Monday, April 30, 2007

Joel's Links

Kuddos to Joel Kasselman for this article written by Robert Locke in 2002 and Ted Sampley in Jan 2007. Sampley explains that America has had to deal with Islam since its inception. There are some groups of people that are reasonable. Islam has demonstrated it is not one of them.

Sampley argues that the idea of appeasement as President Adams tried simply was succumbing to terrorism of the 18th century. Instead of terrorists strapping bombs to themselves, people were being kidnapped and sold into slavery. What do we have today on the Left? Appeasement all over again.

People on the Left side of thinking in this nation need to go back to history and try to understand a religion they are always saying we need to understand. Islam believes Christianity is corrupt and had a false prophet write new scripture (Koran) in order to prop up her false beliefs. Locke is correct when he says that Islam has a "sense of superiority and destiny of domination". Islam by its nature must bring everyone into submission to Allah, either by conversion or sword.

Locke is also correct when continues his sentence, "
combined with a curiously inflamed sense of victimhood, for example the ongoing obsession with the crusades as having political relevance to the present day". This is an odd thing. Yet we see it with the almost violent King James Only advocates and the wonderful (sarcasm) Fred Phelps. How they play the persecution (old ladies bumping into them with wheel chairs) bit makes them feel as though they are suffering for God.

In an email conversation I had with a
Yugoslavian or Czeckoslavian (I can't remember which and that email is now lost) he attempted to play the persecution bit by the supposed the Christians that were slaughtering masses of people. This persecution may have been real, but it was not being done by Christians. This leads to a crucial misunderstanding by Islam of the West. They simply believe Christendom and Christianity are the same thing. They are not. Can anyone even think of a Christian country in western Europe today? Have not all become atheistic or secular?

The United States is truly running on the fumes of her forefathers. If she falls, the west will fall with her. Islam may claim persecution, but Byron (?email, but could not verify source) is right when he points out that many of the countries that are "occupied" by Islam today were once Christian. How many thousands of Christians were put to the sword in order to conquer these nations? If Western Christendom did not stop the violent advance of Islam, there would be no freedom to even argue about this today.

May God preserve the West by waking her up. May He use whatever it takes to do so!

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Thompson's Views Stated

Thanks to a nudge by Pastor Groover, I decided to go and watch the U-Tubes of Fred Thompson. Perhaps in this clip he may not sound quite as inspiring as Guiliani does as to why he is for Victory against the Terrorists. He does have the overall conservative principles needed to persuade myself. Perhaps this clip will help you to understand him better.

One of the first questions is about abortion. He is right. The reason abortion is such a huge debate in this country is the fact that nine judges without any Constitutional authority legislated bad law from the bench. His answer about having Judges fix the problem is problematic though. Judges can not fix this problem. Even if Roe V. Wade were overturned, it would be seen by the Left as a take over in the Courts (Remember, Leftists need not be consistent when they do it.). The answer must come through a debate in Congress via a Constitutional Amendment.

Would he be willing to lead a conservative movement to take back not only the White House but Congress as well?

Friday, April 27, 2007

Sam YellowBack

Why is it that a non-conservative Republican like Rudy Giuliani is putting the Dems on defense? While the entire field of Republicans that are running for President have thought it wise to attack Bush's policy on the War, here is one candidate attacking the Liberal's incoherent worldview.

On Rush Limbaugh's site, Giuliani is quoted as saying:

They hate us, not because of anything bad we've done. This has nothing to do with any aggression on the part of the United States of America. It has nothing to do with anything America is taking from anyone. It has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine. They hate us for the freedoms that we have and the freedoms that we want to share with the world because the freedoms that we have and the freedoms that we want to share with the world are in conflict with their perverted interpretation of their religion. Their maniacal, violent, and perverted interpretation of their religion, in which they train their young people to be suicide bombers, and they train them to hate you and despise you and they train them to hate your religion and to not allow you to have religion of your own or anyone else. They hate us for the reasons that are the best about us, because we have freedom of religion, because we have freedom for women, because women are allowed to participate in society, because we have elections, because we have a free economy. Well, we're not giving that up, and you're not going to come and take it from us.

