Southern Baptist Convention recently launched a website to encourage Christians reach out to their Muslim neighbors. The website is LovingMuslims.com and the timing of the launch was no mistake as the 10 year anniversary of 9/11 approaches.

I had the privilege to send a few question to the person behind the vision for the website. That person is, Lil Brooks, the IMB Project Coordinator for Loving Muslims. Lil Brooks may be reached via the email linked here. I pray the interview is helpful and the website useful to help Christians reach their Muslim neighbors with the gospel.

Q: How much prayer and effort went into creating LovingMuslims.com?

This is an interesting question to me because one of the things God has been teaching me in the past eighteen months is how to labor through prayer. Wanting to create something that would touch this very sensitive topic felt overwhelming. So, from the very beginning, prayer was crucial and it remains so as the whole thing is now available for people to see. We are praying for fruit; that God would use this project to help Christians understand their role of loving and telling their Muslim neighbors the Good News of Jesus Christ.

I fear that speaking of the effort required to accomplish this project would probably overlook important contributions. There were a number of people involved, including writers, videographers, designers, programmers, producers, and executives. Of course there were also those who were gracious enough to let us put them on “that side” of the camera, especially Mr. Buti (the Muslim friend), our Christian friends from Muslim backgrounds, and the church in Texas.

The team worked really hard and, interestingly enough, never together in the same office. We are all spread across the globe in at least four different countries (and time zones!). The new Global Communications Team within IMB Church and Partners Services (new since the reorganization) really did work as a Global Communications Team embodying the Global, the Communications, and the Team parts very well.

Q: What was the primary motivation for putting the website together?

This project started as what we call an Advocacy Project from the Central Asia Communications Team. We wanted to somehow speak into the Tenth Anniversary of the September 11 attacks. God has moved us all to Central Asia to share the Gospel with those people who are Muslims, and we wanted to help the church in America learn to the love the people we have learned to love because God is worthy to be praised from every tongue — even English-speaking Muslims in the United States.

Q: Would you mind sharing anything you learned about Muslims and evangelism while putting the website together?

Well, the many things I’ve learned about Muslims and evangelism are really fruit from the eight years I’ve worked overseas with the IMB rather than stemming from this particular project. I did, however, learn a lot about communicating this particular message to the American church! There was a lot of prayer and conversations concerning how exactly we should say this. For many of us, after living overseas for various amounts of time, we realize that we kind of feel out of touch with what happens in America (both in the culture and in the church). So, we wanted to lovingly come to our brothers and sisters and say,“this might be something you want to consider in light of the Tenth Anniversary of September 11, the growing number of Muslims in the U.S., and the duty of Christians to share the Good News.”

But, I will say, what I have learned about Muslims and evangelism has been pretty simple, actually. The same Gospel that has the power to save a kid growing up in Southern Baptist churches in America is the same Gospel that has the power to save a Muslim kid growing up in Afghanistan. What is that Gospel? It is just this – God our Creator is unfathomably holy and righteous. When He created Adam and Eve and they sinned against Him, we inherited that sin. Not only did we inherit sin, we’re pretty good at it ourselves. God sent Christ to bear the punishment for man’s sin and die a sacrificial death so that we could be reconciled to God. Those who turn from their sins and turn toward God in faith in Christ’s righteousness in place of their own are promised eternal life and forever joy in the presence of God. Those who do not turn from their sins and believe in Christ, whether they have clearly heard the Gospel or not, will suffer the full penalty for their sins in eternal punishment.

This is the thing that needs to be articulated when sharing the Gospel with Muslims. Just like you and I were before the Spirit gave us understanding, so also do they take sin incredibly lightly and do not consider their sins worthy of death. The Bible is very clear on this and, thankfully, it’s also very clear on how we can be righteous in God’s eyes through Christ. They need to know who Jesus really is.

Q: What do you ultimately hope to accomplish with the website?

Ultimately, wow, ultimately we hope that Christians will understand that the biggest need Muslims have is to be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ and that it is their call to share this with their Muslim neighbors. We want to see Christians recognize Muslims as their neighbors and to put aside any fears of misunderstandings for the sake of loving these neighbors through deed and through word—caring for them as friends and neighbors and, all along the way, sharing the Gospel with them. Through these actions, our prayer is for fruit: Muslims submitting themselves to the Lord Jesus Christ, repenting of their sins and believing on Him for salvation. We don’t want to merely accomplish a dialogue or friendship. We don’t want lost people, in this case Muslims, to simply have good friendships with Christians but not know the Gospel.

Q: How do you think Christians and churches may best utilize the material on the website?

The website is designed to point churches (leaders and members) to a small group study guide and an 8-day devotional guide which are designed to help Christians analyze their hearts on this subject. The devotional guide encourages the reader to consider God’s generous hospitality toward us in Christ Jesus and to consider ways to extend hospitality to a Muslim neighbor. Included are cultural tips and information to help the reader understand a little more about Islam.

As I said, the website points users to these resources (available for immediate PDF download or ordering from the IMB Resource Center). But that’s not all the website does. On the website are stories of Muslim Background Believers and how they came to Christ, the story of a church who has begun to recognize the Muslims in its community, and many other stories. All of these stories, including promotional trailers for the 9-11 theme and the Loving Muslims site, are available on the website.

This year, the anniversary of 9/11 just “so happens” to be on a Sunday so, there are resources for pastors to consider for their Sunday gatherings. We are hoping that churches will engage in the Small Group study on the 4th and 11th of September and that members will use the Prayer Guide in their daily personal devotions from the 4th to the 11th. However, the resources are not “date-stamped” for these Sundays only and could be used at any time.

Another way churches and individuals can help is by connecting on Facebook by liking “LovingMuslims.com” and by following us on Twitter @Loving_Muslims.

Q: Is there any type of support available for outreach, teaching, etc. outside of the online materials?

As for support, I think we’d hope that the local church becomes the main support as she understands God’s Word, applies it, and with the help of the Holy Spirit, reaches out to Muslims. Of course, we understand that there’s a learning curve to reaching out to Muslims. The best resource for learning how to reach out to Muslims is your Bible and your Muslim friend. Your Bible will be the source of truth that you need to keep coming back to—you’ve got to know your Bible. But not just for the sake of sharing it with Muslims. A humble view on the gift you received in the Gospel should accompany any friendships a Christian has. Your Muslim neighbor will help you to navigate weird cultural things so long as you are willing to learn. So, actually, the biggest tool anyone can have in ministering to Muslims is humility which is confidently rooted in the Gospel and willing to learn another culture.

And, of course, there are other resources available and we have a list of recommended materials on our website. Also, if your church is interested in learning more about partnering with IMB to reach an unreached, unengaged people group (most of whom are Muslim people groups), you can find out more at IMB Connecting.

Q: What is the relationship between loving Muslims and using apologetics?

This is an interesting subject. I’ve been looking into this as a way to better sharpen my personal sharing with Muslims. There are some good resources available (again, refer to the Additional Resources page of the Loving Muslims site). What is more important than learning a method for “witnessing to the Muslim people” is the very real need for the Christian to love and exalt Christ as the center of the Christian faith. It is so easy to accidentally exalt other things: worship styles, material stuff, outreach ministries, buildings, and pastors with great personalities and straight teeth. Christians needs to become self-aware of the way their culture and their faith interact. Look for ways to exalt Jesus in your community (at church, with those whom you ONLY have Christ in common), your speech (not backing down from truths Muslims find problematic and commending only Christ as the basis and glorious reward of Salvation), and your actions (opening your home and your life to your neighbors).

There’s a story on the website about a girl who comes to America to get her MBA and ends up living with a Christian family. The wife of the family didn’t have any higher education. What stood out to Merve¹ was this woman’s walk with God. This woman was bold in her conversations with Merve and did not avoid the topic of Jesus even from day one.

What most Muslims need to hear is the truth about Jesus. Most Muslims don’t need a doctoral thesis on penal substitutionary atonement. They do, however, need to know that Jesus Christ was punished by God, taking the guilt for their sins so that they could live forever with Him and glorify Him as the Savior, and that they have received from God the merit of Christ on their behalf (aka, penal substitutionary atonement in a nutshell). To roughly quote John Piper here, “You don’t have to know a lot to change the world. You just have to know One Thing and be consumed by it.” Christians don’t have to have all of their doctrinal ducks in a row to reach Muslims. They just have to know Jesus and be consumed by Him and be able to communicate the Gospel clearly and repeatedly. Take heart in God’s promises to draw up a people for Himself from every tribe, tongue, people, and language (Rev 7:9). He is faithful and He will do it.

Q: How can the readers be praying for Muslims and this ministry going forward?

Readers can use the Small Group guide as a resource to begin to pray. From there, they can utilize tools like the Central Asian Peoples Prayer Guide or other resources. The 30-days prayer emails during the month of Ramadan are also helpful.

They can pray for their Muslim neighbors and for opportunities to share the Gospel with them. They can pray that God would already be working in those hearts and preparing them to hear the Good News. And they can pray for themselves to be bold witnesses, making nothing known except Christ and Him crucified, as Paul talks about.

