What Is In Your Hand?

OK. I have finally stoppped being lazy long enough to record Pastor Livingston's sermon, "What is in your hand?" Keep in mind there is a slightly edited break. He read the Scriptures during the Scripture reading time, but he first gave context and then had the people read in unison. You will then hear a slight break as he goes into the sermon portion of the service.

Here is the link. I will try to get a web page up soon for those of you who are MP3 geeks.

God Bless

Purpose of Law

Today Rush read an editorial on the issue of abortion. The editorial argued that making laws restricting abortion was counter-productive. It provided statistics showing that where laws were passed to restrict abortion only caused the number of abortions to go up.

ABC News Journal at 5 O'Clock gave an opinion that states with seatbelt laws was a good thing. The opinion cited statistics showing that states that have seatbelt laws actually reduced the number of deaths, and it also demonstrated that simply having the laws caused more people to actually wear their seatbelts.

So I have to ask the left-wing media, why cite statstics at all when making laws? If in one law you are arguing that laws only make things worse, why have them? How then do you opine that laws are good when they suit your purposes? Wouldn't that just cause people to disobey you? Should I just stop wearing my seatbelt because I'm in rebellion to the state?

I simply do not accept the premise of the Left's thinking in this country. Laws are not written for convenience sake. They are not to be written because of the whims of man. To be honest, I am not sure why the Left in this country wants Laws at all. They simply have no foundation for them whatsoever.

Laws are a reflection of righteousness. They are written to enforce what God has revealed to be right and wrong. Without God as being the foundation for Law, you are simply left with, "Might Makes Right".

I believe a nation that wishes to be blessed by God must have the Ten Commandments as it's foundation. So my challenge to the Left in my community still stands. A public debate at our nice giant brand new High School on the question, "Was Judge Roy Moore in Alabama violating the First Amendment by keeping the Ten Commandments in his court room?"

Any takers? I didn't think so.

Calvinism In History

Years ago I read the Declaration of Independence and noticed that it seemed extremely Calvinistic. Was Jefferson a Calvinist? No. For years the question has always bugged me. Although I am only just finishing chapter 2, Nathaniel S. McFeteridge’s book, Calvinism in History: A Political, Moral and Evangelizing Force, I am ever more convinced that D. James Kennedy was right when he said, “John Calvin is considered by many historians to be the father of our country.”

It is clear from the book that Jefferson borrowed from Mecklenburg's Declaration (a document written by Calvinists) to write the Declaration of Independence.

The book was first published 1882. Therefore there is some difficulty with some archaic language that is used, but if you are an American history buff, you will greatly appreciate chapter 2, Calvinism as a Political Force In the History of the United States.

I have known for many years that the Revolution would never have happened were it not for preachers preaching sermons to take up arms in defense of religious liberty. I simply did not know that the overwhelming number of preachers that did this were Presbyterians and Calvinists. In a letter written by Charles Inglis, a rector of Trinity Church and one who opposed the Revolution (as almost all those who were Episcopal in their view of government), stated:

“I do not know one of them (the Presbyterian clergy), nor have I been able, after strict inquiry, to hear of any, who did not, by preaching and every effort in their power, promote all the measures of Congress, however extravagant.”

Yes, it was the Calvinists that opposed those who were Episcopal in their view of church government. The Episcopal form led to monarchies and despotism, while Calvinism led to Republicanism.

Although there is much to say I will close this post with a quote from the end of the chapter:

“It has ever been a mystery to the so-called liberals that the Calvinists, with what they have considered their harshly despotic and rigid views and doctrines, should always have been the staunchest and bravest defenders of freedom.”

“It [Calvinism] intensifies, beyond all examples, the individuality of man, and shows in a clear and overpowering light his responsibility to God and his relations to eternity. It points out man as entering life under the weight of a tremendous responsibility, having, on his march toward the grave, this one sole solace—of securing heaven and escaping hell.

Thus the Calvinist sees man pressed, burdened, urged on, by the most mighty influencing forces. He is on the march for eternity, and is soon to stand crowned in heaven or to lie sweltering in hell, thus to continue for ever and ever. Who shall dare to fetter such a being? Get out of his way! Hinder him not, or do it at the peril of your own soul. Leave him free to find his way to God. Meddle not with him or his rights. Let him work out his salvation as he can. No hand must be laid crushingly upon a creature who is on such a race as this—a race whose end is to be eternal glory or unutterable woe for ever and ever.”

