Baptist Theologue

2011-04-01T12:50:00.007-05:00

New Developments ................................................................................................................. My chapel message on March 24, 2011: http://www.swbts.edu/chapel/chapel_archive.cfm My new journal article: "The Receptivity Principle: A Tried-and-True Guide for Missionaries," Evangelical Missions Quarterly 47, no. 2 (April 2011): 178-184.

2010-12-25T20:01:00.008-06:00

A Good Idea for Future State and National Annual Meetings?

First of all, Merry Christmas! Second, I represented SWBTS at the recent annual meeting of the Tennessee Baptist Convention, and it was a lot of fun seeing some old friends and making some new friends in my home state. I had an interesting conversation with a new friend who shared my concern about small church pastors not being able to afford attending both state and national annual meetings. He suggested that arrangements could be made so that a pastor could attend both at the same time and thus save a lot of money. How could this be accomplished? Well, all the state conventions and the national convention would have to cooperate and schedule their annual meetings during the same week. The pastor's conferences for the state and national conventions would occur at their normal times. All state business would be conducted at the various state venues on Tuesday. On Wednesday, state messengers would remain in the same venues, but their credentials would need to be verified so that they could vote in the national convention. All national business would be conducted on Wednesday. The state venues would be electronically connected to the primary national venue, and the moderator at the national venue would be able to recognize speakers at microphones in the various state venues. Votes could be conducted at all the venues, and the voting results could be simultaneously announced at all the venues. I talked to a communications specialist about this idea, and he said that current technology could make this idea a reality, but the technology would be expensive. The attendance at the primary national venue would be greatly reduced, but many more messengers would be involved than in past years in the national meeting via the state venues. Would connectionalism be inevitable in such an arrangement? Would the state and national entities be able to maintain complete autonomy apart from each other in such an arrangement? What do you think about this idea?

2010-11-27T16:02:00.001-06:00

Happy Thanksgiving!

Grace, Andy, and I toured the museum at Barksdale Air Force Base last Wednesday as we were visiting her twin sister, Ginger, and Ginger's husband Ken, who live near Shreveport. Barksdale Air Force Base is the home of the 8th Air Force, which has a very distinguished history. In this photo, I am standing in front of a B-29. I thought it would be a bigger plane than it was.

2010-10-02T09:24:00.002-05:00

Good Chapel Speaker

Two days ago (Sept. 30) at Southwestern Baptist Seminary we heard a marvelous critique of the "health and wealth" gospel by Justin Peters, who has cerebral palsy. You can see the presentation that he did at the seminary in 2006 at his website:

http://www.justinpeters.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10&Itemid=7

I was impressed.

2010-09-21T21:15:00.002-05:00

Supper with My Church Growth Class

We invited our Introduction to Church Growth class over to our house this past Saturday night. All sixteen of our guests were Korean. I was able to break in my big, new charcoal grill. We had burgers, brats, slaw, baked beans, chips, congealed salad, macaroni and cheese, etc. My grill can handle 24 burgers on the bottom rack and many brats and hotdogs on the top rack. I can lower or raise the charcoal in the grill. It's a wonderful addition to our patio.

2010-07-30T11:17:00.001-05:00

Move Accomplished

We are now in Fort Worth and renting a duplex near Hulen Mall. I've also moved into my office in Fleming Hall (Fleming 202 near the rotunda). Come visit me if you're in the area.

2010-07-04T20:06:00.001-05:00

Old Fashion Day at Our Church on the 4th

Left to Right: Julie, Rick, Me, Jeremy, Andy

2010-06-03T22:51:00.002-05:00

Moving to Texas

We're moving from Memphis to Fort Worth in July. This fall I'll be teaching the following three Master's level courses: Intro. to Missiology, Intro. to Church Growth, and Cross-Cultural Witness to the Gospel and Ministry. I'll also teach a one-on-one Ph.D. seminar.

2010-05-09T20:47:00.002-05:00

Andy (my older son) graduated from law school today. Thank you, Lord!

2010-04-28T10:10:00.004-05:00

Worrisome Stats from LifeWay Research

Yesterday I read an article by Cathy Lynn Grossman on the USAToday website that referenced the work done by LifeWay Research in August of 2009. Cathy's opening comments caught my attention:

"Most young adults today don't pray, don't worship and don't read the Bible, a major survey by a Christian research firm shows. If the trends continue, 'the Millennial generation will see churches closing as quickly as GM dealerships,' says Thom Rainer, president of LifeWay Christian Resources. In the group's survey of 1,200 18- to 29-year-olds, 72% say they're 'really more spiritual than religious.' Among the 65% who call themselves Christian, 'many are either mushy Christians or Christians in name only,' Rainer says. 'Most are just indifferent. The more precisely you try to measure their Christianity, the fewer you find committed to the faith.'"

From http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-04-27-1Amillfaith27_ST_N.htm , accessed April 27, 2010.

Here are some comments that caught my eye from the LifeWay site:

"Two-thirds of American 'Millennials' – those born between 1980 and 1991 – call themselves Christian, but far fewer pray or read the Bible daily, attend weekly worship services, or hold to historical positions on the Bible and its teachings. . . . One in four Millennials attends religious worship services once a week or more, but two out of three rarely or never visit a church, synagogue, mosque or temple. . . . 'The research shows us that religion and its practices are decreasing and becoming increasingly privatized among the Millennial generation,' said Thom Rainer, president of LifeWay Christian Resources. 'With fewer people attending worship services or praying with other faith adherents, it is not surprising that the religious landscape of our culture is changing with the maturation of the Millennials.'"

From http://www.lifeway.com/article/170233/ , accessed April 27, 2010.

Some thoughts about these worrisome stats:

1. Our American culture has dramatically changed for the worse in regard to evangelistic receptivity and church life. I was saved during my tenth grade year (1971-72) during the height of a big Jesus movement in America. The SBC's largest baptism total was achieved in 1972. In 2008, the SBC baptized roughly half the number of teenagers baptized in 1972. Some of my friends went to Explo 72 in the Cotton Bowl in Dallas that year to hear Billy Graham preach to a stadium full of teenagers and young adults. I remember the excitement about Jesus in churches among young people at that time. We were unashamed of the gospel. We enjoyed traditional churches, and it didn't take much to get us there. (Pizza, other teens, choir practice, etc. were enough.) Our parents made sure we were at church on Sunday morning. (Many parents no longer require church attendance on Sundays.) We loved going on choir tours, mission trips, summer camps, etc. I think technology has affected things dramatically. We were lonely and bored outside of school in the early 70s (only four TV channels, no computers or cell phones). Church was both a social and spiritual outlet for us. Today, high tech gadgets and numerous cable TV channels make possible a virtual reality type of social and spiritual world that is totally engrossing for teenagers and young adults. Also, there was the fear of nuclear annihilation in the early 70s. There was great interest in Christ's second coming. We were motivated to live vibrant Christian lives. We saw traditional churches as being relevant in the grand scheme of things. I don't sense such an attitude today.

2. If this trend continues, the future for evangelical growth in America is bleak. Many of our churches now are funded by the older generation. As they die, churches will die, and as Thom Rainer said in the quote above, "'the Millennial generation will see churches closing as quickly as GM dealerships." This phenomenon will definitely affect church planting. Many church planters have tried to build their churches around young adults and have utilized contemporary music, etc. Most church plants in the future, however, may involve older adults who have moved to a new area and are looking for a local church. Our church plant constituted on March 21st of this year with 21 charter members. All of them are over 45 years of age except for my associate pastor and my older son (who leads the singing). I expect to see many more church plants like ours in the future. Generally speaking, denominations and conventions in America will likely continue their decline (see the Pew Survey online). Our nation seems to be heading in the same direction as Europe. We may see more and more churches that are "niche" churches. In other words, churches of the future may not try to be "full-serve churches" that try to do everything that typical traditional churches try to do. They can still meet the biblical definition of "church," but they may not look like traditional churches. For example, they may not have any young people, although they are certainly open to having them. They may be like Starbucks. Starbucks is a franchise that fills a niche; it doesn't offer everything that a traditional full-serve restaurant offers, but it does a few things very well. Similarly, I believe that many churches in the future will not offer everything that some full-serve churches do now, but they will do a few things well and fill an important niche in their cultural context.

As ministers of the gospel, we must remain faithful to God's word and not compromise any biblical principles in order to bring more people into our churches. Our success should not be judged on numbers, especially now.

2010-03-24T21:31:00.003-05:00

The Fayette Baptist Mission constituted as First Baptist Church of Macon this past Sunday night, March 21st. Pictured are 19 of our charter members. The service took place Sunday evening at First Baptist Church in Oakland, our chief sponsoring church.

2010-01-11T21:53:00.003-06:00

My Thoughts about "Avatar"

I saw "Avatar" in 3D mode. The special effects were marvelous. The plot was not original except in where it took place (a beautiful alien planet called Pandora). I was immediately reminded of "Dances with Wolves" and "The Last Samurai" when I saw "Avatar." The plot in all three movies involved the persecution of a native population by American soldiers (in "Dances with Wolves") or former American soldiers/marines (in "The Last Samurai" and "Avatar"). All three movies show a former persecuter eventually siding with the persecuted and leading them against the persecuters. Also, "Avatar" and "The Last Samurai" sympathize with the spiritual beliefs of the persecuted. The theme of an environmentally related religion ran through "Avatar." The natives (the Na'vi) were intimately connected with the animals and plants on their planet and could even communicate with them through a part of their body (pony-tail tendrils).

Jo Piazza of CNN wrote an interesting article on the CNN website about the reaction of audience members to "Avatar" ("Audiences Experience 'Avatar' Blues," January 11, 2010). Piazza said:

"James Cameron's completely immersive spectacle 'Avatar' may have been a little too real for some fans who say they have experienced depression and suicidal thoughts after seeing the film because they long to enjoy the beauty of the alien world Pandora. On the fan forum site 'Avatar Forums,' a topic thread entitled 'Ways to cope with the depression of the dream of Pandora being intangible,' has received more than 1,000 posts from people experiencing depression and fans trying to help them cope."

I'm not too concerned about the movie poisoning the minds of particular people. I think their minds are already poisoned. Many Christians were in a panic about the feared effects of "The Da Vinci Code," but that movie didn't destroy Christianity. Conversely, many Christians had unrealistic hopes about "The Passion of the Christ" (directed by Mel Gibson). I think that most movies simply reveal the values of a lot of people. "Avatar" seems to indicate that a lot of people are looking for spirituality that is connected to environmental concerns. Such people apparently don't think they can find what they are looking for in traditional Christianity. The tree of souls in the movie allows for the Na'vi to commune with their ancestors and their nature god. The tribe gathers for group worship around the tree. Interestingly, the scientist who leads the team of people that place human minds in Na'vi bodies is named Dr. Grace Augustine (a character portrayed by Sigourney Weaver).

I have to admit that I enjoyed the special effects. The 3D glasses have come a long way through the decades. I can remember the days when the glasses had one red lens. The improved 3D effects made it seem like tracer bullets barely missed my head. Also, it seemed like stuff was floating down directly in front of my face.

2009-12-14T19:33:00.006-06:00

Was there something special about Mary?

In the past I assumed that Mary was chosen to be the mother of Jesus because she was an unusually good girl. Scripture, however, tells us that Mary did not earn the honor of being the mother of Jesus; rather, the honor was a gift of grace. We see the truth of the matter in Luke 1:28, 30. In verse 28, the Greek word χαριτόω was used. This word is the verb form of "grace." She was "graced" or "endued by grace." In verse 30, the noun form χάρις was used. Clearly, her selection was not because of her good works. It was all of grace. Many Jewish girls desired to be the mother of the Messiah. Apparently, however, they were not expecting a virgin birth. Mary expressed her surprise (1:34): "How can this be, since I am a virgin" (NASB)? She knew that she could be put to death when she was found to be pregnant during the one-year betrothal period (Deuteronomy 22:23-24). Nevertheless, she accepted her role by faith (1:38): "Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; be it done to me according to your word." Gossip about her may have followed her for the rest of her life. John 8 may indicate that some insinuations were made about her as Jewish leaders addressed Jesus. Notice John 8:19a: "And so they were saying to Him, 'Where is Your Father?'" Also notice John 8:41b: "They said to Him, 'We were not born of fornication.'" On the other hand, at least one of the admirers of Jesus complimented her (Luke 11:27-28): "And it came about while He said these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice, and said to Him, 'Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts at which You nursed.' But He said, 'On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God, and observe it.'" Clearly, by faith Mary heard the word of God and observed (kept) it.

2009-06-05T20:42:00.005-05:00

Grits in the Old Testament

I am in the process of reading through the Bible. I noticed Leviticus 2:14,16:

"Also if you bring a grain offering of early ripened things to the LORD, you shall bring fresh heads of grain roasted in the fire, grits of new growth, for the grain offering of your early ripened things. . . . The priest shall offer up in smoke its memorial portion, part of its grits and its oil with all its incense as an offering by fire to the LORD." (emphasis mine, NASB)

Rather than "grits," the NKJV has "beaten grain," and the KJV has "beaten corn."

I don't think we need to offer such grain offerings today, but isn't it interesting that grits are mentioned in the Bible? Those of you who have not eaten grits need to try them for breakfast. When my wife and I were in South Korea as IMB missionaries, we made grits for some Americans who were in the country for a few weeks training at a Hyundai plant. We knew that they were missing Southern food. They were all from Alabama. The new Hyundai plant is in Montgomery, where my wife went to Robert E. Lee High School. We conducted a worship service for them on a Sunday and served the grits. Needless to say, they really enjoyed those grits in South Korea.

2009-05-19T21:55:00.004-05:00

Spiritual Entertainment vs. Spiritual Service

A recent LifeWay survey gave some interesting stats about what SBC pastors think are the most critical ministries in their churches:

"When pastors were asked to list up to five ministries in their order of importance, the largest group (24 percent) identified evangelism/outreach as the most important. The next six ministries identified as most important were Sunday school/Bible study/small groups (17 percent); worship/specific worship services (13 percent); preaching/proclamation/teaching (10 percent); children/youth (9 percent); discipleship/spiritual growth/mentoring/counseling (7 percent); and prayer/prayer ministry/prayer groups (5 percent). When a list of the five ministries mentioned most often was compiled, however, children/youth moved to the top, identified as one of the five most important ministries by 85 percent of the respondents. The other four most-mentioned ministries were evangelism/outreach (68 percent); Sunday school/Bible study/small groups (53 percent); discipleship/spiritual growth/mentoring/counseling (37 percent); and worship/specific worship services (33 percent)."

Why do you think that children/youth ministries are at the top? I agree that such ministries are very important for the discipleship of our children and youth. I was a youth minister for about 7 years, and my wife (a seminary grad) is currently a full-time assistant in the preschool ministry at a church. What I see happening in many churches and what I have heard about from other pastors, however, disturbs me. I hear about many parents who like churches that provide places/ministries where they can drop off their kids while they do their own church thing. In such situations, the kids don't see their parents serving God. They sense that the churches are like restaurants that have kids' menus and adult menus. If you aren't happy with the service provided to you at one church, find another. Church attenders are seen as consumers, not as servers. Some churches provide the equivalents of spiritual Disneylands to entertain the kids. When the kids get old enough to drive on their own, we should not be surprised that they find more exciting entertainment outside the churches and leave. It's the consumer mindset. Pastor's intuitively understand this mindset. Unfortunately, many pastors try to imitate the world to attract young couples and their children. The problem is, if you bring them in with worldly entertainment, you must continue using worldly entertainment to keep them. Some pastors think they can trick the couples by slowly introducing the spiritual elements, but the couples aren't stupid. They recognize the "bait and switch" routine. I believe it's better to say from the beginning that our priority is spiritual truth and service, not entertainment. We may be regarded as irrelevant by most of the couples, but we'll have a stronger nucleus of members. Our criteria for success can no longer be large numbers of people. If the most successful pastor in America is the guy with the largest numbers, then Joel Osteen is the most successful pastor in America. Nope. Our criteria for success must not be size; rather, it must involve faithfulness, purity, and service. In regard to entertainment, small churches cannot compete with large churches, and large churches cannot compete with the world. Unfortunately, a lot of young couples care nothing about doctrinal truth. Thus, churches that prioritize doctrinal truth are viewed as irrelevant. Such couples like churches that emphasize entertainment over doctrinal truth. The denominational label is not important to them. I'm not willing to compromise with the world to attract bigger crowds, but I'm very willing to pastor a group of people who want to prioritize faithfulness, purity, and service. Even a small bit of salt can be extremely useful. We should not forget that the crowds quickly left Jesus after He stressed the cost of discipleship:

John 6:66-69 -- "As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, 'You do not want to go away also, do you?' Simon Peter answered Him, 'Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.'" (NASB)

2009-03-09T21:12:00.001-05:00

Bad Stats for Christianity in America

The bad news was on the CBS evening news tonight, and it was also on the USA Today website today. Here are some excerpts from the USA Today article by Cathy Lynn Grossman:

“The percentage of people who call themselves in some way Christian has dropped more than 11% in a generation. . . . These dramatic shifts in just 18 years are detailed in the new American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), to be released today. It finds that, despite growth and immigration that has added nearly 50 million adults to the U.S. population, almost all religious denominations have lost ground since the first ARIS survey in 1990. . . . So many Americans claim no religion at all (15%, up from 8% in 1990), that this category now outranks every other major U.S. religious group except Catholics and Baptists. In a nation that has long been mostly Christian, ‘the challenge to Christianity … does not come from other religions but from a rejection of all forms of organized religion,’ the report concludes. . . . Baptists, 15.8% of those surveyed, are down from 19.3% in 1990. Mainline Protestant denominations, once socially dominant, have seen sharp declines: The percentage of Methodists, for example, dropped from 8% to 5%. . . . Kosmin and Keysar also found a ‘piety gap’ in how Americans understand God: While 69% say they believe in a personal God, the Judeo-Christian understanding of the Almighty, an additional 30% made no such connection. The piety gap defines the primary sides in the culture wars, Kosmin says. ‘It's about gay marriage and abortion and stem cells and the family. If a personal God says, “Thou shalt not” or “Thou shalt” see these a certain way, you'd take it very seriously. Meanwhile, three in 10 people aren't listening to that God,’ he says. ‘There's more clarity at the two extremes and the mishmash is in the middle,’ Keysar adds. Mark Silk, director of the Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life at Trinity College, sees in the numbers "an emergence of a soft evangelicalism — E-lite — that owes a lot to evangelical styles of worship and basic approach to church. ‘But E-lite is more a matter of aesthetic and style and a considerable softening of the edges in doctrine, politics and social values,’ Silk says.”

The “E-lite” religion is what I find most disturbing. The E-lite folks find themselves in a convenient place. They don’t have to be biblical salt and light in their culture; rather, they can just fit in without making waves. For them, culture is more authoritative than the Bible. America will continue its descent into heathenism unless true Christianity is revived.

2009-03-04T09:00:00.004-06:00

Biggest Snow in 40 Years

We had our biggest snow in 40 years in the Memphis area this past weekend. I took a few shots of our little mission church, including our sanctuary with new carpet. We won't be eating in there for a while, even though the room also serves as our fellowship hall. The carpet looks too good right now to chance it. We've started a community Bible study/brunch at a local coffee shop on Saturdays at 10:00 a.m., and it's going pretty well.

2009-02-18T21:59:00.002-06:00

A Short Book Review:

Miller, Donald. Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2003.

The title of the 243-page book comes from Miller’s description of the stars: “They hang there, the stars, like notes on a page of music, free-form verse, silent mysteries swirling in the blue like jazz” (100). He regards Christian spirituality to be like jazz music—“something you feel” (239). Miller regards himself as a writer of “new-realism essays” (188). He gave evidence of his postmodern mindset about the lack of absolute truth; rather his decisions are based on emotions, etc.: “I don’t believe I will ever walk away from God for intellectual reasons. Who knows anything anyway? If I walk away from Him . . . I will walk away for social reasons, identity reasons, deep emotional reasons, the same reasons that any of us do anything” (103). He also explained, “There isn’t any truth anymore” (121). He said that Christian spirituality “cannot be explained” and “is something you feel” (57). Miller writes with a shifting style in which many images that involve sensory perception are presented to the reader. He believes that human depravity exists (17-18), and he affirms tithing (197). He grew up as a Baptist (130), but he went to some pains to criticize stereotypical traditional religion in the book, as evidenced by his mention of a “blow-hard preacher” (15) and “big-haired preachers” (33). In contrast, he affirmed his non-traditional church, referring to four of its qualities: “spiritual,” “art,” “community,” and “authenticity” (136-137). His respected friends in the book seemed to have a penchant for tobacco, cussing, and alcohol. Miller made some thought-provoking statements. For instance, while discussing his selfishness he stated, “Life is a story about me. . . . There is no addiction so powerful as self-addiction” (182). This book is a must-read for those people who desire to understand the postmodern mindset of many emergent church attendees.

2009-01-01T09:40:00.005-06:00

Interesting Quote

Last night I finished reading a book by Charles Van Engen, who is the Arthur F. Glasser Professor of Biblical Theology of Mission at Fuller Seminary's School of World Mission. Engen stated,

"To achieve our ends in our churches and mission organizations, we may have too easily used secular management principles whose bottom line was measurable production, not faith. We like results, we like to count our results, and we like to count what we can see. Thus, whether it be in church growth and evangelism or in relief and development, have we not tended to accept the scientific reduction of life to the material and visible, and then to justify our mission endeavors on the basis of visible results?"

Van Engen, Mission on the Way: Issues in Mission Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996), 221-222.

If I could make a generalization and compare most of our churches and religious organizations to ships at sea, it seems we have often been more interested in how smoothly the ship is running and how fast it is going than in the direction in which it is heading day by day and minute by minute. Thus, our leaders tend to be good administrators but not necessarily good theorists who can react well to changing conditions on the voyage. The captain of the Titanic knew what his final destination was supposed to be (New York City), but his crew did not react properly when an iceberg was unexpectedly in the way. The main concern seemed to be the comfort of the passengers and the speed of the voyage. If we are leaders, then we need to be leaders all the time, not just when we are designated as leaders at the beginning of the voyage.

Churches and religious organizations are not secular businesses. We cannot lead them as we would secular businesses. The spiritual welfare of each person in the group is important. We cannot look at them as expendable parts. Also, when we look at results, we must examine the genuineness of the results. Spiritual quality is more important than material quality. It is true that spiritual quality produces spiritual quantity in most cases, but we tend to be more concerned about quantity than quality. Are those who are baptized really Christians? Do those people who are baptized grow as they should? Do the churches that are planted last very long? Are they biblical churches with biblical leadership in place? Are the individuals and churches headed in the right direction? Are they equipped to react to changing spiritual circumstances? These are some questions we should be asking.

2008-11-25T13:06:00.000-06:00

John Smyth, John Smith, and Squanto: Some Thoughts on Thanksgiving

This is the time of year when we typically think about the Pilgrims. They left England in September of 1620 and arrived off the coast of New England in November of 1620 – not a good time to arrive in New England. They stayed on the Mayflower for a while until they found a good place to build a community. That place was Plymouth in what is now Massachusetts. Plymouth had been discovered by John Smith before the Pilgrims set sail from England. A different man with a variant spelling of the same name, John Smyth, was also connected with the Pilgrims. Smyth was a member of the same Separatist congregation in Gainesborough from which William Bradford led his group of Pilgrims to America. The Separatists experienced a lot of persecution in England. This persecution motivated Bradford’s group to go to America and Smyth’s group to go to Holland.

Smyth founded the first church to practice believer’s baptism in Holland in 1609. He baptized himself, Thomas Helwys and about 40 others. Smyth baptized by affusion, or pouring. (Immersion came into practice with Particular Baptists in 1640-41.) In 1611 Helwys led part of the group back to England and established the first believer’s baptism church on English soil in Spitalfield, a section of London. He attempted to moderate his views between the Calvinism typical of the English Separatists and the Arminianism of the Mennonites.

The Pilgrims were not the first folks from England to sail near the coast of New England. Many English traders and fishermen sailed there before the Pilgrims arrived. On one occasion an Indian called “Squanto” was captured and taken back to England. He was trained to speak English so that he could go back to New England and assist traders in making deals with the Indians. He was eventually released, but he was later captured by another group of Englishmen when he went out to greet them upon their arrival. They took him to Spain to a slave market, and he was sold to a monastery. There he became a Christian. Once again, he was returned to New England. After the Pilgrims arrived in 1620, they experienced a very tough winter. Only 50 of the 110 people on the Mayflower survived the first winter. Squanto, who had experienced persecution at the hands of English people, took pity on them, and he showed them how to plant corn (putting seeds in a mound of dirt with a dead fish for fertilizer), how to get sap from trees, how to tell poisonous plants from medicinal plants, etc. The Pilgrims would not have survived the second winter without Squanto’s help. They had a good harvest in October of 1621, and they were able to store food for the coming winter. About 90 Indians joined them for three days of a thanksgiving celebration in October.

For what should we be thankful this year? In difficult times when the economy is bad, we of course are thankful that God has provided us with the material necessities of life. We should also, however, be thankful for spiritual blessings. We see some of these listed in 2 Thessalonians 1:3-4:

1. Our spiritual growth – We should count it all joy when we fall into various trials because such tests of our faith produces patience so that we can be complete/mature (James 1:2-4).

2. The sacrificial love of Christians for each other – We should follow the example of Squanto, who risked being captured again when he helped the Pilgrims.

3. Faithful living in the face of persecution – As our culture becomes less Christian, we will see more and more of this quality. The Christians in Thessalonica were persecuted greatly. The people there were less receptive to the gospel than were the people in Berea. Some of the Jews in Thessalonica were persuaded (Acts 17:4), but many of the Jews in Berea believed (Acts 17:12), and the Bereans were more “fair-minded” (NKJV) than were the Thessalonians (Acts 17:11).

I am thankful to God for the spiritual growth I see among Christians in my sphere of influence. I am also thankful for their sacrificial love for each other and for their faithfulness in difficult circumstances. Contrary to what the prosperity teachers say, life on earth for faithful Christians quite often includes spiritual battle and painful trials; a pain-free heaven comes only after physical death. Thankfully, God has provided to us the resources we need to be victorious on the spiritual field of battle before death.

2008-11-03T20:57:00.002-06:00

My Thoughts on the Eve of the Presidential Election

I’ve noticed lately how emotionally invested people are in the two candidates for president. It’s a bit scary, really. If their candidate wins, they think he will be able to solve just about every problem that faces this nation. If their candidate loses, they think our nation will be doomed. Of course leadership is important, but so is individual responsibility.

Another mistake is thinking that money will solve all the problems in our nation. In the Memphis newspaper, The Commercial Appeal, on November 2, 2008, Kerry Hayes stated, “Everywhere in Memphis, the lingering specter of segregation and wealth inequality is nakedly visible. As the economy is dragged further and further down, the agencies and schools tasked with confronting these challenges find themselves further and further deprived of resources” (page V1). In contrast to the statement by Hayes, Chris Toshach stated, “Now there are campaign promises of relatively free mortgages, free education, free health care . . . free everything. . . . I don’t hear anything about personal responsibility” (page V3). After hearing about the waste/loss of food and laptop computers in Memphis City Schools, I don’t think throwing money at the problems there will solve them. Personal responsibility is needed on the part of parents, students, and school employees.

If the majority of people in our country elect bad leaders, then that choice of leadership reflects on the choosers, obviously. I am quite worried about the lack of a good moral framework among many voters. Our traditional, Judeo-Christian moral absolutes seem to be shunned or ignored by many voters. Moral relativism is in vogue, and chaos has resulted. One is reminded of the time of the judges: “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25, NKJV). There was an unfortunate progression. As the Israelites grew tired of the chaos, they desired a king to end it—not God, but a human king. Notice 1 Samuel 8:7, 19-20: “ ‘They have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.’ . . . Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, ‘No, but we will have a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.’ ” How many times have we heard candidates say, “I will fight for you”? Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear the candidate say, “Let’s fight together for what is right.” As people around the world tire of the chaos, they may be quite open to the leadership of an impressive man that we read about in Revelation. God will let them have what they want, just as He did before King Saul was chosen: “So the LORD said to Samuel, ‘Heed their voice, and make them a king’ ” (1 Samuel 8:22).

No matter who is elected, we as Christians will still have personal responsibility to be salt and light in our individual spheres of influence.

2008-10-03T19:06:00.002-05:00

Fireproof

I saw the movie last night and really liked it. Of course the movie is useful for ongoing marriages, but it is also useful for premarital counseling. The movie shows how bad things can get in a marriage and how sacrifices must be made to heal a troubled marriage. In the past, I have had difficulty getting couples in premarital counseling to focus on anything but the wedding. This movie will help them see how marriages can gradually turn ugly. I plan to use it when I counsel couples in the future.

2008-09-23T08:40:00.003-05:00

Has An Economic Earthquake Arrived?

Back in 1991, the late Larry Burkett wrote The Coming Economic Earthquake. One of his concerns was with America's very large national debt and our eventual inability to pay the interest on the debt. Right now, the official national debt stands at 9.7 trillion dollars, which includes treasury bills and bonds, but if you include promises to pay Social Security/Medicare/government pensions, the debt stands at 55 trillion. I have recently looked back at his book and found some interesting information:

Before the Great Depression:

Banks were pressured to make loans. (23)
People thought they could become wealthy by borrowing money, and loans were easy to get. (26)
Seventy percent of Americans lived in rural communities and supported the farming industry; only 20% were needed on the farms due to greater efficiency. (41).
Saving rate declined from 12% of income to less than 4%. (43)

During the Great Depression:

There was panic in the stock market, and many people wanted to sell their stocks. (24)
Many people lost their life savings, and the number of unemployed people grew. (25)
By 1932, more than 5,000 banks had closed their doors, leaving nothing for depositors. (26)
It became impossible to get a loan. (26)
People bought land, businesses, etc. for a fraction of what they were worth. (26)
Hoover did not intervene to repair the economy. There was no government bailout under Hoover. (26-27)
Forty percent of available workers were unemployed. (41)
The middle class virtually disappeared. (41)
FDR raised the status of the federal government to that of the “great provider,” and this set the stage for the next economic disaster in America. (28)

Results of Great Depression Policies:

Banks became more vulnerable to defaults by borrowers. (37)

Burkett also indicated that there are usually 60 years (plus or minus 6 years) between Great Depressions. If you add approximately 60 years to the end of World War II, you have our present time. It's a bit frightening, isn't it?