_____________

Name changed to protect identity. ↩

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | No comment | Add to
Post tags: 9/11, Evangelism, IMB, Islam, Muslim

Presuppositional Apologetics Month at Monergism

Mark — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:36:17 +0000

The monthly focus at Monergism.com is Presuppositional Apologetics. Some resources are given on the introductory page.

The resources include articles apologetic articles by:

Cornelius Van Til
Greg Bahnsen
Doug Wilson
John Frame
Tim Keller

They offer more on Presuppositional Apologetics at the bottom of the page.

You may also want to check out a blog run by some friends of mine that focuses on Presuppositional Apologetics called Choosing Hats.

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | No comment | Add to
Post tags: presuppositional, presuppositional apologetics

Mini-Movie: Bahnsen vs. Stein on the Laws of Logic

Mark — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 17:04:25 +0000

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | No comment | Add to
Post tags: Gordon Stein, Greg Bahnsen, logic

Church Sign: Gospel or Moralism?

Mark — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:07:28 +0000

In a message this morning about post-modernism the church sign pictured above was put up as an example of what post-modernists are rebelling against in the modernist Christian culture. The question that crossed my mind is whether this picture is an example of reaching out with the gospel or with moralism?

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2011. | Permalink | 14 comments | Add to
Post tags: immorality, modernism

A Grinch Alert?

Mark — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 18:52:33 +0000

I’m convinced that the celebration of Christmas is always going to be a point of contention somewhere. Whether it’s from anti-Christian secularists, Christians who are convicted that it is not a holiday to be celebrated or corporations that embrace the holiday season in general simply as a means for revenue.

Scripture gives Christians no direct command to celebrate or not to celebrate Christmas, or the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ if you will. So why not take advantage of the holiday as Christians? People will always attempt to steal Christmas here in the U.S. It is a Federal Holiday and like many Federal Holidays there will always be Americans who disagree with them.

In attempting to take advantage of Christmas sometimes Christians do quirky things. (Hey, we’re people too!) One of those things is putting up the Grinch Alert! website where people can contribute to naughty and nice lists. The stated purpose for this site is:

Have you encountered a “Grinch” this Christmas season? Share your experiences here at GrinchAlert.com! Here, you can nominate businesses and organizations that shut-out expressions of Christmas in their interactions with the public via marketing, advertising and public relations. When companies use misplaced political correctness to halt the celebration of Christmas, they belong on the “Naughty List.”
We also want to know which companies are celebrating Christmas with excitement and meaning–especially those who keep Christ in Christmas where He belongs! Those companies and organizations will be placed on our “Nice List.” Help us preserve Christ this Christmas.

I read that and I wonder – Who is really stealing Christmas? The Christian Post reported that the pastor behind the site did respond: Dallas Pastor Responds to ‘GrinchAlert’ Controversy. I wanted to point this out before commenting and to be fair the pastor did say:

“I realize saying ‘Merry Christmas’ isn’t going to get anyone into heaven,” said Pastor Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Church of Dallas after his sermon on Sunday. “But I believe our nation overall is going to be healthier as a nation with a public acknowledgment of God than we are if we allow the secularists, the atheists, the infidels to remove any mention of God from our public arena and that’s why I’m doing this.”

Ironically enough, GrinchAlert.com is using the fictional character, Grinch, from a secular source, Dr. Seuss, to put non-religious companies on imaginary lists created to support a fictional, secular character named Santa Claus to inform others which companies are trying to halt the celebration of the historical birth of Christ the Son of God.

I just thought I’d point that out. It’s not really right or wrong. It’s more of a cultural, contextual approach to the issue with this church having some fun as mentioned in the Christian Post article. I digress.

What strikes a chord with this website is that it is somewhat typical of what American Christianity has become. If we just sprinkle the name Jesus or Christ on a product is automatically becomes “Christian.” If a company won’t allow its employees to say ‘Merry Christmas’ will this erase Christmas in due time? If this same company changes next week and all of its employees start saying ‘Merry Christmas’ do they then become a para-church ministry? Is the gospel being proclaimed?

There are a handful of Christmas movies that have been playing on TV the last few weeks. Most of them have ‘Merry Christmas’ said throughout the movie. Yet none of them are proclaiming the birth of Jesus nor His gospel. Based on the GrinchAlert.com premise would these movies be keeping Christ in Christmas or not? I’m confused. Simply saying ‘Christmas’ is not the same as acknowledging Christ.

If all businesses said ‘Merry Christmas’ would many Christians find comfort in thinking the local evangelistic outreach is then complete? Is that all it takes? If not, what are folks complaining about? Do some Christians really want more marketing and advertising in Christ’s name via Christmas? It seems that many American Christians have come to rely on large, visible actions such as getting all businesses to say ‘Merry Christmas’ rather than sharing the gospel themselves and ministering to others by glorifying God in all things that some may be saved (1 Corinthians 10:31-33).

Too many in the world already think that Christianity is about God keeping a list of people doing good and bad. And if you’re good enough, God, and especially church people, will love and accept you. The truth is that we all belong on the naughty list and if it weren’t for Jesus Christ all would remain on that list. So maybe a better website would be one aimed at helping Christians engage in conversations about the gospel during Christmas time.

And with those thoughts I just want to say – Merry Christmas! “For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:11 ESV)

An Illustration On Urgency: Starring Satan

Mark — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:37:36 +0000

Below is a great illustration I ran across on urgency. I thought I’d share it.

The story of told of three apprentice devils being trained by Satan. ‘What are you going to try today?’ asks the leader. The first apprentice replies, ‘I’m going to tell them there is no God.’ ‘Well,’ says Satan, ‘you can try. A few fools will believe you. But the universe shouts the existence of God. There is evidence all around and you’ll not do very well. Indeed, even in the secular twenty-first century you may find your self witnessing the slow death of atheism. Any other ideas?’ The second apprentice tries this: ‘I’m going to tell them there’s no judgment.’ ‘That’s a better idea,’ says Satan. ‘You will persuade more people of that, especially some of the clergy. But human beings have a gut sense of accountability, that actions have consequences. They know what it is to feel guilty even when there therapists tell them not to. So I think you’ll find it an uphill struggle. Anyone else have an idea?’ The third apprentice pipes up, ‘I’m going to tell them there’s no hurry.’ ‘Brilliant,’ says Satan. ‘That is just what you want to say. You will have great success. Let them listen to the word of God and whisper in their ears, “This is good stuff. One day you ought to do something about this. But tomorrow will do.” – Christopher Ash, The Priority of Preaching (A Mentor Commentary) (Norhaven: Christian Focus, 2009), 65.

Highway to Heaven

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2010. | Permalink | One comment | Add to
Post tags: illustration

Calvin the Evangelist

Mark — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:13:23 +0000

Reprinted by permission of Reformed Theological Seminary. This article was first published in the Reformed Quarterly Magazine Fall 2001.

There are many popular misconceptions about John Calvin. Who is the true Calvin behind the image?

Will Durant, the famous author of the eleven-volume series on the History of Western Civilization, said of Calvin: “We shall always find it hard to love the man, John Calvin, who darkened the human soul with the most absurd and blasphemous conception of God in all the long and honored history of nonsense.”

Even the defrocked TV evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, has something to say about Calvin. “Calvin,” said Swaggart,” has caused untold millions of souls to be damned.”

Such judgments, besides being uncharitable, fail to get at the real John Calvin – a man with a strong evangelical heart.

One of the most pervasive criticisms of Calvin is that he had no interest in missions. The well-known Protestant missiologist, Gustav Warneck, portrayed the Reformers, including Calvin, as missiologically challenged merely because they believed in predestination. “We miss in the Reformers, not only missionary action, but even the idea of missions… because fundamental theological views hindered them from giving their activity and even their thoughts a missionary direction.”

But history tells another story.

The city of Geneva, long associated with Calvin, was also an important refugee center in the Reformer’s day. Throughout sixteenth century Europe, persecuted Protestants fled their homelands, many of whom found their way to Geneva. In the 1550s, the population of Geneva literally doubled.

One of those refugees who came to Geneva was the Englishman John Bale, who wrote: “Geneva seems to me to be the wonderful miracle of the whole world. For so many from all countries come here, as it were, to a sanctuary. Is it not wonderful that Spaniards, Italians, Scots, Englishmen, Frenchmen, Germans, disagreeing in manners, speech, and apparel, should live so lovingly and friendly, and dwell together like a … Christian congregation?”

Since Geneva was French-speaking, the vast majority of refugees came from France. As they sat under Calvin’s teaching in the Cathedral of St. Pierre, the French refugees’ hearts stirred for their homeland. Many of them felt compelled to return to France with the Protestant gospel.

Calvin, however, did not want to send uneducated missionaries back to the dangers of Catholic France. He believed that a good missionary had to be a good theologian first. And so he inspired and educated them. He trained them theologically, tested their preaching ability, and carefully scrutinized their moral character. Calvin and the Genevan Consistory sent properly trained missionaries back to France to share the Gospel.

Calvin did not just educate them and send men back to France. These missionaries did not just become photographic memories on Calvin’s refrigerator door. On the contrary; Calvin remained intimately involved in all that they were doing.

The Genevan archives hold hundreds of letters containing Calvin’s pastoral and practical advice on establishing underground churches. He did not just send missionaries; he invested himself in long-term relationships with them.