Here you have it folks. A Republican that wants to be President. I have said it several times on this Blog. If there any Conservative Republican that wants to be President all that needs to be done is to stop attacking Bush and start attacking Democrats?

Here in Kansas we have one of our Conservative, Pro life, Pro family, Sam Brownback running for President. Have you ever heard of him? I suspect not. Right from the start he blew it. He attacked Bush and the War in Iraq. He sided with the Democrats that must lose the War at all costs. He is simply not leadership material. That is a shame. I hate seeing a non-Conservative (Guiliani) defeat Liberals when such golden opportunities have been squandered by the Brownbacks.

Perhaps this is the fault of Bush himself. Instead of destroying the Dems while they were (still are) committing Harry Cary, he hopes the Rush Limbaughs will carry the water. This Ronald Reagan did not do.

Conservatives are starving for true leadership. Guiliani is offering just that. Is there any Conservative willing to lead? Please!

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Look to the Son

When John said there is a New Heavens and a New Earth coming, I don't think he meant that we needed to go look for a new Earth somewhere else in the neighborhood. For the Left and Evolutionists like Stephen Hawking that is exactly what they intend to do.

This story in the BBC news reports that a new planet has been found. It is a mere 20 light years away. If it is so close then "This remarkable discovery appears to confirm the suspicions of most astronomers that the universe is swarming with Earth-like worlds."

Although it is admitted "We don't yet know much about this planet", that doesn't stop them from making videos and offering descriptions about what a great possibility it would be to move there. It is even described as "The Earth-like planet that could be covered in oceans and may support life." So with all of the maybes, we should all be doing as Hawking says and "move to a planet beyond our Solar System to protect the future of the species."

Now don't get me wrong. If Hawking wants to "build a passenger spaceship" and take every Liberal Leftist there, that is fine with me. In fact, let me help them pack their bags. Is this really salvation? In the Evolutionary world, if man dies what?!

Liberalism has several major flaws, the chief of which seems to not be able to recognize that sinful human nature will follow man wherever he goes, Evolution notwithstanding. Hawking and those like him interpret the world from an idolatrous point of view. They have so suppressed the knowledge of God within them and all around them, that they are willing to save themselves to another planet. Which is easier to believe? That God created us and sent His Son to save sinners and raised Him from the dead, or getting on a ship and sailing away into the void of night to a planet that offers...what?

The Evolutionary world view is so bankrupt it actually asserts the ridiculous, and that is somehow lauded as intellectual. My friends, if you believe in this silliness please let me explain something to you. God created the earth. It is man's designed place to live. Jesus said in Matthew 5, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." At the Return of Christ, all of the evil that men like Hawking supposedly dread shall be over and cast out. The trouble is, until Hawking comes to Christ his dreams will eventually perish with the passing of this age.

There is simply no real hope in Hawking's world. Christ and Christ alone is the only true Savior. Look to the Son!

Tuesday, April 24, 2007


I thank my God that the Democrats are not in full control. They have certainly invested themselves in defeat. The War must be lost at all costs. I have bit my lip watching the Dems align themselves with the Islamic Terrorists, but after hearing about Harry Reid comments it is the duty of every Red Blooded American to speak out against him. By now you have heard his statement:

"I believe myself that the secretary of state, secretary of defense and — you have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows — (know) this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq (Wednesday)," Reid said.
Yes the War is over according to Reid. He is now officially siding with the Terrorists. He has officially denigrated our troops morale. If he were Washington, the Revolution would have been lost. If he were Linclon, this Nation would have been splintered and lost. If he were Patton, War War II would have been lost and the Germans would be slaughtering Jews worldwide. If he were protesting Vietnam, we would have lost to the communists.

