Rob Bell, Oprah, And God’s Word

Rob-kristen-bell-oprah

The below is taken in entirety from In The Line Of Fire by Michael Brown. While, I am wanting to write my own response to recent Rob Bell comments. My thoughts are many, and time is…. limited. So, for now, the below will have to suffice.

My quick response before I turn it over to Mr. Brown.

May our hearts grow in conviction for this 2,000 yr old book and its absolute relevance in our lives today!!  Is there anything more relevant than the God of the Universes revealing Himself and Redemption to us?!? Rob Bell thinks God’s Word to be irrelevant…. Does that make Rob Bell irrelevant?  

Michael Brown

For those who had any questions, Rob Bell has now made himself totally clear: He is willing to trash parts of the Bible as “letters from 2,000 years ago” when God’s Word contradicts his views on same-sex “marriage.”

Bell appeared on Oprah’s Super Soul Sunday program together with his wife, Kristen, to promote their new book The Zimzum of Love: A New Way of Understanding Marriage. In an interview last December, Bell explained that on page 16 of the book, he and Kristen give their “whole hearted affirmation” to same-sex “marriage.”

That was no surprise in light of his announcement in 2013 that he supported redefining marriage. In fact, that had been his position for years, although he had not proclaimed it publicly prior to 2013.

But on Oprah’s show, he and Kristen went much further, dismissing the words of Scripture and criticizing churches that were determined to be faithful to God.

Explaining to Oprah why they included “gay marriage” in their book, Rob said, “One of the oldest aches in the bones of humanity is loneliness. Loneliness is not good for the world. Whoever you are, gay or straight, it is totally normal, natural and healthy to want someone to go through life with. It’s central to our humanity. We want someone to go on the journey with.”

Of course, he’s absolutely right in terms of the importance of intimate personal relationships.

God made us to be relational beings, but in a very specific way. He formed Eve as the fit companion and helper for Adam, the two of them uniquely designed to complement each other in the journey and mission of life.

And Paul’s solution to loneliness (and, even more so, to temptation) was specific as well: “Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband” (1 Cor. 7:2).

He didn’t say, “Each person should have his or her own companion,” because that was never God’s intent for His creation.

In contrast, what the Bells want to do is take God’s very specific, beautiful blueprint, and radically redesign it in the name of “love.”

To be sure, the church needs to take on the burden of those who struggle with same-sex attraction, helping them in every way possible find personal and relational wholeness in Jesus. But we are hurting them rather than helping them when we think we know better than God.

Rob Bell was then asked by Oprah when the church was going to embrace same-sex “marriage,” to which he responded, “We’re close,” with Kristen adding, “I think it’s evolving.”

Rob then explained, “Lots of people are already there. We think it’s inevitable, and we’re moments … ,” at which point Oprah chimed in, “Moments away from the church accepting it?”

Rob’s answer said it all: “Absolutely … I think culture is already there, and the church will continue to be even more irrelevant when it quotes letters from 2,000 years ago as their best defense. When you have in front of you flesh-and-blood people who are your brothers and sisters and aunts and uncles and co-workers and neighbors, and they love each other, and they just want to go through life with someone.”

So, according to Rob Bell, the church of Jesus should follow worldly culture and deny the plain teaching of God’s Word in order to be “relevant.” (For my thoughts on the idolatry of “relevance,” click here.)

And according to Bell, human feelings trump God’s Word, which can easily be dismissed as outdated—2,000 years outdated, it appears.

I guess what’s trending on Twitter trumps the timeless wisdom of the living Word of the living God.

I guess an emotional appeal carries far more weight than transcendent truth.

That’s similar to what Methodist Pastor Frank Schaeffer told me on my radio broadcast last year, explaining that he had to revise his views on the Bible and same-sex “marriage” after his son came out as gay but would “absolutely” have to restudy the issue if his son reversed his position about homosexuality.

Talk about loving your son or daughter (or father or mother) more than Jesus (see Matt. 10:37)

But that is exactly what Rob Bell is calling for: Go with the culture, stay “relevant,” dismiss the outdated biblical evidence and listen to your emotions.