Concrete information exists from the year 1555 onwards. The data indicate that by 1555, there were five underground Protestant churches in France. By 1559, the number of these Protestant churches jumped to more than one hundred. And scholars estimate that by 1562 there were more than 2,150 churches established in France with approximately three-million Protestant souls in attendance.

This can only be described as an explosion of missionary activity; detonated in large part by the Genevan Consistory and other Swiss Protestant cities. Far from being disinterested in missions, history shows that Calvin was enraptured by it.

To be a missionary in France was so dangerous that the Genevan Consistory decided not to keep any record of such missionary activity in order to protect their lives. And so the Genevan Consistory deliberately obscured the names and the numbers of missionaries sent out from Geneva.

Scholar peter Wilcox has combed the Genevan archives and dusted off some of Calvin’s five hundred-year old correspondence. Much to his surprise, Wilcox discovered a treasure trove of material indicating that the last ten years of Calvin’s life in Geneva (1555-1564) were preoccupied with missions’ Among the dusty tomes were letters written by the Genevan missionaries themselves revealing just how successful they had been. One French church in Bergerac boasted to Calvin:

“There is, by the grace of God, such a movement in our district, that the devil is already for the most part driven out, so that we are able to provide ministers for ourselves. From day to day, we are growing, and God has caused His Word to bear such fruit that at sermons on Sundays, there are about four- to five-thousand people.”

Another letter from Montpelier rejoiced, “Our church, thanks to the Lord, has so grown and so continues to grow every day that we are obliged to preach three sermons on Sundays to a total of five- to six-thousand people.”

And it gets better. A pastor in Toulouse wrote to the Genevan Consistory: “Our church has grown to the astonishing number of about eight- to nine-thousand souls.”

Calvin didn’t just plant small fledgling churches; he planted mega-churches that in turn planted more churches. It is difficult to fathom the extraordinary success of these Genevan sponsored missionaries. Even in our modern era, such statistics are unheard of.

The French government became so concerned about all these churches being planted that they sent a letter of protest to the Genevan city council. The Genevan city council responded by saying, “What missionaries?”

Genevan missionaries planted churches in other European destinations. Records indicate missionaries also were sent to Italy; the Netherlands, Hungary; Poland, and the free Imperial city-states in the Rhineland. The late Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, one of the few modern scholars aware of this extraordinary achievement, concluded that Calvin’s Geneva was a “school of missions… [and] a dynamic centre of missionary concern and activity.”

There is still more to the story of Genevan missions. It is one thing to send missionaries to Europe, but what about transcontinental missions?

Once again, Calvin earns high masks. As a matter of historical fact, Calvin also sent missionaries across the Atlantic Ocean to South America. It is a little known missionary episode that reads like an adventure story.

Because of increasing persecution, the leading Protestant in France, Admiral Coligny, embraced a grand vision for establishing a French Protestant colony in the New World where Protestants would be free to worship. Coligny sent out an expedition that eventually landed in what is now Brazil.

Along with his plans to establish a colony in Brazil, Coligny collaborated with Calvin to provide missionaries to the new settlement.

We actually know the names of the two missionaries that Geneva sent to Brazil – Pierre Richier and William Chartier. These two Genevan trained missionaries were to serve as chaplains to the settlers and bring the gospel to Brazil’s natives.

The French expedition landed in Rio de Janeiro on March 10, 1557, and suddenly things took a turn for the worse. Nicholas Durand de Villegagnon, the leader of the expedition, turned traitor to the Protestant cause. He decided to create his own South American fiefdom. When the French Protestant settlers disapproved, he actually killed a number of them. The Protestant colonists and the Genevan missionaries fled into the Brazilian jungle where they found refuge, believe it or not, with a tribe of cannibals.

Over time, the Protestant colonists and missionaries eventually made their way back to France where one of them (Jean de Lery) wrote a book describing his Brazilian adventures. He described how the colonists and missionaries made every effort to share the gospel with the cannibals. Although their efforts ultimately proved unsuccessful, they nevertheless exhibited an abiding missionary interest – even in the midst of a terrible trial.

What motivated Calvin’s extraordinary missions interests? The answer, in part, can be found in Calvin’s sermons.

Calvin’s sermons typically offer a concluding prayer. These prayers often repeated his most deeply held convictions. After preaching a sermon on 1 Timothy 2:3, Calvin offered this prayer:

“Seeing that God has given us such a treasure and so inestimable a thing as His Word, we must employ ourselves as much as we can, that it may be kept safe and sound and not perish. And let every man be sure to lock it up securely in his own heart. But it is not enough to have an eye to his own salvation, but the knowledge of God must shine generally throughout the whole world.”

Similar sentiments are found in many of his concluding pastoral prayers. For Calvin, it was axiomatic that the salvation of our souls necessarily carries with it an inevitable desire to share the gospel with others.

Calvin was missions-minded because he understood the transformational character of the gospel. He understood that when God saves a person, it makes a profound difference in that person’s life and in the lives of others.

If Calvin is taken as a model, Reformed theology ought to produce not only the best theologians. but also the best pastors and missionaries. These convictions reveal the true Calvin behind the image.

Dr. James is associate Professor of Historical and Systematic Theology at RTS/Orlando. He holds doctorates from Oxford University and Westminster Theological Seminary.

Don’t Waste Your Life Sentence Livestream Tonight

Mark — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 22:52:21 +0000

Don’t Waste Your Life Sentence
Voices from the Louisiana State Penitentiary

This video will be streamed live tonight at 7:30 CT/ 8:30 EST. Click here for the live stream location. I’m looking forward to it.

If you want to know more about this powerful trailer, below is the description from the Desiring God website.

The Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola, LA is one of the largest and historically one of the most bloody maximum-security prisons in the USA. In 2009, Desiring God and John Piper were invited to Angola to learn about prison life, hear from men who have been radically changed by the gospel, and minister to many of the 5,000 inmates.

In this documentary, be confronted by the realities of men who have squandered their lives and whom society has deemed a waste. Hear firsthand from those who have ruined others’ lives and lost their lives of freedom, yet today are no longer wasting their lives. Be challenged by inmates who seem to have a greater grasp on eternity than those on the outside.

The DVD is available at the DG Store for only $10!

Robbery Ends After Talk of Jesus

Mark — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:42:14 +0000

Wow! Christians seem to have a tough time talking about Jesus in everyday causal settings, but at gunpoint? During a robbery? I wonder how many others would react this way. Makes me wonder a lot of things…

Are you convicted?

(HT: Ray Ortlund)

Mack Stiles: Is Jesus the Only Way to Heaven?

Mark — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 15:10:53 +0000

In the Atlanta area this weekend!
Is Jesus The Only Way to Heaven? with Mack Stiles

Mack Stiles, the CEO of Gulf Digital Solutions in the United Arab Emirates, will be speaking at Mount Vernon Dialogues this weekend. He is the author of several books including Speaking of Jesus: How to Tell Your Friends the Best News They Will Ever Hear, 17 Things My Kids Taught Me About God: Parable of Spiritual Insight and most recently in 2010 Marks of the Messenger: Knowing, Living and Speaking the Gospel (my review here).

Admission: Free
Date: Saturday, August 7, 2010
Time: 7:00 pm
Location: Fellowship Hall
Address: 850 Mt Vernon Hwy NW, Sandy Springs, GA 30327

Non-Christians and those wanting to understand more about Christianity are encouraged to attend and bring questions.

Visit Mount Vernon Dialogues for more information!

On Altar Calls And Gospel Proclamation

Mark — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 14:10:31 +0000

Recently, brother Les Puryear posted an article on the issue of altar calls – Differences Between Reformed and Southern Baptist Churches: Altar Calls vs No Altar Calls. Please not that Les calls himself a Calvinist, but not Reformed which is a fair position. As one might imagine from the title some debate took place in the comment section.

I like Les. I’ve met him and talked to him a few times over the past couple of years. Though I want to point out that he has made a very unhelpful and inaccurate comment in concluding the above referenced article.

If your church doesn’t want to invite people to Christ during a worship service then go ahead and call a reformed pastor to your church. But if you want for everyone to have an opportunity to come to Christ during all worship services, call a traditional Southern Baptist pastor.

These two statements conflate the altar call and the proclamation of the gospel for sinners to repent and believe. Even worse is the implication that a Reformed pastor does not preach the gospel during worship services. (It is not just Reformed pastors who are uncomfortable using an altar call.) Also note that Les is actually doing what he says traditional Southern Baptist pastors don’t do. Earlier in the article he states:

There is no SBC pastor who believes “walking the aisle,” praying a prayer, marking a commitment card, or any other methods is what saves anyone.

I agree with this statement, yet the two previous sentences imply that without an altar call from Reformed pastors there will be no opportunity for anyone to come to Christ. I.e. no altar call by the Reformed pastor equals no invitation to come to Christ. Even so, I don’t think Les believes that an altar call is what is doing the saving. It seems that in his zeal to show that Southern Baptists and Reformed Baptists are mutually exclusive groups, he’s made an error along with a very unkind painting of Reformed pastors. It’s actually not a Reformed versus Baptist issue.

Baptists Vs.

As a reference point, Christianity Today’s Walk the Aisle by Douglas A. Sweeney and Mark C. Rogers gives a brief background of the altar call.