Hold on. That's right. These people committed treason in the 60s and no one stopped them forcing the United States to lose a War they had actually won. They are committing Treason now and Republicans stick their finger in the wind to see if it is o.k. to say anything. This is due to a lack of leadership coming from the White House.

I hereby demand, as an American who believes America can and should win this War, that Harry Reid be forced to step down from his position. I also Demand that President Bush lead the charge. If Democrats may call for the Attorney General's resignation (along with the miriads of others, yet somehow the reverse never seems to happen), then any man with any common sense should demand Reid's.


Monday, April 23, 2007

Left Attacks Minorities

Pastor Groover once again steers me to a place I had completely forgotten about. La Shawn Barber's Corner writes about the recent Supreme Court Ruling, which upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. She references the testimony of Brenda Pratt Shafer, who testified to Congress of this insanely sick and vile practice. I mention this because La Shawn is an "African American", who is committing a traitorous act against the Left by revealing the incoherency of their world view.

She finishes her post by stating:

The only silver lining in this dark cloud of cultural rot is that unlike Roe v. Wade, which is judge-made (and therefore unconstitutional) law, the partial birth abortion ban is backed by the will of the people, crafted by elected representatives. But I don’t need politicians or “we the people” to bolster my position on partial birth or any form of abortion. Even if I were the only person in the world who opposed it, it still would have a name:


Murder is correct. While the Left attempts to argue about the VT Massacre they miss the obvious. If they are going to bully those like La Shawn for having a moral compass, they undercut their credibility to speak to any moral issue. They attack her vociferously for not remaining on the plantation.

Perhaps all of this "cultural rot" is a form of judgment by the Creator on those who would reject the clear revelation of God and His law. Dr. White writes in a recent post,

You can’t listen to the media these days without hearing the left (and the middle) spitting in God’s face. Surely, “the wrath of God is being revealed (present tense) from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men” (Romans 1:18). The culture wars seem to be little more than a rear-guard action these days. The intention of the original founders of the nation are, functionally, irrelevant. Transcendent morality has been banished from public dialogue as any thought that God may have in fact revealed His truth on such issues is considered offensive and un-American. Most “conservatives” are fighting a losing battle, for they themselves have lost the will to say, “Yes, there is a right and a wrong, it is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of revelation..."

I am hoping that there will be more voices from unexpected places. It is one thing for a Reformed Baptist Conservative to point out the obvious, it would be another to hear a united voice from the Black community. Planned Parenthood's original intention (which is destroying the people it set out to destroy) of weeding out blacks has been destructive to the black community along with welfare. Perhaps with more La Shawn's speaking to the moral issues of the day (abortion is as racist as anything I have ever seen), the hypocrisy of the Left will become seen for what it is, a lie.

Christians of all stripes must be bold in their proclamation of the law of God. We must call men to repentance. In doing so, men may become more irrational in their rebellion against God, but if Christians do nothing how will men ever come to their senses? Perhaps if God's people repent of their own sin, then God may bless us once again. A healthy church is a blessing upon a nation. A church that does not heed her Savior's voice is a curse.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

I Hate Gimmicks

All of those two readers of this Blog know full well that I am a gimmmickless, humorless guy when it comes to the Gospel. Yet my wife managed to talk me into something that hopefully won't get repeated to soon. For 7 years we have participated in the Wednesday night AWANA group for kids age 5-7.

AWANA is a program where kids are taught to memorize verses of the Bible. Believe when I tell you that memorizing a book for each year is quite a task. In order to assist in motivating the "Crum Munchers", my wonderful Helpmate decided that if they finished their book they would be allowed to throw a "pie" in my face (pie = plate of whipped cream). To my surprise, 17 finished and one of them literally being at the last minute.

Here are a couple of pictures.

Notice that the cream starts to get into the hair. I want to publicly thank the little culprit (Steven Fisher) for starting the chant "In his hair".

This may be the last time we will be doing that age group for AWANA until Jacob is older. I truly have enjoyed teaching kids to memorize Scripture. In fact, I now have memorized several passages because of helping the children.