Kristen, for her part, explained that some churches are just not getting with the program: “There are churches who are moving forward,” she said, “and there are churches who are almost regressing and making it more of a battle.”

How antiquated! How backwards! How embarrassing!

How dare these churches entrench themselves against the onslaught of worldly culture.

How dare they continue to resist the redefining of marriage and the rewriting of the sacred Scriptures.

How dare they hold fast to their position that God’s ways are best.

How dare they not get with the program of liberal progressivism.

The bad news is that many professing Christians are capitulating to culture and abandoning the holy and wholesome ways of the Lord.

The good news is that the Word of God stands forever (Is. 40:7-8; Matt. 24:35), and one day, Oprah Winfrey, with all her massive influence, and Rob and Kristen Bell, with their substantial influence as well, will be mere footnotes in this age of compromise and apostasy, marked as eternally irrelevant by the only One whose opinion matters.

That’s why I pray for their repentance today.

 Michael Brown

What’s The Point?

Study Time

I don’t know how you read books, but when I start into a new book I try to ascertain, as quickly as possible, what is the point? Yep, that’s all folks…. I want to know why did the author write this book? And, I want to know why…. fast!

I want to microwave my book – cook it fast!  What can I say…. I am an American.

Usually one can find a purpose statement tucked in the introduction.  I hunt for that statement, sentence, or even a few sentences where the author lets us in on the reason he has spent countless, frustrating hours researching, writing, and laboring to bring all that work to a finish and into our lives.

And hey, I am just like you….. I am busy!  I need to know – and quick – is this book worth the time?

Me:  Why did you write this book?

Author:  Here is why I wrote this and where this book is headed.

Me:  Thank you for letting me know if I should put the book down and forget it or journey on with the author.

(By the way – some authors already have credibility and I pre-order the book knowing…. it will be worth my time and effort.  More on that later.)

I have a weird relationship with the author. I consider him / her my friend.  Yep, weird right?!? . But, I like to think of the book I have in front of me as a conversation.

Grab a coffee, grab my friend off the shelf and let’s chat. And when I think this way, I get to do coffee with Charles Spurgeon, or a theology with Edwards, fantasy with Lewis or Tolkien.  And, while I love to sit down with these friends!  It is hit or miss sometimes to do so on any given day.

BUT –  my every day goal and desire is to sit down with my Creator, Savior, Father, God!

Wow, are you kidding me?!? When I (when you) sit down to read the Bible, you are reading GOD’S WORD. You are sitting down with….. Almighty God!  Coffee nearby, pen in hand – God is right there with me/ you!

Back to where this post started.

The point of the Bible – from start to finish – is to lay out for us God’s plan for Redemption.

Here is a quick overview of the Bible.

  • God Creates…. Everything…. out of nothing!
  • His creation includes mankind.
  • Man, the created – rebels against the Creator.
  • As a result, man is now separated from the Creator.
  • The rest of the story line of Gods Word is HOW God Redeems (or removes the separation) between God and man.

We could say – the point of the whole Bible – is about: Redemption.  How will the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit each work to bring about redemption of fallen man?

The Father Sends

The Son takes on human flesh and goes to the cross for our sins!  (Phil 2)

The Spirit quickens our hearts.

God’s Word in a nutshell.  Redemption.  The purpose of the Word of God, the purpose for our lives, and the reason the believer does not put the book down or ignore the glory it reveals.

The gospel is the Bible’s main message, and preaching the content of the Bible—that is, the prophetic anticipation of God’s redemptive purpose in Christ from the Old Testament and the apostolic witness to the accomplished work of Christ in the New Testament—unleashes the power of the gospel message and achieves its God-ordained end.

Bullmore, Mike (2011-08-02). The Gospel and Scripture: How to Read the Bible (The Gospel Coalition Booklets) (Kindle Locations 88-90). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

From start to finish, the consistent thread throughout the Word of God is REDEMPTION.

Everything prior to Jesus, looks forward to Jesus.  Everything post Jesus, looks back to Jesus.