Successful evangelists such as George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, and John Wesley never gave an altar call. In fact, they did not even know what it was. They invited their hearers passionately to come to Christ by faith and regularly counseled anxious sinners after their services. But they did not call sinners to make a public, physical response after evangelistic appeals.

Note that none of these men were Baptists. Yet, according to this article, their methodology did not include an altar call. The Lord saved many through their ministries though.

Methodists experienced exponential growth during the first 20 years of the 1800s partly because of their evangelistic methods, including camp meetings and altar calls.

Many people consider Charles Grandison Finney (1792-1875) to be the “father” of the altar call. Ordained as a Presbyterian minister in 1823, Finney did not begin giving public invitations until long after Methodists had made the altar call a regular part of their camp meetings.

Considering these statement in light of the current Reformed vs. Southern Baptist – would some Methodists would not consider Wesley a true or traditional Methodist? And Finney, a Presbyterian in name only, was certainly no Baptist.

As I understand it the main issue some have with altar calls are their abuse, not necessarily their use. It’s not hard to find stories of abuse. I’ve personally witnessed abuse with the sinner’s prayer. Given that abuse of certain evangelistic methods do exist for some this may translate into not using these methods at all. However, method should not be the real issue.

Invitation Equals Proclamation

The real issue is whether or not the gospel is proclaimed. An invitation is a proclamation of the gospel for sinners to repent and believe in Christ for the forgiveness of sins and salvation. The altar call is just one method through which the gospel may be presented. An altar call may be done well or it may be done poorly. Its absence does not mean there is not an invitation.

The understanding that the altar call method does not save anyone furthers the point that this method is not needed. Not that it can’t be used, but that it is not necessary. If one makes the use of an altar call a hill upon which to die while adamantly denying the method itself has any power, then what on that hill is being protected?

An ironic observation on this issue is that the Reformed (and non-Reformed) that I am familiar with choose not to use an altar call though think it can be used as long as the gospel is presented. Then, there are others who are not Reformed, like brother Les, who essentially deny that Reformed pastors preach the gospel since the altar call is absent.

There will be disagreement in methods among different churches. These disagreements are present in churches that are Southern Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc. As I see it, the main concern for any church is not whether or not an unbeliever is called to walk the aisle, but whether or not they are called to walk with Christ.

Mark

P.s. Andy Naselli has some helpful resources on the altar call.
P.p.s. Dr. James Galyon offers a helpful analysis in What is an Invitation?

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2010. | Permalink | 6 comments | Add to
Post tags: altar call, reformed

Quote on Southern Baptist Cooperation

Mark — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:31:41 +0000

Matt over at SBCVoices wrote an interesting post called Arminio and Calvinito: Best Friends? In light of the recent Great Commission Resurgence, he lays out where some unnecessary Southern Baptist infighting takes place. Of course, the ultimate solution is the gospel.

I was reminded of a quote that grabbed my attention from a book I recently read.

Baptists have certainly held differing views on the nature of salvation, with some holding more of a conviction that God is sovereign in salvation while others gave greater emphasis to man’s role in the process. But when they have been at their best, both sides have been deeply committed to gospel proclamation. God is sovereign, gospel truths much be proclaimed, and men and women must be urged to repent and believe the gospel.

For some, this might be a non sequitur. If God is sovereign, then why must we comment sinners to repent and come to Christ in evangelism? Both Arminians, like Daniel Taylor, and hyper-Calvinists, like James Wells of London, concluded that the two ideas do not go together. Taylor contended with Andrew Fuller that his commitment to evangelism did not comport with his theology, while Wells lambasted Charles Spurgeon for not being faithful to the heritage of English Baptist preaching.

Both the Arminian and the hyper-Calvinist were out of their league, though. When Spurgeon was asked how he reconciled the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man, he replied, “I never reconcile friends.” Both men, and a host of others like them, were assured that their one task was to follow the Bible faithfully. If Scripture said that God is preeminent, powerful, and awesome in salvation, then they affirmed that. If it also said that men and women must repent and believe the gospel, then they affirmed that with the conviction that the two thoughts are not ultimately in conflict.
- Brand, Chad, and David Hankins. One Sacred Effort. B&H Academic, 2006. 25. Print.

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2010. | Permalink | No comment | Add to
Post tags: cooperation, great commission resurgence

Metro Atlanta Apologetics conference with James White

Mark — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:42:48 +0000

Christianity – A Faith Worth Defending
Dr. James White

James White will be giving a FREE Christian apologetics conference in the Metro Atlanta area. The details are below. I plan on attending. Don’t let that scare you off!

WHERE: Rockdale Community Church, Conyers, GA (DIRECTIONS)
WHEN: Feb. 5th-7th, 2010 (Friday 7pm – 9:30pm & Saturday 9am – 5pm)
WHY: Because we are all commanded to be prepared to give a defense
HOW: Register free online

SESSIONS
(A short Q&A time will follow each session.)

FRIDAY, February 5th
7:00 p.m. Session #1 – Apologetics: Every Christian’s Duty
8:30 p.m. Session #2 – The Doctrines of Grace

SATURDAY, February 6th
9:00 a.m. Session #3 – The Post-Modern Church
10:30 a.m. Session #4 – Witnessing to Cults (JW’s, etc.)
2:00 p.m. Session #5 – Is the Roman Catholic My Brother?
3:30 p.m. Session #6 – Rightly Dividing the Word
4:30-4:45 p.m. Conference Close – Butch Rumble

SUNDAY, February 7th
(Not actually part of the conference.)
9:00 a.m. Breakfast Fellowship
9:30 a.m. Joint Sunday School in Sanctuary – Led by Dr. James White
10:30 a.m. Worship – Sermon by Dr. James White

See the full conference schedule for details on food, books, etc.

See you there!

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2010. | Permalink | 11 comments | Add to
Post tags: James White

I am Tiger Woods

Mark — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:56:07 +0000

‘I am Tiger Woods’ is a popular slogan repeated by several kids in a Nike commercial. Given Woods’ recent transgressions that phrase is even more true today. Except the adults are missing.

GASP?!

It’s true, as I mentioned in Tiger Woods and the cross, he is just like the rest of us. I am not talking about the money or the golf. I am talking about the transgressions. The sin.

Woods’ sin might look different in manifestation than yours, but your sin is still sin. Even the slogan ‘I am Tiger Woods’ can push people to idolatry and covetousness.

How many still idolize and covet Woods’ golfing ability? Business success? Money? How many, married or not, would gladly add Woods’ recent transgressions as a notch in their belts?

What he did to his family was terrible. His sins before God are worse as are all of ours. Paul tells us in Galatians what these sins look like.

Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. [Galatians 5:19-21, ESV]

Woods’ sins are fodder for the world. They sell and may never go away in his life time or after. Your sins are fodder on a different scale, but no less. You are Tiger Woods. Repent and turn to Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.

I am Tiger Woods.

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | One comment | Add to
Post tags: Tiger Woods

Comfort in God’s Sovereignty and Goodness

Mark — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:00:10 +0000

My good friends John and Shannon Jordan are going through one of those unexpected trials of life. On October 31 their six year old son Gideon was diagnosed with a brain tumor.

They started a Facebook group (link at the end) for prayers and updates on Gideon. In less than a month, over 1,800 members joined the group. This group allowed people to pray, keep up with Gideon’s progress and even gave a way for people to donate to the Jordan’s to help them financially.

The bad news is that the Jordan’s are still recovering in some ways including financially. The good news is that Gideon went through the surgery just fine and is home improving daily. The best news is that God has been glorified during this whole turn of events as the Jordan’s have sought Him to sustain them. They have been able to share God’s faithfulness to strangers of whom many are not Christians.

Below is John Jordan’s last message on the Facebook group. It is very encouraging for anyone to read from someone going through a this situation. John shares about trusting in God during this time. He would be the first to tell you that theology matters which includes a biblically high view of God, His goodness and sovereignty.

A Personal Message of Trusting God

It’s now been more than two weeks since this trial began. God has been so good to us. Probably 90% of you who have joined this group, I’ve never met. Thank you so much for this great outpouring of love.

Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve done a lot of thinking about what God might be teaching us through this. We’ve received many comments from people who have admired our faith through this trial.

I’ve always been a little uncomfortable with those comments. As I’ve thought about why that makes uncomfortable, I’ve come up with two reasons.

First of all, I’m unsure about what kind of faith is being talked about. I’ve never been sure that it is God’s will that our Gideon be brought back to full health.

Now, when I say that, I’m not saying that I don’t think God could do that nor do I want you do think that I don’t desire that. I just don’t think that is the way God always works. However, I do know that God does work all things out for Him to get the maximum glory.

Now, many of you may ask “how can God get glory unless he heals Gideon?” My response would be that he definitely gets glory by healing Gideon, but He gets even more glory when we have our full satisfaction in Him and Him alone!

God isn’t all satisfying and worthy of my praise because he makes us healthy and wealthy. He isn’t worthy because He heals my little boy. He is all satisfying because He is God and He always does what is right! He is all satisfying because he rescued me from my biggest problem.

Our greatest problem isn’t poverty, lack of self-esteem, or brain tumors. Our biggest problem is we have sinned against a holy righteous God. He has saved me from my sin, and for that reason alone he is all satisfying. He is enough.