I believe that the basic cause of our present problems is greed. Remember the parable of the rich fool in Luke 12:

18 "Then he said, `This is what I will do: I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. 19 `And I will say to my soul, "Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years to come; take your ease, eat, drink and be merry."' 20 "But God said to him, `You fool! This very night your soul is required of you; and now who will own what you have prepared?' 21 "So is the man who stores up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." (NASB)

Have we been building bigger barns that we do not need? Notice these figures from the National Association of Home Builders that show the average square footage for a new single-family home per year:

1950 – 983 square feet
1970 – 1500 square feet
1990 – 2080 square feet
2004 – 2,349 square feet

People have been buying large homes that they cannot afford, and they have defaulted on their mortgages in many cases. Why did they do such a foolish thing? Greed. I am not a fan of Karl Marx, but Burkett used a quote from Marx to make a point about how greed could destroy our country:

“A democracy is not a form of government to survive. For it will only succeed until its citizens discover they can vote themselves money from the treasury, then they will bankrupt it.” (34)

Let's pray for our country. Life as we have known it may be about to change dramatically.

2008-09-09T16:10:00.001-05:00

Interesting News about Megachurches

An article by Cathy Lynn Grossman about declining attendance in megachurches appeared today at the USA Today website. Some quotes follow with my comments:

“After decades of soaring growth, the phenomenon of Protestant megachurches — behemoths of belief where 2,000 to 20,000 or more people attend weekend worship — may be stalled.”

I’m not sure what all the reasons are for this stall. One explanation may be that an overall downward growth trend for churches in America has caught up with the megachurches.

“Experts see more troubling concerns than slowing growth: No measurable inroads on overall church attendance and signs that many churchgoers are spectators, not driving toward a deeper faith.”

Bingo. Evangelism will not be very effective if a large percentage of our people are mere spectators who are not growing spiritually.

“ ‘The megachurch story is not really about growth, it's about shifting allegiances. People want to feel good about who they already are,’ says Philip Goff, director of the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University in Indianapolis. ‘If church is too challenging or not entertaining, they'll move on.’ ”

If Philip is correct, then biblical churches are not going to experience much growth. A biblical church greatly challenges its people and will not compete with the world’s entertainment standards. Plus, churches are in the transformation business. Radical transformation occurs with conversion and spiritual growth. Some churches say, “God loves you just as you are.” Churches should say, “God loves you in spite of how you are.”

2008-09-02T07:48:00.006-05:00

Honoring Brother Harold Griffin

This past Sunday, we gave Harold a plaque to honor him for 76 years in the ministry. He is 91 years old. It's amazing that so many people drop out of the ministry so quickly. According to the Schaeffer Institute, 80% of seminary and Bible college graduates leave the ministry in the first 5 years of their ministry. According to the Hartford Institute, in the 5 years prior to the year 2000, 75% of churches experienced some degree of conflict, and in the 2 years prior to the year 2005, 57% of churches experienced conflict. Men like Harold deserve to be honored for their endurance. I've heard it said that the pastor is like a cork in a bottle, and when the bottle is shaken in a time of conflict, the pressure is on the pastor to leave. In these days there seems to be more pressure than ever in most churches. I'm thankful that we have not yet had any conflict in our little mission church. (Click on the photo for a closer view.)

2008-08-14T17:57:00.002-05:00

Lunch with Bloggers at Bozo's in Mason, TN

I enjoyed good barbecue and conversation today with these guys. Left to right: Mike Morris, Geoff Baggett, David Worley, and David Rogers. Click on the photo for a closer view.

2008-08-08T12:49:00.011-05:00

More Water Bottles (Click on each photo for a closer view)

Nine people from our mission church gave out about 440 water bottles on Saturday, August 2nd. It was a bit too hot, I think. The heat index was close to 110. Folks were in a hurry to get from their air-conditioned cars to the air-conditioned store, so we didn't have many opportunities for in-depth conversations. We had over 500 bottles prepared with labels, but we only gave out about 440 during the 2-hour time period. Still, it was good exposure for our little mission church. We are thinking about giving out hot chocolate when it gets cold outside. By the way, we have discovered that double-zip-lock bags keep the water away from the bottles in the coolers much better than single-zip-lock bags.

2008-07-07T16:21:00.007-05:00

Water Bottle Ministry

Probably some of you have already given out (free) water bottles, but I want to share my experience with this ministry to help those of you who might try it in the future. We received permission to give out water bottles from the Wal-Mart in Oakland, TN, and we proceeded to do so this past Saturday, July 5th. We were required to set up our tables at least 15 feet from the two main entrances. Three of us were near one entrance, and four were near the other entrance. We had put labels on close to 200 bottles, not knowing how many we would be able to distribute during the allotted time. The labels had a photo of our podium with an American flag (a nice touch on a fourth of July weekend), our street address, phone number, website address, times for worship and Sunday School, and an invitation to attend. We set out our American flag near the busiest entrance, and all of us wore red shirts with our mission name on them. Seven men, including me, distributed the bottles. I was surprised that so many people were willing to take a bottle. Maybe 70% of the folks to whom we offered a bottle did take one. We distributed all our bottles in the first 30 to 45 minutes, so I had to buy more bottles inside Wal-Mart. Altogether, we distributed about 480 bottles from 12:45 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. The weather was cooperative—very hot and no rain. Many people were thirsty. After we ran out of bottles with labels, we gave out the newly-bought bottles along with flyers with our address, etc. on them. Eventually we ran out of flyers and gave out only the bottles. Several people seemed interested enough to ask questions, and we felt like the bottle distribution helped us immensely in getting the word out about our church plant. In short, we plan on doing it again later this summer, and we will prepare about 500 bottles with labels. Oakland has been the fastest-growing community in the state of Tennessee, but there are no ballgames on the weekends during the summer. It is difficult to find a crowd of people on a Saturday to whom we can distribute materials about our church plant, so this ministry was an efficient use of our time. We have found that fewer people come to the door when we do our door-to-door survey in the summer months.

Some logistical details: We had to turn in a letter with our church plant letterhead to Wal-Mart requesting permission to distribute bottles. We used two very large coolers, each of which could contain 100 water bottles plus ice. My impression is that the most inexpensive way to do this is to print the labels myself. I used full sheet labels, and I would cut them in half. It takes a half-page label to wrap around the bottle and provide enough room for our information. My ink-jet printer made nice labels, but they would smear when they were rubbed while wet. I could put three bottles in a large zip-lock bag, and this system kept them dry while in the cooler. After removing them from the cooler, however, they perspired and became wet. I didn’t notice any smearing when I saw them in people’s shopping carts, so apparently they were not rubbed after people received them. There are weather-proof labels for laser printers available that might solve this problem.

2008-06-24T22:25:00.001-05:00

Frogs, Kettles, and Decline in the SBC

I have been fascinated with “the frog in the kettle” illustration ever since I read about it in George Barna’s book with the same title. You remember it: If you put a frog in a kettle with boiling water, he’ll quickly jump out, but if you put him in lukewarm water and slowly (almost imperceptively) raise the temperature to the boiling point, he’ll stay in the water and die. If we look at the LifeWay stats for SBC membership since 1950, we can see a slow (almost imperceptible) decline in growth rate until we see the recent plateau and decline (1). Our growth has not kept up with population increase, and 70% of our SBC churches are not growing. Other indicators tell us that American churches have experienced declining growth rates for decades (2). Thus, the decline (which we now can see clearly) has been building up over many decades. So far, most fingers of blame have been pointed at today’s Christians, particularly today’s Christian leaders. This blame is illogical, however, because declining growth rates started five decades ago. Could the problem be the kettle (culture) rather than the frog (Christian leaders)? Think about the changes that have occurred in our culture during the past five decades. Effective evangelism is much more difficult now than it used to be. If our economy continues to decline and many people begin to suffer, perhaps the time will be ripe for revival in our country. I believe that we should be encouraging Christians and Christian leaders rather than blaming them. We should encourage them to be faithful to their task and avoid compromise. Faithfulness to the task is appreciated by the Lord (Matthew 25:21, 23).

Endnotes:
(1) http://www.lifeway.com/lwc/mainpage/0,1701,M%3D200905,00.html
(2) http://www.heritage.org/Research/religion/hl1049.cfm
http://www.baptistpress.org/bpnews.asp?id=25593

2008-05-20T22:24:00.006-05:00

Good Weekend

The Lord blessed our little mission church this past weekend. Bellevue Baptist Church, First Baptist Church of Oakland (TN), and our Fayette Baptist Mission sponsored a block party at West Junior High School in Oakland this past Saturday, May 17th. We have been focusing our evangelistic efforts on the 369 new homes in the neighborhood surrounding this school. At the block party, 285 people registered, and 60 of those were volunteer workers. Eighteen of our folks from the mission attended, and seventeen of them wore their mission shirts and did volunteer work. In the photo, Rick is on the left, and Tom is on the right. Rick is one of our members, and Tom is on loan to us from First Baptist Church in Oakland. You can click on the photo to make it bigger.

We also started our Sunday School organization this past Sunday, May 18th. Eight men were in our men's class, and five women were in our women's class. In our worship service, one of the men who attended the block party came to our worship service for the first time. God is good!

2008-05-08T22:46:00.009-05:00

Interesting Info About Charles G. Finney

Finney’s background influenced him as he formed his theological framework. He felt that he did not benefit from the Calvinistic preaching to which he was first exposed:

"When I went to Adams to study law, I was almost as ignorant of religion as a heathen. I had been brought up mostly in the woods. I had very little regard to the Sabbath, and had no definite knowledge of religious truth. At Adams, for the first time, I sat statedly, for a length of time, under an educated ministry. Rev. George W. Gale, from Princeton, New Jersey, became, soon after I went there, pastor of the Presbyterian Church in that place. His preaching was of the old school type; that is, it was thoroughly Calvinistic; and whenever he came out with the doctrines, which he seldom did, he would preach what has been called hyper-calvinism [sic] . . . . I was rather perplexed than edified by his preaching." (1)

Finney eventually rebelled against the Calvinistic doctrines described by his pastor, George Gale:

"He held to the old school doctrine of original sin, or that the human constitution was morally depraved. He held also, that men were utterly unable to comply with the terms of the Gospel, to repent, to believe, or to do anything that God required them to do; that while they were free to all evil, in the sense of being able to commit any amount of sin, yet they were not free to perform any good; that God had condemned men for their sinful nature; and for this, as well as for their transgressions, they deserved eternal death. He held also that the influences of the Spirit of God on the minds of men were physical, acting directly upon the substance of the soul; that men were passive in regeneration; and in short he held all those doctrines that logically flow from the fact of a nature sinful in itself. These doctrines I could not receive. I could not receive his views on the subject of atonement, regeneration, faith, repentance, the slavery of the will, or any of the
kindred doctrines." (2)

Thus, Finney came to have a Pelagian view of human beings.

Iain Murray discussed the Pelagian nature of Finney’s theology: “By asserting that man’s only problem was his will, Finney had put himself among the Pelagians who denied the reality of man’s ruined nature.” (3) Rather than believing that all humans are born with an innate depravity, Finney believed that depravity is a voluntary acquisition: “I insisted upon the voluntary total moral depravity of the unregenerate.” (4) He distinguished between physical depravity (innate, involuntary depravity) and moral depravity (voluntary depravity): “Physical depravity, as the word denotes, is the depravity of constitution, or substance, as distinguished from depravity of free moral action. . . . Moral depravity is the depravity of free-will, not of the faculty itself, but of its free action.” (5) He elaborated on his position: “I assumed that moral depravity is, and must be, a voluntary attitude of the mind; that it does, and must, consist in the committal of the will to the gratification of the desires.” (6) Finney clearly resented being called a Pelagian:

"It has been common for theologians of the old school, as soon as the dogma of a physical regeneration, and of a physical influence in regeneration, has been called in question, to cry out and insist that this is Pelagianism, and that it is a denial of divine influence altogether. . . . I have been ashamed of such representations." (7)

He clearly denied the doctrine of original sin: “The Bible once, and only once, incidentally intimates that Adam’s first sin has in some way been the occasion, not the cause, of all the sins of men. Rom. v. 12-19.” (8)

Because Finney did not believe in innate, involuntary, physical depravity, he did not believe that a special, physical act of God (at the time that the plan of salvation is presented) is necessary to counteract depravity so that conversion can occur. He thus rejected the Calvinistic concept of regeneration preceding conversion in logical order, and he also rejected the Wesleyan concept of prevenient grace preceding conversion in logical order.

Finney was licensed as a Presbyterian minister, but he eventually criticized the Westminster Confession of Faith. When a presbytery questioned him prior to granting him a license, he was not adequately examined, and he was familiar enough with the Westminster Confession of Faith at that time to discuss it:

"The presbytery was finally called together at Adams to examine me; and, if they could agree to do so, to license me to preach the Gospel. . . . I expected a severe struggle with them in my examination; but I found them a good deal softened. . . . They avoided asking any such questions as would naturally bring my views into collision with theirs. When they examined me, they voted unanimously to license me to preach. . . . They asked if I received the confession of faith of the Presbyterian church. I had not examined it. . . . I replied that I received it for substance of doctrine, so far as I understood it." (9)

Later, Finney opposed the Westminster Confession of Faith: “When I came to read the confession of faith, and saw the passages that were quoted to sustain these peculiar positions, I was absolutely ashamed of it.” (10) He questioned the knowledge of the framers in regard to their belief in innate depravity:

"The framers of the Westminster Confession of Faith made this affirmation in words, at least; whether intelligently or unintelligently, we are left to inquire. The reason of a moral agent condemning himself . . . for possessing a nature entailed on him by a natural law. . . . This can never be." (11)

Finney, licensed as a Presbyterian, did not accept believers’ baptism, but he saw the need for converts to make some type of profession of faith:

"I had never, I believe, except in rare instances, until I went to Rochester, used as a means of promoting revivals, what has since been called 'the anxious seat.' I had sometimes asked persons in the congregation to stand up; but this I had not frequently done. However, in studying upon the subject, I had often felt the necessity of some measure that would bring sinners to a stand. . . . I had found also that something was needed, to make the impression on them that they were expected at once to give up their hearts; something that would call them to act, and act as publicly before the world, as they had in their sins; something that would commit them publicly to the service of Christ. . . . I made a call, I think for the first time, upon all that class of persons whose convictions were so ripe that they were willing to renounce their sins and give themselves to God, to come forward to certain seats which I requested to be vacated, and offer themselves up to God, while we made them subjects of prayer." (12)

Finney further expanded on his rationale for the anxious seat:

"If you say to him, 'There is the anxious seat, come out and avow your determination to be on the Lord’s side,' and if he is not willing to do so small a thing as that, then he is not willing to do anything, and there he is, brought out before his own conscience. It uncovers the delusion of the human heart, and prevents a great many spurious conversions, by showing those who might
otherwise imagine themselves willing to do anything for Christ, that in fact they are willing to do nothing. The church has always felt it necessary to have something of the kind to answer this very purpose. In the days of the apostles baptism answered this purpose. . . . It held the precise place that the anxious seat does now, as a public manifestation of their determination to be Christians." (13)

These procedures, however, were not original with Finney. Iain Murray commented,

"If Finney had not so resolutely defended the new measures, their correctness might have been discussed apart from his own ministry. He was not, after all, their originator, for they were not new at all. They did not derive from Burchard, Beman, or anyone else in New York State. The encouragement of physical responses to preaching (such as falling to the floor); women speaking in worship; meetings carried on through long hours and on successive days (protracted meetings); and, above all, inviting individuals to “submit to God” and to prove it by a 'humbling action' such as standing up, kneeling down, or coming forward to 'the anxious seat'—all came straight from the procedures that some Methodists had been popularizing for a quarter of a century." (14)

Russell Richey described Finney’s popularization of the new measures with their emphasis on human effort as a turning point: “Since Finney, ministers have self-consciously assumed control, even manipulative control, over these rituals; as revivalists they have presumed that they could produce revivals.” (15)

[1] Charles G. Finney, Memoirs of Rev. Charles G. Finney (New York: A. S. Barnes & Company, 1876), 7.
[2] Ibid., 46.
[3] Iain Murray, Revival and Revivalism: The Making and Marring of American Evangelicalism (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1994), 7.
[4] Finney, Memoirs, 77.
[5] Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, ed. J. H. Fairchild (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), 228-229.
[6] Finney, Memoirs, 154.
[7] Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, 296.
[8] Ibid., 253.
[9] Finney, Memoirs, 51.
[10] Ibid., 60.
[11] Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, 339-340.
[12] Ibid., 288-289.
[13] Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1898), 254.
[14] Murray, 241-242.
[15] Russell E. Richey, “Revivalism: In Search of a Definition,” Wesleyan Theological Journal 28, no. 1 and 2 (Spring-Fall 1993): 168.

2008-04-10T17:58:00.003-05:00

The following is the full text of an interview I had with an imam using the Camel method, minus the introductions and some unintelligible conversation.

Morris: Okay. I just have a few questions. I read that in 1998, in an article, that at the present rate of growth then, some people project that Islam will be the second-largest religion in America in about twenty years. And I was wondering how you would account for that growth. Is it because of immigration, or because of Muslims in the United States having a lot of children, or effective evangelism of non-Muslims, or all of the above?

Imam: Well, first of all thank you for coming. It’s always a pleasure to welcome people in the masjid and to talk to them and the questions they have, to answer. And if not we’ll go back to the books. The question is very important because it’s a now-a-days topic about the growth of Muslims, not only in America but around the world. It’s not because of the important number of immigrants. It’s not because of effective evangelism. It is about something (unintelligible words). It’s the message of Islam as a universal message. . . . So I was born a Muslim but was not born from an Arab family, and as a six-year-old child I was taken to a Qur’anic school to learn the Qur’an, and there they will teach you how to read the Qur’an, not how to understand it, but how to read it and then how to memorize it. . . .

Morris: Obviously, the Qur’an discusses the prophet Isa. I was particularly interested in the third Surah, especially the forty-seventh verse. Does this ayyah say that Isa came directly from Allah, and that He did not have a father?

Imam: Yes, what the Qur’an says is, and I know this, what the Qur’an says is God sent angel Gabriel to Mary to give Mary the good news of having a child. And Mary as a woman and knowing what it means to have a child and how a child is conceived, Mary says, “How can I have a child and have not permitted adultery or any man has ever touched me?” because that’s the natural way to have a child. Then Gabriel answers and says, “It is a decision your Lord has already taken,” and Gabriel (unintelligible word) this period in Mary, and then Mary started feeling pregnant. This is one of the miracles of God. He’s so powerful, He can do anything He wants. The same way He created Adam the first human being without any father or mother. And create Eve from Adam without any mother, the same way God could create Isa, Jesus, with a mother and without a father. Now, Isa then went through those steps, the three major steps as far as pregnancy is concerned, but it was in a quicker way because God made it so, and then was born naturally, the way we all were born, and to be a miracle, and the Qur’an called it a miracle. Remember when the people of Israel came to Mary they said, “How come you have a child? Your father had never been a bad person. So how come Mary you have a child?” Then Mary didn’t say a word. The Qur’an said (unintelligible Arabic words). She just pointed her finger to the newborn baby, and the newborn baby Jesus then spoke from the cradle. So asked to defend His mother, and what did He say? He says, “I am a prophet of God, and I was given the book and the wisdom, and I was commanded to say My prayers and to give charity. That’s how the Qur’an states it. So then, Jesus from there spoke to the people, which was a miracle of God for a newborn baby to speak out defending his mother. And this is how the Qur’an states the story of Jesus in many, many chapters, not only in Chapter Mary, but if you go to Chapter Mary, also, which is not the third chapter, but you will see also how detailed it is from God takes the plan of how Jesus works. And Muslims believe in that as a miracle and don’t take Jesus as anything else as a creature of God who is a prophet and a messenger to the people of Israel.

Morris: Now in two verses later, in verse forty-nine in surah three, it seems to indicate that He was given power over death. Do you know of any other prophet mentioned that had that kind of power over death?

Imam: What do you mean by power over death?

Morris: Let me look at that again. It says, “Bring the dead to life with Allah’s permission.”

Imam: Yes, but that was not only given to him. It was given to previous messengers and even was given to Prophet Muhammad—peace be upon him. But the important words in that verse, or words in any verse is important, but the important thing to lay the stress upon is “with God’s permission,” meaning he wouldn’t be able to do it without the permission of God. Remember what Jesus said, “I was sent down on earth not to do My will but to do the will of the One who sent Me.” And in some Scriptures you see the “will of the Father” or he said the “will of the One who sent Me.” So then Jesus was never entrusted in his own will, but the will of God. This is why he couldn’t do anything without the permission of God. This is why he sometimes would vacate anyplace and go alone and pray and communicate with the Lord so as to have the permission of the Lord as far as what he was doing is concerned. So that in that verse (unintelligible word) was given the power, and the power is known. Jesus could raise the dead but with the permission of God which has nothing to do with his human status. But it is a power coming from God with the permission of God Himself.

Morris: In surah three, in verse fifty-five, “Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so I will decide between you concerning that in which you differed.” So it seems to indicate at that time Isa was taken to heaven, and the path was shown to him. Out of all the prophets, would he be the one who was most capable of helping a human being know the way to heaven because of that incident?

Imam: You know actually every single prophet was given the knowledge and the wisdom to show people the way to heaven—every single prophet. But Jesus is very particular because no prophet has ever experienced what he has experienced as far as ascending to the Lord when he was thirty-three years old. Then he ascended, meaning he was elevated to heaven. And he is living somewhere in heaven with the same age—thirty-three years old—and he will come back on earth with the same age—thirty-three years old, because in heaven there is no getting old. You will be always in the same style, in the same level. Therefore he will come back as we believe, and this is why the Qur’an says “ascended.” As he was living, a human being, he was ascended. So then he did not die, but he will come back on earth and then will face death as everybody will face death and then be buried. And when he comes, he will come at the same time with what we call “Al Mahdi (unintelligible Arabic word)” the messiah. In our own will come also will {sic} (unintelligible Arab word) Dajjal the antichrist. They will all have the same time. And then he with the help of the Mahdi then will kill the antichrist who will actually mess around on earth. So then Jesus as we said was ascended and of course will come back and will face that because he is a human being. Therefore he will have to go through what human beings go through, but was given favors that was given to nobody else as far as his birth is concerned and as far as his ascending to the heavens is concerned.

Morris: In that same verse, verse fifty-five in chapter three, it depends on the translation, but it seems to some people to say that,

Imam: Let me get the Arabic version.

Morris: Okay. In this translation it says, “I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth).” I think the Arabic word in question is “mutawaffika” or the short form “tawaffika,” and apparently that word can be translated in several different ways—as “received,” as “to take back,” but some people say it’s the most common verb used in Arabic for “to cause to die.”

Imam: You say chapter three?

Morris: Chapter three, verse fifty-five. I was wondering how you normally translate verse fifty-five.

Imam: Yes, I can see now. It says (unintelligible Arabic passage). Now this verse means, and I’m going to tell you what it means. Remember when the Lord said, “O Jesus, I am going to ascend you, to elevate you toward me. And you will come to me as you will be purified,” meaning God will purify Jesus. “Purify you” (unintelligible Arabic phrase) “from those people who are disbelievers,” meaning those people who are disbelievers—they are coming to harm you, and I’m gonna avoid {sic} that to happen. This is why when they came to get Jesus, actually Jesus was elevated towards heaven, and one of them was given the image of Jesus so as to be crucified. That was the punishment.

Morris: Was that Judas in most people’s minds who are Muslim, or do most Muslims speculate on who that person was that took the place of Jesus?

Imam: Yes, yes, they speculate. Some of them say it was one of Jesus’ disciples, and some say it was one of those who was coming to harm him. But Allah knows best. And therefore Allah says then. (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) “And I will make those people who believe and follow you,” meaning the true believers and the true followers—disciples—of Jesus. (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) “And I will put them” actually “on top of those who disbelieved in you,” meaning they will be better than them and much more honorable than them. (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) “And this will happen until the day of judgment, after the day of judgment.” (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) “And know for sure that you all shall return to me.” (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) “And when you come to me, then I will judge in between you.”

Morris: So, “mutawaffika” in this context means “to take him back,” or does it mean “to cause him to die”?

Imam: Yes, “mutawaffik” is a word that is coming from “fata,” and “fata” means “to die.” But what does it mean? That means separation from the light in this world to another life. Now Jesus was taken from this life to another life because the life in heaven far differs from the life on earth. So therefore still he did not die, but “mutawaffika (unintelligible Arabic phrase),” meaning I will take you from this life to the other life.

Morris: So he did not experience physical death.

Imam: No.

Morris: He was just quickly transferred and changed.

Imam: That’s the word—transferred—from this life to another life, but did not face death, physically, but will face death physically after having returned on earth by the end of time.

Morris: Is that the standard translation or interpretation that most Muslims give to that?

Imam: Yes, you know that is the authentic interpretation we have received from Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Now, let me make something clear. We have those we call “Orientalists.” You may have heard of them. It is a sect which took birth in the fourth or fifth century (unintelligible Arabic phrase) in Europe because of the extension of Islam in Europe. So therefore they have to create something which will sometime contradict. It’s within Islam, but which will {sic} contradict the teachings of authentic Islam. But still God will bless the community of Muslims of the best understanding, of the understanding itself of the religion. But anytime somebody brings something out of the limits of Islam, then the Muslims will know. The scholars will know, and therefore the Qur’an will teach us how to deal with those people. Those Orientalists now will come with certain ideas like that.

Morris: What countries do the Orientalists predominate in?

Imam: Okay, it was in Europe (unintelligible words) and according to history it was in Spain at that time, and you know that Spain was dominated by Islam.

Morris: Cordoba.

Imam: Yeah, and Spain became actually the heart of Islam as far as knowledge is concerned.

Morris: I have a question about surah forty-six, verse nine, The Sandhills. My translation, Muhammad is speaking: “Say: I am not the first of the apostles, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner.” Is this saying that he did not know his final destination, or what would be your interpretation of that verse?

Imam: Read the verse again.

Morris: “Say: I am not the first of the apostles, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner.”

Imam: Okay, that verse reads this way: “Say, I am not a new thing among the messengers,” meaning, I am not the first messenger sent. “Nor do I know what will be done with me or you. I only follow that which is revealed to me, and I am but a plain warner.” Okay, concerning this verse, Allah is showing us that there have been prophets and messengers before Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. So then, whatever happened to those prophets and messengers before him may happen to him—Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him—how some messengers were killed by the people of Israel, and some were tortured. And this may happen to him. And he faced something like that when he went to Taif, when the people—the community of Taif—took the sick people, you know, and also the children, and they were throwing stones to him so as to have him bleeding. And God actually knew about it and sent the angel to him and say, “Whatever you want me to do for these people, I can do,” as He did to other people who used to do prophets like that. So then, God (unintelligible Arabic phrase) of course had the knowledge, and Allah gave him the knowledge, and he can predict things. But he would just let people know that I’m a human being like you. But what is special about me is that I am a messenger (unintelligible Arabic phrase), I am a person who God is revealing things to. So whatever happened to the messengers before can also happen to me, and that’s what I know what I know, what will be done with me or you. Nor do I know what will be done with me.

Morris: So he was not talking about the way to heaven. He was talking about physically being attacked on earth.

Imam: There you go. The messengers faced those kind of problems actually before him. Then this—also to let people know that the prophets and messengers who came before him were also teaching the same thing that he is teaching. Therefore he may face the same thing that they faced with opposition from other people. And by the way, if you really want to have an understanding of the Qur’an, this is Tafsir Ibn Kathir. This is the most authentic translation or explanation of the Qur’an.

Morris: I understand there is a festival called “Korbani Eid.” I was wondering, is that practiced all over the world. When I’ve read about it, it sounds like the sacrifice atones for names placed on a piece of paper as well as those placing their hands on the animal, and then the animal is killed. Is that a worldwide practice, or is that something confined to one area?

Imam: Okay, the Eid is called the “Eid-ul-Adha,” meaning the festival of Adha, meaning “sacrifice.” Now, remember what I said earlier about culture. Culture is very important to people, and people do—and let me just mention that placing your hands on the animal while it is being slaughtered—you know, we used to do that when our father was slaughtering, you know, the sheep on this particular day. It is our culture, and the people used to believe that if you do so, you will have the same reward as your father—the one who is sacrificing the sheep or the animal on that particular day. Now, Eid-ul-Adha is the eid of sacrifice, which is going to be on Wednesday, this coming Wednesday, and you will be very welcome to come there, you know, and see how things go and all that. And then on the particular we just remember the day when Abraham was about to sacrifice his son Ishmael as related in the Bible or in other Scriptures. And God then, of course, put Abraham and his son through that test even though God knew exactly what Abraham believed, but He wanted Abraham to be sure of his faith, and Abraham was of course as a prophet and a messenger. So then, God put him through that test, and Abraham passed the test, so he was to be rewarded. Okay, so Allah made his children to be prophets and also the Prophet Muhammad to come you know through Ishmael, you know, as (unintelligible Arabic phrase), and those were Ishmael’s words, the father, we can say, the father of Arabs. Now, what is to be done is this: to go perform the sala and then go and slaughter, meaning the sacrifice. There is no putting the hands and all that. That is part of culture. It isn’t a part of the teaching of Islam. It is just part of culture, like I said again. But it is not a culture (unintelligible phrase), but it is better for the Muslim to limit himself in the teachings of Islam and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. But it’s all about culture at that particular point you are making. But of course every single Muslim, if they can, have to sacrifice this sheep or whatever they can, according to Islam, and for the sake of God, not for the sake of anything else. We don’t need the blood, and we cannot throw away the meat. That’s why we have to eat from the meat and also give charity to those who don’t have from the meat as well, and the blood is shed for the sake of Allah. We don’t need the blood. And sometimes as you go, they will, you know, put their finger in the blood and then put it right on their face, you know, all day long. This is part of culture but not part of Islam as well.

Morris: In some of the cultures is there a feeling that the guilt of the people is transferred to the animal, and maybe that’s why they touch the animal and put the animal’s blood on them—that the animal’s sacrifice takes care of their guilt and that it benefits them somehow?