Listen in on how John gives us the purpose statement for the gospel of John.

 “so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31).

How will sinful man be made right with God?

Well, therein lies the point of the whole book.  Jesus Christ is the Author AND He is the Answer!  He is the point. He is the reason we have a Bible and need a Bible. And friend, He is WORTH OUR TIME!  That is right,  He is WORTH it. Worth my / your time!  Worth the effort.

So, take up the book this year in 2015.  Grab a coffee and pen.  And get to know the Author and The Point of the whole book!

“You have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God. . . . And this word is the good news that was preached to you” (1 Pet. 1:23–25).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“It so misrepresents the truth, it’s a sin”

 

20141226cover600-x-800

The below is taken in its entirety from Albertmohler.com.

 

Newsweek on the Bible — So Misrepresented It’s a Sin
MONDAY • December 29, 2014
newsweekcover2015
Newsweek magazine decided to greet the start of 2015 with a massive cover story on the Bible. For decades now, major news magazines have tended to feature cover articles timed for Christmas and Easter, taking an opportunity to consider some major question about Christianity and the modern world. Leading the journalistic pack for years, both TIME and Newsweek dedicated cover article after article, following a rather predictable format. In the main, scholars or leaders from very liberal quarters commented side-by-side those committed to historic Christianity on questions ranging from the virgin birth to the resurrection of Christ.
When written by journalists like Newsweek‘s former editor Jon Meacham or TIME reporters such as David Van Biema, the articles were often balanced and genuinely insightful. Meacham and Van Biema knew the difference between theological liberals and theological conservatives and they were determined to let both sides speak. I was interviewed several times by both writers, along with others from both magazines. I may not have liked the final version of the article in some cases, but I was treated fairly and with journalistic integrity.
So, when Newsweek, now back in print under new ownership, let loose its first issue of the New Year on the Bible, I held out the hope that the article would be fair, journalistically credible, and interesting, even if written from a more liberal perspective.
But Newsweek‘s cover story is nothing of the sort. It is an irresponsible screed of post-Christian invective leveled against the Bible and, even more to the point, against evangelical Christianity. It is one of the most irresponsible articles ever to appear in a journalistic guise.
The author of the massive essay is Kurt Eichenwald, who boasts an impressive reputation as a writer and reporter for newspapers like The New York Times and magazines including Vanity Fair. A two-time winner of the George Polk Award, he was also a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize. Eichenwald, however, has been primarily known for reporting and writing in a very different area of expertise. Most of his writing has been on business and financial matters, including business scandals.
When it comes to Newsweek‘s cover story, “The Bible: So Misunderstood It’s a Sin,” Eichenwald appears to be far outside his area of expertise and knowledge. More to the point, he really does not address the subject of the Bible like a reporter at all. His article is a hit-piece that lacks any journalistic balance or credibility. His only sources cited within the article are from severe critics of evangelical Christianity, and he does not even represent some of them accurately.
The opening two paragraph of the article sets the stage for what follows:
“They wave their Bibles at passersby, screaming their condemnations of homosexuals. They fall on their knees, worshipping at the base of granite monuments to the Ten Commandments while demanding prayer in school. They appeal to God to save America from their political opponents, mostly Democrats. They gather in football stadiums by the thousands to pray for the country’s salvation.
They are God’s frauds, cafeteria Christians who pick and choose which Bible verses they heed with less care than they exercise in selecting side orders for lunch. They are joined by religious rationalizers—fundamentalists who, unable to find Scripture supporting their biases and beliefs, twist phrases and modify translations to prove they are honoring the Bible’s words.”
What is really going on here? Did some fundamentalist preacher run over young Kurt Eichenwald’s pet hamster when the reporter was just a boy? He opens with the most crude caricature of evangelical Christians — one unrecognizable in the vast majority of evangelical churches, and even to credible journalists. But the opening lines are truly a foretaste of what follows.
Amazingly, Eichenwald claims some stance of objectivity. “Newsweek’s exploration here of the Bible’s history and meaning is not intended to advance a particular theology or debate the existence of God,” Eichenwald insists. “Rather, it is designed to shine a light on a book that has been abused by people who claim to revere it but don’t read it, in the process creating misery for others.”
But Eichenwald demonstrates absolutely no attempt to understand traditional Christian understandings of the Bible, nor ever to have spoken with the people he asserts “claim to revere [the Bible] but don’t read it.” What follows is a reckless rant against the Bible and Christians who claim to base their faith upon its teachings.