Yes, we have faith in our God, but our faith is that He will do what’s right and what is best…even if that meant taking Gideon from us.

Psalm 73:25-28 says it best: [NIV]

Whom have I in heaven but you?
And earth has nothing I desire besides you.

My flesh and my heart may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart
and my portion forever.

Those who are far from you will perish;
you destroy all who are unfaithful to you.

But as for me, it is good to be near God.
I have made the Sovereign LORD my refuge;
I will tell of all your deeds.

The other reason I’m uncomfortable for praise of our faith is because this faith isn’t something of our own doing. This isn’t something that we “tried” and found it to work so we went with it. This faith we have is a gift from God. We cannot take any credit for our trust and faith in God during this trial.

The great news is that there is nothing that disqualifies any of you reading this from having this same faith. No amount of sin disqualifies you. I can say this because I know that I’m probably a greater sinner than any of you and God has been so kind to give me this faith.

Many of you reading this I know are in one of two places. Some of you think that you are a believer, but you aren’t. Some of you know that you aren’t a Christian.

To each of you, I would like to ask you the question-How do you feel right now about your sin? Do you hate it? Are there things that you are treasuring more than Christ?

Maybe you’re treasuring wealth. Maybe it’s sex. Maybe it’s your home. Maybe it’s your children. If you couldn’t do without any of these things, then you have every reason to doubt you are a Christian.

Jesus is the only way to heaven. No one can be good enough to get there. God demands perfection and we just can’t come close to attaining that. That’s why we need Jesus. He lived a sinless life and then became the substitute for His children’s sins.

If you are now seeing your sin in a different light…if you are now seeing how bad your sin is, perhaps you are one of His and He is now calling you into His family.

Plead with Him to save you and He will. He is so satisfying, friends! I’ve never known it as strongly as I have in the last couple weeks. He really is ALL that we need.

I would be happy to talk to any of you who have questions. Feel free to send me a message. (Note: John mentioned this for those on the Facebook Group.)

–John

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | 4 comments | Add to
Post tags: sovereignty, trials

Poll: Can Evangelism Be An Idol?

Mark — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:18:17 +0000

In An Idol Called Evangelism Dr. Roy Hargrave states that evangelism rather than the glory of God is driving many churches today.

That might be too strong a position for some to fathom. Maybe unbiblical for others. It is not often that evangelism is spoken of in terms of idolatry. It is an uncomfortable question. Evangelism is very important, but people are good at making just about anything into an idol. So – Could there be a valid concern in this area?

Dr. Hargrave understands that evangelism is the “highest and loftiest” in importance for fulfilling the church’s mission. The issue he is tackling is slightly different as expressed on page 8 of An Idol Called Evangelism.

The problem, however, arises when evangelism is considered an end in itself. It is of utmost importance that the church recognizes evangelism as a means to an end-no an end in itself. The end of all things, including evangelism, is God and His manifested glory.

When evangelism is seen in this ligh, the motive becomes worship instead of mere duty, and it is properly centered upon God and not the creature.

I mentioned this page 16 booklet back in 2007 and recently took another look at it. Can evangelism become an idol? Is it? What are your thoughts? What does it look like when evangelism is an idol?

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Trent: Let Me Be Anathema

Mark — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:00:36 +0000

The sixth session of the Council of Trent,the Canons Concerning Justification, anathematizes me how many times?

Else where in the meta Dan Phillips mentioned to me that we should have a contest.

“How many Romish anathemas can you rack up?”

I decided to count the number of anathemas that I am under from the 33 canons on justification. My count is 23 anathemas as I understand the canons. I tried to consider any nuances. Keep in mind that this is only 1 of 25 sessions of Trent.

It is a wonder if the doctrines of faith alone and imputed righteousness matter anymore. Trent has not changed so the wondering is of the Protestant side. It would not be difficult to find evidence that the doctrines are minimized today. One example is the upcoming National Conference on Christian Apologetics to be held at a baptist church which includes three (as best I can tell) Roman Catholics presenters. (As James White mentions the speakers may not have known who they were to share the stage with.) Another example comes from one of the observations from a recent evangelical conference on evangelism at the 9Marks blog.

Jonathan Leeman in Beware Your Seminary Professors writes the following.

Most of the speakers seemed only too happy to treat Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox as “brothers and sisters in the faith,” as easily as a Baptist might refer to a Presbyterian. Now, I trust that some RC and GOs are Christians, but such unqualified, unnuanced passing remarks effectively dismiss the Reformation and jeopardize souls. Don’t you realize the effect your passing comments have on sheep?

There are two recent examples from the evangelical side of things that seem to gloss over the differences between Protestants and Roman Catholics. To compromise the theological differences in an apologetics and an evangelism conference makes no sense. In both of these areas the Gospel is central. These mixes are like oil and water.

The canons in question are listed below. Also, here are two resources explaining sola fide: 1 – An mp3 from the Issues, Etc. radio show: The Reformation and Its Theology: Faith Alone. 2 – Justification by Faith Alone: The Relation of Faith to Justification by Dr. Joel Beeke.

Oh Anathema, My Anathema

Canon 4.
If anyone says that man’s free will moved and aroused by God, by assenting to God’s call and action, in no way cooperates toward disposing and preparing itself to obtain the grace of justification, that it cannot refuse its assent if it wishes, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive, let him be anathema.

Canon 6.
If anyone says that it is not in man’s power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil as well as those that are good God produces, not permissively only but also propria et per se, so that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of St. Paul, let him be anathema.

Canon 7.
If anyone says that all works done before justification, in whatever manner they may be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins, let him be anathema.

Canon 9.
If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema.

Canon 11.
If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12.
If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.

Canon 13.
If anyone says that in order to obtain the remission of sins it is necessary for every man to believe with certainty and without any hesitation arising from his own weakness and indisposition that his sins are forgiven him, let him be anathema.

Canon 14.
If anyone says that man is absolved from his sins and justified because he firmly believes that he is absolved and justified, or that no one is truly justified except him who believes himself justified, and that by this faith alone absolution and justification are effected, let him be anathema.

Canon 15.
If anyone says that a man who is born again and justified is bound ex fide to believe that he is certainly in the number of the predestined, let him be anathema.

Canon 17.
If anyone says that the grace of justification is shared by those only who are predestined to life, but that all others who are called are called indeed but receive not grace, as if they are by divine power predestined to evil, let him be anathema.

Canon 18.
If anyone says that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to observe, let him be anathema.

Canon 19.
If anyone says that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel, that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor forbidden, but free; or that the ten commandments in no way pertain to Christians, let him be anathema.

Canon 20.
If anyone says that a man who is justified and however perfect is not bound to observe the commandments of God and the Church, but only to believe, as if the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life without the condition of observing the commandments, let him be anathema.

Canon 23.
If anyone says that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or on the contrary, that he can during his whole life avoid all sins, even those that are venial, except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard to the Blessed Virgin, let him be anathema.

Canon 24.
If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of its increase, let him be anathema.

Canon 25.
If anyone says that in every good work the just man sins at least venially, or, what is more intolerable, mortally, and hence merits eternal punishment, and that he is not damned for this reason only, because God does not impute these works into damnation, let him be anathema.

Canon 26.
If anyone says that the just ought not for the good works done in God to expect and hope for an eternal reward from God through His mercy and the merit of Jesus Christ, if by doing well and by keeping the divine commandments they persevere to the end, let him be anathema.

Canon 27.
If anyone says that there is no mortal sin except that of unbelief, or that grace once received is not lost through any other sin however grievous and enormous except by that of unbelief, let him be anathema.

Canon 29.
If anyone says that he who has fallen after baptism cannot by the grace of God rise again, or that he can indeed recover again the lost justice but by faith alone without the sacrament of penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and Universal Church, instructed by Christ the Lord and His Apostles, has hitherto professed, observed and taught, let him be anathema.

Canon 30.
If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened,[132] let him be anathema.

Canon 31.
If anyone says that the one justified sins when he performs good works with a view to an eternal reward, let him be anathema.

Canon 32.
If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life, and in case he dies in grace, the attainment of eternal life itself and also an increase of glory, let him be anathema.

Canon 33.
If anyone says that the Catholic doctrine of justification as set forth by the holy council in the present decree, derogates in some respect from the glory of God or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, and does not rather illustrate the truth of our faith and no less the glory of God and of Christ Jesus, let him be anathema.

What did I miss? What did I let slip through?

Thoughts?

Blog Action Day 2009: Climate Change

Mark — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:38:08 +0000

Today is Blog Action Day 2009. The topic this year is climate change. The most talked about in this area may be global warming. Global warming is here to stay. The question becomes – What are we going to do about it?

Global warming is here, but not necessarily in a literal sense. It exists as an assertion both politically and socially. Recently, Al Gore was asked some inconvenient questions at the Society of Environmental Journalists conference. The British High Court found many errors in Gore’s film and the journalist began asking about those errors until his microphone was turned off.

One of the solutions is an open and honest dialogue without the actions that took place at this conference. The main stream does not even consider sites like Global Warming Hoax or GlobalWarming.org. Instead, Al Gore gets a Nobel Peace prize and the press coverage to push his agenda. It is awfully hard to not call it an agenda when a politician gets his say, turns off microphones to his questioners and recent studies cited from the journal of Geophysical Research Letters get little to no coverage.