Imam: It has nothing to do with guiltiness or anything like that. No. It is something prescribed by God, and we do it as we pray, as we give charity. It is an order from God, and we do it, now, for those who can. For those who cannot, it is not an obligation, but as far as feeling guiltiness and your guilt being carried away along with a sacrifice, no, Islam does not teach that. And if people think about that, it’s because based on character, that’s different from what Islam teaches. It’s not going to carry anything, but you do it. You do it for the sake of God, and then God will reward you and may forgive you of your sins because of how submitted and devoted you are in obeying Him.

Morris: So, we’ve talked some about accumulating good works. So at the end of time, my impression is that if you’ve lived by the five pillars of Islam: you’ve made a pilgrimage to Mecca, you’ve kept the fast at Ramadan, you’ve given alms to the poor, you’ve used the confession, and you’ve prayed five times a day—those things, and if your other good deeds compensate for any bad deeds, then at the end of your life, most likely Allah will accept you into Paradise. Is that a correct understanding?

Imam: First of all, a person can do something depending on the intention he has. In Islam every single act will have the value of the intention you have in order to do the act. Okay, people can call for a fundraising to help needy people. Is that a good deed or a bad deed?

Morris: So you’re saying the intention is what’s important, not necessarily the deed itself.

Imam: Not necessarily the deed, but the intention you have, because if you have a good intention of doing something and then you were not able to do it, still God will reward you for that good intention you have. And if you have the intention of doing something bad, it is a sin. And then in the long run you abstain from doing it, God will reward you for abstaining from doing that thing which is wrong because of the intention you have to retrieve yourself from acting wrongly. Now, the example I was going to give you, we have people, millionaires, and we say these people in Somalia, they are in need. It’s tremendously good to help needy people. Then I come. I have millions in my bank account, and they say, “Who can donate fifty thousand dollars?” I look around, see all these people, and I want it to be mentioned in the future as a good donor, and I write a check for a hundred thousand dollars and give. Everybody can see it.

Morris: So your motives are wrong.

Imam: There you go. So there you have done something great in the eyes of people, but (unintelligible Arabic phrase) in the eyes of God it is zero because of the intention you have to be mentioned in the book of good donors in the future.

Morris: So the time of judgment, it’s not just the things you’ve done, it’s the intentions that Allah looks at, and your good intentions can compensate for your bad intentions.

Imam: Every single deed you do with a good intention will erase a previous sin (unintelligible Arabic phrase). Every good deed you do with a good intention will erase previous sins. This is how it goes. This is how the Qur’an teaches us.

Morris: So, you’re saying Allah is perfect, His standard is perfection, and in order for us to meet that standard of perfection, our bad intentions, bad deeds, must be erased by corresponding good intentions and good deeds.

Imam: A human being will never reach the standard of perfection because the human being was created weak and never shall a human being be perfect. You can get closer and closer to God, moving toward perfection, but you will never reach perfection because, remember, human beings think, and they doubt, and perfection doesn’t go with doubt, and tell me, who is among the human beings that does not doubt? So doubt cannot go with perfection. That’s why only God is perfect, and perfected messengers were perfect as far as the message they were conveying is concerned, but as far as their lives as human beings, they were not perfect at all. They could make mistakes. They could give an idea in their lives, or somebody else may have a brighter idea which the prophet or the messenger will of course take, and we have so many examples in the story of the prophet and messenger, but as far as the message they were conveying, they are perfect because the message is not coming from them. It comes from a perfect Being who is God, but human beings cannot be perfect. But every single good deed you do is like taking you toward perfection, meaning purifying you, not making you perfect, but purifying you. And the more purified you are, the better person you are and closer you will be to your Lord.

Morris: Let’s see. I’m almost finished. Do most Muslims look at the Qur’an as being created or as being eternal?

Imam: Yes. I wouldn’t say most Muslims, but all Muslims should look at the Qur’an as not created because revelation is not creation, and the Qur’an is the words of God, and the words of God are attributes of God? And how can attributes of God be creatures, as God Himself is not a creature? He is the Creator. So, therefore, Muslims look at the Qur’an as the words of God which is eternal and not created.

Morris: So, I’m trying to understand in my own mind. In that sense, like God’s plan for the universe it’s always been His plan, and in that sense it’s eternal. I think I understand what you’re saying. Okay. Do you think it would be beneficial for Muslims and Christians to study the Qur’an together as a way to help them mutually understand some of these issues? And I know that many Muslims believe that the Injil, the New Testament, has been corrupted. Would there be any benefit for Muslims to study the New Testament as it is now?

Imam: The Muslim is the person that can find any answer of any question from the Qur’an. This is why you can see that many Muslims are not interested in studying the other books like the Injil. Now, I have studied it for two years because I thought that for me to better communicate with the Christians I had to know their book. Okay. But if it was only one book—called the New Testament, the Injil, the Bible—if it was only one book, one intact book that has no changes or anything like that, yes, it would be recommended for the Muslims to learn it because it will never differ from the Qur’an. The Qur’an is this Qur’an, and not even a single letter has been changed since it was revealed fourteen hundred years ago. Now, the Bible I don’t judge because judgment belongs to God. I have studied King James Version. I haven’t gotten the chance to study other versions, but I have listened to scholars who are well-versed in studying different versions of their book. But when I studied King James, what was very interesting was King James himself. I first studied King James himself and what brought the King James Version. That’s what I studied, and studied the history of King James and the War of the Roses that happened between King James’s family and the family of Lancaster and what brought this version. So if every single king or every single authority would have the power to have his own version concerning the Bible, and then we will see those differences between versions, then the Muslim will be confused which version to (unintelligible words) to get in order to have the clear understanding of the words of God. And this is why some of them will question, is the Bible the word of God, as you can see in some of those videos or some of those tapes. You may have listened to many of those with (unintelligible names). So that is the problem.

Morris: Do you feel that the Qur’an itself says that the Bible has been changed, or does it say that the interpretations of the Bible are corrupt?

Imam: The Qur’an states clearly that the Bible has been changed—not interpretations—but the Bible has been changed. And then God is saying, “Woe to those who have written the books with their own hands”—you see, with their own hands—meaning written in the way they wanted. And then says, (unintelligible Arabic phrase) “This is from God.” And it says, “Woe to them,” because that is not from God. So, not every single word has been changed, but some. This is why you see those differences in the different versions, more than two hundred versions today that we are seeing, as far as they are concerning, of the Bible.

Morris: Why do you think that Allah would preserve the Qur’an perfectly as his word, but he did not preserve for instance the Injil? Have you thought about that?

Imam: Yes, because the Injil actually was not the last message, and you were talking about God’s plan. God’s plan was to reveal the Qur’an as the last message. So then the Qur’an as the verifier of the truth in those previous books has to be perfect and preserved. That would allow us to know what is true and what is not in the previous books, as in the hands of the people. You see? Therefore it makes sense that the Qur’an will be preserved and will be kept intact as we can use it to verify the truth or what is not true in the previous books.

Morris: So in the original form of the Injil, it agreed perfectly with the Qur’an.

Imam: Which exists until now and which is not released.

Morris: Okay. So it agreed perfectly with the Qur’an?

Imam: Oh yes, definitely.

Morris: Now, I know you don’t see it as being equal to the Qur’an, but it agreed with the Qur’an?

Imam: Oh yes, definitely.

Morris: How would you classify that original Injil? Would it be called the word of God or as maybe an interpretation of the word of God?

Imam: It will be the word of God, not interpretation of the word of God. Okay, this is the Qur’an that you have, and this is an interpretation, meaning explanation. You know the words of God are words which are perfect. And do you think a human being, as imperfect, can understand everything of the words of God which are perfect without an explanation? This is why God would send prophets and messengers, and prophets and messengers would explain the word of God. It’s like when you are in the military. You have to be taught the codes, the coded language. But we who have never been in the military may not understand. And the Qur’an is a coded message, and there should be somebody to decode it, and that person to decode it is the messenger so that the people can understand the words of God. This is why you read what we call “hadith.” Hadith will come to explain the words of God. Some of them are very easy to understand. Some others are coded, and there should be a messenger to decode that which is coded as a message in the Qur’an.

Morris: So you’re saying the Qur’an is the word of God, pure and undefiled. The Injil as it was originally given was also the word of God, but not equal to the Qur’an.

Imam: Not equal to the Qur’an to the sense that every single prophet and messenger was sent to a particular people, a particular community. But the Prophet Muhammad was sent to the entire human family.

Morris: So it’s universal whereas the Injil was more of a local book.

Imam: Like Moses was sent to the people of Israel and then to Egypt. He was the only one {sic} prophet who was sent to two different peoples, for example to Egypt. Jesus was sent to the people of Israel. So then their shari’a, the legislation they have in their books, will only be considered within the people of Israel. So that will be the difference between that book and the Qur’an.

Morris: Well that is about all the questions I had. I appreciate your answering them so well.

Imam: No problem. You are very welcome.

2008-04-08T15:42:00.002-05:00

Marks of an Effective Church -- Sermon Outline

Introduction: Effective sports teams have well-defined roles for team members and a well-understood system in place. Team members on successful teams appreciate one another and eventually succeed in spite of adversity. Local churches are teams of people that can learn from the effective church at Antioch.

1. Effective churches engage in effective evangelism (Acts 11:19-24). They can appeal to diverse groups of people. Effective witnesses exhibit good moral character and are full of the Spirit and faith. Who we are and what we say are both important.

2. Effective churches engage in effective teaching (Acts 11:25-26). Paul and Barnabas taught many people for a whole year. Eventually, the changed lives of the people in the church brought them recognition from the surrounding community, and the church members were first called Christians there.

3. Effective churches are characterized by effective giving (Acts 11:29-30). They gather funds for needy people and allow trusted people in the church to distribute it.

4. Effective churches have effective preachers and teachers (Acts 13:1, 15:35). Teachers are reproduced so that many small groups can be taught.

5. Effective churches engage in effective missions work, including church planting (Acts 13:2-3, 14:26-28). Such churches both send out missionaries and receive reports from them.

Conclusion: Teams cannot preserve the status quo. New team members must be recruited and trained so that the church can be effective in the future.

2008-03-21T19:33:00.004-05:00

(Click on it to make it larger.) Union University Construction: You can see the "safe room" next to the normal rooms as the new dormitory is being built.

2008-03-21T19:29:00.003-05:00

(Click on it to make it larger). Union University Construction: The men are building one of the "safe rooms" in the new dorm using concrete blocks. These rooms will be on the first floor, and students can go to them after a tornado warning is sounded.

2008-03-03T15:43:00.002-06:00

The Church and Its Ordinances – Sermon Outline

Introduction: When I was a child, I learned the old saying that is illustrated with the hands: “Here is the church, and here is the steeple. Open the doors, and here are the people.” The old saying is misleading, however, because the church is not the building; rather, it is the people inside the building. We will see the relationship between the church and its ordinances.

1. The Church

The word “church” in our English translations of the New Testament is a translation of the Greek word “ecclesia” from which we get the words “ecclesiology” and “ecclesiastical.” The word “ecclesia” existed before the church was established. It always referred to an organized assembly of people. The same word is used in Acts 19:29-41 to refer to a secular assembly of people in a theater. In the New Testament in reference to the church, the word always refers to the local church, the institution of the church, or the universal church assembled in heaven. The universal church does not yet exist because it cannot at this time be assembled. As the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message states, the universal church “includes all of the redeemed of all the ages.” Jesus mentioned the church twice: Matthew 16:18-19 and Matthew 18:15-18. In Matthew 16:18-19, He referred to the institution of the church—“the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (NKJV). Jesus was speaking to Peter, an individual, in verse 19 when He said, “And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” The personal pronoun “you” is singular as a Greek word in this verse. Individual Christians have authority to do certain things, such as to share the gospel, thus using the keys of the kingdom. In contrast, Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17 talked about church discipline and then said the following in verse 18: “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” In verse 18, the personal pronoun “you” is plural in the Greek, thus indicating that the church, the group, has authority in some areas such as church discipline. Two other areas in which the church has authority are the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

2. Baptism

An ordinance is a ceremony ordered/ ordained by God, but it does not convey saving grace. In contrast, a sacrament is a ceremony believed to convey saving grace. Southern Baptists observe two ordinances, but they do not believe that sacraments are valid. The mode of biblical baptism is immersion. Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch went down into the water, and they came up out of the water (Acts 8:38-39). Romans 6:3-5 describes baptism as a symbolic identification with Christ and an illustration of the fact that Christians have died to their old lives and raised to walk in newness of life. The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message clarifies the meaning of this ordinance: “It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer's faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer's death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus.” The burial of the old life is a once-for-all-time action, as is being raised to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. Thus, the eternal security of the believer is clearly pictured by baptism. When a Christian is baptized in a church or setting where the people are taught that salvation can be lost, then the symbolism is lost and such a baptism is invalid. Local churches are the administrators and authorities for baptism. Philip was an officer of the church at Jerusalem when he baptized the Ethiopian eunuch. Churches frequently delegate the performance of baptism to their pastors, who are also frequently charged with the examination of candidates. The church, however, is the administrator, and thus churches can decide to allow other members besides their pastors to perform baptisms and examine candidates for baptism. Believers are commanded to baptize new believers (Matthew 28:19), and new believers are commanded to submit to baptism (Acts 2:38). If a believer refuses to be biblically baptized (immersed), then he is being disobedient to God’s command, and he should not be allowed to participate in the observance of the Lord’s Supper in a Southern Baptist Church until he is baptized. This point about baptism is clarified in the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message: “Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord's Supper.”

3. The Lord’s Supper

The Lord’s Supper proclaims His death until He returns to earth, and it should not be desecrated by unconfessed sin and disobedience. Paul discussed the desecration of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:27-30: “Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.” This passage has implications for church discipline. If it is known that a church member is continuing to engage in a serious sin such as adultery and has refused to repent of that sin after the steps of Matthew 18:15-17 have been applied, then that church member should not be allowed to partake of the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper clearly was observed in biblical times as a church ordinance. Paul stated that the Corinthian believers had “come together as a church” and had “come together in one place” (1 Corinthians 11:18, 20) when it was observed. Paul quoted Jesus in saying that this ordinance should be done “in remembrance of Me” (1 Corinthians 11:24-25). Thus, it is an ordinance, and churches should be obedient and observe it on a regular basis. Three ways to observe the Lord’s Supper are prevalent in Southern Baptist Churches:

a. Open Communion: Any Christian, regardless of his beliefs or the beliefs of the group that baptized him and regardless of whether or not he has been biblically immersed, may participate.

b. Close Communion: Southern Baptists and other Christians of like faith and order may participate. They must have been scripturally immersed. This view is the view that I believe to be correct, and it is the view that is expressed in the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message.

c. Closed Communion: Only members of a particular congregation may participate.

Conclusion: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are intimately related to each other and to the local church.

2008-02-29T20:20:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: In the February 19th edition of The Commercial Appeal (the daily newspaper in Memphis), someone wrote the following comment about the tornado at Union University in a letter to the editor:

“It is amazing that a seemingly intelligent man like David Dockery, president of Union University, says that he ‘can point to the overwhelming grace and goodness of our God’ (Feb. 10 article). Really? He should ask himself why it happened in the first place. And where is this ‘overwhelming grace and goodness’?”

I will attempt to answer this man’s two questions.

1. Why did it happen in the first place? There are three possible answers:

a. After Adam and Eve committed their first sin, God cursed the ground (Genesis 3:17). This curse affected all of nature, not just agriculture. Thus, God allows a flawed nature to occasionally cause death and destruction through tornados, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc.

b. God sometimes allows Satan to physically attack people and test their faith, even with a strong wind (Job 1:19). God allows such attacks because He knows that a greater good will eventually come to pass.

c. God sometimes directly afflicts humans with destructive force, as when He sent a great wind in an area of the sea where Jonah was sailing on a ship (Jonah 1:4). God can use such direct action to get the attention of His people and change their direction. He can also take His people from this earth as a result of their disobedience, as with Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-10).

2. Where is the overwhelming grace and goodness?

After Job suffered and had a confrontation with God, he had a better perspective on life and God, and so did his friends. Job’s friends had thought that such personal suffering is always the result of personal sin (Job 4:7-8). They learned a powerful lesson through Job’s suffering. God “gave Job twice as much as he had before” (Job 42:10, NKJV). Seven sons and three daughters had been taken from Job. God gave him seven more sons and three more daughters. Is that twice as much? Yes, he had twice as many children because Job’s original sons and daughters were only temporarily separated from him. He would see them again in heaven. In contrast, Job was given 14,000 more sheep, and he originally had 7,000 sheep. Most of all, God’s grace and goodness are evident in that eternal life cannot be taken from us. In contrast, we can lose our physical lives.

2008-02-15T19:52:00.003-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: I heard a great man say that he believed in the separation of church and state but not in the separation of God and government. I agree with that statement. Government has a place in God’s plan.

1. When our government does not clearly, seriously violate God’s laws, we should be subject to that government (Romans 13:1-2).

2. When our government clearly, seriously violates God’s laws, we have three choices:

A. Be subject, but work within the system to change ungodly laws. For instance, we can work to elect godly officials who will appoint godly judges.

B. Engage in non-violent civil disobedience to accelerate change or to maintain a clean conscience and be obedient to God (Acts 4:19-20, 5:29).

C. Overthrow the government. This rebellion should only occur in the most serious cases. For instance, our government does not require abortions; rather, it now only allows them. Thus, Christians in America do not advocate a revolution. In contrast, to require abortions would be much more serious. Obviously, during World War II the government of Adolf Hitler should have been overthrown. In 1776 the men who led the revolution in America said that life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness were "unalienable rights." They said, "Whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it." They overthrew the governing authorities from England.

3. Governments that function under God’s authority have the right to kill (Romans 13:3-4). Rulers are both a terror to evil people (deterrent) and God’s avengers to execute wrath on evil people (justice). Bearing the sword has implications both for capital punishment and just warfare.

4. We should pay taxes to whom they are due (Romans 13:6). Fair taxes are important for social justice.

5. We should recognize the separation of church and state (Romans 13:7). Churches and church officials should speak clearly and publicly about issues that are both political and spiritual, but they should not endorse candidates. Some of the issues dealt with by candidates are not spiritual in nature, and those non-spiritual issues must also be considered by voters. Churches and church officials should only be concerned with spiritual issues in their official public pronouncements. They should not endorse particular candidates. The decision to vote for a particular candidate involves more than that candidate’s stand on spiritual issues, although the candidate’s stand on spiritual issues is the most important consideration.

Conclusion: Government is a God-given institution. It should not be ignored. We should be good stewards of our citizenship and be salt and light in our communities. Government, however, is not a panacea. It will not solve all the spiritual problems in our communities.

2008-02-06T22:05:00.001-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage from Tornado at Union University: Feb. 6, 2008

2008-02-06T22:01:00.001-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage from Tornado at Union University: Feb. 6, 2008

2008-02-06T21:49:00.000-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage from Tornado at Union University: Feb. 6, 2008

2008-02-06T21:45:00.000-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage from Tornado at Union University: Feb. 6, 2008. The Duesner dorm is on the right.

2008-02-06T21:43:00.001-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage from Tornado at Union University: Feb. 6, 2008

2008-02-06T21:34:00.001-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage at Union University from Tornado: My son's blue Hyundai Santa Fe was barely damaged. Only the passenger side window was broken.

2008-02-06T20:22:00.000-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage at Union University from Tornado: My younger son was in the first floor bathroom when the tornado hit. You can see the bathtub in the second floor bathroom in this photo taken on Wednesday, Feb. 6, 2008. This building was the Ebersold dorm. The Watters Commons area that collapsed was next to it.

2008-02-06T20:20:00.000-06:00

(Click on it to make it bigger.) Damage at Union University: The Roof of Jennings Hall, Feb. 6, 2008

2008-02-01T17:11:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: Many people today think that effective Christian leaders have detailed visions from God and are able to cast their visions well. People who follow such leaders relish having detailed spiritual road maps for the future. Unfortunately, rather than understanding the biblical definition for the word “vision,” such leaders claim to have a new vision from God and use the secular definition—a detailed goal for the future. When the Bible discusses the type of vision that motivates, it always refers to supernatural revelation. Many secular businesses and even schools have "visions" and "vision statements," not supernatural revelation. Many pastors have imported the secular definition and don't understand the biblical definition. If they understood the biblical definition, they would not claim to have a new vision.

1. What We Should Not Do to Determine God’s Will—Look for New Visions

Proverbs 29:18 – “Where there is no vision, the people are unrestrained, but happy is he who keeps the law” (NASB). This verse is often abused by those who talk about visions. The vision here refers to a detailed prophetic vision of the future that was supernaturally given by God. Such visions always came true. Daniel received such prophetic visions, as did the apostle John on the Isle of Patmos. Jeremiah warned of false prophets who claim to have a vision from God in Jeremiah 23:16: “Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘Do not listen to the words of the prophets who are prophesying to you. They are leading you into futility; they speak a vision of their own imagination, not from the mouth of the LORD.’” Another verse that is frequently abused is Joel 2:28: “It will come about after this that I will pour out My Spirit on all mankind; and your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions.” This verse was quoted in Acts 2:17 by Peter on the Day of Pentecost. Peter translated “after this” from Joel 2:28 as “in the last days” in Acts 2:17. Thus, many people think the direct visions from God will continue until the second coming of Christ, but the verse from Joel was fulfilled during the time that Peter lived. The “last days” does not always refer to the time of the second coming of Christ. Jesus died on the cross in the last days—“at the consummation of the ages” (Hebrews 9:26). The author of Hebrews said that God “in these last days has spoken to us in His Son” (Hebrews 1:2). The Canon of Scripture is now closed. If people could now receive direct visions from God such as the vision John received on Patmos, then the Canon would not be closed, and we would in fact need notebooks to which we could continually add new visions—new revelations from God. New visions that come directly from God do not exist today. Scripture is sufficient. We now have no need for new visions—new detailed, supernatural, prophetic revelations.

2. What We Should Do to Discern God’s Will—Don’t Conform, Be Transformed

Romans 12:1-2 – “Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.” Paul was writing to Christians here—the “brethren.” The word “prove” in this context means “discern.” Thus, to discern God’s will, Christians must do two things. They must not be conformed to the world, and they must be transformed by the renewing of their minds. Many Christians today have gone to the opposite extreme of the Amish, and they are greatly infected by worldliness. We must allow Scripture to transform our minds like a scalpel in spiritual surgery. Indeed, “the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

Conclusion: When an important decision needs to be made, Christians should pray about the issue and carefully analyze the issue using Scriptural principles and renewed minds while not allowing worldly attitudes to affect the decision-making process. The Bible is sufficient to direct us. We do not need any new visions. We can certainly set goals, but we should not define goals as visions. Biblical visions were always direct, supernatural revelations from God.

2008-01-22T15:03:00.000-06:00

Sunday's Sermon Outline

Introduction: Is a seed alive or dead? The answer depends on the dormancy period of the particular seed. If a seed does not germinate during its allotted dormancy (life) period, then it will die and will not germinate under any conditions. Some maple species have seeds that only stay alive for two weeks before they die. In contrast, some lotus species have seeds that will stay alive (yet dormant) for thousands of years. Even though a seed is dormant and appears dead, it will germinate under the right conditions. Those conditions may involve heat, light, and/or water. Inside the seed is a live plant embryo that includes a “pre-root” and a “pre-stem.” The “pre-root” emerges first during germination, and from it comes the primary root. Jesus compared the seed to the word of God in the parable of the sower and the soils. In this parable, the constants are the sower and the seed, and the variable is the soil. This parable is found in Matthew 13, Mark 4, and Luke 8.

1. The Wayside (Hardened Path) – In this soil there is no germination. This person does not understand the gospel (Matthew 13:19). In context of this chapter, the understanding refers to spiritual comprehension rather than intellectual comprehension (Matthew 13:13, 15). The proper conditions for germination are absent. This non-Christian hears the gospel but is not placed under the special conviction of the Holy Spirit.

2. The Rocky Soil – In this soil the seed apparently germinates, but no primary root develops: “He has no root in himself” (Matthew 13:21, NKJV), and there is a lack of soil (Matthew 13:5) and moisture (Luke 8:6). These non-Christians “believe for a while” (Luke 8:13), but this belief is mere intellectual assent, not saving faith. An example of this type of person was Simon Magus who believed and was baptized (Acts 8:13), but was later found to be a non-Christian. Simon Peter said that Simon Magus needed to repent so that “perhaps” he might be forgiven (Acts 8:22). Simon Peter also said that Simon Magus was “bound by iniquity” (Acts 8:23), but Christians have been freed from sin’s slavery (Romans 6:18) although sin still influences them. These non-Christians are described in 1 John 2:19: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.” These people are quickly revealed to be non-Christians when “trouble or persecution arises because of the word” (Matthew 13:21).

3. The Thorny Soil – In this soil the seed apparently germinates and grows into what seems to be a mature plant, but these people “bring no fruit to maturity” (Luke 8:14). Jesus had earlier said, “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them” (Matthew 7:19-20). All Christians bring good fruit to maturity. The non-Christians represented by the thorny soil slowly are revealed to be what they are as “the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word” (Matthew 13:22). As is the case with the rocky soil, 1 John 2:19 can be applied to the thorny soil. The non-Christians represented by the rocky soil are revealed quickly, but the non-Christians represented by the thorny soil may not be revealed for many years. Judas Iscariot was an example of a person represented by the thorny soil. Jesus knew about him from the beginning, but Judas was chosen as an apostle to fulfill prophecy.

4. The Good Soil – In this soil the seed germinates, grows, and bears good fruit. There are different levels of fruit bearing: “some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty” (Matthew 13:8), but all Christians bear good fruit. These people have made an ultimate, final decision to surrender their lives to Christ in repentance and faith.

Conclusion: Matthew 13:1 tells us that on the same day Jesus gave this parable, He had earlier had a confrontational conversation with some Pharisees in which they accused Him of casting out demons by Beelzebub (Matthew 12:24). In reply, Jesus said that blasphemy against the Spirit would not be forgiven (Matthew 12:31). Their accusation was the outward manifestation of an ultimate, final rejection of Jesus, which is the unforgivable sin. The Hebrews 6:4-6 passage tells us that such an ultimate, final rejection of Jesus is unforgivable. The tasters refused to swallow (commit their lives to Jesus) after a “once for all time” (Greek hapax) enlightenment. The parallel passage in Hebrews 10:26-29 says that this willful sin involves insulting the Holy Spirit and that “there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.” Non-Christians who make an ultimate, final decision to reject Christ while under the special conviction of the Holy Spirit have committed the unpardonable sin. Non-Christians who make an ultimate, final decision to surrender their lives to Christ in repentance and faith while under the special conviction of the Holy Spirit have become Christians and have eternal life.

2008-01-06T21:17:00.000-06:00

New Year’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: A guy who works regularly recently said that January is the worst month at the gym because all the “resolution people” are there. Many people at this time of year feel that it is the ideal time to begin exercising and losing weight. When we make resolutions, we are saying that it is time to take action.

1. There’s an ideal time for important actions (Ecclesiastes 3:1-8). There are seasons in our lives where we have special opportunities. We should seize the day when it is the ideal time. God does great things in our lives through divine appointments. Sometimes we get second chances if we miss an opportunity.

2. There’s an ideal time to share the gospel with particular individuals and groups of people (Luke 10:1-11). One reason that laborers are few is that they feel overwhelmed by the task of harvesting. Jesus made it clear that the task is not overwhelming if we locate receptive individuals and groups of people. Jesus also said that we should not cast our gospel pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). He was referring to resistant people. The apostle Paul followed Jesus’ instructions to shake off the dust and go elsewhere when resistant people are encountered (Luke 10:11, Acts 13:51, Acts 18:6).

Conclusion: Non-Christians should not receive the grace of God in vain during the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:1-2). When they are under the special conviction of the Holy Spirit, they should take advantage of their special opportunity and be willing to surrender their lives to Christ in repentance and faith.

2007-12-31T14:06:00.000-06:00

My Interview with an Imam

I served as an IMB missionary to South Korea for ten years, and there are few Muslims there, so obviously any missiological expertise I have is not in the area of Islamic studies. I am very interested in Islam, however, and I decided to see how an imam would react to key elements of the Camel method. I knew that an imam would most likely be resistant to Camel methodology, but I believed that, generally speaking, solidly Muslim individuals who had been well trained by such an imam would also be resistant. I believed and still believe that nominal Muslim groups are much more receptive to gospel presentations than are solid, well-trained Muslim groups. Of course, individuals within resistant groups can surrender their lives in repentance and faith to Christ while under the special conviction of the Holy Spirit, but I believe that missionaries are wise to concentrate their efforts and resources on groups that are receptive now, but which may become resistant later. Kevin Greeson stated that the Camel method is a “powerful tool in reaching Muslims everywhere” (Greeson, The Camel, 2007, p. 16). In the forward to Greeson’s book, an unnamed “Missionary in the Arab Muslim World” described his view of the significance of Greeson’s methodology: “There may not be a magic bullet for Muslim evangelism, but the Camel is as close as it gets” (The Camel, p. 13). To be fair in my assessment, I want to point out that Greeson said the following: “Do not linger in a community that is unresponsive. Not only is it unproductive, wasting your time laboring in an unresponsive community can even be dangerous” (The Camel, p. 76). The imam allowed me to record the interview. He had studied the New Testament and was fluent in both Arabic and English.

First, I asked to what factor the numerical growth of Muslims in America can be attributed:

BT: “I read that in 1998, in an article, that at the present rate of growth then, some people project that Islam will be the second-largest religion in America in about twenty years. And I was wondering how you would account for that growth. Is it because of immigration, or because of Muslims in the United States having a lot of children, or effective evangelism of non-Muslims, or all of the above?”

Imam: “It’s not because of the important number of immigrants. It’s not because of effective evangelism. . . . It’s the message of Islam as a universal message.”

In his “Camel 101” instructions, Greeson’s first key point was in regard to surah 3:47 when he gave the following advice for a practitioner: “Then ask, ‘Does this ayyah say that Isa came directly from Allah, and that He did not have a father?’” (The Camel, p. 107) Thus, the following conversation ensued:

BT: “Obviously, the Qur’an discusses the prophet Isa. I was particularly interested in the third surah, especially the forty-seventh verse. Does this ayyah say that Isa came directly from Allah, and that He did not have a father?”