 

In a predictable move, Eichenwald claims to base his research on “works of scores of theologians and scholars, some of which dates back centuries.” But the sources he cites are from the far, far left of biblical studies and the most significant living source appears to be University of North Carolina professor Bart Ehrman, who is post-Christian. Even so, he makes claims that go far beyond even what Bart Ehrman has claimed in print.
Eichenwald’s first claim is that we cannot really read the Bible, for it does not actually exist and never has. “No television preacher has ever read the Bible,” he asserts. “Neither has any evangelical politician. Neither has the pope. Neither have I. And neither have you. At best, we’ve all read a bad translation—a translation of translations of translations of hand-copied copies of copies of copies of copies, and on and on, hundreds of times.”
No knowledgeable evangelical claims that the Bibles we read in English are anything other than translations. But it is just wrong and reckless to claim that today’s best translations are merely “a translation of translations of translations.” That just isn’t so — not even close. Eichenwald writes as if textual criticism is a recent development and as if Christian scholars have not been practicing it for centuries. He also grossly exaggerates the time between the writing of the New Testament documents and the establishment of a functional canon. He tells of the process of copying manuscripts by hand over centuries as if that seals some argument about textual reliability, wrongly suggesting that many, if not most, of the ancient Christian scribes were illiterate. He writes accurately of the Greek used in the New Testament, and then makes an argument that could only impress a ten year old:
“These manuscripts were originally written in Koiné, or ‘common’ Greek, and not all of the amateur copyists spoke the language or were even fully literate. Some copied the script without understanding the words. And Koiné was written in what is known as scriptio continua—meaning no spaces between words and no punctuation. So, a sentence like weshouldgoeatmom could be interpreted as ‘We should go eat, Mom,’ or ‘We should go eat Mom.’ Sentences can have different meaning depending on where the spaces are placed. For example, godisnowhere could be ‘God is now here’ or ‘God is nowhere.’”
Isn’t that clever! But there is no text in the Bible in which this is truly a problem. Context determines the meaning, and no mom is in any danger of being eaten due to confused punctuation. That might impress a fifth-grade class, but not any serious reader. Later in his essay he makes essentially the same argument when he deals with the Greek word translated as worship when the text refers to deity. He rightly points out that translators use other terms when the context is merely human. Yes, the same word is used, but not in the same sense. This is not a translator’s sleight of hand, but common sense. Similarly, when a British nobleman is addressed as “Your Lordship” in public, this does not mean that he is being worshiped in the same sense as when a Christian speaks of the lordship of Christ. Common sense indicates that the same word has a different meaning in a different context.
Eichenwald grossly over-estimates the total number of ancient New Testament manuscripts and he seems to believe that mainstream Christianity in the Patristic era might have been seriously confused about the legitimacy of the so-called Gnostic gospels and other heretical writings. He cited Bart Ehrman as saying,“There are more variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament,” but then he follows that with his own concession: “Most of those discrepancies are little more than the handwritten equivalent of a typo, but that error was then included by future scribes.” So there are many variations, but most are “little more than the handwritten equivalent of a typo?” Then, why is the point even important?