A 30-year minimum Antarctic snowmelt record occurred during austral summer 2008–2009 according to spaceborne microwave observations for 1980–2009.

As a Christian, I believe the earth will continue to deteriorate until Christ comes again and brings in the new heaven and new earth. However, this does not diminish responsibility for the world which God has given man dominion over. The disagreement lies with out this is worked out.

The Cornwall Alliance is an organization that offers a more balanced and biblical approach to climate change. Like many issues both sides (the other side) need a better hearing. The proposed solution of government as the solution to alleged global warming may be the easy answer, but not necessarily the right one. It is not clear why so many find comfort in trying to decrease the carbon footprint while increasing Uncle Sam’s. It is a wonder if Al Gore’s carbon footprint has decreased to the point that he calls others’ to since his attempt to fight global warming started.

Thankfully, there are other movements to promote the other side of the debate. One such movement is in the upcoming movie of this trailer promo for the Not Evil Just Wrong: The True Cost of Global Warming Hysteria. Also, more information is available in the press kit.

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | 4 comments | Add to
Post tags: Blog Action Day

Gospel Then Morality: Lesson From Abortion Counseling

Mark — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:56:07 +0000

What can Christians learn about the Gospel and change from abortion counseling?

I recently attended a fundraiser for Cobb Pregnancy Services (CPS). It was a great night of fellowship and celebration of what God is doing at this organization. A young pregnant lady gave her testimony of how God used CPS to convince her to return to Christ and keep her baby. Great news, but she spoke of having a boyfriend not a husband.

Do not misunderstand. Praise be to God! She has come back to Christ, is keeping her baby and getting future plans in place the right way. However, she is not the issue. The issue is how she was counseled to keep her baby. Think in terms of the Gospel, morality and political activism.

These three items are fine for Christian involvement, especially evangelism. Some (many) times though Christians get the process a little backwards. Correct morality and political views often get the primary emphasis while the Gospel becomes secondary. Consider the abortion counseling in the above case. The young lady was not told that she first must marry her boyfriend and get her life in the “correct” order before considering keeping her baby. This would actually encourage an abortion so that another pregnancy could then take place in its proper order.

The conversation would sound something like – “I’m sorry. We do not want you to have an abortion, but since you have not done things in the proper order of marriage, sex, pregnancy, etc. you have to start all over and get right for God.” It is a good thing that this is not the counseling process that takes place in these situations. The person is met where they are sins and all, given the Gospel and then motivated to true change through Christ.

Person + Gospel = Change

People do not get right with God based upon proper moral order, etc. God transforms sinners making them right for Himself. This is not to say that Christians should not fight for what is biblically proper for a better society. But this only changes some laws and actions not people. The fight for a moral society must be grounded in the Gospel.

The Gospel is the reason for not aborting a baby just as it is the reason for working for both moral and political change. When the Gospel is assumed and unspoken the Christian offers nothing more than a personal opinion. If the person(s) who is presented with the Gospel rejects it, they will at least know the true motivation is not based on change for the sake of change. They will know it is based objectively on the Person and work of Jesus Christ on the cross. Sinners do not put on clean clothes so Jesus will meet them; Jesus meets them to give them clean clothes.

Great Night: Don’t Waste Your Life Concert

Mark — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:45:36 +0000

Thanks to Lecrae for the video below. You can hear everyone yelling, “Send me. I’ll go.” It was an awesome night! We took some of our youth group and they really enjoyed it. Even one of my pastors was there who is a few generations removed from the hip-hop era. It was a good night of Christ-centered music and fellowship.

Check out more about the night at Don’t Waste Your Life Tour Atlanta: Mission Accomplished.

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | No comment | Add to
Post tags: DWYL, hip-hop, Lecrae

Lord Kill Me If I Don’t Preach the Gospel

Mark — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:55:39 +0000

So I’m driving. I hear “Lord kill me If I don’t preach the gospel.” What? Did I hear that right? Rewind! Again. Yep! That line really hit me. It made me think. Imagine singing that in church to the tune of Amazing Grace.

This was not from a hymn though. (Maybe we can add it somewhere?) “Lord kill me If I don’t preach the gospel” is the first verse in Lecrae’s song Go Hard from his album Rebel. Lord willing, I will be at the Don’t Waste Your Life concert this weekend hearing it live. That’s right, this not-so-old yet not-so-young white guy will be there.

So, this week I’ve been listening to music while driving rather than my normal geeked out theology podcasts. And don’t picture me as Michael Bolton in Office Space sitting in traffic listening to Scarface. I’ve been listening to Lecrae and Sho Baraka. I had the pleasure of interviewing Sho this week which was awesome.

I already knew the lyrics of these hip-hop artists were theologically solid. You’re not going to find any ‘God is my girlfriend’ songs as my friend Steve Camp puts it.

Instead, you will find verses like in my title. Or from Lecrae’s Change, “Now you got oprah on,thinking maybe she can help you out your hopeless zone.” Or Tedashii’s Make War, “Whatever the sin is we gotta go go go harder, By His grace no time to waste and just just just like there’s no tomorrow.” Or Sho Baraka’s 100, “Sometimes I see the wicked and I lust for their things, but then I see the Lord and I trust in the King.”

Not everyone is going to get the lyrics right away nor will everyone appreciate the sound. I get that. Since country music exists I really do understand! However, the target audience will like the sound and get the lyrics. I’m thankful these brothers in the Lord are out there reaching into a hip-hop culture of those who otherwise might be over looked.

I still can’t get that line out of my head. “Lord kill me If I don’t preach the gospel.” It might be a slightly different perspective, but what a thought. What a great reminder of our sovereign God who saves sinners through the preaching of the Gospel. A great reminder to preach the Gospel to ourselves and others.

For what it’s worth…

Mark

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | 6 comments | Add to
Post tags: hip-hop, Lecrae, Reach Records, Sho Baraka

Michael Horton Interviews Robert Schuller

Mark — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:00:03 +0000

A Conversation with Dr. Robert Schuller*

The following are highlights from a two hour discussion between Dr. Robert Schuller and Dr. Michael Horton on the White Horse Inn radio broadcast, Nov. 1992.

Michael Horton: Would you be willing to address your congregation as a group as sinners?
Robert Schuller: No I don’t think I need to do that. First of all, my congregation is a very mixed audience.

MH: But our Lord’s audiences were mixed with disciples and unbelievers both.
RS: Oh yes, but I’ll tell you, the audience is quite different that I talk to than what the Lord spoke to. I speak every week to millions, not a million but millions of people in Russia on channel one. And I speaking to a couple of million people every Sunday.

MH: Are you saying that it is the size of the audience that matters?
RS: No it’s not the size of the audience, it’s where are they at at this time. My only concern is: I don’t want to drive them farther away than they are! And I listen to so many preachers on religious radio stations…and by golly, if I wasn’t a Christian, they’d drive me farther away. I am so afraid that I am going to drive them farther; I want to attract them, and so I use the strategy that Jesus used. I preach the way Jesus preached. I don’t preach, probably, the way Paul preached….

_____________________

RS: If we want to win people to Jesus we have to understand where they are at.
MH: I agree absolutely. And they are in sin, that is where they are at.

RS: They are in the state of condition called sin which means they don’t trust. They are lacking faith.
MH: I guess the difference would be our definition of sin, because what I see in scripture is that we’re dead in sin and cannot respond to God even if we were trusting.

RS: Oh no, you’re wrong, you’re wrong. And very seldom do use this language. People who know me say, “Schuller never comes across as if he knows the answers and others don’t. It is not my style. But I intuitively say to you, you’re wrong! The ultimate, deepest, most sinful problem that you can imagine is lack of trust. Hebrews 11:6, “For without faith it is impossible to please God.” I can show you people, they believe the Bible is the Word of God from cover to cover, they believe that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary…but, they really don’t have a relationship with Jesus. They have that head knowledge, that head information and unless you have a wonderful warm relationship, which means you are mutually friends, then you really don’t have the faith. And there are people who live wonderful lives today. They don’t commit adultery and they don’t steal and they don’t kill…if you go by what is sinful behavior they seem to be leading very fine lives. But they don’t have faith….
MH: But isn’t it because faith is the instrument through which we’re justified before a God who otherwise would take account of us for our sins, not just our “not trusting…”

RS: We are not justified by faith.
MH: No, it is by grace through faith.

RS: By grace through faith, that’s right.
MH: But what I’m asking is this. Justified from what? The wrath of God?

RS: Oh! I’ll never use that language
MH: But the Bible does.

RS: Yes, the Bible does, but the Bible is God’s book to believers primarily. Listen, and then call me a heretic if you want to, but I’m interested in attracting people, and not driving them farther away. There is language I can and will use and there are times, if we are wise, there is language we will not use….If God is a God of love, how do we handle this concept of wrath? At the outset, on the surface, it appears to be a contradiction; maybe it is. I tell you this, I have come to the conclusion that I haven’t stepped into the center of truth until I’ve dared to step into contradiction. The Bible is a contradiction: Old Testament–Law, New Testament–Grace. Jesus is a contradiction; totally human and totally God.