"I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes." Romans 1:16

Monday, April 16, 2007

Jerry Fails

News of Jerry Falwell referring to Limited Atonement as heresy from Friday the 13th has been making the rounds at different apologetic websites. James White posts a clip. Watch here:

Notice carefully what he says at the end of the video. He says, "We are not into the particular love or limited atonement. Matter of fact, we consider it heresy"

Now I would love to ask Jerry if he loves his wife with a particular love or does he love all women in the same way? Would Jerry love all women in a fashion that he would lay down his life for them, even at the cost of his own family?

I would also like to ask Jerry if he is a universalist. He would obviously say "no", since he believes only "whosoever wills" will come to Christ to be saved. Yet isn't that still limiting the Atonement? Instead of limiting the scope, he limits its efficacy. He says that Jesus actually died for every single person but then takes away its actual power to save in the next breath by limiting it to "whosoever wills".

I have heard many pastors use this incoherent thinking. Inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument. Jerry just failed.

BTW: Notice how he uses a typical straw-man argument. He makes the "Elect" something different from "those whosoever will". In other words, he trying to say that there are many people who want to believe but are turned away because they are not of the Elect.

This kind of argumentation may persuade the faithful follower in his congregation, but it will not satisfy the thinking person who looks to Scripture as his final authority. The Elect are those who believe ("wills"). Why would anyone who is not of the Elect believe?

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Means of Grace

How often have we fallen into despair as Christians? Perhaps we are struggling with temptations and sin and feel as though we will be lost forever. “God's withdrawing the light of his countenance”(1) may bring the Christian to despair or depression. Yet the promises of Scripture are such that no matter the feelings one may have, God will remain with him till the end of the age and forever.

In my studies of the London Baptist Confession and of the doctrine of Faith Alone, I have been coming to an understanding that Christians often may lose assurance of their salvation. This may be caused by physical illnesses or other natural causes. Another obvious source of loss of assurance may simply be from sin. Perhaps just simply being worldly in our thinking and behavior. We may not necessarily be sinning in an active sense. Yet perhaps we are always watching the news and becoming news junkies. We are constantly being told bad things. How often do we find Christians listening to secular scientists explaining the world around us and coming to some very unbiblical conclusions without using any discernment at all? Christians may become depressed and not even know why.

The LBCF 1689 states in Chapter 18:

3. This infallible assurance doth not so belong to the essence of faith, but that a true Believer, may wait long and conflict with many difficulties before he be (i) partaker of it; yet being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given him of God, he may without extraordinary revelation in the right use of means (k) attain thereunto: and therefore it is the duty of every one, to give all diligence to make their Calling and Election sure, that thereby his heart may be enlarged in peace and joy in the holy Spirit, in love and thankfulness to God, and in strength and chearfulness in the duties of obedience, the proper (l) fruits of this Assurance; so far is it (m) from inclining men to looseness.

Notice the confession calls all Christians to make their “calling and election sure”. Peter commands this when he says in 2Pe 1:10 “Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.”

The Confession is not saying do good works to stay saved. It is merely recognizing that the New Testament teaches that assurance and faith are linked but are to be distinguished.

Christians often fail to use the means of grace or as the Confession states, “right use of means” in order to have their joy and peace enlarged in the Holy Spirit. Saying the phrase “means of grace” for many Protestants may cause them to reel back thinking they are being called back to Rome. We must keep in mind however that the primary means of grace by which sinners are called and saved is through preaching. They are also preserved through preaching. This does not mean that grace is dispensed to us, but only that we grow in the “grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ”, thereby growing in assurance.

Therefore the Christian ought to make use of every means available to him. Here are some “means” that Scripture clearly teaches us to use. The gathering of the saints especially on the Lord’s Day, listening to Biblically sound preaching and teaching, the taking of communion and baptism (the ordinances of the Lord), daily reading Scripture and especially reading His Word on the Sabbath, being in constant prayer in both public worship with God’s people and in private especially on the Sabbath Day, being obedient to explicit commands in Scripture, forgiving one another, and “loving the brethren”.