He turns to text critical questions related to the long ending of Mark’s Gospel (16:17-18) and the account of Jesus and the woman caught in adultery in John’s Gospel. These questions would not trouble any first-year seminarian in an evangelical seminary, but they are presented in the article as blockbuster discoveries. Furthermore, with reference to the woman caught in adultery, Eichenwald states: “Unfortunately, John didn’t write it. Scribes made it up sometime in the Middle Ages.” But the fact that the account is not found in the older manuscripts of the Gospel of John does not mean, in any credible sense, that scribes simply made it up in the Middle Ages. Eichenwald seems unaware of the very category of oral tradition.
He also presents a twisted version of Emperor Constantine’s influence in Christian history, getting right the fact that Constantine called and influenced the Council of Nicaea but getting facts wrong when he claimed that Constantine influenced the formation of the New Testament canon by determining which books were to be included. His accusation of political intrigue by Constantine on the question of Christ’s deity appears, within the totality of Eichenwald’s essay, as a pointer to a strange antipathy to the doctrine of the Trinity itself. He argues that the Trinity is never defined in a singular verse of Scripture — orthodox Christians do not claim that any single text does — but he ignores the development of the doctrine of the Trinity drawn from the totality of the New Testament itself.
Eichenwald’s opening sentences trumpeted his disdain for evangelical Christianity’s sexual ethic, and his essay turns to deny that Christians have any textual basis for a negative view of homosexuality. He dismisses 1 Timothy as being falsely claimed to be written by the Apostle Paul, citing, oddly enough, Friedrich Schleiermacher, the father of modern theological liberalism, who made that argument in 1807. There is no counter-argument offered. Eichenwald simply credits the “scholars” he cites without any admission that other scholars hold very different opinions. Interestingly, he appears unable to deny that Paul wrote Romans and that Romans 1:27 identifies men lusting after other men as sinful.
He seems to believe that the teachings about women teaching and leading in 1 Timothy would apply to a woman in political office, failing to read that the text is clearly speaking of order within the Christian assembly. He seems totally unaware of any distinction between the moral law in the Old Testament and the ceremonial law and the holiness code.
In the main, he argues that historic Christianity has been based on nothing but a lie and that those who now represent themselves as biblical Christians are lying to themselves and to others — and doing great harm in the process.
But Kurt Eichenwald’s essay is not ground-breaking in any sense. These arguments have been around for centuries in some form. He mixes serious points of argument with caricatures and cartoons and he does exactly what he accuses Christians of doing — he picks his “facts” and arguments for deliberate effect.
Newsweek’s cover story is exactly what happens when a writer fueled by open antipathy to evangelical Christianity tries to throw every argument he can think of against the Bible and its authority. To put the matter plainly, no honest historian would recognize the portrait of Christian history presented in this essay as accurate and no credible journalist would recognize this screed as balanced.
Oddly enough, Kurt Eichenwald’s attack on evangelical Christianity would likely be a measure more effective had he left out the personal invective that opens his essay and appears pervasively. He has an axe to grind, and grind he does.
But the authority of the Bible is not the victim of the grinding. To the contrary, this article is likely to do far more damage to Newsweek in its sad new reality. Kurt Eichenwald probably has little to lose among his friends at Vanity Fair, but this article is nothing less than an embarrassment.