Imam: “Yes, what the Qur’an says is, and I know this, what the Qur’an says is God sent angel Gabriel to Mary to give Mary the good news of having a child. And Mary as a woman and knowing what it means to have a child and how a child is conceived, Mary says, ‘How can I have a child and have not permitted adultery or any man has ever touched me?’ because that’s the natural way to have a child. Then Gabriel answers and says, ‘It is a decision your Lord has already taken,’ and Gabriel (unintelligible word) this period in Mary, and then Mary started feeling pregnant. This is one of the miracles of God. He’s so powerful, He can do anything He wants. The same way He created Adam the first human being without any father or mother. And create Eve from Adam without any mother {sic}, the same way God could create Isa, Jesus, with a mother and without a father. Now, Isa then went through those steps, the three major steps as far as pregnancy is concerned, but it was in a quicker way because God made it so, and then was born naturally, the way we all were born, and to be a miracle, and the Qur’an called it a miracle. Remember when the people of Israel came to Mary they said, ‘How come you have a child? Your father had never been a bad person. So how come Mary you have a child?’ Then Mary didn’t say a word. The Qur’an said (unintelligible Arabic words). She just pointed her finger to the newborn baby, and the newborn baby Jesus then spoke from the cradle. So {sic} asked to defend His mother, and what did He say? He says, ‘I am a prophet of God, and I was given the book and the wisdom, and I was commanded to say My prayers and to give charity.’ That’s how the Qur’an states it. So then, Jesus from there spoke to the people, which was a miracle of God for a newborn baby to speak out defending his mother. And this is how the Qur’an states the story of Jesus in many, many chapters, not only in Chapter Mary, but if you go to Chapter Mary, also, which is not the third chapter, but you will see also how detailed it is from {sic} God takes the plan of how Jesus works. And Muslims believe in that as a miracle and don’t take Jesus as anything else {sic} as a creature of God who is a prophet and a messenger to the people of Israel.”

Greeson had warned that such a response could occur: “He may reply that Adam did not have a father” (The Camel, p. 107). Greeson’s main goal, however, at this point was to use surah 3:45-47 to show that Jesus is holy. The imam instead emphasized Allah’s power and the humanity of Jesus. Greeson’s second key point in the “Camel 101” presentation was in regard to Isa’s power over death, and Greeson stated, “Then ask, ‘Do you know of any other prophet who was given the power over death?’ He will respond with, ‘No.’” (The Camel, p. 108) My conversation with the imam continued:

BT: “Now in two verses later, in verse forty-nine in surah three, it seems to indicate that he was given power over death. Do you know of any other prophet mentioned that had that kind of power over death?”

Imam: “That was not only given to him. It was given to previous messengers and even was given to Prophet Muhammad—peace be upon him. But the important words in that verse, or words in any verse is important, but the important thing to lay the stress upon is ‘with God’s permission,’ meaning he wouldn’t be able to do it without the permission of God. Remember what Jesus said, ‘I was sent down on earth not to do My will but to do the will of the One who sent Me.’ And in some Scriptures you see the ‘will of the Father’ or he said the ‘will of the One who sent Me.’ So then Jesus was never entrusted in his own will, but the will of God. This is why he couldn’t do anything without the permission of God. This is why he sometimes would vacate anyplace and go alone and pray and communicate with the Lord so as to have the permission of the Lord as far as what he was doing is concerned. So that in that verse (unintelligible word) was given the power, and the power is known. Jesus could raise the dead but with the permission of God which has nothing to do with his human status. But it is a power coming from God with the permission of God Himself.”

Thus, the imam agreed with Greeson’s assertion that Isa had power over death, but the imam stressed that such power came from Allah, not from Jesus. The imam continually emphasized the attributes of Allah, not those of Jesus. Greeson’s third key point in the “Camel 101” presentation was in regard to Isa knowing the way to heaven, and he stated, “Finally, use this ayyah to help Muslims understand that Isa knows the way to heaven because He Himself has traveled the straight path from Allah to earth and returned to Allah in heaven. . . . Say to him. . . . Out of all the prophets, which one do you think is most capable of helping me get to heaven?” (The Camel, p. 108) Our conversation continued:

BT: “In surah three, in verse fifty-five, ‘Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so I will decide between you concerning that in which you differed.’ So it seems to indicate at that time Isa was taken to heaven, and the path was shown to him. Out of all the prophets, would he be the one who was most capable of helping a human being know the way to heaven because of that incident?”

Imam: “You know actually every single prophet was given the knowledge and the wisdom to show people the way to heaven—every single prophet. But Jesus is very particular because no prophet has ever experienced what he has experienced as far as ascending to the Lord when he was thirty-three years old. Then he ascended, meaning he was elevated to heaven. And he is living somewhere in heaven with the same age—thirty-three years old—and he will come back on earth with the same age—thirty-three years old, because in heaven there is no getting old. You will be always in the same style, in the same level. Therefore he will come back as we believe, and this is why the Qur’an says ‘ascended.’ As he was living, a human being, he was ascended. So then he did not die, but he will come back on earth and then will face death as everybody will face death and then be buried. And when he comes, he will come at the same time with what we call ‘Al Mahdi (unintelligible Arabic word)’ the messiah. In our own will come also will {sic} (unintelligible Arabic word) Dajjal the antichrist. They will all have the same time. And then he with the help of the Mahdi then will kill the antichrist who will actually mess around on earth. So then Jesus as we said was ascended and of course will come back and will face that because he is a human being. Therefore he will have to go through what human beings go through, but was given favors that was given to nobody else as far as his birth is concerned and as far as his ascending to the heavens is concerned.”

Thus, the imam did not sense Christ’s exclusivity in this surah. He did not view Christ as being the most capable prophet to help a person go to heaven. The imam believed that every prophet knew the way to heaven. Greeson placed a lot of emphasis on using the Arabic word mutawaffika in surah 3:55 as a bridge to the Christian understanding of Christ’s death on the cross: “According to ayyah 55, it was Allah’s plan to cause Isa to die. Many Muslims will try to gloss over this point, even denying that Jesus died on the cross. But the Arabic word used in the Qur’an here is unmistakable, mutawaffika—‘to cause to die.’ It was Allah’s plan to cause Isa to die. . . . When you hear your friend pronounce the word mutawaffika ask him to stop and discuss this word. . . . If he does know Arabic, he should answer, ‘The word means “to die,” “to cause to die,” or “to kill.”’” (The Camel, p. 138) Our conversation continued:

BT: “Okay. In this translation it says, ‘I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth).’ I think the Arabic word in question is mutawaffika or the short form tawaffika, and apparently that word can be translated in several different ways—as ‘received,’ as ‘to take back,’ but some people say it’s the most common verb used in Arabic for ‘to cause to die.’”

Imam: “It says, (unintelligible Arabic passage). Now this verse means, and I’m going to tell you what it means. Remember when the Lord said, ‘O Jesus, I am going to ascend {sic} you, to elevate you toward me. And you will come to me as you will be purified,’ meaning God will purify Jesus. ‘Purify you’ (unintelligible Arabic phrase) ‘from those people who are disbelievers,’ meaning those people who are disbelievers—they are coming to harm you, and I’m gonna avoid {sic} that to happen. This is why when they came to get Jesus, actually Jesus was elevated towards heaven, and one of them was given the image of Jesus so as to be crucified. That was the punishment.”

BT: “Was that Judas in most people’s minds who are Muslim, or do most Muslims speculate on who that person was that took the place of Jesus?”

Imam: “Yes, yes, they speculate. Some of them say it was one of Jesus’ disciples, and some say it was one of those who was coming to harm him. But Allah knows best. And therefore Allah says then, (Unintelligible Arabic phrase). ‘And I will make those people who believe and follow you,’ meaning the true believers and the true followers—disciples—of Jesus. (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) ‘And I will put them’ actually ‘on top of those who disbelieved in you,’ meaning they will be better than them and much more honorable than them. (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) ‘And this will happen until the day of judgment, after the day of judgment.’ (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) ‘And know for sure that you all shall return to me.’ (Unintelligible Arabic phrase) ‘And when you come to me, then I will judge in between you.’”

BT: “So, mutawaffika in this context means ‘to take him back,’ or does it mean ‘to cause him to die’?”

Imam: “Yes, mutawaffik is a word that is coming from fata, and fata means ‘to die.’ But what does it mean? That means separation from the light in this world to another life. Now Jesus was taken from this life to another life because the life in heaven far differs from the life on earth. So therefore still he did not die, but mutawaffika (unintelligible Arabic phrase), meaning I will take you from this life to the other life.”

BT: “So He did not experience physical death.”

Imam: “No.”

BT: “He was just quickly transferred and changed.”

Imam: “That’s the word—transferred—from this life to another life, but did not face death, physically, but will face death physically after having returned on earth by the end of time.”

BT: “Is that the standard translation or interpretation that most Muslims give to that?”

Imam: “Yes, you know that is the authentic interpretation we have received from Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Now, let me make something clear. We have those we call ‘Orientalists.’ You may have heard of them. It is a sect which took birth in the fourth or fifth century (unintelligible Arabic phrase) in Europe because of the extension of Islam in Europe. So therefore they have to create something which will sometime contradict. It’s within Islam, but which will {sic} contradict the teachings of authentic Islam. But still God will bless the community of Muslims of the best understanding, of the understanding itself of the religion. But anytime somebody brings something out of the limits of Islam, then the Muslims will know. The scholars will know, and therefore the Qur’an will teach us how to deal with those people. Those Orientalists now will come with certain ideas like that.”

As part of Greeson’s third key point in his “Camel 101” presentation, he suggested using surah 46:9: “Ask him to read surah 46, The Sandhills, verse 9 in which Allah instructs Mohammed. . . . This ayyah states that Mohammed did not know where he or his followers would go after death” (The Camel, p. 109). Our conversation continued:

BT: “I have a question about surah forty-six, verse nine, The Sandhills. My translation, Muhammad is speaking: ‘Say: I am not the first of the apostles, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner.’ Is this saying that he did not know his final destination, or what would be your interpretation of that verse?”

Imam: “Okay, that verse reads this way: ‘Say, I am not a new thing among the messengers,’ meaning, I am not the first messenger sent. ‘Nor do I know what will be done with me or you. I only follow that which is revealed to me, and I am but a plain warner.’ Okay, concerning this verse, Allah is showing us that there have been prophets and messengers before Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. So then, whatever happened to those prophets and messengers before him may happen to him—Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him—how some messengers were killed by the people of Israel, and some were tortured. And this may happen to him. And he faced something like that when he went to Taif, when the people—the community of Taif—took the sick people, you know, and also the children, and they were throwing stones to him so as to have him bleeding. And God actually knew about it and sent the angel to him and say, ‘Whatever you want me to do for these people, I can do,’ as He did to other people who used to do prophets like that. So then, God (unintelligible Arabic phrase) of course had the knowledge, and Allah gave him the knowledge, and he can predict things. But he would just let people know that I’m a human being like you. But what is special about me is that I am a messenger (unintelligible Arabic phrase), I am a person who God is revealing things to. So whatever happened to the messengers before can also happen to me, and that’s what I know what I know, what will be done with me or you. Nor do I know what will be done with me.”

BT: “So he was not talking about the way to heaven. He was talking about physically being attacked on earth.”

Imam: “There you go. The messengers faced those kinds of problems actually before him. Then this—also to let people know that the prophets and messengers who came before him were also teaching the same thing that he is teaching. Therefore he may face the same thing that they faced with opposition from other people. And by the way, if you really want to have an understanding of the Qur’an, this is Tafsir Ibn Kathir. This is the most authentic translation or explanation of the Qur’an.”

Obviously, this passage in the Qur'an (46:9) does not explicitly mention death. Greeson’s interpretation of the passage thus fails with solid Muslims without an explicit mention of physical death. Greeson said that if a Muslim gave a favorable answer to the third key point in the “Camel 101” presentation, then the Christian witness should then present the gospel in a way that utilizes Islamic bridges: “If he answers, ‘Isa is the one most capable to help me get to heaven,’ then you may have found your person of peace. Walk him through the Korbani Plan of Salvation.” (The Camel, p. 108) Greeson explained the plan: “The Korbani Plan uses natural bridges within the culture of every Muslim to introduce the New Testament message of salvation. Some Camel practitioners go straight into the Korbani Plan of Salvation from the initial Camel presentation. . . . The word korbani (kor BAHN ee) comes from the word korban which has both Hebrew and Arabic roots. As a verb it means to draw near, but as a noun it means a sacrifice. For Jew and Arab alike, the connection was clear: the way for people to draw near to God was through a sacrifice. Each year, Muslims observe a sacrifice called Korbani-Eid (also known as Eid-al-Adha or Bakr-Eid.)” (The Camel, p. 113) I questioned the imam about the meaning of the festival:

BT: “I understand there is a festival called Korbani Eid. I was wondering, is that practiced all over the world? When I’ve read about it, it sounds like the sacrifice atones for names placed on a piece of paper as well as those placing their hands on the animal, and then the animal is killed. Is that a worldwide practice, or is that something confined to one area?”

Imam: “Okay, the Eid is called the Eid-ul-Adha, meaning the festival of Adha, meaning ‘sacrifice.’ Now, remember what I said earlier about culture. Culture is very important to people, and people do—and let me just mention that placing your hands on the animal while it is being slaughtered—you know, we used to do that when our father was slaughtering, you know, the sheep on this particular day. It is our culture, and the people used to believe that if you do so, you will have the same reward as your father—the one who is sacrificing the sheep or the animal on that particular day. Now, Eid-ul-Adha is the Eid of sacrifice, which is going to be on Wednesday, this coming Wednesday, and you will be very welcome to come there, you know, and see how things go and all that. And then on the particular we just remember the day when Abraham was about to sacrifice his son Ishmael as related in the Bible or in other Scriptures. And God then, of course, put Abraham and his son through that test even though God knew exactly what Abraham believed, but He wanted Abraham to be sure of his faith, and Abraham was of course as a prophet and a messenger. So then, God put him through that test, and Abraham passed the test, so he was to be rewarded. Okay, so Allah made his children to be prophets and also the Prophet Muhammad to come you know through Ishmael, you know, as (unintelligible Arabic phrase), and those were Ishmael’s words, the father, we can say, the father of Arabs. Now, what is to be done is this: to go perform the sala and then go and slaughter, meaning the sacrifice. There is no putting the hands and all that. That is part of culture. It isn’t a part of the teaching of Islam. It is just part of culture, like I said again. But it is not a culture (unintelligible phrase), but it is better for the Muslim to limit himself in the teachings of Islam and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. But it’s all about culture at that particular point you are making. But of course every single Muslim, if they can, have to sacrifice this sheep or whatever they can, according to Islam, and for the sake of God, not for the sake of anything else. We don’t need the blood, and we cannot throw away the meat. That’s why we have to eat from the meat and also give charity to those who don’t have from the meat as well, and the blood is shed for the sake of Allah. We don’t need the blood. And sometimes as you go, they will, you know, put their finger in the blood and then put it right on their face, you know, all day long. This is part of culture but not part of Islam as well.”

BT: “In some of the cultures is there a feeling that the guilt of the people is transferred to the animal, and maybe that’s why they touch the animal and put the animal’s blood on them—that the animal’s sacrifice takes care of their guilt and that it benefits them somehow?”

Imam: “It has nothing to do with guiltiness or anything like that. No. It is something prescribed by God, and we do it as we pray, as we give charity. It is an order from God, and we do it, now, for those who can. For those who cannot, it is not an obligation, but as far as feeling guiltiness and your guilt being carried away along with a sacrifice, no, Islam does not teach that. And if people think about that, it’s because based on character, that’s different from what Islam teaches. It’s not going to carry anything, but you do it. You do it for the sake of God, and then God will reward you and may forgive you of your sins because of how submitted and devoted you are in obeying Him.”

Thus, the imam believed that the observance of Korbani-Eid is a simple act of obedience and has nothing to do with a transfer of guilt. For solid, well-trained Muslims such as the imam, the festival cannot be utilized as a bridge to the Christian understanding of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.

Christian missionaries to Islamic groups should concentrate on both receptive groups and receptive individuals, if possible. Jesus made this very point: “Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace be to this house.’ If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; but if not, it will return to you. Stay in that house, eating and drinking what they give you; for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not keep moving from house to house. Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ But whatever city you enter and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’” (Luke 10:5-9, NASB)

Donald McGavran, a missiologist who served among many Muslims, made the same point about concentration on receptive groups:

“Correct policy is to occupy fields of low receptivity lightly. The harvest will ripen some day. Their populations are made up of men and women for whom Christ died. While they continue in their rebellious and resistant state, they should be given the opportunity to hear the gospel in as courteous a way as possible. But they should not be heavily occupied lest, fearing that they will be swamped by Christians, they become even more resistant. They should not be bothered and badgered. Generations should not be reared in schools where—receiving small doses of the gospel that they successfully reject—they are in effect inoculated against the Christian religion. Resistant lands should be held lightly. While holding them lightly, Christian leaders should perfect organizational arrangement so that when these lands turn responsive, missionary resources can be sent in quickly. For some time now we have been hearing a great deal about the sudden new receptivity among Muslims in Indonesia. It is devoutly to be hoped that missionaries to Muslims in great numbers will be transferred to that part of the world. Some have, but not nearly enough. Reinforcing receptive areas is the only mode of mission by which resistant populations that become receptive may be led to responsible membership in ongoing churches.”

Donald A. McGavran, Understanding Church Growth, rev. and ed. C. Peter Wagner, 3d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 191.

2007-12-09T22:19:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: When I was a boy, I made some startling discoveries about Christmas. I learned that getting what I want doesn’t necessarily make me happy. I also learned that Christmas is not about me. Finally, I learned that Christmas is about Jesus Christ and how He humbled Himself in the incarnation.

1. Jesus was fully God and fully human in the humility of His incarnation, and He also humbled Himself by His death on the cross (Philippians 2:5-8). Jesus was “in the form of God” (verse 6, NKJV) and took “the form of a bondservant . . . coming in the likeness of men” (verse 7). The translation and interpretation of verse 6 is controversial. Jesus was not tempted to rob His Father to get equality with Him. Jesus already had equality with His Father. Other translations say that Jesus did not consider equality with God as something to be grasped, as something to be held onto, as something to be used for His own advantage, or as something to be exploited. The translation and interpretation of verse 7 is also controversial. He “made Himself of no reputation.” Some translations say that He emptied Himself. The essential truth in both verse 6 and verse 7 is that Jesus left His environment of glory behind when He was incarnated on earth. He did not lose any of His divinity. Jesus was still fully God while He had a human body on earth. Theologians have debated how to explain the fact that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human. Some people said that He was really two separate persons. Other people have said that He was one person with one predominant nature. At Chalcedon in 451 AD the correct position was described: “We also teach that we apprehend this one and only Christ-Son, Lord, only-begotten—in two natures, and we do this without confusing the two natures, without transmuting one nature into the other, without dividing them into two separate categories, without contrasting them according to area or function. The distinctiveness of each nature is not nullified by the union. Instead, the ‘properties’ of each nature are conserved and both natures concur in one ‘person’ and in one reality. They are not divided or cut into two persons.” Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus “was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” James 1:13, however, says that God “cannot be tempted by evil.” Obviously, Jesus’ human nature could be tempted, but His divine nature could not be tempted. How about Jesus viewed as one person, not as two natures? Could Jesus be tempted? There is a mystery here. Interestingly, when Jesus was in agony before His arrest and crucifixion, He stated, “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.”

2. Our response to God’s initiative should be worship and spiritual growth (Philippians 2:9-13). At the end of time, every creature (angelic and human) will bow before Jesus and confess that He is Lord. Of course, not all of these creatures will be elect/saved creatures. We must surrender our lives to Christ in repentance and faith before we physically die. True worship of Jesus now is possible for Christians who can worship Him in spirit and in truth. In verse 12, Christians are told to “work out” their salvation in fear and trembling. This verse does not mean that Christians need to be re-converted or that they should be afraid of losing their salvation. Christians cannot lose their salvation. Salvation has three aspects: justification, sanctification, and glorification. Verse 12 is a reference to sanctification, the process of spiritual growth. Verse 13 says that God “works in” us “both to will and to do for His good pleasure.” As we grow spiritually, we can cooperate with God in being all that He wants us to be, and thus we can “work out” our salvation. Our flesh, with which we are born, still influences us to sin, but the indwelling Spirit in us influences us to work for God for His good pleasure.

Conclusion: We should strive to humble ourselves and be obedient. We should worship Christ and grow spiritually. Christmas is about Him and His humble incarnation.

2007-12-07T18:57:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: At this time of the year we sometimes hear that more people commit suicide during the holidays than at other times. This statement is simply not true. The number of suicides is less than average during Thanksgiving and the Christmas holidays. The number does go up on New Year’s Day, and that increase probably occurs because people dread returning to their normal routine. Experts do say, however, that stress increases during the holidays. The traffic jams, expenditure of money, extended time with relatives, and changes in sleep patterns increase our stress levels. Two other factors increase our stress, and the Bible deals with these two factors.

1. Unresolved anger adds to our stress (Ephesians 4:26-27, 29-32). Verse 26 includes a quote from Psalm 4:4: “‘Be angry, and do not sin:’ Do not let the sun go down on your wrath” (NKJV). Verse 31 tells us to put away bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking. Anger should be a temporary phenomenon, not a lasting obsession. Unresolved anger becomes bitterness. Such bitter poison can be passed on to our children. Our children may be uncomfortable around relatives during the holidays after they have heard those relatives criticized at home.

2. Materialism adds to our stress (1 Timothy 6:6-11). Verse 8 tells us that we should be content with adequate food and clothing. Most of us do not need expensive gifts at Christmas. We should strive for a simpler lifestyle and better stewardship of our resources. Verse 9 says that those “who desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare.” This verse can apply to very poor people because it is not discussing wealthy people; rather, it is discussing those who desire to be wealthy. Verse 10 is often misquoted. It does not say that money is the root of all evil. It says that “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.” Again, wealth is not the problem; rather, the love of wealth is the problem. Jesus said that no one can serve two masters and that we cannot serve both God and mammon (Matthew 6:24). Some people worship wealth; they place it above God in their list of priorities. This temptation is especially strong during the holiday season.

Conclusion: At this time of the year, we should focus on the simple, yet important things. We can focus better if we deal properly with unresolved anger and materialism.

2007-11-28T16:04:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: The number “3” is an important number in the Bible. The one God is revealed as three persons. The temple and tabernacle had three basic parts: the outside court, the inside Holy Place, and the innermost Holy of Holies. In Genesis 1:26, what did God mean when He said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness” (NASB)? We know that we are not divine. We are the creature, not the Creator. The number “3,” however, is significant for us. I am a trichotomist, not a dichotomist, and I thus believe that each of us has three parts, not two. In 1 Corinthians 3:16, Paul asked, “Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?” I believe that an analogy can be drawn between the temple/tabernacle and the human being. The outside court, like the human body, could be seen by anyone. The inside Holy Place, like the human soul, could be seen by a few people. The innermost Holy of Holies, like the human spirit, could only be seen by one man/Man. In 1 Thessalonians 5:23, Paul used the Greek optative mood to express his wish, “May your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Deuteronomy 6:5 also affirms three parts: the heart (spirit), the soul, and might (body). Let’s examine each of the three parts:

1. The Human Spirit – Both the Hebrew word “ruah” and the Greek word “pnooma” can mean breath, wind, or spirit/Spirit. We get our English words “pneumonia” and “pneumatic” from the Greek word. The Holy Spirit dwells in the Christian's human spirit. Ephesians 4:30 says, “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” The word “sealed” here does not refer to a seal that holds things together to prevent leakage; rather, it refers to a seal that is stamped on something as a sign of approval like the “Good Housekeeping” seal of approval or the seal on a signet ring. We can grieve the Spirit Who dwells in us. The spirit is an invisible part of us, and the conscience is part of the human spirit. Notice what Romans 2:15 says about the conscience: “They know the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternatively accusing or else defending them.” The conscience can accuse or defend. It needs to be enlightened by the word of God. Some new Christians feel guilty about things about which they should not feel guilty, and the Bible says that they have weak consciences. The consciences of non-Christians can become seared and corrupted.

2. The Human Soul – From the Greek word “psuche” we get our words “psyche” and “psychology.” Freud is considered to be the father of psychology. He had a Jewish background and believed that human beings have three parts: the id (bodily impulses), the superego (high moral impulses), and the ego (the mediator between the often conflicting bodily impulses and high moral impulses). Perhaps Freud was influenced by Deuteronomy 6:5, a verse which affirms three parts. The soul is at the intersection between our visible (body) and invisible (spirit) parts. We can make both freewill and non-freewill decisions. When we make freewill decisions, the soul will be influenced by both physical impulses and spiritual impulses. Hebrews 4:12 states, “The word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and pierces as far as the division of soul and spirit.” The word of God is used like a scalpel to deal with sin and to help the soul separate spiritual impulses from physical impulses.

3. The Human Body – From the Greek word “soma” we get our word “somatic.” Paul in Romans 12:1 urged Christians to “present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.” Remember that the place of sacrifice in temple/tabernacle worship was the altar in the outside court. We should be willing to sacrifice our bodies for God anywhere and anytime. Our bodies should be kept holy. We should be good stewards of our bodies by being careful about our diets and exercise regimens.

Conclusion: At the time of conversion, the Holy Spirit will move into the human spirit and begin to change the soul and body in the process of sanctification (spiritual growth). We should desire to grow spiritually as much as we can in our lifetimes.

2007-11-22T08:32:00.000-06:00

Tuesday Night’s Sermon Outline
(I preached this message at a Community Thanksgiving Service.)

Introduction: In a letter to his daughter in 1784, Benjamin Franklin seemed to prefer the turkey over the eagle as a national bird for America. He said that the turkey is a courageous bird; however, he also admitted that the turkey is “a little vain and silly.” In our country there now seem to be two distinct groups. One group is distinctly Christian, but the second is not and seems to hold values that are far from being Christian values. The same situation existed in ancient Rome. Many historians think Christians played a major role in the fall of the Roman Empire. Christians spread their influence in Rome, and they even appeared in the household of Caesar (Philippians 4:22). Paul’s letter to the Romans was written sometime between 54 and 58 BC. Nero became emperor in 54 BC. His vanity and silliness influenced Rome in a bad way. The two groups in Rome are clearly contrasted in chapter one of Romans.

1. Paul thanked God through Jesus Christ, and he was ready to preach the gospel unashamedly in Rome (Romans 1:8, 15-16). We too, can be thankful “through Jesus Christ.” All truly good things come to us through Jesus. Paul was thankful for the faith of the Roman Christians. Their faith was spoken of throughout the whole world. We too can share the gospel of Christ, which is the power of God for salvation. We can demonstrate our thanksgiving to God by sharing the good news about His son.

2. The non-Christian group in Rome was not thankful to God; rather it was an idolatrous group of people (Romans 1: 21-25). The members of this group knew about God but did not really know God in terms of having a personal relationship with Him. They became futile in their thoughts—vain and silly, and their foolish hearts were darkened. They worshiped birds, four-footed animals, and creeping things. Do any people in America do such things? Yes, when Americans put tigers, bulldogs, razorbacks, panthers, etc. before God in priority, then they are guilty of such idolatry. Sports fans can become idolatrous if they elevate their teams above God. Some Americans put spotted owls, snail darters, etc. before God. Environmentalists can become idolatrous if they elevate the environment above God. Some Americans put Ford Mustangs before God. Car lovers can become idolatrous if they elevate cars above God. Idolatry occurs when people worship the creature rather than the Creator (verse 25). Idolatrous people cannot be truly thankful to God. Many Americans worship created people (self, celebrities, family, and friends) or created things rather than God. Such people need to be evangelized.

Conclusion: After the Pilgrims survived their first year, Governor William Bradford called for a celebration. We know that they ate venison and fowl at that time. Edward Winslow described his feelings at the celebration: “Although it be not always so plentiful as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want that we often wish you partakers of our plenty.” He had experienced famine in the new colony, but he was willing to share what he had received through the goodness of God.” As Christians who have previously known spiritual famine, we should be willing to share the gospel with those who are now spiritually hungry.

2007-11-12T19:31:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: All of us have limited time and resources. We must choose carefully how we will use our time and resources as we make daily decisions.

1. We must determine what is good, better, and best (Luke 10:38-42). Martha had a problem with the tyranny of the urgent during Jesus’ visit to her home. She was doing a good thing, but not the best thing. Mary had chosen the best thing (verse 42). The Bible contains both rules and principles. Sometimes these rules and principles seem to conflict. For example, Rahab thought that she had to choose between lying or telling the truth, and she assumed that telling the truth would cost the lives of the two spies she was hiding (Joshua 2:4). We need spiritual maturity to choose the better or best instead of the merely good. When the time comes for us to make a decision, it helps if we have our priorities firmly established in our minds. As individuals we should put our relationship with God first, our families second, and our careers, hobbies, etc. down the list.

2. We must accept God’s perspective on what is best (John 11:1-6). We discover in verse five that Jesus loved Mary, Martha, and Lazarus with “agape” love. When Jesus heard about Lazarus being sick, however, He stayed another two days where He was instead of leaving immediately to visit Lazarus. Raising Lazarus from the dead was better than merely healing him before he died. God loves us, but He sometimes allows evil things to happen to us. We must understand that a greater good will eventually come, and God will be glorified as good ultimately triumphs over evil. The crucifixion of Christ was a horribly evil event in one sense. It was a sin to put the sinless Son of God on a cross, and He asked the Father to forgive those who did it (Luke 23:34). From our perspective, however, we can see that a greater good occurred—the atonement.

Conclusion: Because of the greater good that was accomplished on the cross, salvation is now available.

2007-11-05T19:52:00.000-06:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: We can learn about the things that a local church must do when we look at the early Jerusalem church.