There are many ways in which God may use means by which to cause us to grow. It is the duty of every Christian to use them and ought to be every Christian’s desire. If you are struggling in your faith, if you feel God has abandoned you, do not remain in despair Christian. Seek the Lord with all of your heart. Use the means He has specifically given you. In time I believe what the Confession says will come to pass that you may “attain thereto”.

Soli Deo Gloria

(1) London Baptist Confession Chapter 18 paragraph 3

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Luquin, ABC and Biblical Manhood

ABMen’s Spring issue of Men In Action has been published and the cover article is “Where Are the Men?” It is written by ABMen/USA President, Manuel Luquin. I have appreciated past articles by this author. He seems to have a conservative bent or at least he is one that recognizes problems within the denomination and is more than willing to point them out. He seems to have a high view of Scripture, yet sometimes I wonder. Is he just not willing to explain the deeper underlying issues?

He asks point blank, “Why aren’t more men in ministry? How come men don’t take their faith seriously?” He then cites George Orwell. The problem is however that Orwell may notice secular reasons as to why men do nothing or become complacent, he is simply not able to deal with Biblical manhood.

Luquin then rightly recognizes that men are having “their identity…squashed, their will is broken, and that the lives of those who love and depend upon them are being diminished as well.” What troubles me about his article is that Luquin seeks to almost give men what they need, tough preaching and a call to true repentance, a call to stand up to “conflict”, “to be freed from niceness”, “and allow God to use us according to how He has made us”, while refusing to admit the underlying reason why this isn’t being done.

To put it another way, where is sound preaching being done? Where is God speaking to His people from American Baptist pulpits? Topical sermons are given ad nauseam. Pop psychology 101 from Osteen like thinking pervades everyone’s happy Christianity.

Perhaps we are overlooking something even deeper. One pastor recently told me that after 7 years of prayer his church is pulling out of the ABC/USA. When I asked him “Why?” he responded by saying that Biblical authority held by the denomination as a whole is not what his church agrees with. This has manifested in the homosexuality debate. But one thing really stood out for him. There are now more women than men in seminary looking for pastoral positions within the church. Feminism has run a muck.

For a man to listen to a woman call him to repentance would be more like listening to your mother or a nagging wife or worse yet, Hilary Clinton telling us why feminism is right. Have you ever seen an American Baptist church with a woman pastor just overflow with masculinity? The ABC/USA are losing churches in droves. Perhaps they are overlooking the obvious. I don’t think so. The Leadership as well as Luquin clearly recognize the problem, and men like Luquin are only willing to go so far.

My challenge to Luquin is to force those who have a liberal theological view of Scripture to make their case from Scripture. I have yet to hear a positive case for women pastors. Why doesn’t Luquin make his case from Scripture for calling men back to their God given roles? Until the male pastoral leadership gets over their fear of women and culture I simply don’t see men coming to American Baptist churches in the numbers they’d like to see, much less serving in their God-given capacities.

Luquin is on the right track. Perhaps his next article will make a stronger Biblical case for male pastors calling men to repentance and training them for service while demolishing the rampant and destructive feminism that has overrun the denomination. The Southern Baptists had their fight and the conservatives won. I wonder what Luquin truly has in mind. God Speed Sir.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Not Enough Water Sam?

Years ago Sam Miller told me the flood could not have happened. Why? There simply isn't enough water. Mount Everest is far too high and the Genesis account refers to all of the earth being covered with water. Therefore....

Yesterday on either the Discovery channel or something like that one, I heard the same argument again. Yet it was put forth by someone who should know better. The assumptions this man made were obvious since he was stating them clearly. The earth is billions of years old, the mountains are too high, we know how much water there is, blah blah blah.

Let me try to set straight those of you who think you know more than God.