To take advantage of Newsweek’s title — it so misrepresents the truth, it’s a sin.

To read the Newsweek article in full, click: HERE

Ear Tickling Relevance

camera

 

I begin this post once again stating that I am not for irrelevance!

The church must be relevant and as I said in the last post – Truth IS relevant.

Read the last 2 posts here:

The Cry For Relevance

Truth IS Relevant

 

My concern is when the church, pastors, and believers lust to be relevant today. And in that lust there lies a warning or concern. Is it possible that in the lust for relevance that we lose sight of truth and in so doing we become “ear ticklers”?

Is it possible in the name of wanting to add people to the church that we water down the message of the Gospel and ones need for salvation?

And, if we water down the gospel and yet we are “relevant” don’t we need to ask: “What exactly are people being saved to?”

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. (2 Timothy 4:3-4 ESV)

Paul has been exhorting Timothy to preach the Word. Why? Because the Word IS relevant.

It is a sad day when pastors concern themselves more with political correctness than bible correctness. It is dangerous when we study cultural relevance without seeing how relevant the Word is to our culture.

In the name of love, we don’t want to offend. We allow culture to define what is love. This then silences or edits the believer from saying anything of value at all.

The gospel my friend, IS offensive.  The Word, speaking of itself, says it is “folly to those who do not believe….”

The Word calls us sinners. Sinners need to repent. Because, hell and judgement awaits the un-forgiven sinner…..

And that is offensive! It is offensive to sinners, but it is relevant to sinners!

The Christian, the pastor, the church that says nothing of sin, repentance, and our need for a Savior…. well that is like a Dr. who will not tell the patient he is chronically sick. The Dr. is by no means showing love by withholding that information. No, we call that malpractice. And the Dr. gets slapped with a lawsuit for that lack of love!

Listen to the words of Jesus:

“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours”  Jesus  (John 15:18-20).

I do not hear Jesus saying here, “Be relevant so everyone will be attracted to you and your church!”

In Mark 10 we see Jesus being relevant to the rich young ruler. And the result of His relevant truths caused this man to walk away sad.

Be careful, Christian.  A wrong understanding of relevance might render you silent and thus irrelevant in a culture that needs truth and love. If cultural relevance is your guide, well, you are on shifting sand. Today’s cultural relevance will be irrelevant tomorrow. Grass withers, flowers fade, but the Word of the Lord remains forever….

God, help us to grow in our understanding of your Word. Let us see how incredibly relevant it is to a lost and dying world. And help us to speak without fear and with much relevance, love, and care.

 

Withering Grass and Fading Flowers

Grass withers

 

It has become the phrase I like to recite prior to preaching God’s Word.  But, it is more than just a “phrase”. It is truth. And truth has value.  I know, truth has lost its value in our culture, but that does not make it any less valuable. My youngest son used to value pennies more than nickels just because he had more of them.

My heart is like a child sometimes with what has real and lasting value.

Prior to preaching, this little phrase brings the truth of God’s Word before me. And as it sits before me, and I trust before the people of Trinity Community Church, it instructs my / our faith as I seek to preach God’s amazing, eternal, Word.

The phrase?

The grass withers, the flowers fade, BUT the Word of the Lord remains FOREVER!

Here is that text in its wider context.

A voice cries:
“In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord;
    make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
Every valley shall be lifted up,
    and every mountain and hill be made low;
the uneven ground shall become level,
    and the rough places a plain.
And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
    and all flesh shall see it together,
    for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”

A voice says, “Cry!”
    And I said,“What shall I cry?”
All flesh is grass,
    and all its beauty[d] is like the flower of the field.
The grass withers, the flower fades
    when the breath of the Lord blows on it;
    surely the people are grass.
The grass withers, the flower fades,
    but the word of our God will stand forever.

The rest of Isaiah 40 is….. well…. amazing!  But, for now, for today – consider: all that is around you is withering and fading and yet God’s Word is forever.

That truth sure puts the “stuff” of this world in its rightful place. The things we value, the stuff our hearts crave, and all the that we desire…. fading and withering.

God, help me to put my heart and my faith on that which does not fade or wither!

The Cry For Relevance

Church

The cry for “relevance” in the Christian community today is deafening.

Consider: The cry for relevance is often louder than the cry for God’s Word or the Gospel!

Don’t misunderstand:

  • I am not for Christians being irrelevant in society and culture!!
  • To be irrelevant in todays society, is to have no voice.
  • No voice is neither, wise or necessary.
  • I DO think the Bible IS relevant!!!
  • Whether a person realizes the relevance of the Bible does not determine IF the bible IS relevant.

Is their any caution to be given in the midst of the cry for relevance?

Relevant churches

Relevant evangelism

Relevant music

on and on it goes…..

Sometimes, Christians are not comfortable in their own skin…..

Paul to the Corinthians:

“For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor. 1:22-24).

The gospel IS a stumbling block, it IS folly to the unbeliever.

Which means:  We must be careful that our desire for relevance does not = compromise.

Ours is a day that can easily be captured up in the desire to “reach” people, at the expense of remaining faithful to the Word.  And…. if we are reaching people, while NOT remaining faithful to the Word…. then what exactly are we reaching people to?