1. We must testify about Jesus and invite people to surrender their lives to Him (Acts 2:37-41). After the people were “pierced to the heart” (verse 37, NASB), they wanted to know what they should do. Peter told them to repent and be baptized “for” the forgiveness of their sins. Did their baptism lead to forgiveness, or was their baptism because of forgiveness? The Greek preposition (like its English translation “for”) can be translated either way depending on the context. For instance, we can say that we are taking medicine “for” (leading to) relief, or we can say that we are taking medicine “for” (because of) an upset stomach. In the broadest context of Scripture, it is clear in both the Old Testament and New Testament that people are justified by faith, not by a physical work such as physical baptism (Romans 4). In the narrower context of Scripture, it is clear in the New Testament that physical baptism is symbolic of death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:4). Physical immersion is the first step of obedience after conversion. The word for “exhorted” in verse 40 can also mean “invited.” Peter invited people to be saved.

2. We must continue in the faith by doing the following (Acts 2:42-47):
Studying doctrine – As iron sharpens iron, Christians should sharpen one another.
Fellowshipping – This word refers to participating together in God’s work.
Breaking bread – Christians should spend time together on social occasions.
Praying – This activity involves a group in this context.
Sharing possessions – Christians should be good stewards and minister to others.
Praising God – Christians should participate joyfully in group worship.
Having favor – A local church should maintain a pure image in the community.
Witnessing – Christians should work together to lead the lost to Christ.

Conclusion: Local churches that fail to engage in these activities will fail as local churches.

2007-10-28T20:59:00.000-05:00

Sunday's Sermon Outline

1. We must come to Jesus in spite of our doubts (John 3:1-3). The fact that Nicodemus came to visit Jesus at night was significant. He had his doubts about who Jesus was. Jesus used the term “born again” to indicate that a complete change is necessary for salvation.

2. We must come to Jesus by water and the Spirit (John 3:4-8). The water has been improperly interpreted as the water of physical baptism and as the water of physical birth, but it should be properly understood as a reference to the word of God (Ephesians 5:26). The Spirit is compared to the wind because He has an invisible appearance but visible effects.

3. We must come to Jesus through faith (John 3:16, 36). We have everlasting life at the moment that we have saving faith. Everlasting life cannot be lost. The wrath of God abides on those who refuse to surrender their lives to Jesus in repentance and faith. We are thus warned that the ultimate, final rejection of Jesus by a non-Christian under the special conviction of the Spirit is unpardonable (Hebrews 6:4-6, 10:26-29).

2007-10-17T12:05:00.000-05:00

Outline of Message Given at the Annual Meeting of the Fayette Baptist Association

I had the privilege of giving the theme interpretation at the eighty-first annual meeting of the Fayette Baptist Association this past Monday (October 15, 2007). Fayette County is just east of the Memphis metropolitan area. The theme was “Churches Cooperating through the Association.” I decided to deal with the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 because more than one church was involved in that Council. Of course, the Jerusalem Council was not exactly like an associational meeting that we see today, but some precedents were set there that are relevant for today’s associations.

1. The Council received messengers from a local church and dealt with a doctrinal matter (Acts 15:1-4). “The brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue” (verse 2, NASB). The word “determined” (Greek τασσω) is a key word. The Greek scholar A. T. Robertson said that the word “suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly.” Paul, Barnabas, and others from the church at Antioch were appointed as messengers to the Jerusalem Council.

2. After dealing with a doctrinal matter, the Council did not instruct a local church; rather, it spoke as a group of messengers to a group of Christians (Acts 15: 22-30). “It seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas” (verse 22). The key phrase is “the whole church” (Greek ολη τη εκκλησια). This phrase can also be translated as “the whole assembly” and thus could refer to the messengers of the Council, not the members of the Jerusalem church. An example of the word “εκκλησια” being used for “assembly” rather than “church” occurs in Acts 19:32, 39, 40, and 41 in regard to an assembly in a theater that was dismissed by the town clerk in Ephesus. The thousands of members of the church at Jerusalem were probably not consulted on this matter, and thus “the whole assembly” seems to be a more appropriate translation. Antioch was the capital of the province of Syria. Notice that the letter was also sent to Cilicia (verse 23), an adjacent province in what is now Turkey. Notice also that the word “our” is used to describe Paul and Barnabas. This used of the word “our” would be appropriate in regard to the Council but inappropriate in regard to the Jerusalem church. Paul and Barnabas were messengers from the Antioch church, so the word “your” would have been more appropriate if the Jerusalem church was in mind rather than the Council. This letter was sent from a group of messengers (mostly native Hebrews) to a group of Christians (mostly Gentiles) over a wide geographic area.

3. The Council’s representatives exhorted and strengthened the brethren, and one of them (Silas) traveled with Paul to strengthen the churches and establish new ones after receiving a supernatural vision (Acts 15:32-33, 40-41; 16:9-10). For a short period of time, the people in the area of Jerusalem had been receptive to the gospel. This was no longer true at the time of the Jerusalem Council. Now the Gentiles were receptive to the gospel, and the Council encouraged the brethren in their evangelistic work among these people. Silas, the Council’s representative, helped Paul start new churches during his second missionary journey.

Conclusion: The role of the association has biblical precedent. It should be the primary theological watchdog to deal with errant churches. The association cannot force local churches to do anything, but it can withdraw fellowship from them. It can strengthen individuals, strengthen churches, and establish new churches.

2007-10-07T15:52:00.000-05:00

Sunday’s Sermon Outline

Introduction: It’s possible for a non-Christian to pick up a Bible and be saved without assistance from a Christian. It’s also possible for a Christian to explain the plan of salvation and lead a non-Christian to Christ without quoting or reading Scripture. The ideal situation, however, is for a Christian to utilize the Bible to witness to a non-Christian. In all cases, a special, supernatural work of the Holy Spirit is required for the conversion of a non-Christian.

1. Sometimes the Spirit leads us to strategic non-Christians at the perfect time (Acts 8:26-28).

2. We should obey the Spirit’s leading and utilize Scripture in our witness (Acts 8:29-31, 35). The Bible is a sword that is helpful in the spiritual battle that occurs during evangelism (Hebrews 4:12).

3. We should encourage the immersion of true believers, those who believe with all their hearts (Acts 8:36-39).

Conclusion: True conversions occur when people under conviction are willing to surrender all of their lives to Christ in repentance and faith. These people should experience immersion as a symbol of death, burial, and resurrection.

2007-09-28T23:11:00.000-05:00

Wednesday Night Message Outline

Introduction: We sometimes have mountaintop experiences, and at other times we feel like we are in a valley. Sometimes we have an emotional/spiritual letdown after a great victory, and at other times we feel very depressed due to a series of difficult experiences. Elijah had a series of ups and downs in close proximity. We can learn from his experiences.

1. A Mountain of Special Service

Elijah offered the people a freewill choice. He recognized that they were between two opinions and had not yet made a commitment either to follow God or to follow Baal. (1 Kings 18:20-21) Elijah’s focus was not on himself; rather, he prayed that God would show His power and turn the hearts of the people toward Him. (1 Kings 18:37-38) Sometimes patience is needed to wait on God to demonstrate His power. (1 Kings 18:43-44)

2. A Valley of Depression

Elijah was physically, mentally, and spiritually exhausted. He was alone and close to suicide following the great victory on Mount Carmel. When an angel awakened him, the angel did not command him to pray, to worship, or to witness; rather, the angel told him to eat. When we are physically exhausted (1 Kings 19:4-5) as Elijah was, we need to rest and eat. After being physically renewed, Elijah moved in faith toward Mount Horeb. (1 Kings 19:8) There was no quick fix for his depression.

3. A Mountain of Revival

Twice God asked Elijah what he was doing on the mountain. (1 Kings 19:9, 13) God was trying to help Elijah gain perspective. Elijah twice answered God that he was alone and that people were trying to kill him. His focus was on himself and his problems, not on God and His solutions. God gave Elijah some simple tasks to perform to help him get back on the right track. God also told him that he was not alone—that there were 7,000 people who had not surrendered to Baal. (1 Kings 19:15-18) When God gives us a task and a team, we can move out of our depression.

4. A Valley of Simple Service

We cannot live permanently on a spiritual mountain, and neither should we live permanently in a deep valley of depression. Sometimes, however, we have to perform rather simple, unexciting tasks that may be very important from God’s perspective but may seem insignificant from our perspective. Elijah threw his mantle on Elisha while Elisha was plowing a field with oxen. Elisha understood the symbol, and he indicated that he had closure on his old life by killing the oxen. Then Elisha became the servant of Elijah. (1 Kings 19:19-21) God was not yet finished with Elijah.

Conclusion: Our spiritual lives will have many peaks and valleys. Our emotional and physical conditions can affect our spiritual condition, and our spiritual condition can affect our emotional and physical conditions. God wants us to lead a balanced life.

2007-09-24T07:17:00.000-05:00

Yesterday's Sermon Outline

Introduction: One large, famous church does not have a cross inside or outside its building. Apparently the leaders of the church fear that the symbol of the cross will be offensive to the non-Christians that they are trying to reach with the gospel. The cross is a powerful symbol in our world today. Muslims dislike it. The Ku Klux Klan and some rock stars misuse it. In Galatians 5:11 and 1 Corinthians 1:23, Paul made it clear that the cross is offensive (a stumbling block) to some people. The cross, however, is very important to Christians.

1. The cross is necessary for spiritual growth. Notice Luke 9:23:

“And He was saying to them all, ‘If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me.’” (NASB)

The same quote is given in Matthew 16:24 and Mark 8:34, but Matthew and Mark did not include the word “daily.” Luke was a physician and was more concerned about details than most people. The work of the cross does not stop at the time of conversion; it continues during our spiritual growth. Notice Colossians 2:6:

“Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him.”

We are saved by grace, and we are to grow spiritually by grace. We are saved through the work of the cross, and we are to grow spiritually through the work of the cross. Notice Romans 6:6, 11-12:

“Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin. . . . Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts.”

Even though the Christian’s old self (the sinful flesh) was crucified and is now dead, it still influences the Christian. It is as if the Christian props up a corpse in a chair, places a gun in its lap, and waves a white flag while saying, “I surrender!” This scenario is morbid, not natural. It sounds more like the Hitchcock movie, “Psycho.” Christians should submit new situations to Christ’s lordship. When we become Christians, the Holy Spirit moves into our lives. It is as if our lives are houses, and the Holy Spirit looks around in our dark closets with a flashlight and finds stinking, rotting things that need to be cleaned out of the houses. This cleaning process takes time and is somewhat painful. God uses trials and painful experiences to help us grow. Notice James 1:2-4:

“Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.”

The trials and tests lead to completion (spiritual growth and maturity).

2. The cross is necessary for conversion. Notice Luke 9:24-26:

“For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.”

Jim Elliot, a missionary who was killed by the Auca Indians in South America to whom he was trying to witness, said something very similar to what Jesus said in verse 24: “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.” When we hear that quote by Elliot, we think about a missionary who was martyred for a great cause, but really his statement applies to all Christians. In order to become Christians, we must be willing to surrender what we cannot keep (our earthly lives) to gain what we cannot lose (eternal life).

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German pastor and theologian during World War II who was killed in a concentration camp, also said something similar to what Jesus said in verse 24: “When Christ calls a man, He bids him come and die.” He was talking about death to the self life and the willingness to surrender everything to him, including attachments to the world. Notice 1 John 2:15:

“Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

In John 3:16 we are told that God loves the world, but in 1 John 2:15 the reference is to a different world—the evil world system. We cannot love the evil world system and have the love of God in us at the same time.

Conclusion: We must make a choice. Joshua told the Israelites that they had to choose whom they would serve (Joshua 24:15). Jesus said that no one could serve two masters (Matthew 6:24).

2007-09-19T10:37:00.000-05:00

Islam, Iraq, and Some “Ancient” Missionaries

I recently read two fascinating books: Islam and the Cross by Samuel Zwemer and Pioneers in the Arab World by Dorothy Van Ess. Both served as missionaries to the Middle East and were sponsored by the Reformed Church in America (formerly known as the Dutch Reformed Church). Zwemer (1867-1952) was known as “the apostle to Islam,” and Dorothy Van Ess served in Basrah, Iraq. Dorothy was the wife of John Van Ess (1879-1949), a noted authority on the Arabic language. Some interesting quotes follow. First are those from Zwemer’s book:

“Islam is indeed the only anti-Christian religion. This world faith takes issue with everything that is vital in the Christian religion, because it takes issue in its attitude toward the Christ. By this it must stand or fall. In this respect all schools of Muslim thought are practically the same.” (1)

“Especially in lands that are wholly Muslim, nothing seems to stand out more prominently than Islam’s hatred of the cross.” (2)

“We must meet this earnest and latest challenge of our Muslim opponents not by compromises and concessions, nor by cowardice of silence, but by boldly proclaiming that the very heart of our religion, its center and its cynosure, its pivot and power, is the atonement wrought by Christ on the cross.” (3)

“That Islam in its origin and popular character is a composite faith, with pagan, Jewish, and Christian elements, is known to all students of comparative religion. Rabbi Geiger has shown how much of the warp and woof of the Koran was taken from Talmudic Judaism and how the entire ritual is simply that of the Pharisees translated into Arabic.” (4)

“Islam is also a political problem. When Muslim leaders sit down at conference tables with representatives of Western nations to discuss democracy, the incongruity of all this with the old idea of Islam as a church-state and with the whole Muslim theory of political government is self-evident. In spite of what has been said to the contrary, missionaries in the past realized the baffling character of the problem that Western colonial governments faced in Muslim lands. The chasm between democratic and Muslim political systems is enormous.” (5)

“Syncretism would be equivalent to surrender. For Islam thrives only by its denial of the authority of the Scriptures, the deity of our Lord, the blessedness of the Holy Trinity, the cruciality and significance of the cross (nay, its very historicity), and the preeminence of Jesus Christ as King and Savior. . . . At all these points the missionary problem is how to bridge the chasm with courage and tact, by the manifestation of the truth in love. The distribution of the Word of God always holds first place. . . . Islam is a spiritual problem and can be solved only in spiritual terms.” (6)

Some quotes follow from the book written by Dorothy Van Ess:

“The world of Islam, toward the end of the nineteenth century, was the great exception to the rule that this was an age of triumphant missionary expansion. . . . Those relations have been marked by bitter conflict, by the Muslim’s sense of superiority, and by his successful resistance to evangelization.” (7)

“I first saw Basrah under a full moon on the last night of 1911. . . . I have never forgotten the loveliness of my first impression of the city which was to be my home for nearly half a century.” (8)

“As soon as the British General Headquarters was established in Basrah in November, 1914, the general commanding officer appointed a military governor with two deputies. . . . A reliable police force was one of the first necessities for Basrah, and the American missionary had contacts with the Arabs which enabled him to select men who could be trusted, and who had the ability to do the job.” (9)

“I heard my Arab women friends in the harems discussing President Wilson’s famous Fourteen Points with great enthusiasm. . . . Wilson was a tremendous hero throughout the Near East at this time, and as Americans we had the advantage of basking in his reflected glory.” (10)

“The British attempted to get an idea of public opinion, to find out whether the Arabs of Iraq would favor a single Arab state, from Mosul to the Persian Gulf, under British tutelage; if so, should there be an Arab head, and whom would they prefer? The Kurds were against Arab government and favored British administration. . . . A. T. Wilson and Gertrude Bell attempted to enlighten the Arab experts at the Peace Conference about the Shiah Muslim element in Iraq (of which they knew nothing), the trouble to be anticipated from the Kurds in Mosul Vilayet, and the increasing power and importance of Ibn Saud in the Arab world.” (11)

“The rebellion of 1920 has been cited as a heroic effort on the part of patriotic Nationalists to throw off the British yoke. . . . The rebellion was put down by a British expeditionary force which was said to cost the British Exchequer about forty million pounds sterling, and caused an estimated ten thousand total casualties on both sides.” (12)

“In 1940 we had a crisis in our schools. Nationalism had developed a definite anti-Western bias.” (13)

“From early days our mission had not converts from Islam, but ‘born Christians,’ descendants of one of the minorities in Asiatic Turkey who had never become Muslims.” (14)

Conclusions: After reading these two books, I conclude that Muslims are in a general sense resistant to the gospel. Some Muslim groups are more receptive than other groups are. The more receptive groups should receive more of our evangelistic efforts than do very resistant groups. As for the very resistant groups, missionaries should wait until they are more receptive before making major efforts to share the gospel with them. This is simply good stewardship of resources—human and otherwise.

1. Samuel M. Zwemer, Islam and the Cross, ed. Roger Greenway (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2002), 26-27.
2. Ibid., 41-42.
3. Ibid., 53.
4. Ibid., 69.
5. Ibid., 151.
6. Ibid., 152.
7. Dorothy F. Van Ess, Pioneers in the Arab World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 6.
8. Ibid., 51.
9. Ibid., 88-89.
10. Ibid., 109.
11. Ibid., 110-111.
12. Ibid., 114.
13. Ibid., 146.
14. Ibid., 159-160.

2007-08-31T09:23:00.000-05:00

Good Sermon Illustration

In yesterday’s (August 30th) edition of The Commercial Appeal (the daily newspaper in Memphis), an interesting article by Richard Lardner of the Associated Press was placed on the front page. Lardner described a new weapon that American military commanders in Iraq have requested:

“Saddam Hussein had been gone just a few weeks, and U.S. forces in Fallujah, west of Baghdad, were already being called unwelcome invaders. One of the first big anti-American protests of the war escalated into shootouts that left 18 Iraqis dead and 78 wounded. It would be a familiar scene in Iraq’s next few years: Crowds gather, insurgents mingle with civilians. Troops open fire, and innocents die. All the while, according to internal military correspondence obtained by The Associated Press, U.S. commanders were telling Washington that many civilian casualties could be avoided by using a new, non-lethal weapon. . . . It’s a ray gun that neither kills nor maims. But the Pentagon has refused to deploy it out of concern that the weapon itself might be seen as a torture device. Perched on a Humvee or a flatbed truck, the Active Denial System gives people hit by the invisible beam the sense that their skin is on fire. They move out of the way quickly and without injury.”

The Application

We as Christians have the Holy Spirit inside us as a source of power to be utilized in spiritual battle. When we are used by God to share the gospel with non-Christians who are under the special conviction of the Holy Spirit, those non-Christians are made to feel a bit uncomfortable. Many of us don’t want them to feel uncomfortable, and thus we do not witness to non-Christians as often as we should. We should realize, however, that the non-lethal conviction that may even evoke images of a fiery hell is necessary for saving lives. Because of their hearing the gospel under the powerful conviction of the Holy Spirit, we will be able to see them moved out of harm’s way quickly and without permanent injury.

2007-08-24T15:46:00.000-05:00

Thoughts from Other Thinkers

I was at a meeting this past week at which I heard an interesting comment from a speaker whom I greatly respect. I won’t give his name yet because I cannot give an exact quote at this time. (I have ordered CD recordings of the messages.) His message dealt with dissension in churches, and he stated that he has seen more of it lately than at any time in his ministry. I thoroughly agree with him! He also said that there is no such thing as a strong local church—that all churches are fragile. He stated that many in the audience would disagree with him about church fragility. Some churches obviously have more problems than do others at any particular moment, but I agree with him that all churches are fragile. Unfortunately, it doesn’t take much to upset the perceived stability that may exist at any given time in a church.

I finally finished reading Ed Stetzer’s wonderful book, Planting Missional Churches (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), and I want to share some interesting quotes from the book.

Stetzer distinguished between seeker-sensitive and seeker-driven churches:

“Much of the criticism directed at the seeker-driven church is a result of the misunderstanding of their strategy. In seeker-driven churches, Sunday morning is not supposed to look like church; it’s designed to be an ongoing evangelistic service. A student who visited Willow Creek with me commented that the service looked like a Young Life meeting, a low-key evangelistic service with an opportunity for those who attend to go deeper at another time. The strategy has worked for Willow Creek, but it’s not one I embrace for theological reasons. Instead of focusing on a seeker-driven worship service, I believe it’s better to ask why the church exists—and then to ask questions about the content of the worship service. Churches should exalt God, edify believers, and evangelize the world. Worship services, first and foremost, should exalt God. This statement underscores the imperative of God-centered worship. Believers should also be built up in the faith. Finally, authentic worship can evangelize unbelievers. . . . Every church is seeker-sensitive to some degree. If we are worshipping in the local language, wearing local clothing, and singing music written in the last one thousand years, we are using a worship style that’s sensitive to those who attend. . . . My main concern is that the actions of the church are understandable to the unchurched, sensitive to their needs, but not changing the message to be sensitive.” (261-263)

I agree with Stetzer here. We should be seeker-sensitive, but not seeker-driven in our churches. Unfortunately, a lot of Christians only attend local church meetings on Sunday mornings, and if they are not fed deep spiritual food on Sunday mornings, they may not attend a Wednesday night meeting to get it. I believe that a preacher can deliver a message that both feeds the Christians and evangelizes the lost.

Stetzer defined vision casting:

“Understand here that by ‘casting the vision,’ I mean what I announced as our goal.” (302)

I'm glad that Stetzer defined the term as he was using it here. I must admit that I am uncomfortable with all the talk these days using the words “vision” and “endvision” in churches and on the mission field. Biblically speaking, the word “vision” refers to a supernatural revelation from God. Prophetic visions described in the Bible always came to pass. In contrast, as the word is used today in churches and on the mission field, it refers to a detailed goal described by a leader that may or may not come to pass. We sometimes refer to visionary leaders and leaders with vision. Many businesses and schools have vision statements. I fear that many of us have been using the secular definition rather than the biblical definition of the word. I prefer to use the word “goal.” It may not have the sense of mystery or authority that the word “vision” has, but I think it is more suitable in the Christian context. Today, if a Christian leader’s vision (goal) doesn’t come to pass, our folks who are using the biblical definition of the word might get a bit concerned. Notice Jeremiah 14:14:

“Then the LORD said to me, ‘The prophets are prophesying falsehood in My name. I have neither sent them nor commanded them nor spoken to them; they are prophesying to you a false vision, divination, futility and the deception of their own minds.’”

F. B. Huey Jr. commented on the passage:

“These words contain a warning for today’s preacher that he must be careful not to cloak his own desires under the guise of being God’s desires. They also warn people to be responsible in discernment when listening to ‘prophetic’ voices.”

Huey, “Jeremiah, Lamentations,” in The New American Commentary, vol. 16, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1993), 154.

2007-08-20T08:55:00.000-05:00

The Sermon I Preached Yesterday

(The photo on the right is of me in 1973.)

Text: Philippians 3:8-14
Subject: “How to Win in Our Spiritual Lives”

Introduction: How do we win as individuals and as churches? Is it by numbers of converts, the length of our prayers, etc.?

1. We win by surrender (vs. 8-9). This sounds strange at first. If one football team surrenders to another football team on the field, we would not call that game a win for the surrendering team. We can understand the concept, however, if we can conceive of a football player surrendering his body to a very good coach on the first day of practice. The coach will mold the player into a winner. Paul counted all things as loss/rubbish in order that he would gain Christ. He realized that at the moment he surrendered his life to Christ in repentance and faith, the righteousness of Christ would be imputed to him—the “righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith” (vs. 9, NASB). The rich, young ruler wanted eternal life, but he was not willing to surrender his wealth to Christ, and thus he walked away from Christ sadly (Matthew 19:16-22).

2. We win by suffering (vs. 10). This also sounds strange. We do not usually think of winners as suffering people. Paul talked about knowing “the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death.” Children experience growing pains. They eventually have more power as they grow. Football players often say, “No pain, no gain.” As they lift weights and undergo conditioning exercises, their muscles experience some wear and tear, but they become more powerful through the suffering. I sometimes meet Christians who say they have not suffered. The reason for their lack of suffering is that they have not exercised their spiritual muscles. Christianity is not a spectator sport. We are to be spiritual athletes. Church membership should mean something. All members, unless physically unable, should commit themselves to specific, active ministries in local churches. Too many Christians have a consumer’s attitude: “What can a church do for me?” Their attitude should be different: “In what church can I best serve the Lord?”

3. We win by forgetting (vs. 11-14). Again, this sounds strange. Paul discussed the importance of “forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead.” He also mentioned pressing on toward the goal. Paul was using an illustration familiar to his audience of a runner straining toward the finish line. Imagine a football team that refused to break its huddle on the field to run an offensive play. While the other team and the referees were watching, the team began an internal feud. In spite of many penalty flags and the departure of the audience, the team refused to stop fighting and begin concentrating on reaching the goal line. This scenario is a picture of many churches today. There is a lot of dissension, and many churches are stuck in their huddles. They are not moving toward the goal. Their members need to forget about what lies behind—the disappointments, hurt feelings, anger, bitterness, etc. Paul was moving toward the “goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” He was a mature Christian, but he was not yet perfected/completed in the absolute sense. He was looking forward to his glorification and the perfect fellowship he would have with Jesus Christ. We, too, should keep the ultimate goal in focus and forget about things about which we can do nothing.

Conclusion: Paul was discussing death in this passage, but we should not see it as a morbid discussion. He mentioned the three aspects of salvation. We are saved from the penalty of sin (justification), the power of sin (sanctification), and the presence of sin (glorification).

2007-08-08T12:00:00.000-05:00

Sowing the Seed and Reaping a Harvest

Is it enough to share the gospel with a lost person? Must we also reap a harvest? I’ve heard the following statement in some form many times: “Christians are responsible for sowing the seed, but they are not responsible for reaping a harvest.” In one sense the statement is certainly true. We cannot force people to surrender their lives to Christ in repentance and faith: “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force it to drink.”

The Great Commission, however, says the following:

“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” (NASB)

Christians are commanded to “make disciples” (mathēteuō, μαθητευω). A disciple (a Christian) is a person who has committed himself to forsake all and follow Jesus (Luke 9:23, 14:33). This forsaking and following involves repentance and faith. The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message describes repentance and faith: “Repentance is a genuine turning from sin toward God. Faith is the acceptance of Jesus Christ and commitment of the entire personality to Him as Lord and Saviour.” True disciples eventually bear good fruit. Some of our seed inevitably falls on soil that is hard, rocky, or thorny. We should try to sow our seed on the good soil, the soil from which will come a good harvest (Matthew 13:3-23).

Notice that Paul both sowed the seed and reaped a harvest on his first missionary journey (Acts 14:21):

“After they had preached the gospel to that city and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch.”

In Acts 14:21, the word for “preach the gospel” is “euaggelizō” (ευαγγελιζω), and the word for “make disciples” again is “mathēteuō” (μαθητευω).

In regard to resistant people, sometimes it is said that we can only share the gospel with them and that we cannot harvest such people. That is true. Some Christians find themselves in the midst of a resistant people group. We should always look for receptive individuals in our sphere of influence, but as a general rule we should focus our efforts on receptive groups, not resistant groups. Jesus said that we should shake off the dust and leave when we encounter resistant people (Matthew 10:14):

“Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.”

Notice He referred to both individuals (“house”) and groups (“city”). Group resistance was emphasized by Jesus in Luke 10:10-11:

“But whatever city you enter and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’”

Notice that the apostle Paul followed this principle on his first missionary journey (Acts 13: 46, 51):

“Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, ‘It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.’ . . . But they shook off the dust of their feet in protest against them and went to Iconium.”

Donald McGavran said,

“Evangelism can be and ought to be directed to responsive persons, groups, and segments of society. . . . Correct policy is to occupy fields of low receptivity lightly. The harvest will ripen someday. . . . They should not be heavily occupied lest, fearing that they will be swamped by Christians, they become even more resistant. . . . While holding them lightly, Christian leaders should perfect organizational arrangements so that when these lands turn responsive, missionary resources can be sent in quickly.”

McGavran, Understanding Church Growth, Third Edition, ed. C. Peter Wagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 187, 191.

The culture in America has changed, and it is now generally more resistant to the gospel than it used to be. In an extremely receptive culture, any biblical method will work, so methodology is not very important. In an extremely resistant culture, virtually no method will work, so methodology is not very important. In the middle range, in which a culture such as America’s is neither extremely resistant nor extremely receptive, some methods work while other methods don’t work, so methodology is very important. Within our American culture, there are both somewhat resistant groups/individuals and somewhat receptive groups/individuals. Our primary evangelistic focus should be on the receptive groups and individuals. That’s a biblical strategy. Ed Stetzer commented on such a focus:

“Focusing acknowledges that people generally prefer to come to Christ without crossing social, racial, or economic boundaries. Every international missionary is aware of this and focuses on a selected receptive group of people.”

Stetzer, Planting Missional Churches (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 144.

Our country is now a large mission field. Our people must view themselves as missionaries to their own culture and thus focus on receptive groups and individuals. This view of church membership is the essence of being a missional church.

2007-07-28T15:01:00.000-05:00

Too Little Emphasis on the Local Church?

I’ve been reading Ed Stetzer’s book on church planting recently. He made the following statement that grabbed my attention:

“Eighty to 85 percent of American churches are on the downside of their life cycle.”

Stetzer, Planting Missional Churches (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 13.

Stetzer placed an endnote for that statement on page 334: “Win Arn, cited in Malphurs, Planting Growing Churches, 32.” I’m not sure how that figure of 80-85% was determined or what the criteria was for determining whether a church was on the downside of its life cycle, but the statement is certainly disturbing.

I do not know all the reasons for such a high percentage of our churches being on the downside of their life cycle, but I would like to speculate on a few. Our church members only have so much time to give in their busy schedules. This is particularly true in our American culture in this era when both husbands and wives typically work outside the home. There are many good activities, and sometimes it’s difficult to separate the good from the best. I want to suggest some possible competitors to the local church that have perhaps diverted our members from the best to the merely good and thus weakened the local church:

1. Athletic Events – I can remember when ballgames were not scheduled on Sundays, except in professional sports. Now, weekend tournaments for our church members and their children are quite common. I wonder how families can finance so many of them. I love sports, and I think athletic events are wholesome activities. They can even be used for evangelism and discipleship. When I served as pastor of a church in Kentucky, we built a Family Life Center with a very nice basketball court. Our gym, however, did not interfere with other church activities; rather, it complemented them.
2. Parachurch Ministries – Again, parachurch ministries are good, but if our members neglect local church involvement by getting over-involved in parachurch ministries, they are making a mistake. A parachurch organization cannot take the place of a local church. Large parachurch ministries may be more glamorous than small local churches, but our members must remember that parachurch ministries should assist local churches, not take their place.
3. Famous Preachers on Television and Radio – Once again, these are good ministries. These famous preachers may be better at preaching than the preacher in a particular local church, but certainly they cannot substitute for the local church pastor. Many church members send money to these guys and spend a lot of time listening to them, but if that involvement negatively affects involvement in the local church, then it should change to some degree.