1) God was there. You were not. For you to say what the world was like dogmatically requires you to know something you can not possibly know.

2) The whole water issue is just plain silly. Prior to the flood there was far less water on the earth's surface. The Biblical account gives three sources of the flood waters. Go read it again.

3) The mountains issue is even sillier. Read Psalm 104:

He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever. You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth.

God specifically tells us in a Psalm written 3,000 years before modern science came along that the mountains were not existing as they do now. Isn't this an obvious explanation. The assumptions of earth's geology are so pervasive, that to even question the idea of billions of years is literally unthinkable. Yet man's wisdom is demonstrated to be foolishness again.

I would write about this some more, but I am getting bored with having to think through every false thought and assumption when so many who have gone before me in the creationist movement have already taken these thoughts captive.

If you have never considered that God is actually able to speak and tell us about earth's history, then you are simply taking man's authority and wisdom over God's. Could anything be more foolish?

Saturday, April 07, 2007

The New Creation In Christ

Tomorrow is the Christian Sabbath. Have you ever wondered why Jews worship on Saturday (as some Christians do as well)? Have you ever wondered why two religions so related would have two different days of worship?

The answer is simple, Christ and his resurrection. Tomorrow is the Day that we recognize as being the beginning of a new creation. Revelation 21:1 says,

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea.

God has promised a new heavens and a new earth since the fall of man. God is not interested in throwing this creation away, but instead is making it new. What is often missed is how God is doing this.

Paul tells his readers in 1 Corinthians 15:

"But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming…”

We see from this passage that Christ is first. He is preeminent over all of the new creation and preeminent over all of those who are raised with Him. We also see from this passage that if Christ has been raised, then there must be a resurrection of His people and the creation. This is the new creation.

Jesus said in John 5:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

What good news this is. Jesus is not only promising a future resurrection and creation, but that those who hear His voice may have union with Christ now. Paul says in 1 Cor 5:

Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.

We are indeed new creatures in Christ. We are now under a New Covenant, a perfect covenant and an everlasting covenant. Therefore, in anticipation of the fulfillment of God’s promises at the end of this present and evil age, the old creation’s Sabbath has been moved. It has been moved to the Day in which all Christian believers find rest in Christ, the Lord’s Day…the Day of His own possession, the Day representing the new creation.

Perhaps tomorrow’s Lord’s Day, this Easter celebration; we would keep in mind all of what Christ has accomplished in His death and resurrection. He has truly reconciled men unto God, and all the creation groans, waiting for that day of the appearing “of our Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”

Soli Deo Gloria

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Guiliani and Abortion


Thanks to Jacob for finding the newer U-Tube clip. For some reason I was not able to find it the other day. Now compare both clips and see if there is any real difference.

I heard clips on the Limbaugh show of Rudy Guiliani saying that he is for the government paying for abortions. The logic is simple. He stated that since it is a Constitutional Right to have an abortion, and because some women can not afford an abortion, therefore a woman should not be denied her right to choose an abortion simply due to funds.

Although there are many fundamental and mental flaws in this thinking, I would just like to add this thought. If the above is correct and if Giuliani is going to be consistent, then the Government ought to give me money in order for me to own property. You see the 14th Amendment specifically states:
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property"
Since it is a right to own property and since many do not have the funds to buy it, therefore Guiliani ought to be for making sure every American owns property. I am sure Guiliani will not be consistent here. Therefore his inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument and a mere political ploy.

Here is a past clip I found on U-Tube demonstrating Guiliani is no conservative, and he clearly has no ability to think consistently.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Homosexuality and the Law

Albert Mohler comments on feminist Linda Hirshman's recent book on today's Blog concerning homosexuality. I wanted to expand upon a quote that he cites from her book. (I would really like to know how he reads so much, but...) She says:

But why do Christians pay the Old Testament's commandments any mind? After all they stopped keeping Kosher centuries ago, when Jesus wiped the rulebook clean except for the ethical code--e.g., the Ten Commandments. And the Judeo-Christian ethics don't say anything about sodomy. The whole apparatus of condemnation rests on three letters from Paul, decades later, in which he called homosexuality "against nature."