Pragmatism?

Our opinions?

Self- Authority?

Our hope is in the Word of God itself!

“And by neglecting the Scriptures, we lose track of what we are reaching people to. If it’s to a savior other than the holy, triune creator God of the Bible, or if it’s to a God other than the one in the Scriptures who died to appease God’s wrath toward sinful men, justifying completely those who repent and believe, then we’re no longer offering salvation at all, and we’re not building a ‘church.’  We might have gathered a good group of people who do good things, but it’s not the bride of Christ.”  Matt Chandler

There is such a lust for relevance today.  We want to be liked, accepted, thought well of in society.  And it is this lust that (potentially) waters down biblical truths in the name of “reaching people”.

In the end, doesn’t it boil down to what we believe about the Bible? Is it the very Word of God??

Paul says to the Romans – I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ for it is the is the power of God to salvation.

Do you believe that?

Or does God’s Word need some “props” – do you feel the need to take the “edge” off?

Or to quote Bono of U2 – “stop helping God across the road, like a little old lady….”

“The issue of sin and depravity is as old as the fall of man. Likewise the Word we live by is just as relevant today as it ever was. God is not in catch up mode when it comes to being abreast of current trends, trials, and temptations.”  David Ravenhill  Read full article here.

The Word of God is where our convictions MUST lie.

The grass withers, the flowers fade, but the Word of the Lord remains forever!

 

 

 

 

 

Trinity (12): 5 Quick Reasons Why It REALLY Does Matter

java

 

Grab your coffee and consider today the glory of the Trinity!

We have had 12 posts on the Trinity.  We have gone out into the “deep end”.  You might be thinking: “ok, ok, the Trinity matters, but does it REALLY matter that much?”

Good question!

Here is an attempt to give a short Answer:

5 quick reasons why the Trinity REALLY does matter:

 

1.)  Atonement Implications

“If Jesus is merely a created being, and not fully God, then it is hard to see how he, a creature, could bear the full wrath of God against all our sins.  Could any creature, no matter how great, really save us?”  

Wayne Grudem

Take the Son out of the Trinity….. and you and I are not and CAN NOT be saved!

Good news…. Jesus IS God!

2.)  Trust Implications

The Trinity gives me reason to trust in God for salvation.

  • If the Father did not send the Son…
  • If Jesus did not come in human flesh, die, rise from the grave….
  • If the Spirit did not breath new life in us….
  • Then who, exactly, are we trusting in for salvation, forgiveness, eternity, etc and is it wise to do so?!?

Good news….. you can trust in the 3 in 1 for salvation!

3.)  Worship and Prayer Implications

If the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not equal God…. why worship Him or pray to Him?  Every prayer ever uttered “in Jesus name” is meaningless.  The reason the words, “in Jesus name” carry meaning is because the Son is our mediator before the Father.  We don’t come before the Father in prayer, in the name of our self or in the name of a priest. We come in the name of THEE great high priest – Jesus Christ.  He is your mediator!    If Jesus is not God, then Christians are the worst of idolaters!

Good news….you can come to the Father!

4.)  Bible Implications

If the Trinity is not God, then the Bible and all of its teachings are meaningless and should NOT be followed.

Good news…. Father, Son, Holy Spirit = God!

5.)  Gospel Implications

The Gospel IS Trinity

Meaning we experience our salvation by all of the Godhead.

“We are saved by the eternal purpose of the Father, by the atoning work of the Son, through the power and wisdom of the Spirit.  We grow in our understanding of God’s grace as we see how each person of the Trinity interacts with the others to bring us out of darkness, into the light.”  

John Frame Systematic Theology

Good news… the gospel IS good news because of the Trinity!

 

For Further Study: 

The Father:  Sends His Son into the world

1 John 4:14

The Son:  Obeys the Father fully by living a perfect life and dying on the cross for to forgive us of our sins.

Phil 3:9

I Corinthians 15:3

The Spirit:  Is sent by the Father and the Son to apply salvation to us.