MH: Of course we would say that that the dual nature of Christ is a mystery but not a contradiction.
RS: It is a contradiction, but you know what? Contradictions are ultimate points of creativity…

_____________________

MH: Dr. Schuller, “The real problem,” you have written, “is that deep down we feel we’re not good enough to approach a holy God.” But isn’t that the truth about us. Isn’t that precisely why we need the cross because we cannot approach a holy God in our own righteousness. In other words, isn’t that fear legitimate; the distance between a holy God and a sinful people, isn’t that meant to drive us to despair of our own righteousness and flee to Christ.
RS: Maybe so, I wouldn’t quarrel with that. I have no argument with that.

MH: Well on what texts would you base your definition of sin as “any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem.”
RS: Try some other questions because I think your question isn’t uh, isn’t…I don’t understand it.

MH: Okay. If the definition of sin is “any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem,” then, first of all….
RS: Okay, okay, I can handle that. That’s a little piece. Any sinful act that arises out of the sinful condition, and I have to repeat, sin is a condition before it is an action.

MH: Absolutely. We would agree a hundred percent on that. But what is that condition?
RS: That condition is, you are separated from God, totally and completely. And therefore you don’t have the emotional and spiritual affirmation that only comes out of a relationship. And when you have a hostility between two persons instead of a trusting relationship, the normal inclination naturally is to become rebellious or “defensive;” we speak of this a defensive behavior (I come from a psychological background so I use probably different terminology, but there’s no problem). So any behavior that is “sinful behavior” is obviously going to space you farther from the possibility of a closeness with the God that alone could affirm you through grace of your value as persons. And I keep saying, the single most important thing for people to know is what God thinks of them. And I’ll tell you what God thinks of you: if you were the only person that didn’t have this wonderful relationship with him, why he would take his son and crucify him as your saviour.

MH: But why would He have to do that Dr. Schuller if in fact the only problem that I have with God is that I am non trusting and lack self confidence?
RS: Wait, wait, wait, wait! The “only thing!” That’s everything! That’s Hell!…To be non-trusting is the ultimate sinful condition.

_____________________

MH: Dr. Schuller, how could the cross as you write, “sanctify the ego trip,” and make us proud, in the light of passages that say, “I hate pride and arrogance (Prov. 8:13), “Pride goes before destruction” (Prov. 16:18),”The Lord detests all the proud” (Prov. 16:5), “Do not be proud”(Rom. 12:16), “Love does not boast it is not proud” (1Cor 13:4). In fact Paul warns Timothy that in the last days men “will be lovers of themselves” (2Tim 3:2). Why should we as Christian ministers, myself included, why should we do anything to encourage people to become “lovers of themselves” if Paul in fact warned others that that would be the state of godlessness in the last days?
RS: I hope you don’t preach this, I hope you don’t preach this!

MH: What, the texts?
RS: No, what you just spoke into the microphone right now. I hope you don’t because you could do a lot of damage to a lot of beautiful people. But maybe if you preach it, maybe you will demonstrate your knowledge of human relationships and maybe you’ll demonstrate a sensitivity of caring about these pathetic, pathetic people that are so lost in pain and suffering because of their sinful condition, and I think you’d want to save them. I think you’d want to bring them to Jesus. And so if you preach that text, oh man, I sure hope you give it the kind of interpretation that I do or, I’ll tell you, you’ll drive them farther away and they’ll be madder than hell at you and they’ll turn the Bible off, and they’ll switch you off, and they’ll turn on the rock music and Madonna. Just because it’s in the Bible doesn’t mean you should preach it. And if you do, you have to say, “Who’s listening to me? Will they understand? And will the love of Jesus come through my words and through my message; through my personality. Will it come through my spirit? Will I come across as a humble person or will I come across as a person who’s kind of mean and know-it-all: I’ve got the answers and when people like Schuller come along, they’re heretics! Be careful, it is so difficult to preach some of those texts and not come across as lacking humility…

_____________________

MH: You write that “the essence of sin is not thinking you’re good enough” and that the reason unsaved people reject the gospel is that they “believe they’re an unworthy sinnner.” Again you state that “the unsaved person cannot perceive himself as worthy of divine grace and hence rejects it.” But how can a person deserve “undeserved favor”?
RS: No I never said that….I didn’t say that the essence of sin is not thinking you’re good enough.” I never said that. I know my words. Someone read what I said, re-wrote it, put these words together very carelessly. One adjective placed or misplaced tips the meaning….

MH: How about the next phrase…
RS: I never said that see….so I really don’t think the rest of the paragraph deserves the time and attention. Thank you. (The program goes out to a break and returns with Mike’s promise to check his citation with the original — which incidentally was later found in Schuller’s book, Self Esteem, The New Reformation — then Mike asks the following):

MH: But Dr. Schuller, did you write “The unsaved person cannot perceive himself as worthy of divine grace and hence rejects it.”?
RS: I may have said that because I am inclined to believe very definitely that the person who is lost and unsaved is afraid of the light. The person who is only used to darkness is afraid of the light and I think unsaved people do not consider themselves worthy enough; I think that’s absolutely true, “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us.”

MH: But not while we were worthy Christ died for us?
RS: Listen, if Christ had died for somebody who wasn’t worth anything that would have been a lousy deal. God is a good steward and he teaches us to be good stewards. God knows the worst sinner is worth saving so that he would die on a cross for us.

MH: But how can we deserve undeserved favor?
RS: You tell me! I don’t have to answer that question. You’re asking me how we can be saved by grace. It’s because of the love of God, and we are saved by grace.

MH: But if we are worth it, then it is not grace, it’s merit.
RS: No, no. It means that we are still creatures of God, we are still sons of God. We have value. We still have value.

MH: I agree with you to the extent that we are created in the image of God…
RS: And even the value of a human being who is not a Christian is worth dying for on the cross. That’s what God said. Don’t ask me why, that’s his evaluation of who we are.

MH: But isn’t it really the goodness of God that moved him to put Christ on the cross, seeing our misery, rather than God seeing something in us worth redeeming?
RS: Well… I think…. yes and yes. Yes and yes to that one….

_____________________

RS: I do let people know how great their sins and miseries are. How do I do that? I don’t do that by standing in a pulpit and telling them they’re sinners. I don’t do it that way. The way I do it is ask questions. Are you happy? Do you have problems, what are they? So then I come across as somebody who cares about them because every single human problem, if you look at it deeply enough, is rooted in the sinful condition. We agree on that. So the way I preach sin is by calling to attention what it does to them here and now, and their need for divine grace!

MH: But what about what it does for them in eternity?
RS: Listen, I believe in heaven. I believe in hell. But I don’t know what happens there. I don’t take it literally that it’s a fire that never stops burning.

MH: As Jesus said it was?
RS: Jesus was not literal. See, now this is where you have differences of interpretation. I went to a different theological school than you did. And there are different denominations, like about four hundred in the United States of America, and we don’t belong to the same denomination. In my denomination, Jesus stood outside Gehenna, the city dump, and said that’s outside the walls, that’s hell. And in the dump there were always worms, and there were fires….

_____________________

Various Questions from the “Call-in” Segment
CALLER: Could you explain your concept of Original Sin with regard to infants?
RS: …I had a Doctor tell me once, “The stuff these Christians teach is ridiculous! Some of these churches teach that every baby is a born sinner. That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard! Look at a little baby. They don’t lie, they don’t kill, they don’t commit adultery, their perfect.” I said, “Just because the child hasn’t done anything doesn’t mean he’s is perfect though, that child is born with a sinful condition.” He said, “Explain it to me.” And at that point in my life, even though I had a very good theological education, I couldn’t explain it to him. I did a lot of praying and studying, until I concluded of course, that it is first expressed in the ego with all its damnable sins. But the ego is the destructive force in human personality that rises when a person is not deeply inwardly secure enough to be relaxed without egotistic activity, and that comes through salvation. And so the human condition is that the child is born non-trusting.

MH: Although you say it’s not charged to his children…
RS: What did I say?

MH: The direct quote is, “His rebellion should not be charged to his children and his children’s children. Adam chose to rebel.”
RS: That’s out of context and without seeing it in the whole chapter…I don’t think it’s a fair question.

CALLER: Dr. Schuller, Paul called the gospel an offense. You seem to have a gospel that is a “kinder, gentler” kind of thing.
RS: Thank you. I try to make it that way.

CALLER: How do you reconcile that?
RS: Because I think it honors the name of Jesus.

CALLER: Dr. Schuller, what do we tell someone who says, “I’m already happy and fulfilled, so why do I need the gospel?”
RS: I don’t know…I can’t relate to that.

CALLER: Dr. Schuller, as a Calvinist with your belief in eternal election…how can anything we say drive a person away from being saved?
RS: That’s a good question. I don’t have the answer.