One attitude that has negatively affected local churches is consumerism. Many folks shop around for a church like they would for a house. How comfortable is it? Will it require much maintenance from me? Is it beautiful and state-of-the-art? In contrast, it would be refreshing to see more folks ask the following questions: Where can I most effectively serve the Lord? Which local church needs me the most? Another attitude that has negatively affected local churches is individualism. In America, with the exception of corporate worship, we have emphasized individual religious activities but not group religious activities. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts in regard to evangelism, education, ministry, and fellowship. Part of the problem is that members have low expectations for membership. It's as if we say, "All you need to do is be a part of the audience." Our message should be that every member is expected to have a place of service, a specific ministry. We need each other!

2007-07-12T20:00:00.000-05:00

It’s a Small World

Last night my wife and I spoke for an hour in regard to our 10-year IMB career at Bellevue’s summer camp for fourth and fifth graders at Camp Cordova in Memphis, an associational camp that I attended as a boy. About 200 campers were there, and they had some interesting questions for us at the end. One of them asked a question that I dread: “What is the strangest food that you ate in South Korea?” I don’t like this question because my answer always “grosses out” the audience, and such was the case last night. Interestingly, one of the counselors in the audience had lived in South Korea for four years near the DMZ, and I mentioned this to the crowd during the introduction. (He was not surprised at my answer to the food question.)

I have recently made another interesting discovery that makes me want to repeat the old cliché once again about our “small world.” Richard C. Strub wrote a book dealing with the history of the church in which I was reared in Memphis: The Eudora Baptist Story: God’s 150-Year Miracle, 1850-2000. I was surprised to find that J. R. Graves, the famous leader of the Landmark movement, served briefly as pastor of the church during 1868. Strub described Graves’ time in Memphis:

“One of the most notable of all Eudora pastors apparently served here only part of 1868. . . . He moved to Memphis is 1867 as editor and publisher—and helped bring the new Sunday School Union here. He served as interim at First Baptist, where he held a long membership. Union University benefited from his generosity when located at Murfreesboro and Jackson. . . . His wife and mother were Yellow Fever victims in 1867. Graves was an invalid following an 1884 stroke. He died here June 26, 1893.” (Strub, 13-14)

Graves had the stroke while filling the pulpit at First Baptist Church in Memphis, according to Samuel H. Ford (Life, Times and Teachings of J. R. Graves, 1899).

2007-06-26T12:00:00.000-05:00

Cultural Perspective

I watched a 1974 rerun of The Lawrence Welk Show last Saturday night on our PBS channel. When it started at 7:00 p.m., my wife said, “No, it’s dorky.” To her credit, however, she tolerated it well. I suggested to her that her reaction stemmed from her mindset as a high school senior in 1974. I also shared my opinion about the wholesome qualities of the program. Upon reflecting on the experience, I can understand the differing emotional reactions that each of us had to the program. When I was growing up in Memphis, watching the program on Saturday nights was a family ritual for me. Watching it again in 2007 brought back some of those pleasant feelings that I had in 1974. Ironically, watching The Lawrence Welk Show made me feel young again. My wife did not experience the same Saturday night ritual as she grew up in Florida and Alabama, and her initial reaction to the program in 2007 reflected the negative feelings she had about the program in 1974.

Many of our emotional reactions to events in our present cultural milieu can be traced to our cultural backgrounds. Understanding this phenomenon is important to our successful adaptation to a new culture. I experienced culture shock as an IMB missionary to South Korea, but I think it is also possible to experience culture shock in the United States. Our country includes a variety of very diverse cultures. Rather than being a melting pot, America is a stew pot or salad bowl. We must be careful to distinguish morally neutral cultural differences from things that are morally right or wrong.

Duane Elmer wrote a very helpful book entitled Cross-Cultural Connections (Downer’s Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2002). He drew a line with three areas of varying sizes, depending on one’s perspective: right—differences—wrong. Elmer made some useful comments about this line:

“Over time, it dawned on me that the things I put into the category of ‘right’ were the things that were like me and the things I pegged as ‘wrong’ were the things and people that were unlike me. . . . This kind of thinking will likely cause serious problems since we live in a world bursting with differences. . . . The Bible does speak of right and wrong. The modern tendency to categorize everything as a difference—‘your thing’ or ‘whatever’—leads us to very dangerous ground. A mindset where everything is ‘just different’—and nothing is judged by Scripture to be wrong or sinful—must be rejected. Contemporary culture has shifted from the rigid right-wrong categories of my childhood to the opposite extreme where virtually everything is different and nothing is declared wrong. Throwing out all absolutes doesn’t solve anything. Both extremes need to be avoided. . . . If we treat everything as right and wrong, we do a great disservice to the human diversity God has placed in his creation. If we treat everything as a cultural difference, we do a great disservice to the God who authored an uncompromising word of truth. I attempt to respect both God’s world and the Scripture.” (pages 24-25)

It wasn’t difficult for me to handle the cultural differences that I had with my wife in regard to The Lawrence Welk Show. The cultural and theological differences we have with other people in regard to more serious issues, however, are sometimes very difficult to handle. Our culturally different backgrounds may lead to different interpretations of Scripture passages. We should strive to exegete Scripture in a way that minimizes our own cultural biases. Sometimes it is very difficult to apply Scriptural principles to our own cultural context without doing so in a biased way. We must pray often for God's assistance in this very important activity.

2007-06-20T11:27:00.000-05:00

Interesting Stats in Regard to Church Growth in the Memphis Area

On June 18, 2007, an interesting article appeared in the Memphis newspaper, The Commercial Appeal, in regard to church growth in Memphis. The article was entitled “Pews Filling Fast,” and it was written by James Dowd and based on research done by Laurie Cooper Stoll, a former graduate student at the University of Memphis. Her work was supervised by Larry Petersen, interim chairman of the Department of Sociology there.

Dowd described some of Stoll’s findings:

“Stoll researched 1,200 Christian churches in Shelby County. Of those, she tracked membership trends at 133 randomly selected Catholic and Protestant congregations from 1998 to 2003. The report draws on Census data from 1990 and 2000 as well as questionnaires and telephone interviews with clergy. The findings show that Evangelicals, broadly defined as theologically conservative and who teach the Bible as inspired by God, posted the highest level of growth. Close behind were fundamentalists, who accept the Bible as the literal and inerrant Word of God. Moderate and liberal branches mirrored national trends and experienced smaller gains. Other local findings that support national statistics show that congregations with myriad programs for young families and single adults tend to experience greater growth.”

Dowd also said, “The overwhelming majority of churches in Shelby County are growing, with evangelical congregations leading the way. But regardless of denomination, Christian churches here are thriving, with 70 percent reporting membership gains.”

I did a bit of research myself to see how the SBC churches in our local association have done in regard to growth. The Shelby Baptist Association (known as the Mid-South Baptist Association since 2004) consists of 139 churches. It is now a regional association, and it also includes some churches from two other states. In 1998 the average Sunday School attendance for churches in the association was 29,210, and in 2003 it was 28,078. Thus, the gains reported in the research done by Stoll were not reflected in our association as a whole. (The average Sunday School attendance for the association in 1980 was 33,885, and in 2005 it was 31,013.) I suppose it could be argued that worship attendance may have increased while Sunday School attendance remained stable, but I do not have average worship attendance data for the association.

The anecdotal evidence that I have heard about church growth in our association is not good. I’m not sure what the reasons are for the lack of growth in our association, but I am disturbed by the fact that we are not reaching the harvestable people as efficiently as other groups apparently are.

2007-06-15T09:33:00.001-05:00

Where Are the Young Folks?

Last Saturday night I did something that I had wanted to do for a long time. I visited one of the ten fastest growing churches in America. It is not a Baptist church, and it is located in my area. In about 20 years of existence, it has grown from zero to about 7,000 members. (Prospective members must go through a six-week series of classes before they are official members.) Fortunately, the church has a Saturday night service which is exactly like its Sunday morning services, so I was able to get a good taste of its worship essence. I went with my wife, my two sons, a seminary student that I mentor each week, and his wife.

I enjoyed the experience. The worship building arrangement was unique. The podium was between the gymnasium and sanctuary, where I suppose a wall used to be in place. I assume that neither the gym nor the sanctuary would accommodate the crowds, so the decision was apparently made to utilize both. When I walked into the sanctuary, I thought at first that I was looking at a mirror when I saw people sitting on the other side of the podium in the gym. A couple of praise team members faced one side, and a couple of them faced the other side. The pastor switched sides at regular intervals during his sermons, but his face was always projected on the screens on both sides. The music was contemporary in style. The pastor utilized some movie clips to make his points during the sermon. The whole thing lasted exactly one hour. The church is presently building a new worship center.

What surprised me was the average age of the people gathered to worship. I looked around the room, and I noticed that most of the people were baby boomers like me. Everyone dressed very casually, and some guys my age wore shorts, etc. I had expected to see a lot of teenagers and younger adults in that type of atmosphere, but they just were not there. I was shocked. The experience confirmed what I have been hearing about young folks in America—they have left the churches. We went out to a restaurant for supper after we left the church, and we discussed the experience during the meal. I remarked that I had recently heard that seven or eight out of every ten students who grow up in American churches leave them within two years after graduation from high school. My seminary student friend, who is a youth minister, told me that 88% of our church kids leave church soon after high school graduation. I responded by noting the stats that each generation has a smaller percentage of Christians. The WWII generation has the highest percentage of Christians, and then the percentage lessens with each succeeding generation starting with the baby boomers. When one takes into consideration that most people become Christians when they are young, the stats are sobering, indeed. In most of the SBC churches that I have seen recently, there is a lot of silver hair but not much else. I fear for the future of our denomination and our country.

2007-06-06T20:21:00.000-05:00

A Lack of Small Group Accountability for Witnessing

Lately I have been thinking about how to improve the efficiency of SBC evangelism in America. The problem is complicated. It is affected by cultural and demographic changes. Thus, I don’t want to sound too simplistic. We can control some factors such as training and motivation, but we cannot control other factors such as the aforementioned cultural and demographic changes in our communities.

Speaking of training programs, I think we have some very good ones available to our churches. I have been certified in EE, CWT, and FAITH. All three are valuable programs. Our SBC pastors received good evangelism training in our seminaries, and presumably they are imparting that training in their preaching and teaching. I don’t think training is the problem.

I also don’t think a “general type” of motivation is the problem. Most of our SBC pastors frequently mention the priority of evangelism to their people: keeping the main thing the main thing. I think most of our SBC people want to witness to others, in spite of whatever level of fear they might have of doing so. They have a general type of feeling that they want to witness.

What is missing is a “specific type” of motivation for witnessing on a regular basis. Merely scheduling a weekly visitation night is not enough to give most people in our churches that specific type of motivation. There should be an accountability factor that affects them on a regular basis. It should involve the community of believers in their immediate sphere of influence (their small group in their local church). This type of thing is quite difficult in our individualistic American culture. I served as an IMB missionary to South Korea for ten years, and I noticed in that group-oriented culture that small group accountability was a very powerful type of motivation for witnessing on a regular basis. FAITH has attempted to involve Sunday School classes more so than EE or CWT, but we still seem to be weak in the area of small group accountability. (There is a small accountability group for EE and CWT as long as the individual is in the witnessing program, but the group only contains EE and CWT participants, and thus it provides no accountability for other church members.) I can remember the 10-point system on offering envelopes many years ago. Church members put their money in the envelopes, but they also indicated on the envelope whether they had read their Bible daily, made contacts, etc. The class secretary tallied the total points for the class as well as the total offering. That is just one example of an attempt at small group accountability. Unfortunately, I don’t have a new accountability system in mind, but the problem is certainly worth studying.

Hopefully all SBC folks agree that accountability is important. Our children would probably not study very much if there were no tests and report cards. Wouldn't it be great if we could train our children to witness at a young age. They would become more and more skilled as they grew older. Why not require a mandatory witnessing course at Baptist high schools, colleges, and universities? The students would not graduate unless they passed the witnessing course. The course would include memorization of an outline, illustrations, relevant Bible passages, apologetics, and cultural analysis and adaptation. I hope this post provides some food for thought.

2007-05-29T22:14:00.000-05:00

My wife and I have been married for 25 wonderful years!

2007-05-29T09:02:00.000-05:00

The Reality of Suffering and Death

On Friday, May 18, 2007, my stepfather died. He was a great guy, and he will be missed by many people. I did the eulogy at his funeral this past week.

I compared my stepfather to a rather obscure character in the Bible, Ahimaaz (2 Samuel 18). Ahimaaz was the son of Zadok, the high priest. He was fleet of foot and served at times as a messenger. (My stepfather was a fast runner in high school.) After Joab defeated David’s enemies in a rebellion, Joab needed to send the news back to David. Ahimaaz volunteered, but Joab sent another man as messenger instead of Ahimaaz. Ahimaaz, however, persisted and asked for permission to run to David even after the other man had been sent. Joab gave him permission to run, and Ahimaaz passed the other man and was the first person to bear good news to David. He was enthusiastic, loyal, and good in character. When the watchman saw Ahimaaz approaching, David described Ahimaaz: “He is a good man, and comes with good news” (NKJV).

My stepfather was a good man, and he was an enthusiastic bearer of good news. When people saw him approaching, they had a good feeling about him. He was a good man in terms of his faithfulness to his family, church, and various institutions. My stepfather also had a positive, enthusiastic outlook on life, in spite of the various difficulties that life brought him on earth. Sometimes we have to suffer in this life, and his last two years on earth included much physical and mental suffering. He had Alzheimer’s disease, neuropathy, congestive heart failure, and other problems. My mother was his third wife. His first two wives had died. My stepfather was faithful to all three. He loved social events, good food, and travel. My mother and stepfather had the opportunity to travel to San Francisco, Seattle, Charleston, Savannah, Williamsburg, Boston, Denver, Kansas City, Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Europe during their 30 years of marriage.

I had the privilege of being one of his caregivers during his last two years of life. I learned a lot about him during this time of difficulty. He maintained his sweet spirit in the midst of his suffering. I hope that I die quickly in my sleep and that I will not linger in pain, but I don’t get to choose the manner of my death. (A funeral director told me a few years ago that the quick death of an elderly person in his sleep is called a “Cadillac death.”) If I linger and suffer before I die, I hope I will be as sweet-spirited as my stepfather was.

2007-05-15T09:37:00.000-05:00

Unexpected Joy

Last night, my older son needed to go to Wal-Mart at about 10:30 to get a part for his computer. Knowing that this time of the year is gang initiation season in Memphis, I decided to go with him, since two are better than one in terms of safety. (Do I sound over-protective?) Anyway, after we parked the truck close to the entry doors in a well-lit area, we were approached by a guy. He said, “Can I talk to you guys? I’m not going to kill you.” I had a split second to size up the situation: We were near the doors to Wal-Mart, and there were other folks around us. I didn’t see any weapons, and he didn’t have any friends with him. So, I decided to engage him in conversation. He said, “I need to buy some baby food for my infant. If you’ll give me some cash, I’ll write you a check.” I gave him six bucks—all the cash I had in my wallet, and I refused to take his check. I did, however, ask him the two diagnostic questions from EE. He answered the first question by saying that he thought he was saved. In answer to the second question, he said that he was basing his salvation on good works. I explained the plan of salvation to him, and he agreed to surrender his life to Christ in repentance and faith. He didn’t wait for me to lead him in the sinner’s prayer; rather, he started by himself. I helped him after his good start. After we prayed, he was full of joy and said that he really needed what he had just experienced. He showed us a photo of his wife and talked about how fortunate he was to have her. Another neat thing about this whole experience is that my older son was there to see the conversion. I have wanted to train him in witnessing, and this was truly a teachable moment.

Unfortunately, we cannot depend on such unexpected encounters to provide all the needed witnessing opportunities. I believe that we should engage in regular, purposeful witnessing events. Such events don’t always bear a lot of fruit; nevertheless, they are needful. About a week ago, I went door to door in an area near Memphis where many homes are being built. It was part of the survey work being used to start a new Baptist church in the area. For three hours, two of us went door to door. Only one man was ready and willing to hear the gospel. I didn’t need to ask the two diagnostic questions; he blurted out that he was lost. I shared the plan of salvation with him, but unfortunately he was not yet ready to surrender his life to Christ in repentance and faith. He apparently had some “issues” that needed to be settled first. For example, he had wandered away from the church of his youth (where he thought he had been saved), and when he tried to come back to that church, someone at the church told him that he had crucified Christ again and that there no longer was a sacrifice remaining for his sins. He believed that he had committed the unpardonable sin. I told him that God loves him and that we love him, but he needed to work through all that false programming. There were other such issues, and I feel that I and other folks need to help him work through those things. Nevertheless, I thought that our visit to him was a divine appointment and that some good seeds were planted. Not every witnessing encounter results in a conversion, but that doesn’t mean that such encounters are not fruitful.

2007-05-10T23:21:00.000-05:00

Herschel Hobbs’s Position on the Church

I have sensed that there is some confusion about Herschel’s position on the church. He chaired the committee that framed the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message. The 1925 Baptist Faith and Message only mentioned the local church. The 1963 document added the following description:

“The New Testament speaks also of the church as the body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages.”

This addition, however, is speaking of a universal church that is not yet in existence. Notice what Herschel said in his commentary on the 1963 document:

“The word ‘church’ in the New Testament never refers to organized Christianity or to a group of churches. It denotes either a local body of baptized believers or includes all the redeemed through all the ages.”

Herschel H. Hobbs, The Baptist Faith and Message (Nashville: Convention Press, 1971), 75.

This position was also held by B. H. Carroll, the founder of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary:

“Of the 117 instances of use in the New Testament certainly all but five (Acts 7:38; 19:32, 39, 42; Heb. 2:12) refer to Christ's ecclesia. And since Hebrews 2:12, though a quotation from the Old Testament, is prophetic, finding fulfillment in New Testament times, we need not regard it as an exception. These 113 uses of the word, including Hebrews 2:12, refer either to the particular assembly of Jesus Christ on earth, or to His general assembly in glory (heaven). . . . But while nearly all of the 113 instances of the use of ecclesia belong to the particular class, there are some instances, as Hebrews 12:23, and Ephesians 5:25-27, where the reference seems to be to the general assembly of Christ. But in every case the ecclesia is prospective, not actual. That is to say, there is not now, but there will be a general assembly of Christ's people. That general assembly will be composed of all the redeemed of all time.”

B. H. Carroll, Ecclesia, http://www.reformedreader.org/ekk.htm, accessed 23 April, 2007.

2007-04-24T19:14:00.000-05:00

Two Types of Anger

Angry people have been in the national news lately. I’m not talking about common annoyance; rather, I’m talking about passionate anger. I preached a sermon on anger a couple of Sundays ago. My text was Ephesians 4:26, 29, 31-32. The passage discusses two types of anger:

1. Good Anger – Righteous Indignation

Verse 26 is a direct quote from Psalm 4:4: “Be ye angry, and sin not.” (KJV) The Greek scholar A. T. Robertson called the construction in the verse a permissive imperative. The verse is not a command to be angry; rather, when we are angry for good reasons, we should carefully avoid sin. This type of anger is edifying (verse 29), and it desires justice. It is also temporary (verse 26) and doesn’t become a long-term obsession or grudge. God is described as being angry at times, so we can obviously be angry without sinning.

2. Bad Anger – Unrighteous Indignation

Verse 31 says that this type of sinful anger involves bitterness, malice, and evil speaking. It is a selfish type of anger, and it is not forgiving. I see more and more of this type of anger in America, especially involving public figures such as football coaches and pastors of megachurches. People seem to be obsessed in this regard. They accumulate ammunition (gossip) to use against people they hate, and they don’t stop to verify its accuracy. I am amazed at the number of churches that I have heard about recently that are torn with dissension. In most cases, at least in my neck of the woods, non-Christians are not pointing at churches and saying, “See how they love each other.”

When one reads Galatians 5:19-21, one can see quite a number of fleshly fruits that are connected with bad anger. Lord, please help us to exhibit the fruits of the Spirit instead of the fruits of the flesh.

2007-04-10T22:53:00.000-05:00

Edgar Young Mullins

I've been doing a lot of research lately on the soteriological beliefs of E. Y. Mullins. I'm not finished yet, but I have been fascinated so far. He believed in three of the five points of Calvinism. Mullins affirmed total depravity, unconditional election, and perseverance of the saints, but he denied limited atonement and irresistible grace. I affirm the same three points, as does Paige Patterson and many other Southern Baptists. Mullins was very influential in Southern Baptist life, serving as president of Southern Seminary from 1899 to 1928 and as chairman of the committee that formed the 1925 Baptist Faith and Message. Key SBC leaders before Mullins were five-point Calvinists. Mullins was very influential in shaping the soteriological views of the present-day SBC in which only 10 percent of pastors hold to all of the five points of Calvinism (according to LifeWay Research). If you are interested in the history of the SBC, you would do well to read about Mullins.

2007-03-14T08:32:00.000-05:00

Differing Levels of Receptivity

Recently I had the privilege of witnessing to people from three very different cultures at a large, secular university. The first opportunity came when an African-American woman sat down at the table where I was drinking coffee and reading the campus newspaper. In answer to a diagnostic question, she indicated that she was basing her salvation on good works. She was very receptive to the true gospel, and in a short time she surrendered her life to Christ in repentance and faith. The other two opportunities were quite different. I shared the gospel with four Sunni Muslims and with an agnostic Chinese man. In both cases the people heard the gospel but did not accept it. Hopefully some good seeds were planted that will eventually be harvested.

Clearly, there's just one gospel, but there are many levels of receptivity, and the strategies we use to present the gospel can vary. When I encounter witnessing situations with non-receptive people that are challenging, it stimulates me to increase both my prayer life and my apologetic preparation. I am continually amazed at the divine appointments that God lays before me. Thank you, Lord!

2007-03-01T20:33:00.000-06:00

The Wal-Martization of the Local Church

A couple of weeks ago I was at a meeting where Leonard Sweet was speaking. He mentioned the Wal-Martization of the local church. I had not heard that term before, but it seemed eerily appropriate for what I have been seeing lately. For instance, last week I was visiting good prospects (i.e., they had already visited our church and had a good experience there) for the large church of which I am a member. (I am not on staff there.) I happened to visit a young couple that has several young children. They are the type of family that any SBC church would want to have. The woman said I looked familiar, and we soon discovered that she had heard me preach about six months ago at the small church she had been attending. I began to feel guilty about inviting them back to our large church because I remembered that the small church had very few children. I decided, however, that the couple has every right to take their children to a church where there are excellent children's programs that will help in their spiritual education. I saw the woman last Sunday, and she told me that her oldest child had made a profession of faith in one of the morning worship services. I guess I still have mixed feelings about this. I feel sorry for the small church that the family left behind. It seems to be mostly composed of senior adults, as are many of our SBC churches. I rejoice, however, that the family has found a church home where there are excellent children's programs that will help in the evangelization and spiritual growth of the children.

2007-02-16T22:33:00.000-06:00

Valentine's Day Gift

This is the Avon bear that I gave to my wife. It sings, "I just called to say, 'I love you.'" His mouth moves as he sings, and the cell phone lights up with a photo of his girlfriend. Pretty cool, huh?

2007-02-16T22:17:00.000-06:00

Some Thoughts on John 1:12

What comes first, regeneration or conversion (faith/repentance)? Most people seem to agree that regeneration and conversion occur simultaneously in terms of temporal/chronological order, but many people disagree about the logical order. Five-point Calvinists believe that regeneration precedes conversion in logical order. In contrast, many non-five-pointers believe that conversion precedes regeneration in logical order. I believe that John 1:12 is a verse that is relevant to this controversy:

“But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” (NASB)

General agreement exists concerning the temporal/chronological order in the verse. Lenski voiced the opinion of many scholars in this regard:

“The two aorists έλαβον and έδωκεν occur simultaneously. The instant of receiving Christ is the instant of receiving the gift of childhood. . . . The gift is here called ‘right to become God’s children.’ Yet the infinitive γενέσθαι is an aorist and thus punctiliar and hence cannot mean that at some later time these persons would develop into God’s children. This aorist infinitive expresses action that is simultaneous with that of the two preceding finite aorists έλαβον and έδωκεν—in other words, the moment of accepting Christ, which is the moment of becoming God’s children, i.e., the moment of regeneration.”

R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of John’s Gospel (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1943), 61.

This simultaneous quality refutes the position of James P. Boyce:

“The relation of regeneration to conversion will, therefore, appear to be one of invariable antecedence. . . . There is not only antecedence, but in some cases an appreciable interval. . . . Between it and regeneration must intervene in some cases some period of time until the knowledge of God’s existence and nature is given, before the heart turns, or even is turned towards that God.”

James Petigru Boyce, Abstract of Systematic Theology (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1887), 380-381.

Can any conclusions be reached about the logical order of repentance and conversion when looking at this passage? Tom Nettles answered in the negative:

“The emphasis of this passage is not on the order of events (i.e., receiving first, then the giving of authority, and so on) but on the inevitable coexistence of ‘receiving’ and sonship as a gift of God. . . . In conformity with the birth figure, the interpreter should understand the word sons. This word is not an emphasis on adoption, as in Ephesians 1 and Romans 8, but focuses on community of nature.” (emphasis in original)

Thomas J. Nettles, By His Grace and for His Glory (Lake Charles, LA: Cor Meum Tibi, 2002), 288.

I believe that a logical order is indeed indicated by the verse. In a translation of a Greek sentence, the order of the clauses can be changed. Notice the NIV translation of the passage:

“Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.”

The clauses are in a different order in regard to each other in the NIV than they are in the NASB. The syntactical order and context within a Greek clause, however, are important. Thus, they become children of God rather than the children of God become them. Who are the ones who become children of God? The ones that received him, who are believing, were given the right to become children of God. The word “become” indicates a change in status. The receiving, believing people were given the right to become something different—children of God. If John had meant to say, “The people were given the right to become receiving, believing children of God,” he would have used a different syntactical structure.

A few more relevant quotes by scholars follow:

“There were some who did open their hearts to Him. To these He gave the right (and the power) to become the spiritual, not merely the cosmic, children of God, to those who believe on His name. Thus He made faith in Himself the touchstone to membership in the family of God.”

A. T. Robertson, The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1916), 44.

“Believers, from their knowledge of God in Christ (xvii. 3), become children of God, by being born of God (comp. iii. 3; 1 John iii. 9), i.e. through the moral transformation and renewal of their entire spiritual nature by the Holy Ghost; so that now the divine element of life rules in them, excludes all that is ungodly, and permanently determines the development of this moral fellowship of nature with God, onwards to its future glorious consummation (1 John iii. 2; John xvii. 24).” (emphasis in original)

Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Gospel of John, trans. William Urwick, ed. Frederick Crombie, 6th ed. (Winona Lake, IN: Alpha Publications, 1979), 58.

“The privilege and right of those who ‘receive’ Christ, i.e. those who ‘believe on His name,’ is that they may become τέκνα θεου; but this (Jn. Suggests) is not an inherent human capacity. . . . The ‘children of God’ are all who ‘believe in the Name’ of Christ.”

J. H. Bernard, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John, ed. A. H. McNeile (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1928), 16.

2007-01-29T09:08:00.000-06:00

The Changing and Unchanging Aspects of Personhood

Since arriving back from South Korea, I have been struck by the fact that our culture’s fascination with personalities has intensified. We have a fascination with celebrities, be they football coaches, politicians, megachurch pastors, or Hollywood stars.

I was reading a particular team’s football forum recently, and I noticed that some of the fans that are disenchanted with their team’s coach were venting their feelings. One participant in the discussion asked how the “haters” would feel if the team won the national championship next year. Would the disenchanted fans still hate the head coach? Their quite serious answer was in the affirmative. Those fans were so obsessed with their hatred that they could not let go of it, even if the coach won the biggest prize. They had painted themselves into a corner with their hate, and they could not get out of it.

I have noticed the same phenomena in churches. When a new pastor comes, there is ordinarily a honeymoon period in which members give him the benefit of the doubt for a temporary period of time, but they begin to form a lasting opinion of him from the beginning of his tenure at the church. At some point, many of them decide that they like him or don’t like him. After that crucial point, everything he does is viewed through colored lenses. If they have decided that they don’t like him, they begin, perhaps unconsciously, to accumulate evidence for his dismissal. If they have decided that they like him, then they blissfully ignore any mistake he makes and thus fail to help him grow when a constructively critical word to him in private (or rarely, publicly) might really be helpful. When a pastor finds a church where he is truly loved and appreciated, he hates to leave. In many cases, however, after about two years a few or many church members make church life unbearable for the pastor, and a divorce between the pastor and the church occurs. It is no wonder that many pastors question their call into the ministry after such negative experiences.

Why do we react to key leaders this way? Perhaps one reason is that we cynically don’t believe our leaders can learn from their mistakes and improve their performances over time. We are impatient with them and have unrealistic expectations. We wonder why they cannot be like the spiritual giant down the road, the superstar pastor of another church. Of course, some aspects of their personalities will not change much, if any. We must understand, however, that Christian people can genuinely change for the better. Perhaps we ignore this great truth because so many of our church members are stalled in their spiritual growth. We simply don’t see people change at all for the better, or we don’t notice any change because it is so gradual. Intellectually, we believe people can change for the better, but emotionally and subconsciously, we don’t believe it. Pastors and denominational leaders are not fully-formed spiritual giants in most cases. If we want our denomination to be all that it can be for the Lord, we need to exercise more patience with our leaders. Most importantly, all of us need to be teachable and “leadable.”

2007-01-19T14:51:00.000-06:00

Different Strokes for Different Folks

I think it is interesting how different groups of people who affirm unconditional election can approach it in different ways. All people who believe in unconditional election would probably agree with the general definition of it given by Bruce Ware, Professor of Christian Theology at The Southern Baptist Seminary:

“Unconditional election to salvation may be defined as God’s gracious choice, made in eternity past, of those whom he would save by faith through the atoning death of his Son, a choice based not upon anything that those so chosen would do, or any choice that they would make, or on how good or bad they might be, or on anything else specifically true about them (i.e., their qualities, characters, decisions, or actions) in contrast to others, but rather based only upon God’s own good pleasure and will.”