John 15:26

Galatians 4:6

 

5 quick reasons to once again stand in awe of who our God is.

Praise the Father,

Praise the Son,

Praise the Spirit, three in one!

 

Trinity (2): One God In A Many god World

coexist

 

Bill Maher

Recently, talk show host and comedian Bill Myer had a moment of brilliance when he tweeted:

Isis- “one of thousands of Islamic militant groups” (NYTimes) “beheads another. Lets keep pretending all religions are alike”

Not only are they not all alike!  But, the implication of the above is ALSO, that not all are serving the same God.

Yawn, so what, who cares, says the society that trumpets all roads lead to heaven.  Culture cries:  “it doesn’t matter which God or which book (Bible, Koran, Book of Mormon, etc) one turns to…  they are all the same…all seeking their version of God….aren’t they?”

Well, I would love to take another post to lay out the HUGE differences between the Bible and these other books – another time….  But, in this post I will keep my focus narrow.

Is there any difference between praying to Allah, or the god of the Jehovah Witness, or ______ and the God of the Bible?

The answer is YES!  And we need to look no further than the Trinity.  The Trinity shouts loudly – “Yes, there is a difference that is bigger than epic proportions!”

Culture:  We live in a many god culture.  We have gods of money, fame, materialism, relationship, substance, and then there is Buddah, Allah, and on and on it goes.

What is idolatry?  Idolatry is devotion.  It is anything that rules and controls you – including anything that controls your emotions, decision making, and your loyalty.  What controls us, what we build our life around, or what we faithfully serve…. that is an idol and that is our god or God.  And….  wow, have you noticed…..culture has many gods!

But, that is nothing new.  This has been true ever since Genesis 3. Remember, it is in this “many gods” culture – the Bible’s opening words are… In the beginning God…

Eve’s temptation in the garden wasn’t hunger or better fruit from a better tree.  It was a temptation of:

  • Being like God
    • See Genesis 3
  • She essentially sought to dethrone the true God and become like God herself!  Imagine the created seeking to become the Creator.  No longer worshiping God, she became an idol to herself…. thus, she was seeking to worship herself.

Christianity:  What does the above have to do with the Trinity?  A lot!  Christians are monotheistic.  Meaning: We believe in ONE God.  But, so does the Muslim… right?  Well yes and no.  They believe in one god but that god is NOT the God of the Bible.  The God of the Bible is:  1 God in 3 persons.

The Father is God

The Son is God

The Spirit is God

Islam, or any other religion, does not believe in the God of the Bible.  The 3 in 1.

As Christians we need to wrestle with WHO God is. Christian, it can not be both!  One cannot say: “she is a moral, good person… she believes in HER VERSION of god, she is going to heaven…”  Either the God of the Bible IS God or He Is NOT God.  But, it can’t be both.  You can’t have the God of the Bible and the god of the Muslim and the god of the Mormon and say:  “we are all good to go – you pick your god and I will pick mine….it doesn’t really matter.”

The reality of the 3 in 1 tells us something.  It tells us IT MATTERS!  To live for, worship, and serve a god who is NOT the 3 in 1 is to NOT worship God.  Because this IS who God is!

The Point?:   My point is to stress to 2 things:

1.)  The doctrine of the Trinity is no small matter!  It is greatly important.  It has incredible implications for the Christian.  So, let’s not entertain some “wishy – washy” – or hold to a vague understanding of the Trinity.

2.)  The Trinity IS WHO GOD IS!  We should labor to know and understand God as best and as accurately as we can.  This labor will have great and lasting implications on our lives!

 

A Parting thought:

For the believer ask:  How has the Father / the Son / the Holy Spirit each brought about your salvation?

 

 

What is the Gospel?

What is the Gospel?

 

If you are on vacation and your destination is a cabin in the Smokey mountains you better have clear directions as to how to get there! I live in Florida, I am a flatlander! Which means….. many times my family has been lost in those mountains! Funny isn’t it – many people today intend to arrive, when their times comes, in heaven. But they have no idea how to get there! Continue reading What is the Gospel?