What I have found interesting over the years is the inherent problem with the question. Two hundred years ago such a statement would never be considered with any seriousness at all. In fact, it would not even be asked because of the obvious answer. Today however, even one of my pastors would ask a similar question, "Would you enact the death penalty against convicted homosexuals too?" It is a sad thing when Christian pastors (supposedly pastors) argue against the Bible in the same fashion as unbelievers do.

This drives to the heart that the modern Christian's understanding of the Old Testament is weak at best. If Christians are going to cite the Old Testament at all, they sure seem inconsistent to ignore dietary laws and civil laws pertaining to National Israel. So again, what has changed since the puritan's view? In my humble opinion...Dispensationalism.

Dispensationalism seems to be the most common theology of Evangelicals. Yet when questions of homosexuality (among others) arise, the answers vary as wide as the spectrum of Dispensationalism has become (if anyone may even define it anymore.) The problem is that Dispensationalism does not have a consistent view of God's law and how it applies under the different covenants.

Let me offer an example. How many Christians concern themselves with the Sabbath? "Nahhh, that is an Old Covenant Law." "The New Covenant does not concern itself with the Sabbath" it is often said. We have been freed from the Law and are now under grace. Yet, as any thinking person will ask, "Are you allowed to murder then?"

The obvious answer starts in Genesis, but because most of us Evangelicals do not read the Old Testament, the answer quite often eludes us. Another problem is that many do not even consider the book of Genesis a part of the Torah or Law. Yet it is the foundation for the rest of the Law. For example, the Tithe may be traced back to the Genesis account. Another would be the Sabbath. Another would be murder (Does Cain murdered Abel sound familiar?). What is really interesting is Jesus' reliance upon the Genesis account for the Law based in the creative act of God in the roles of men and women and their coming together in marriage. Jesus actually cites the text as if it were Law! In other words, we may gather certain foundational laws based in the Creation account. Imagine that God would actually create with a purpose and define how reality should be!

Some time ago I confessed my turning to Covenant Theology. Reason being is that it is by far the most consistent view. It explains how Adam was under the covenant of works (still is) and has failed to live according to the Law of God. It explains how God took the Law and made special application of it under the Old Covenant with National Israel. It explains how the dietary laws were nullified at the dissolving of that Covenant. It explains how the Law of God is applied to the Christian under the New Covenant in Christ.

It also explains why men are religious. They are still attempting to fulfill the Covenant of Works. Yet they have exchanged God for an idol and changed the Law to something they may handle. Even then they still break their own laws! (The White Horse Inn has a great discussion of this. Listen here.)

In conclusion I will simply say this. If Christians had a clearer understanding of the Law of God and how Christ has fulfilled the Covenant of works in behalf of His people, if Christians had a clearer understanding of how the Law of God is applied to the new and regenerated heart under the New Covenant, then perhaps questions by homosexuals would not be so difficult. I am not saying they would not be difficult, for the unregenerate man knows no bounds in his attempt to suppress the truth of God and His Law. Yet perhaps this will give the Christian a more confident and consistent basis to stand and proclaim God's truth.

Mohler rightly cites Jesus at this point:

"For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [Matthew 5:18-19]"

Soli Deo Gloria

Monday, April 02, 2007

Christians In Spite Of Trent

For years I have been asked about whether there are true Christians within Roman Catholicism. I have attempted to answer this question by walking the fine line of separating a church's professed theology verses a person's understanding of the nature of the Gospel itself. I do not believe one must become a full blown Calvinist and fully Reformed in order to be saved. If I did the circle of Christians might become very small.

At times I have wondered if I have communicated my position clearly. On a recent White Horse Inn program, this exact question was discussed, and I thought the discussion was very clear and concise. Listen to the short clip here.