CALLER: My question is directed to Kim Riddlebarger there on the panel. I’d like Kim, and then Dr. Schuller to both explain for me what Question 2 of the Heidelberg Catechism means when it talks about “the greatness of my sins and wretchedness,” (this is a paraphrase of the caller’s question).
Kim Riddlebarger (co-host of The White Horse Inn): Well I would go, as Dr. Schuller knows, to question 7: “Where does this corrupt nature come from?” And the answer, “From the fall and disobedience of our first parents Adam and Eve in paradise. This fall has so poisoned our nature that we are born sinners corrupt from conception on.” Question 8: “But are we so corrupt that we are totally unable to do any good and incline toward all evil?” Answer: “Yes, unless we are born again by the spirit of God.” I would go right along with the catechism on this, that we are poisoned in our nature and we are corrupt from birth on…

RS: I have no problem with that except the part that states, “are we so corrupt that we are totally unable to do any good and incline toward all evil.” The answer in the catechism is yes, but I don’t think I would accept that answer. And I’ll tell you why I wouldn’t; I know people that are not Christians, who are not born-again, but they are very kind people. And in today’s culture, if we take these words and use these words the way they are used in contemporary culture–I have to say [there are people] who do a lot of good. So I don’t think I would accept question and answer 8, but the rest of it I have no problem with…

KR: And you would want to argue then, against somebody like me who says those answers come right out of the biblical text, that I was misinterpreting the texts upon which those answers to the catechism were based?
RS: Well, I’d have to go look at all those Bible references. Would you say that unless a person is born again he absolutely does not do any good at all in his whole life? That’s what that question seems to say!

KR: Yes, I would agree with that, but I would say yes and no. A non-Christian can do a lot of good things [humanly speaking] but if that good is done apart from faith, it is not meritorious, and does not count before God.
MH: It’s the distinction the reformers made between civil and moral righteousness.

RS: Okay, but the question and answer here, taken in context, doesn’t make the fine distinction that you now read into it.
MH: Would you agree that unbelievers can do good that men can accept, but that they cannot do good that God can accept?
KR: That’s what the catechism is referring to: the good that God can accept.

RS: Well, you’re elaborating with your interpretation, and I’m not going to argue the point…
MH: Well the Apostle Paul says, “There is no one who does good, no, not even one.
RS: Well, I’m not going to say that because I just think that leads ultimately to “holier-than-thou-isms,” self-righteousness, etc., and that comes out of the personality of the preacher and does an untold damage…

————————

The Rev. Dr. Horton is the J. Gresham Machen professor of systematic theology and apologetics at Westminster Seminary California, host of the nationally syndicated broadcast of The White Horse Inn radio program (www.whitehorseinn.org) editor-in-chief of Modern Reformation magazine, and a minister in the United Reformed Churches of North America.

Kim Riddlebarger is pastor of Christ United Reformed Church (Anaheim, California) and co-host of The White Horse Inn radio broadcast. He is author of A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times and Man of Sin: Uncovering the Truth about the Antichrist.
————————

This interview is fascinating. I can’t help but wonder what this says about American Christianity. Does it really say anything about American Christianity at large? Or is this an isolated approach to church and the Gospel?

For what it’s worth…

Mark

NOTE: I’ve removed the link to the audio until I hear further that the church hosting it had permission to do so.

(HT: Douglas)

*The preceding interview was used according to the permissions granted in the original article. It reads as follows:

PERMISSIONS: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you do not make more than 500 physical copies. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by White Horse Inn.

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | 22 comments | Add to
Post tags: Michael Horton, Robert Schuller, White Horse Inn

De-baptism Thoughts

Mark — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:00:19 +0000

The title of a recent USA Today article says it all Atheists choose ‘de-baptism’ to renounce childhood faith. I’m not sure that Hemingway could have said it better. When a person becomes a Christian they repent and believe the Gospel. There is a renunciation of the previous life and a proclamation that we belong to Jesus. I imagine this is why we see this reverse of events as far as these de-baptisms go. This is actually another borrowing of the Christian worldview by atheists. Of course, they had another religious element, a de-sacrament.

Hard to Shake Baptisms

I just don’t understand why these atheists give so much credence to their baptisms. I’m not talking about the ones in the article who think de-baptism’s immature or that rituals as such should be left to the religious. Why do their baptisms hold so much weight that they must try to be relieved of them?

Up until last summer, Jennifer Gray of Columbus, Ohio, considered herself “a weak Christian” whose baptism at age 11 in a Kentucky church came to mean less and less to her as she gradually lost faith in God.
Then the 32-year-old medical transcriptionist took a decisive step, one that previously hadn’t been available. She got “de-baptized.”

If her baptism meant so little as its meaning became less and less then why all the effort of de-baptism? It’s like getting a tattoo because your boy/girlfriend liked it. You break up and say the tattoo doesn’t matter anymore, but you start a tattoo removal process. Something matters.

“It was very therapeutic,” Gray said in an interview. “It was a chance to laugh at the silly things I used to believe as a child. It helped me admit that it was OK to think the way I think and to not have any religious beliefs.”

This person admits that it was “therapeutic”. Why? It helped him to think religious beliefs were silly afterward? It took this act to do so? Right before the act was he still convicted? How did he go through with it since this de-baptism was tied to “religion”? What was so pressing from the act of baptism that this person just had to try to undo it? The original baptism apparently had some effect if he was finally able to get his mind clear.

Now, what if these de-baptism don’t take either? If their baptism weighed so heavily on them and they can’t really be de-baptized per the act, how can they be so sure they don’t do it again? What if the tension builds again and another type of baptism is needed is all I’m asking.

Legit?

…said Greg McDowell, the Florida state director for American Atheists, an advocacy and networking group. “It’s a bit of satire. People will play the fool by waving their arms in the air and saying, ‘I got de-baptized!’ But the paperwork is still legit.”

What does it mean that the paperwork is legit? Does this mean that atheism is recognized as a religion and this is one of their legal, religious acts? If not, maybe it’s time they registered themselves as such. If you’re going to borrow a religious act and call it legit (whatever that means) then you just might be a religion. Not to mention you can’t really de-baptize someone since the act looks that same as far as I can tell. And for atheists to even call themselves as such relies on the very God they deny.

No Real De-Baptism

OK, there’s not really a de-baptism. I’m speaking of just the act itself not the act of doing so as would be pleasing to God. As far as I can tell de-baptism looks just like baptism except they try to dry off afterward. Right? Funny thing is that these atheists would really need an act of God to have a true de-baptism.

Just like we baptists go down in the water and come out wet, these atheists would have to go down in the water and come out dry. This would take an act of God.

I think the whole thing is just silly. If I were an atheist I wouldn’t spend any time worrying about my past religion and doing these acts. I’d be living it up only worried about me. The word of God really is living and active dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart (Heb. 4:12 NIV). I’m guessing that’s why these de-baptisms took place. They need to do something. An action to try and take away any last bit of conviction.

Not only do these atheists borrow God so they can renounce Him. They now borrow His order of doing things as found in communion and baptism to renounce those too. What’s next: de-church, de-altar call, de-prayer, de-praise, de-repent, de-Gospel, etc.

I’m not upset with these folks. I’m sad for them. It’s not their baptism that saved them in the first place and it’s not their de-baptism that’s damning them. It is their sins that are killing them. Their rejection of repenting and putting their faith alone in Christ alone for those sins will ensure death.

Praying…

Mark

© Mark for Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ., 2009. | Permalink | 8 comments | Add to
Post tags: atheists, debaptism, USA Today

Here I Blog - for the gospel of Jesus Christ. » Evangelism

Bisagno On Extending the Gospel Invitation

Is Tim Tebow a Religious Hypocrite?

Preaching On Sin and Responsibility

The Gospel in the Liquor Store

What Would You Ask TD Jakes at Elephant Room 2?

Servant Evangelism: Gimmick or Grace?

Anders Breivik Needs to be Crucified

IMB Missionary Interview for LovingMuslims.com

Presuppositional Apologetics Month at Monergism

Mini-Movie: Bahnsen vs. Stein on the Laws of Logic

Church Sign: Gospel or Moralism?

A Grinch Alert?

An Illustration On Urgency: Starring Satan

Calvin the Evangelist

Don’t Waste Your Life Sentence Livestream Tonight

Don’t Waste Your Life Sentence Voices from the Louisiana State Penitentiary

Robbery Ends After Talk of Jesus

Mack Stiles: Is Jesus the Only Way to Heaven?

In the Atlanta area this weekend!Is Jesus The Only Way to Heaven? with Mack Stiles

On Altar Calls And Gospel Proclamation

Baptists Vs.

Invitation Equals Proclamation

Quote on Southern Baptist Cooperation

Metro Atlanta Apologetics conference with James White

I am Tiger Woods

Comfort in God’s Sovereignty and Goodness

A Personal Message of Trusting God

Poll: Can Evangelism Be An Idol?

Trent: Let Me Be Anathema

Oh Anathema, My Anathema

Blog Action Day 2009: Climate Change

Gospel Then Morality: Lesson From Abortion Counseling

Great Night: Don’t Waste Your Life Concert

Lord Kill Me If I Don’t Preach the Gospel

Michael Horton Interviews Robert Schuller

A Conversation with Dr. Robert Schuller*

NOTE: I’ve removed the link to the audio until I hear further that the church hosting it had permission to do so.

De-baptism Thoughts

Hard to Shake Baptisms

Legit?

No Real De-Baptism

Don’t Waste Your Life Sentence
Voices from the Louisiana State Penitentiary

In the Atlanta area this weekend!
Is Jesus The Only Way to Heaven? with Mack Stiles