Bruce Ware, Divine Election to Salvation: Unconditional, Individual, and Infralapsarian in Perspectives on Election: Five Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 4.

Selected Scripture Passages Relevant to Unconditional Election:

Ephesians 1:4-5 – “4 Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will.” (NASB, emphasis mine)

Romans 9:11-13, 22-23 – “11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, 12 it was said to her, ‘THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.’ 13 Just as it is written, ‘JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.’ . . . 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.”

1 Peter 1:1-2 – “1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.”

2 Timothy 1:9 – “Who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity.”

The Key Exegetical Issues in Regard to the Above Verses: “According to” (κατά) takes accusative objects in these verses. Daniel Wallace described the basic uses of this preposition: “1. With Genitive a. Spatial: down from, throughout b. Opposition: against c. Source: from 2. With Accusative a. Standard: in accordance with, corresponding to b. Spatial: along, through (extension); toward, up to (direction) c. Temporal: at, during d. Distributive: ‘indicating the division of a greater whole into individual parts’ e. Purpose: for the purpose of f. Reference/Respect: with respect to, with reference to” (emphasis mine).

Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 376-377.

Thus, a chronological or logical order is not necessarily expressed in regard to predestination and His will in Ephesians 1:5, in regard to purpose and choice in Romans 9:11, in regard to choice and foreknowledge in 1 Peter 1:1-2, and in regard to calling and purpose in 2 Timothy 1:9.

In regard to Romans 9:11-13, 22-23, another exegetical issue is whether Paul is discussing national election or individual election. In the same chapter, Paul said that not every member of the nation of Israel is a member of spiritual Israel (9:6-7), and he discussed Pharaoh as an individual (9:17), so the context indicates that 11-13 and 22-23 should be understood as references to individual election.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 – “But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.”

The Key Exegetical Issue in Regard to the Above Verse: Is faith the cause of election, the effect of election, or the instrument by which God gives salvation? The preposition “by” (εν) is listed by Bauer (BAGD) under the heading “causal or instrumental” (p. 260). Dana and Mantey consider the meaning “because of” to be a remote meaning (p. 105). Carl Conrad, an emeritus professor in the department of classics at Washington University, regards the preposition as instrumental in this verse: “(1) Yes, I think that the EN must govern both dative + genitive phrases--both hAGIASMWi PNEUMATOS and PISTEI ALHQEIAS. (2) It is certainly most probable that the same function of EN + dative is involved in both phrases and that the function is instrumental (‘by means
of ...’) in both instances.”
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2004-October/031561.html
Thus, faith is the instrument by which God saves us.

Romans 8:29-30 – “29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.”

The Key Exegetical Issue in Regard to the Above Verse: Does this verse mean that only the elect are called (καλεω), or is the verse simply saying that those who would receive the gospel if they had the chance (those whom He foreknew) always have the chance (are called)? In the parable of the wedding feast in Matthew 22:3, those called (καλεω) did not come to the wedding feast. In Matthew 22:14, many are called (κλητός), but few are chosen (εκλεκτός). Do the elect receive an internal call while the non-elect receive only an external call?

John 1:13 – “Who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

The Key Exegetical Issue in Regard to the Above Verse: Is this verse simply drawing a distinction between physical birth and spiritual birth, or is it giving a detailed description of the cause and non-causes of the spiritual birth? In any case, God does not save us based on a decision of our will.

John 15:16 – “You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.”

The Key Exegetical Issue in Regard to the Above Verse: Was Jesus referring to their selection as a group of twelve disciples or their selection as elect, individual disciples? Judas was no longer present, so they were “clean” as individuals (John 15:3) whereas they were not all clean when Judas was present (John 13:10). Our election to salvation is unconditional; i.e., it is based on God’s choice, not our choice.

Various Specific Views of Unconditional Election:

1. Five-Point Calvinist (TULIP) Perspective that Denies Libertarian Free Will

Some have argued that Calvin did not believe in limited atonement, but Roger Nicole stated: “Calvin’s statement in response to Heshusius, dealing with the participation of unbelievers in the Lord’s Supper and quoted above, deserves special attention: ‘I should like to know how the wicked can eat the flesh of Christ which was not crucified for them, and how they can drink the blood which was not shed to expiate their sins.’ This appears to be a categorical denial of universal atonement.”
http://www.apuritansmind.com/Arminianism/NicoleRogerCalvinsLimitedAtonement.htm

John Calvin’s perspective on election and foreknowledge (comments on Romans 8:29 and 1 Peter 1:2):

“The foreknowledge of God, therefore, which Paul mentions here, is not a mere knowing beforehand, as some ignorant people imagine in their stupid way. It is rather the act of adoption, by which God has always distinguished his children from those who are reprobate. In this same sense, Peter says that believers have been elected for the sanctification of the Spirit according to the foreknowledge of God. Whence, those mentioned above reason foolishly when they infer that God has elected those whom he foresaw as worthy of his grace. Peter does not flatter the believers, as though each one of them owed his election to his own merit. On the contrary, by recalling them to the eternal counsel of God, he denies that they are worthy of God’s grace. So, Paul here repeats with other words what he had said about God’s purpose elsewhere. It follows that God’s knowing the elect rests upon his own good pleasure, because he foreknew nothing outside of himself which led him to will the adoption of sons. He marked some for election according to his own good pleasure.”

John Calvin, Calvin: Commentaries, ed. and trans. Joseph Haroutunian (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1958), 308.

John Calvin’s perspective on free will:

“Since in fact they take it to imply ability and power, one cannot prevent from entering the minds of most people, as soon as the will is called free, the illusion that it therefore has both good and evil within its power, so that it can by its own strength choose either one of them. . . . We deny that choice is free, because through man’s innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil.”

John Calvin, The Bondage and Liberation of the Will: A Defence of the Orthodox Doctrine of Human Choice against Pighius, ed. A. N. S. Lane, trans. G. I. Davies (Grand Rapids: Baker books, 1996), 68-69.

2. Four-Point Amyraldian/Sublapsarian (TUIP) Perspective that Denies Libertarian Free Will

Brian Armstrong’s description of Amyraut’s (1596-1664) theology:

“This does not mean, of course, that Amyraut does not affirm absolute predestination. Like Luther, he does this in the most unequivocal language. In exercising his absolute mercy God is ‘purely, and simply, and absolutely free.’ By this arbitrary operation of his will God takes no account of man’s condition or response but creates faith in him and imputes to him Christ’s righteousness.”

Brian G. Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth-Century France (Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969), 201.

“This is perhaps the most adequate definition of ‘hypothetical universalism’ which can be given. Fulfilling God’s will for universal salvation, Christ procured it for all. Here is Amyraut’s universalism. It is hypothetical, for salvation is only effectual when and if such and such a condition is fulfilled.”

Ibid., 212.

“Amyraut demonstrates at length his teaching on free will, namely, that the will is never to be thought of as in equilibrio but rather as inclined. In this inclined disposition it chooses freely what it desires. Because it is corrupt, however, the will can never choose the good; indeed, it is totally impotent in salvation unless renewed by God’s Spirit.”

Ibid., 107.

3. Three-Point (TUP) Perspective that Affirms Libertarian Free Will

Perspective of E. Y. Mullins, President of The Southern Baptist Seminary (1899-1928):

“Any doctrine of divine sovereignty must safeguard man’s freedom. The sovereignty of holy and loving character, indeed, expresses itself in constituting man as a free moral being. Sin came in and human nature became so biased that, without God’s prevenient grace the will inevitably chooses evil. But neither prevenient nor regenerating grace, nor grace in any of its forms acts upon the will by way of compulsion, but always in accordance with its freedom. The will responds and man chooses for himself God’s freely offered gift of salvation.”

E. Y. Mullins, The Axioms of Religion (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1908), 83-84.

“The divine forces which operate through the gospel are adjusted and adapted to evoke a free moral response on man’s part.”

E. Y. Mullins, The Christian Religion in Its Doctrinal Expression (Philadelphia: The Judson Press, 1917), 51.

“Freedom of the will, broadly defined, is self-determination. The power of contrary choice is one form of the manifestation of this self-determining power.”

Ibid., 62.

“Does God choose men to salvation because of their good works or because he foresees they will believe when the gospel is preached to them? Beyond doubt God foresees their faith. Beyond doubt faith is a condition of salvation. The question is whether it is also the ground of salvation. The Scriptures answer this question in the negative.”

Ibid., 343.

“In his free act of accepting Christ and his salvation man is self-determined. He would not have made the choice if left to himself without the aid of God’s grace. But when he chooses, it is his own free act. God’s grace is not ‘irresistible’ as a physical force is irresistible.”

Ibid., 344.

Analysis of Mullins by Tom Nettles:

“Although the doctrine of unconditional election was accepted by E. Y. Mullins, both his theological method and his specific exposition of divine election served to compromise the earlier views of Dagg, Boyce, Broadus, Manly, Mell and others.”

Thomas J. Nettles, By His Grace and for His Glory (Lake Charles, LA: Cor Meum Tibi, 2002), 246-247.

Perspective of Norman Geisler, President of Southern Evangelical Seminary (Geisler considers himself an Amyraldian/moderate Calvinist by affirming irresistible grace to the willing and denying five-point Calvinism’s irresistible grace to the unwilling, but as will be seen below, his concept of grace seems resistible as he defines free will as the power of contrary choice):

“God’s will to save those who believe (i.e., the elect) is unconditional. So this is not a repudiation of unconditional election. Election is unconditional from the standpoint of the Giver (God), but it is conditional from the standpoint of the receiver. And since God foreknows for sure who will receive it, the result is certain. Thus, in this sense God’s grace on the elect is irresistible.”

Norman Geisler, Chosen But Free (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1999), 94.

“Although no one can believe unto salvation without the aid of God’s saving grace, the gracious action by which we are saved is not monergistic (an act of God alone) but synergistic (an act of God and our free choice). Salvation comes from God, but it is completed by our cooperation.”

Norman Geisler, Sin, Salvation, vol. 3 of Systematic Theology (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2004), 136.

“Salvation is unconditioned from the perspective of the Giver, but it is conditioned from the view of the receiver (who must believe in order to receive it). In short, salvation comes from God, but we receive it through faith.”

Ibid., 182.

“Since love is always persuasive but never coercive, God cannot force anyone to love Him—and this is what ‘irresistible grace on the unwilling’ would do. God’s persuasive but resistible love goes hand in glove with God-given human free choice. Again, human free will is self-determination, involving the ability to choose otherwise. We can either accept or reject God’s grace. In brief, God’s saving grace works synergistically with free will; that is, it must be received to be effective.”

Ibid., 193-194.

“Humans can be free in the libertarian sense (of having the ability to do otherwise—contrary choice), and God can eternally know all of this without violating our freedom.”

Ibid., 200.

The three-point scheme is different from the concept first made popular by Luis Molina (1535-1600). The term comes from the view that, if one put things in logical order, God first considered an infinite number of imagined worlds and circumstances that determined what an infinite number of imagined persons could do. Second, He knew exactly what free choices would certainly be made by an infinite number of persons in those imagined worlds and circumstances (a second type of knowledge), and thus He knew exactly what any imagined person would certainly do. Next, He decided to actually create the imagined world with the imagined beings and circumstances that glorified Him the most. After that decision, God had a third type of knowledge—a complete knowledge of the world He actually created.

The second type of knowledge was called middle knowledge by its adherents because it logically occurred between the other two types of knowledge. Middle knowledge makes God’s election dependent on the imagined freewill actions of imagined beings, so it is incompatible with unconditional election. In contrast, three-point (TUP) theologians believe that God’s election is in accordance with His knowledge of future events, but they do not believe that God’s election is determined by His knowledge of future events. Geisler commented:

“In opposition to this Molinistic view of middle knowledge, which suggests that God’s foreknowledge is dependent on our free choices, the classical view of God (held by both Calvinists and traditional Arminians) affirms that God is an eternal and entirely independent Being. . . . God’s knowledge cannot be dependent on our free choices. Finally, the whole idea of there being a chronological or even logical sequence in God’s thoughts is highly problematic for evangelical theology. It runs contrary to the traditional doctrine of God’s simplicity (absolute indivisibility) held by Augustine, Anselm, and Aquinas, and bequeathed to modern evangelicals through the Reformers. God’s attention does not pass from thought to thought, for His knowledge embraces everything in a single spiritual co-intuition. For if God is simple, then His thoughts are not sequential but simultaneous. He does not know things inferentially but intuitively. . . . There is a third alternative. It postulates that God’s election is neither based on His foreknowledge of man’s free choices nor exercised in spite of it. As the Scriptures declare, we are ‘elect according to the foreknowledge of God’ (1 Peter 1:2 NKJV). That is to say, there is no chronological or logical priority of election and foreknowledge.”

Geisler, Chosen But Free, 51-52.

“There is no contradiction in God knowingly predetermining and predeterminately knowing from all eternity precisely what we would do with our free acts. For God determined that moral creatures would do things freely. He did not determine that they would be forced to perform free acts.”

Ibid., 54.

2007-01-04T17:49:00.000-06:00

Ecstatic Utterances and PPL Revisited

I’ve been doing some more research in this area. As I earlier indicated, I believe that modern ecstatic utterances (babblings, etc.) are not the same phenomena as biblical tongues. I believe that the biblical tongues were normal, human languages and that the ability to speak them came miraculously, not from studying them. I will try to succinctly present evidence for that conclusion. Second, I will discuss the cessation of that particular gift. (I don’t believe all spiritual gifts have ceased.) Third, I will discuss the origin of modern ecstatic utterances, including private prayer language (PPL). To make this presentation more readable, I will place references as endnotes so as not to interrupt the train of thought.

Question #1: Were the “tongues” mentioned in Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12-14 human languages or ecstatic utterances?

Acts 2

“And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.” (Acts 2:4, NASB)

In the above verse, the word “glossais” (γλώσσαις) is used for “tongues.”

“And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language.” (Acts 2:6)

In the above verse, the word “dialekto” (διαλέκτω) is used for “language.”

Some proponents of modern ecstatic utterances have said that the people speaking in tongues were using non-human languages, and these proponents believe that the hearers miraculously heard the message in their own language. If these proponents are correct, two miracles would have been required. This scenario seems inefficient and unnecessary.

If the miracle was in the hearing, then there was no need for a miracle in the speaking. The speakers could have spoken normally, and the hearers would have heard miraculously. The evidence favors the view that the speakers were miraculously speaking various human languages. The Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest commented on Acts 2:4:

“Let us be careful to note that Acts 2:4 refers to the languages of the individuals mentioned in Acts 2:8-11.” (1)

1 Corinthians 14:21

“21 In the Law it is written, "BY MEN OF STRANGE TONGUES AND BY THE LIPS OF STRANGERS I WILL SPEAK TO THIS PEOPLE, AND EVEN SO THEY WILL NOT LISTEN TO ME," says the Lord. 22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.”

In verse 21, the Greek word for “other tongues” is “heteroglossois” (ετερογλώσσοις). In Acts 2:4, the Greek phrase for “other tongues” is “heterais glossais” (ετέραις γλώσσαις). Notice the similarity between the “other tongues” in Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14. Paul was writing to the church at Corinth, a group that understood what he meant by “tongues.” Luke, in contrast, was writing to someone who may not have been familiar with the gift of tongues, so he was more descriptive in Acts 2.

At the beginning of verse 22 in 1 Corinthians 14, the phrase “so then tongues”—“hoste hai glossai” (ωστε αι γλωσσαι) is significant. The inferential conjunction “hoste” means “therefore” or “so then.” “Hai” is a definite article that modifies “tongues,” and in this situation it is an article of previous reference (anaphoric article). The Greek scholars Dana and Mantey commented on this use of the article:

“To Denote Previous Reference. The article may be used to point out an object the identity of which is defined by some reference made to it in the context.” (2)

Thus, Paul was referring to human languages in verse 21, and he was referring to human languages in verse 22. Fred Fisher, a former professor at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, listed some reasons for believing that the “tongues” in 1 Corinthians 12-14 referred to human languages:

“This was a common use for the word ‘tongues’ in the New and Old Testaments (cf. Rev. 5:9; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15). . . . The complex of Greek words which is translated ‘interpret’ or ‘interpretation’ (1 Cor. 12:10, 30; 14:5, 13, 26-28) is used, with one exception, in the New Testament with the meaning of translating a foreign language (cf. Acts 9:36; John 1:38-42; 9:7; Heb. 7:2). The one exception where the meaning is the more common Greek meaning of explaining something is Luke 24:27. . . . The analogy between the Old Testament passage and the tongues in Corinth (1 Cor. 14:21) would support the idea of a foreign language, for the Old Testament passage clearly has this meaning (cf. Isa. 28:11-12). . . . The statement that the tongues were a sign for ‘unbelievers’ (1 Cor. 14:22) would be in favor of a foreign language which the unbeliever could understand. . . . The strong supposition that all spiritual gifts were for the purpose of gospel proclamation would favor the idea of foreign languages as the meaning of the phenomenon at Corinth. In view of these considerations, it would seem that the weight of the evidence is in favor of giving the ‘tongues’ at Corinth the meaning of speaking unlearned foreign languages. The only real objection to this is found in 1 Corinthians 14:2 and 14 and possibly 23. If, however, we suppose that the speaker did not himself understand the language, but spoke it in the grip of the Holy Spirit, these passages could be so interpreted.” (3)

Question #2: Has the biblical gift of tongues ceased?

1 Corinthians 13:8-10

“8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.”

Four things distinguish tongues from prophecy and knowledge in the passage: the use of the middle voice for “cease” rather than the passive voice for “done away” in verse 8, the use of the verb “cease” (pauo, παύω) with tongues instead of the verb “done away” (katargeo, καταργέω) used with prophecy and knowledge, the fact that verse 9 omits tongues but says that prophecy and knowledge are partial, and the fact that verse 10 uses the same verb (“done away”) as verse 8 for prophecy and knowledge. That's four strikes that indicate that the gift of tongues is in a different category. Paul was saying that biblical tongues would cease by themselves (middle voice), but prophecy and knowledge would be stopped (passive voice) when the perfect comes. I interpret “the perfect” as the second coming of Christ. Thus, Paul was saying that the gifts of prophecy and knowledge will be stopped when Christ returns, but tongues would stop by themselves at some point prior to His return. Has that point in history already occurred? Yes. Notice what Robert Gromacki said about it:

“In the three centuries that followed the apostolic era, there are only two references to tongue-speaking (Montanus and Tertullian who was a Montanist). The fact that Montanism reflected a false, egotistical view of pneumatology can hardly argue for the genuineness of Biblical glossolalia in that period. Therefore, there are no genuine cases of glossolalia in the post-apostolic era. Speaking in tongues had definitely ceased. The testimonies of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine confirm this conclusion.” (4)

Could biblical tongues start again after ceasing for a while? Gromacki answered this question:

“If the gift were supposed to be permanent, then it would have occurred in every generation of every century up to the present time. To argue that the gift was active in the apostolic era, then silent for centuries, and is now active again is contrary to the plain statement of Scripture. When they cease, they cease. This is a blanket statement—not to be repeated again.” (5)

Herschel Hobbs also commented on 1 Corinthians 13:8-10:

“The word ‘cease’ is a future middle form. They will make themselves cease or automatically cease. This gift ended with the first century.” (6)

Question #3: What is the origin of modern ecstatic utterances and private prayer language (PPL)?

This is an interesting question. I’ll quote several people to provide some possible answers.

Gromacki gave the following options:

“Four possible opinions as to the source of modern glossolalia have been presented. Both sides admit that the phenomenon can be satanically, psychologically, and artificially produced. However, the advocates believe that much tongue-speaking has been produced by God. The author believes that the origin of modern speaking in tongues cannot be limited to just one source, but that all modern glossolalia can be explained by the first three mentioned.” (7)

David Christie-Murray referred to animism as a cause:

“Animism is an early stage in the evolution of religions; . . . primitive peoples imbued with animistic beliefs commonly accept that human beings may be possessed by spirits and speak their languages when under possession.” (8)

George Cutten mentioned great excitement as a cause:

“Pseudo language, or articulate sounds which simulate words, is probably the most common kind of speaking with tongues. . . . With the great excitement attending certain experiences, we can well understand from other cases how the rational part of the mind—consciousness—would be put out of action.” (9)

In regard to private prayer language, I think Matthew 6:7 can be applied:

“And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words.”

The Greek word in verse 7 for “use meaningless repetition” is “battologeo” (βαττολογέω). The word is onomatopoetic, meaning it sounds like the word it means. For instance, we use the word “swish” to describe a basketball going through the net without touching the rim, and we use the word “buzz” to describe the sound a bee makes. “Logeo” means “to speak,” and thus “battologeo” means “to speak batto.” Thus, Jesus said that we should not “speak batto” when we pray privately. Jesus said that this practice was something that the Gentiles did. Gromacki cited the instructions given by a person teaching others to speak in tongues:

“Repeat certain elementary sounds which he told them, such as ‘bah-bah-bah,’ or something similar. He then laid his hands on the head of each seeker, prayed for him, and the seeker did actually speak in tongues.” (10)

Not every person that uses PPL today says “batto,” but another onomatopoetic word—“babble”—describes some of the content of the prayers of some people who engage in PPL. We should not babble in private prayer.

Endnotes:

1. Kenneth Wuest, Untranslatable Riches from the Greek New Testament, in
Wuest’s Word Studies from the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1942), 109.
2. H. E. Dana and Julius Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament
(Toronto: The Macmillan Company, 1955), 141.
3. Fred Fisher, Commentary on 1 & 2 Corinthians (Waco: Word Books, 1975), 217.
4. Robert Gromacki, The Modern Tongues Movement (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1967), 17.
5. Gromacki, 126.
6. Herschel Hobbs, The Epistles to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1960), 64.
7. Gromacki, 49.
8. David Christie-Murray, Voices from the Gods: Speaking with Tongues (London: Routledge
& Kegan Paul, 1978), 4.
9. George Cutten, Speaking with Tongues: Historically and Psychologically Considered (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1927), 173.
10.Gromacki, 42.

For Further Study

A missionary friend of mine sent the following web addresses for sites that discuss the origin of ecstatic utterances, etc.:

http://www.piney.com/TonguesIndex.html
http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/speakingtongues.htm
http://www.mydoctrine.com/Tongues.HTM
http://www.holybiblesays.org/articles/tongues.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/pentcsl.htm
http://discernment.org/

2007-01-01T16:15:00.000-06:00

Some Thoughts on New Year's Day

I have been wondering lately how folks in biblical times celebrated New Year's Day. Interestingly, the Israelites had two New Year's Days. The first occurred in the spring on the first day of the first month—the month of Abib/Nissan (Exodus 12:2). The second occurred in the fall on the first day of the seventh month—the month of Tisri (Leviticus 23:24) at the end of the harvest year (Exodus 23:16). Interestingly, in each case, a significant day followed New Year’s Day—Passover in the spring and the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) in the fall. The fall New Year’s Day was more of a civil holiday like our New Year’s Day, but the Israelites celebrated it in spiritual ways. Some specific steps were to be taken on this day (Rosh Hashanah), according to Leviticus 23:24-25:

1. Observe a Sabbath.
2. Observe a memorial of blowing of trumpets.
3. Observe a holy convocation.
4. Give an offering.

This is good advice for activities on New Year's Day that can be applied to us (without the blowing of trumpets). Cease from normal, servile activities. Remember the blessings of the past year. Spend significant time with the family at home and at church. Resolve anew to present ourselves as living sacrifices, which is our reasonable service (Romans 12:1).

2006-12-23T10:44:00.000-06:00

Wesley and Campbell: A Study in Contrasts

Interestingly, our theology affects our preaching styles. For example, because John Wesley believed that the Holy Spirit must act in a special way to save people, he allowed for emotionalism when he preached. Wesley believed that faith is more than intellectual assent, and he believed the Holy Spirit affects all of a person, including the emotions. In contrast, because Alexander Campbell believed that the Holy Spirit does not act in a special way to save people, he did not allow for emotionalism when he preached. Campbell believed that faith is simply intellectual assent to the facts of the gospel. Wesley was one of the first preachers of the First Great Awakening to see emotional responses in his audiences, and Methodist preachers became the leaders of the camp meetings of the Second Great Awakening. Campbell was critical of the emotional preaching and the emotional responses to that preaching that he saw during the camp meetings of the Second Great Awakening in America.

The Moravians influenced Wesley to a great extent. Mark Noll mentioned their influence on Wesley in America:

“While in Georgia, Wesley was taken aback during an interview with the Moravian leader, Spangenberg, in which the latter asked if Wesley had the witness of the Spirit of God in himself.”

Mark A. Noll, “John Wesley and the Doctrine of Assurance” Bibliotheca Sacra 132, no. 526 (April-June 1975): 165.

Bonamy Dobree said that Wesley’s theology changed after a Moravian, Peter Böhler, helped him understand that conversions were instantaneous acts of God:

“How could faith be given in a moment, how could a man be turned at once from darkness to light, from sin and misery to righteousness and joy? ‘Look at the Bible,’ Böhler said; and to his astonishment Wesley found that nearly all the conversions recorded there were instantaneous. . . . Wesley promptly declared his new belief in this faith.”

Bonamy Dobree, John Wesley (London: Duckworth, 1933), 62-63.

Dobree said that Wesley came to understand that faith is more than the intellectual assent that his mother had endorsed:

“Faith had been an assent, even if an assent to what God had revealed because He had revealed it; but this, now, was a sensation, a warming of the heart; it felt like a physical embrace.”

Dobree, 65.

This belief affected his preaching. Wesley understood that preaching should be more than a rational presentation of the facts. He came to the conclusion that preachers should make allowance for a special act of the Holy Spirit on the hearers of the sermon.

A group of people in Scotland known as the Sandemanians (also known as the Glassites) influenced Campbell’s theology. Samuel Rogal discussed the Sandemanians’ origin and John Wesley’s evaluation of the group’s theology:

“Wesley preached in the town on Wednesday, 2 June 1779, to nearly ‘as large a congregation as at Dundee [on June 1], but nothing so serious. The poor Glassites here, pleading for a merely notional faith, greatly hinder either the beginning or the progress of any real work of God’ (Journal, 6:236). John Glass . . . published, in 1729, a tract . . . in which he attempted to prove that the civil establishment of religion is inconsistent with the Gospel. . . . As a result, the Church of Scotland expelled him, and those who rallied to his cause were termed Glassites. Glass’s son-in-law Robert Sandeman (1718-1771), carried on the founder’s work in London and in America, where the group became known as Sandemanians.”

Samuel J. Rogal, John Wesley’s Mission to Scotland, 1751-1790, vol. 3 in Studies in the History of Missions (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988), 185-186.

William Whitsitt explained that Greville Ewing, a Sandemanian, was influential in causing Campbell to theologically depart from Presbyterianism:

“He renounced Presbyterianism forever. . . . The conquest of Greville Ewing and of his particular type of Sandemanianism was then first firmly established.”

William H. Whitsitt, Origin of the Disciples of Christ (New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1888), 60.

According to Whitsitt, young Campbell eventually accepted Greville’s notion that faith is mere intellectual assent to the facts of the gospel:

“Alexander rejected, for a while, the conceit of Ewing and the Sandemanians, that faith is nothing other than mere belief, which is preceded by testimony alone. . . . But the period was near at hand when he should accede to the notion of his master.”

Ibid., 74.

According to Granville Walker, Campbell’s theological view of faith affected his view of preaching:

“He defined preaching by an appeal to what he regarded as the New Testament conception of faith: simple belief in the testimony of credible witnesses.”

Granville T. Walker, Preaching in the Thought of Alexander Campbell (St. Louis: The Bethany Press, 1954), 28.

The lesson to be derived is obvious. We should understand the tremendous influence of our theology on our preaching. Conversely, we should understand the tremendous influence of our preaching on the theology of our hearers. We should be good stewards of the opportunities God has given us to both learn and teach correct theology.

2006-12-16T18:04:00.000-06:00

Graduation Day for My Older Son

Here we are: from the left is my younger son, Paul (a freshman engineering major at Union), my older son, Andy (a graduate of Union as of today), my wife, Grace, and yours truly. Union University in Jackson, Tennessee, is a great school. I highly recommend it. I must admit that I feel a bit older today after watching my son graduate.

2006-12-15T14:23:00.000-06:00

George Whitefield and His Eventual Influence on Southern Baptist Preaching

In New England during the decades immediately prior to the First Great Awakening, many preachers read their sermon manuscripts from the pulpit. During the First Great Awakening in New England, Whitefield’s successful preaching was a catalyst for change in the preaching style of many other preachers. His influence also extended to the South where Separate Baptists multiplied exceedingly by utilizing his preaching style.

John Sparks stated that the preachers in New England who were supportive of the First Great Awakening imitated Whitefield’s preaching style, which came to be known as the “New England Holy Tone”:

“The New England New Light preachers labored on, and although few if any could match Whitefield’s dramatic flair, they compensated by developing a distinctive cadence based largely on Whitefield’s own emotive style and embellished by a singsong, almost hypnotic chant.”

John Sparks, The Roots of Appalachian Christianity: The Life and Legacy of Elder Shubal Stearns (Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 2001), 27.

Alan Heimert also described Whitefield’s preaching and its effect:

“Both admirers and critics noted how Whitefield employed changes in tone and dramatic, though controlled, gestures. From Whitefield’s example was derived a radical redefinition of the nature and character of ‘evangelical preaching.’”

Alan Heimert and Perry Miller, eds., The Great Awakening: Documents Illustrating the Crisis and Its Consequences (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1967), xxvi.

Five of Whitefield’s critics in Connecticut in a 1744 letter described his imitators and their preaching:

“Mr. Whitefield, passing through this land, condemning all but his adherents, and his followers and imitators, by their insufferable enthusiastick [sic] whims and extemporaneous jargon, brought in such a flood of confusion among us, that we became sensible of the unscriptural method we had always been accustomed to take in our worship.”

Henry Cook, Barnaby Ford, Isaac Castel, John How, and Thomas Claselee, in The Great Awakening: Documents Illustrating the Crisis and Its Consequences, 397.

Thus, many New England preachers imitated Whitefield’s preaching in terms of both its extemporaneous nature and its dramatic aspects, such as tones and gestures.

Whitefield’s preaching greatly affected Shubal Stearns, the founding pastor of the Sandy Creek Baptist Church in North Carolina, the mother church for Separate Baptists in the South. Southern Baptist Convention historians have traced the denomination’s roots to both the Separate Baptists of the Sandy Creek tradition and the Regular Baptists of the Charleston tradition. Sparks described the effect of Whitefield’s preaching on Stearns when Stearns was in New England in 1740:

“He had been overpowered by Whitefield’s preaching along with many of his relatives and neighbors—including his parents—and had experienced an ecstatic New Birth in Christ.” (Sparks, 29)

Stearns imitated Whitefield’s preaching style, and his preaching was very effective after he moved to the backcountry of the South, according to Sparks:

“His family’s regard for him would only have furthered the wild adulation with which his musical, emotive New England Holy Tone preaching had been accepted on the backcountry frontier.” (Ibid., 93)

Sparks quoted Morgan Edwards, a minister of the Philadelphia Baptist Association who heard Stearns preach a year before Stearns’ death, to indicate that all Separate Baptist ministers copied Stearns’ preaching style. (Ibid., 65)

The preaching style utilized by Whitefield and Stearns emphasized the conversion experience, which most Southern Baptist preachers also typically emphasize. Heimert explained that Whitefield and his followers measured success by conversions:

“Success, in turn, was measured by what Whitefield and his fellow workers termed the ‘New Birth.’ Not the Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone, but the existential fact of the conversion experience, became the ‘principal hinge’ of what Edwards called ‘the evangelical scheme.’” (Heimert, xxvii)

Most Southern Baptist preachers frequently utilize a lively, extemporaneous preaching style, which is somewhat similar to that utilized by Whitefield and Stearns. God can still utilize this type of preaching to win many souls to Christ.

2006-12-08T19:15:00.000-06:00

Similarities and Differences Between Hybels and Warren

I have looked on with admiration and wonder as God has used Bill Hybels and Rick Warren to build churches that have effectively evangelized many people. Both churches are averaging about 20,000 on weekends at the present time. Interestingly, there are both similarities and differences in their philosophies.

Similarities

Both churches have attempted to contextualize their message without compromising it so that seekers will hear it presented clearly and effectively. Hybels emphasized this important principle:

“We believe that the church should be culturally relevant, while remaining doctrinally pure.”

Lynne and Bill Hybels, Rediscovering Church: The Story and Vision of Willow Creek Community Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 187.

Warren also stressed that Jesus’ disciples “were to adapt to local customs and culture when it didn’t violate a biblical principle.”

Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church: Growth Without Compromising Your Message & Mission (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 195.

Michael Hamilton gave a description of growing churches that could be applied to both Saddleback Community Church and Willow Creek Community Church:

“History seems to show that dynamic, growing churches require a combination of spiritual wisdom, cultural discernment, visionary leadership, talented management, favorable demographics, and adequate financial resources.”

Michael S. Hamilton, “Willow Creek’s Place in History,” Christianity Today 44, no. 13 (November 13, 2000): 68.

Differences

Hybels disagrees with two of the key principles of the classic church growth movement as espoused by Donald McGavran, while Warren agrees with both. McGavran defined the homogeneous unit principle:

“People like to become Christians without crossing racial, linguistic, or class barriers.”

Donald McGavran, Understanding Church Growth, third edition, revised and edited by C. Peter Wagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 163.

In an interview with Bill Hybels in 1994, Michael Maudlin and Edward Gilbreath asked, “Do you endorse the idea called the ‘homogeneous unit principle’ in church-growth circles?” Hybels answered, “I never have. I think a church ought to reflect its neighborhood. If the neighborhood is diverse, I hope the church would be. If the neighborhood is not diverse, it’s pretty hard for a church to be.”

Michael G. Maudlin and Edward Gilbreath, “Selling Out the House of God?” Christianity Today 38, no. 8 (July 18, 1994): 24.

In a forum held in 2005 and moderated by Edward Gilbreath and Mark Galli, however, Hybels said that at one point in his life he thought the homogeneous unit principle was true:

“It was the homogeneous unit principle of church growth. And I remember as a young pastor thinking, That’s true. . . . I marvel at how naïve and pragmatic I was 30 years ago” (emphasis in original).

Noel Castellanos, Bill Hybels, Soong-Chan Rah, Frank Reid, Mark Galli, and Edward Gilbreath, “Harder than Anyone Can Imagine,” Christianity Today 49, no. 4 (April 2005): 38.

In contrast, Warren endorsed the homogeneous unit principle as he discussed the evangelization of people who were like those in his church:

“The people your church is most likely to reach are those who match the existing culture of your church. . . . Whatever type of people you already have in your congregation is the same type you are likely to attract more of.”

Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 174.

McGavran defined the receptivity principle: “Evangelism can be and ought to be directed to responsive persons, groups, and segments of society.”

McGavran, Understanding Church Growth, 187.

Rather than trying to evangelize responsive non-Christians, Willow Creek Community Church has emphasized evangelizing any non-Christians that are in the sphere of influence of Christians. Verne Becker emphasized that the church evangelistically targets particular groups for reasons other than responsiveness:

“Men are targeted, according to associate pastor Don Cousins, only because they are harder to reach.”

Verne Becker, “A Church for Bored Boomers,” Christianity Today 33, no. 14 (October 6, 1989): 25.

In contrast, Warren clearly endorsed the receptivity principle as he explained his strategy for reaching a community:

“Jesus taught in the Parable of the Sower and the Soils (see Matt. 13:3-23) that spiritual receptivity varies widely. . . . For evangelism to have maximum effectiveness, we need to plant our seed in the good soil—the soil that produces a hundredfold harvest. . . . We need to be strategic in reaching the world, focusing our efforts where they will make the greatest difference.”

Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 181.

2006-11-28T22:14:00.000-06:00

Known Causes of Spiritual Growth

Some causes of spiritual growth are mysterious and known only to God. Spiritual growth usually takes quite a bit of time. Unfortunately, some people do not progress very far in spiritual growth over a long period of time. I will proceed to describe some causes of growth that can be easily identified.

One cause of spiritual growth is good spiritual food. Physical babies must have enough healthy food, or their growth will be stunted. The same thing is true for spiritual babies. For one thing, they need adequate Bible study to grow spiritually. “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). The Bible is the only objective source of spiritual truth that is always reliable, and therefore it is much more authoritative than religious leaders or religious traditions.

A person can obtain spiritual food by studying the Bible as an individual or in a group. Both types of study are necessary for the healthy growth of a Christian. Individual Christians are able to interpret the Bible for themselves and do not require another person to interpret it for them.

Individuals, however, can make mistakes while interpreting the Bible, and for that reason group Bible studies are also important. People can gain new insights about the Bible by hearing or reading the interpretations of other Christians. For that reason, we should not forsake “assembling together” (Hebrews 10:25) because we can encourage one another and gain further understanding about the word of God. All Christians should handle the Bible accurately: “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). Groups of Christians should test what they hear and determine if a person’s interpretation of one passage is consistent with other passages in the Bible: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

A second cause of spiritual growth is spiritual exercise. In order to experience healthy physical growth, young children must exercise. Muscles exercised will grow. Unused ones will atrophy. This principle is also true in the spiritual realm. If Christians neglect certain spiritual exercises, their spiritual growth will be hindered. According to Hebrews 5:14, mature Christians have acquired skill through being spiritually exercised or trained (gumnazō in Greek). The same Greek word (from which we get the word “gymnasium”) appears in Hebrews 12:11 which describes Christians being trained by God’s discipline (chastening): “All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.” The word also appears in 1 Timothy 4:7 where Christians are instructed to discipline themselves “for the purpose of godliness.” So we can conclude that God is like a coach or parent for Christians, but Christians are also to be self-disciplined in their spiritual exercise.

The Greek verb nēphō means “to be sober” or “to be self-controlled.” It appears in some verses that answer the question of how Christians can discipline themselves:

"But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation." (1 Thessalonians 5:8)

"But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry." (2 Timothy 4:5)

"The end of all things is at hand; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer." (1 Peter 4:7)

"Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." (1 Peter 5:8)

Notice that the first and last verses refer to spiritual warfare for which Christians should prepare themselves. It is a reality of the Christian life and cannot be avoided. Preparation for spiritual warfare is a spiritual discipline (exercise). Christians should strive to maintain clean minds and bodies, and they should also strive to stay in proper relationship with God and their fellow human beings so there will be fewer weaknesses for Satan to exploit during the inevitable spiritual battles. These spiritual battles can be won only through the power of the Holy Spirit.

The second verse above refers to doing the work of an evangelist. All Christians may not have the gift of evangelism, but all Christians are evangelists and should share the gospel on a regular basis with non-Christians. Witnessing is a spiritual discipline.

The third verse refers to prayer, another spiritual discipline. Christians should regularly pray, and their prayers should include praise, thanksgiving, confession, and intercession.

A third cause of spiritual growth is a spiritual family. Not only do young children need good food and exercise; for healthy development they also need a caring family and help from more mature people. Spiritual children have been adopted by God and are part of His eternal family: “He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will” (Ephesians 1:5). There is one kingdom made up of all Christians, but God also desires that His children be active parts of local churches. The family helps to hold us accountable for spiritual disciplines, and it encourages us when we need it. Every Christian should be an active member in a local church.

2006-11-18T15:45:00.000-06:00

Dealing with Discouragement

Even the greatest servants of God have sometimes been discouraged. An example was the prophet Elijah. After being used by God to gain a great victory over King Ahab and the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel, Elijah became very discouraged. Elijah sounded suicidal when he said the following in 1 Kings 19:4: “It is enough; now, O Lord, take my life, for I am not better than my fathers.” Christians can learn about some of the causes and cures for discouragement by examining 1 Kings 18-19.

The first cause of Elijah’s discouragement was fatigue. He was psychologically and physically exhausted. Elijah had run from Mount Carmel to Jezreel when “the hand of the LORD was on Elijah” (1 Kings 18:46). Elijah, however, also ran from Jezreel to Beersheba when “he was afraid” (1 Kings 19:3). Later he left Beersheba and went a day’s journey into the wilderness (1 Kings 19:4). Elijah had likely been under a lot of stress during his encounter with King Ahab and the 450 prophets of Baal, especially when he killed the prophets (1 Kings 19:40).

The second cause of his discouragement was isolation. Elijah had been running for his life, but after leaving his servant in Beersheba and going alone into the wilderness, he wanted to die. Twice God asked Elijah what he was doing (1 Kings 19:9, 13), and twice Elijah said, “I alone am left” (1 Kings 19:10, 14).

The third cause of his discouragement was the realization that there was a continuing, perhaps unexpected threat from his enemies after a great victory. Elijah probably hoped that everyone, including Ahab and Jezebel, would repent after God displayed His power at Mount Carmel, but that did not happen. Instead, Jezebel sent a message to Elijah in which she promised to kill him (1 Kings 19:2). He became afraid after hearing her words from a messenger.

Like Elijah, Christians can become discouraged due to fatigue, isolation, and continuing, unexpected threats from a committed enemy. Let’s look at the cures for discouragement.

The first cure for Elijah’s discouragement was proper nutrition and rest. When he was at his lowest point and ready to die, an angel touched him and spoke to him (1 Kings 19:5). Did the angel tell Elijah to pray or sing? No. Did the angel tell him to study his Bible or attend a worship service? No. The angel twice told Elijah to eat (1 Kings 19:5, 7). Amen! Christians must realize that even though they have the supernatural Holy Spirit living inside them, their bodies are not yet supernatural, and they must be good stewards of them. Christians must balance work and exercise with proper nutrition and rest.

The second cure for his discouragement was the reception of clear instructions from God. Elijah had fought some major battles, but God indicated that He was not finished with Elijah by giving him some new assignments during a time of personal revival (1 Kings 19:15-17). Christians are happy when they are doing the work that they know God wants them to do.

The third cure for his discouragement was the realization that he was not alone in God’s service. God told Elijah the following in 1 Kings 19:18: “Yet I will leave 7,000 in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal and every mouth that has not kissed him.” Christians must realize that they should work as part of a team—a local church. God did not design them to be spiritual “lone rangers.”

2006-11-01T22:32:00.000-06:00

Starbucks and You Know What

I had a cup of Starbucks coffee today. It was delicious, of course. In the Commercial Appeal (the Memphis newspaper) this past Sunday, there was an interesting Associated Press article about Starbucks by Allison Linn. She described Starbucks’ ambitious goal of “having 40,000 stores worldwide,” but two statements in the article particularly caught my eye:

1. Joshua Sanders of Seattle was asked why he preferred Starbucks over a competitor. He answered, “It’s the coffee.”
2. Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz “said he thought the company had been vastly underestimating the worldwide demand for its items.”

Can you see where I’m going with this? I don’t need to say more, do I?

Addition to This Post

One of my buddies told me today that I need to explain the above comments. My point is this: Starbucks coffee is the main thing at Starbucks. The atmosphere is great for conversations, witnessing, etc., but people go there for the coffee. There is a great demand for it worldwide. Compare this situation to our churches. We worry about the atmosphere and how we will adapt to the surrounding culture, and this concern is important, of course. The main thing, however, is Jesus. If He is being strongly reflected in our lives, people will be drawn to Him. There is a great demand for Him worldwide.

2006-10-27T11:26:00.000-05:00

Road Trip and Witness

Last week I took an interesting trip with my mother and younger son, who was on fall break from college. My mother has been a caregiver for my stepfather for quite a while, and she needed a break.

We drove from Memphis to Little Rock last Thursday and met some of her former classmates from Ouachita Baptist University for lunch at the Peabody Hotel. Later we toured the Clinton Presidential Library (which is really a museum).

On Friday we drove to Fort Smith to visit one of her friends that she had not seen in a long time, and then we went to Fayetteville to see the University of Arkansas campus. I’ve been a Razorback fan for a while, but I had never visited the campus. Mother taught Ken Hatfield at Helena Central High School in the early 60s, so she was excited when he became head coach for the Razorbacks. When I was a pastor in Kentucky, Houston Nutt was head coach at Murray State University, and he spent some time with my older son teaching him the quarterback position at a clinic. I was really impressed with Coach Nutt, so I was excited for him when he became head coach for the Razorbacks.

Later on Friday we drove to Eureka Springs—a beautiful, quaint, picturesque place in the Ozarks. I had not been there since I was a boy. We visited some of the shops on Saturday morning, watched the Razorbacks beat Ole Miss on TV in the afternoon, and attended the outdoor Passion Play Saturday night. A cold front had come through during the afternoon, but fortunately we had plenty of warm clothes and blankets.

On Sunday we drove back to Memphis. I arrived back in time to go to church visitation on Sunday afternoon, and I had two good visits. The second visit was interesting. The man had been a caregiver for a long time, and I admired his perseverance. Before I shared the gospel with him, he said that he was basing his salvation on good works. If God asked him why He should let him into His heaven, he said that he would say that he had been a “really good” person. I then explained the gospel. I clearly told him that we are not saved by good works, quoting Ephesians 2:8-9. After I explained the plan of salvation, he said, “I’ve already done that.”

Since arriving back from South Korea about a year ago, I have been able to lead many more African-Americans than Caucasians to Christ. I shared the gospel with an African-American woman a couple of weeks ago at the University of Memphis, and it was quite easy to lead her to Christ. The African-Americans in Memphis seem to be much more responsive to the gospel at the present time than are Caucasians. I’m not sure what the reasons for that are. The Southern Baptist churches here have been suffering loss for the past couple of decades. The average Sunday School attendance for churches in the local association was about 33,000 in 1980. The latest stats I could find (2003) showed that the average attendance had declined to 27,000. I don’t think there is any easy, simple solution to this problem of decline.

2006-10-18T17:08:00.000-05:00

Characteristics of Mature and Immature Christians

During the years when our two sons were physically growing up, we occasionally asked them to stand next to a wall, and we put a mark on the wall to indicate their height. As they grew older, we could see the change in their height quite easily. It is important to see progress in spiritual growth as well as physical growth.

New Christians, no matter what their chronological age, are spiritual children. Tragically, some remain in this stage for much too long a time. The Bible describes some characteristics of spiritual children.

First, according to Ephesians 4:14-15, spiritual children are easily deceived by false teachers and are in need of spiritual growth:

"As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves, carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him, who is the head, even Christ." (NASB)

Second, according to 1 Corinthians 3:1-3, spiritual children sometimes behave like non-Christians and have relationship problems with other people:

"And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to babes in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?"

Third, according to Hebrews 5:12-13, spiritual children are not skilled in the “word of righteousness”:

"For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is a babe."

The Bible also describes some characteristics of mature Christians.

First, mature Christians should be teachers (Hebrews 5:12): We have already seen in the verse above that mature Christians should be teachers by a certain time. Mature Christians may not have an official teaching position, but they should at least be unofficial teachers (mentors) who help less mature Christians grow spiritually.

Second, mature Christians are also skilled in the word of righteousness and can discern good and evil (Hebrews 5:13-14): “For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.” The word “mature” in the verse is a translation of the Greek word téleios. The Greek word can also be translated as “complete” or “perfect.”

It is quite obvious that God wants all Christians to grow spiritually. Jesus gave the command to be perfect (téleios in Greek) as the “heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). He was not referring to sinless perfection when He used the word “perfect.” Christians cannot reach the state of sinless perfection while they are physically alive on earth. Rather, Jesus was commanding them to be complete and mature in moral character. The apostle Paul used the same word in Colossians 1:28 when he said, “And we proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, that we may present every man complete in Christ.” James also used this word when he said that endurance produced by the testing of a Christian’s faith produces a “perfect” (mature) Christian (James 1:4). Obviously, such testing of one’s faith takes time, but some Christians grow much faster than do other Christians over the same period of time. The Christians who grow fastest are those who take full advantage of the God-given means of spiritual growth.

2006-10-13T11:25:00.000-05:00

My Interview With the Semi-Goths

A few days ago my wife and I made a trip to a mall near us. That is hardly newsworthy, but I had not been to a mall for several months, and I was surprised to see so many teenagers wearing black clothing (including black gloves). Having been a youth minister in the 80s, I quickly realized that I had fallen behind in my understanding of youth culture. My interest was piqued, and I decided yesterday to go back to the mall with a tape recorder to do an interview with any teenagers I found dressed in Gothic clothing. I quickly found five in the food court, and they graciously accepted my request for an interview. I will share some interesting excerpts with you. One of them, a high school senior, was the main spokesman for the group. He said that he was not a full-fledged Goth, and he seemed to like the term I coined (Semi-Goth), so I will refer to him as SG1. I was pleased with SG1’s answer to my questions about Christianity, and I believe he is a Christian. Another person in the group (SG2) also made some comments, and from his comments I assume that he is not a Christian. The other three teenagers were largely silent onlookers, so I will not refer to them except to one comment from SG3. Some excerpts follow:

BT: What does Goth culture mean to you?

SG1: It’s a style of clothes and music to me. . . . I’m not Goth. It’s very rarely that you’ll actually see a Gothic person, like especially around in a mall. They typically keep to themselves.

BT: Some people dress kind of Gothic, but they’re not really Gothic?

SG1: The stereotype that is placed on Goths, like the chains and things like that—typically it’s a generalization of other things that are actually far from Goth.

BT: There have been a lot of stereotypes like Columbine violence and that kind of stuff.

SG1: I wouldn’t necessarily link the Columbine stuff to Gothic behavior, though there are a lot of similarities.

BT: Would you say that most Goths who are really Goths are non-violent people?

SG1: That just depends on the person’s individual nature. . . .

BT: Can you make a generalization about how Goths deal with depression, pain, and anger? Do they do it differently than other people? If any of the rest of you have insights, you can share those too.

SG1: Again I would have to say that it depends on the person. . . . The sound of music gives us an impression.

BT: Are there certain groups that are preferred?

SG1: Again it depends on the tastes. . . . Personally, I’m into just about everything. I’ll listen to anything from Cradle of Filth to Red Hot Chili Peppers. . . .

BT: Would you say that among real Gothic people there’s a fascination with death, or is that just a stereotype?

SG2: That’s just a stereotype. . . .

BT: I’ve seen a little bit of the movie “The Crow.” Is that a favorite movie among Gothic people?

SG1: That’s one of my favorites. I guess that would be fair to say.

BT: Do a lot of Gothic people or semi-Gothic people like to do chat rooms that are related to Goth like “darkrealmchat.com,” something like that?

SG1: Everyone sort of grips their individual culture. I guess the preps hang out with their friends, and everyone’s got their clique to deal with.

BT: Like “myspace.com”—a lot of different kinds of people use that.

SG1: That’s a very general web site. I think that “myspace” is not a bad thing. I think that too much of really anything can be bad. It’s like too much medicine can do the body harm.

BT: You get obsessed.

SG1: Exactly. That’s where the real problem lies—obsession.

BT: My impression so far is that in terms of religion with Gothic people and people that are kind of semi-Gothic there’s no real preference. I mean some Goths are Christian; some are other things. Is that your impression?

SG2: Some just don’t care. It’s just something that they don’t have to worry about because no religion is doing anything for them because they have no proof of anything, so they just follow their life and have fun with it while they’ve got it.

SG1: That’s something that I would actually disagree with. . . . I guess a lot of them would be traditionalists. Some people have a traditionalist mindset, and some of the Gothic style . . . would be more back into past times. You see people wearing frock coats—things like that. . . . Like a Renaissance coat, that style—that’s what I mean when I say traditionalist. . . .

BT: You said earlier there’s no real obsession with death or anything like that. I guess most Goth people are younger. Do they have traditional outlooks on the afterlife, like, if I were to ask, have you come to the point in your life where you know for certain that if you died you’d go to heaven, what do you think most Goth people would say to that? Would they have the same concept of heaven, a traditional concept, or would it be kind of a different afterlife concept?

SG2: It’s according to how the person grew up. . . .

SG1: I think it’s necessary for everyone to draw their own beliefs. . . . Personally, I believe that there is a heaven and a hell, and I’m certain that I will go to heaven. I’m a non-denominational Christian myself. . . . There is a stereotype that I’ve heard—that a lot of Gothics are Satanists.

BT: That’s a stereotype because of the black color and stuff like that.

SG1: Satanism isn’t actually a worship of Satan. It’s basically be a good person and carnal pleasures. That’s what it’s all about. That’s what Satanism is.

BT: So, like if you grew up in a traditional setting, and you said a lot of Goths do that and they believe they’re going to heaven. What do they base that belief that they’re going to heaven on? Is it because they’re good people, or because they’ve gone to church, or what do they base that on?

SG2: It’s according to the person.

BT: So, if they grew up as Buddhists, to enter Nirvana they’d say it was basically by good works. If they’re a Christian, they’d say it’s not by works. You can’t earn it or deserve it. It’s a free gift because Jesus died on the cross for them and rose from the dead and paid for their sins and they receive that through faith, through surrendering their lives to Him. Are most Goths kind of one or another, Buddhist or Christian or something else or nothing at all?

SG1: It comes in perspective. It’s like any other stereotype you can see.

BT: Have all five of you kind of made up your minds about your own religion or are you kind of still making up your mind about what you believe?

SG1: I’d say in the past few years I’ve sort of hopped around different religions and denominations and the Christian church and things, mostly to look at things and decide for myself what I believe, and I think that I’ve decided. There’s not much more to develop.

BT: In the Christian direction?

SG1: That’s definitely to me the most logical thing—the Christian faith.

BT: Not all people who go to church agree on the way of salvation, so if you died, and you were standing before God, and He said, why should I let you into heaven, what would you say?

SG1: I would say that I’m not actually worthy of being let into heaven. What I actually believe is that no one is actually worthy of being let into heaven, and you’re actually let in by the mercy of God.

BT: Okay. How do you receive that mercy, some people instead of others?

SG1: I think it’s through faith. That’s what I believe.

BT: Do the rest of you agree with that, or do you have a different way of looking at it?

SG3: It just depends on the people living in your life.

BT: Okay. When you say faith, do you mean like just intellectual assent—just saying, yes, I agree with that, or do you mean like there’s a surrender and a trust?

SG1: It’s hard to explain. I don’t want to sound like a Bible thumper, but I’ve tried to witness to people, and now that I look at it, I don’t really go around and try to share the Word of God as much anymore because I believe that it’s something that you should find out for yourself.

BT: Usually it has to work through relationships, doesn’t it? I mean it’s hard for a stranger, if you’re a stranger to somebody else, it’s hard to kind of broach that subject. It’s kind of touchy. Do the rest of you feel pretty sure? Do you agree with him? Do you feel that you’d like to receive Christ and you just don’t know how? How do the rest of you feel?

SG2: I believe in all religions. None of them have been proven wrong. None of them have been proven right. . . .

BT: Okay. Do you feel like you’d like to receive Christianity rather than one of the others, or do you just kind of want them all at once?

SG2: I don’t know. I’ve gone through agnostic. I’ve studied the Bible for Satanism. I don’t like for people to think it’s a worship of Satan. Like he said earlier, that’s not what it is. I’ve tried the Pagan Wiccan thing and the Christian thing. For all we know it could be real; for all we know it couldn’t.

BT: Are you looking for proof?

SG2: Well, there is no real proof that we can really say, we’ve got the Bible and it says the word, and that’s what it is; it’s faith. You have to believe in it. And some things are just more of a self-believing thing. . . . I’ve dipped and dabbed into all kinds of religions. I’ve gone this way, that way. I’ve done things I shouldn’t. That’s one thing a higher power did—He gave us a choice of right and wrong.

BT: Right. Free will.

SG2: There’s one thing I don’t like about people who say they’re Christians. They believe in Jesus and God, but they sit there and they say Satan’s not real when in the Bible it says that he is real, and they deny his reality.

BT: How can they say they believe in the Bible if they don’t agree with that? That’s pretty basic. I agree.

SG1: One of the things I’ve asked myself in the past is what would it be like if Lucifer actually won the battle.

BT: But if the Bible’s correct, he won’t win.

SG1: Correct.

BT: If somebody showed you some historical evidence that showed that non-Christian historians talked about Jesus dying on the cross and that His disciples saw that and that they were willing to die for what they believed was true, would that help you believe in the Christian way of thinking?

SG2: Well, what I’ve heard is that Jesus is a real man and He really did die on the cross, and whether He was the Son of God or not, He had a strange type of power. I agree with the fact that He was a real man—the same as that scientists have proven that the world was at one point completely flooded. They’ve had that proven too. . . .

BT: I enjoyed talking to yall, and you’ve helped me get some information.

2006-10-06T09:26:00.000-05:00

Ice Cream and Videotapes

When my two sons were very young, my wife and I introduced them to chocolate ice cream. I suspected that they would like it the first time they tasted it, but I did not know for sure because I could not see into the future. My boys immediately liked it, and now they prefer it to every other flavor. Fortunately, chocolate ice cream was plentiful in South Korea during our years as missionaries there. (The boys are both university students in America these days.)

I have learned from my experience that when choosing ice cream at the grocery store, I should buy only chocolate ice cream. It is the one flavor that everyone in the family likes. I have also learned that under the right circumstances my two sons will always choose to eat chocolate ice cream when it is offered to them. They trust me to give them food that is not poisoned. If I wait until they are hungry, and if they are not sick, they will eat chocolate ice cream if I present it to them in clean bowls or in the form of a milk shake in a clean glass.

When I put the milk shakes or bowls of ice cream in front of my sons in those circumstances, I have in a sense predestined them to eat that ice cream, but I have not violated their free choice by doing so. They exercise their free choice, and they could choose to reject the ice cream and eat something else; but I know with great probability (but not absolute certainty) that they will choose to eat the ice cream because it has been their favorite food since they first tasted it.

There is only one way the average parent can watch his or her child make a free choice and know in advance with absolute certainty what that choice will be. If the parent has already videotaped the choice being made, then the parent can watch the choice being made again on videotape while already knowing the outcome. That is the only way for humans to have perfect “foreknowledge” of an event—the event must be in the past, and the person with knowledge of the past event is watching a replay of the event. You may wish that you could see videocassettes showing all future events before they actually occur, but only God has complete foreknowledge.

My imperfect but accurate assessment of what my sons will do with the ice cream is based on past experience. When the boys first tasted chocolate ice cream I assumed they would like it, but there was a possibility that they would not. They could have spit it out after tasting it for the first time.

There is only one way I could have known in advance that my sons would like the chocolate ice cream the first time they tasted it. God could have miraculously sent me a videocassette showing the actual event before it happened. With such foreknowledge I would truly be predestining them to swallow the ice cream when I set it in front of them for the first time, but I would not be forcing it on them. They would still be making a type of free choice.

If God, utilizing His counterfactual knowledge, had sent me a videocassette of an imagined, non-actual future event that showed my sons spitting out the ice cream when they tasted it for the first time under imagined circumstances, then I might not want to waste the money, time, and effort involved in giving them that first opportunity to taste chocolate ice cream under those particular circumstances. I might not want to force or manipulate them to taste it if I knew they would not like it. Another option, however, would be to ask God if there were any circumstances under which my sons would like the ice cream.

Suppose, for instance, that He sent me another videocassette that showed my sons not liking the ice cream at first but eventually liking it after it had been in their mouth for a while. In that case I would want to go to the trouble to prepare the ice cream and keep my hand over their mouth so they could not spit it out immediately.

Earlier in my life, I had acquired a taste for good coffee, but I must admit that I was not excited about it the first time I tried it. During our family’s first furlough in America I decided that our two sons were old enough to try it for the first time. So I took them to an expensive coffee shop inside a bookstore. I probably made a mistake by not putting sugar and cream in their first cups as neither of them liked the first sip. My younger son was willing to continue trying coffee and gradually developed a taste for it, but my older son has not yet developed a taste for it.

The analogy should be clear. Some elect people are ready to commit their lives to Jesus without experiencing many preparation events. An example of this type of person would be a teenager with loving Christian parents who have nurtured him in an environment largely devoid of hypocrisy. Other elect people, however, have issues that must be dealt with over a longer period of time. Many preparation events may be necessary before they are ready to taste Jesus, and while they taste Him they may procrastinate before they commit their lives to Him by swallowing Him. God knows exactly how much time and how many preparation events will be necessary for those elect tasters who will decide to swallow the living bread (John 6:51). He also knows that non-elect people will refuse to swallow Jesus under any circumstances. God is a loving God, and He will provide an opportunity for conversion to all those that He knows would indeed surrender their lives to Christ in repentance and faith.