Soli Deo Gloria

New Interim Pastor

Pastor Paul Livingstone and his wife Joy arrived this week at First Baptist. Pastor Paul gave a great message this morning and deserves a pat on the back for keeping the ministry at First Baptist going without missing a beat. His pastoral prayer was simply excellent. The congregation could certainly say Amen with him.

The gist of his sermon was, "What is in your hand that God may use?" Reading the account of Exodus 3 and giving some historical backround and exegesis, he then proceded to give application. Almost all of his illustrations were Scriptural. God was still speaking to His people this moring.

Hopefully I will be able to get a web page up for Pastor Livingstone and get his sermons recorded to MP3 format. I think Scott City has been blessed with a good interim minister, who loves the Word of God and loves God's people.

Can You Blame Them?

I am not sure why the Jerusalem Post originally wrote an article saying that Jerry Falwell believed that non-Christian Jews could go to heaven without believing in Christ. Falwell responded by publishing a public response. If you will pay close attention to Falwell’s comments in his public statement, it seems to say what he was denying.

While I am a strong supporter of the State of Israel and dearly love the Jewish people and believe them to be the chosen people of God, I continue to stand on the foundational biblical principle that all people — Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Jews, Muslims, etc. — must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to enter heaven.

Notice he says they are the “chosen people of God”. I am always amazed what the New Testament says about national Israel verses what many Evangelicals say. It is true that in the flesh, national Israel had the promises and covenants. Paul however teaches in Romans chapter 9 that there is a new Israel. To say that they [national Israel] are God’s chosen would be to assume there is still some covenant binding God to them. The statement states clearly that both Falwell and Hagee deny such a covenant exists.

Again, I do not follow this teaching of “dual covenant” theology and I believe it runs counter to the Gospel.

He then says:

I want to reaffirm that I am a Zionist in terms of Israel’s entitlement to its homeland.

Entitlement? Would that not mean the Old Covenant is still in force? I agree that God may ingraft national Israel back into the promises (as defined by the New Covenant) of God as possibly predicted in Romans 11. The point of the New Testament however is that the land promises were changed under the New Covenant by Christ Himself (read Matthew 5). Jesus says in John 4:21-24

Jesus said to her, Woman, believe Me that an hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is of the Jews. But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father also seeks such, the ones worshiping Him. God is a spirit, and the ones worshiping Him must worship in spirit and truth.

To take passages like these and somehow force them to remain solely to national Israel is to turn Jesus’ own eschatology on its head. Jesus was clear about His intentions for national Israel when He gave His Olivet Discourse. The context preceding His prediction in that great discourse was the parable of the Vineyard in Matthew 21 and the denunciation of the Pharisees in chapter 23.

In the end, it may be the language and theology of Dispensationalists that causes them to be misunderstood. Can you blame them?

Pastor Lynne Retires

I first met Pastor Lynne almost 14 years ago. I flew out to Kansas to get married at the First Christian Church in Scott City. I arrived on Saturday and had a brief counseling session. I could see very quickly he had a love for the Word of God. My Bride and I desired to have a Gospel preaching wedding. He was the perfect man. This was in 1992.

In 1997 we moved to Scott City. We looked for a new church home. The Baptist Church had a contemporary worship style service. We decided to attend. Lo and behold, Pastor Lynne was preaching. His enthusiasm for the Word of God was most contagious. It was not too long after that we were encouraged to become members of First Baptist.

Pastor Lynne saw my gift for teaching and allowed me to teach the Jr. High Sunday School class and an adult Wednesday night class as well. Every once in a while we would converse and discuss what I would be teaching. He was always in agreement with my ideas. Even when the Christian Education Board was a little concerned that I was not using published curriculums, he defended my beliefs and positions on what I was doing.

It was Pastor Lynne who helped arrange with Pastor Jim Collinsworth to have me speak at the High School Graduation Breakfast. It was pastor Lynne who recognized my limited gift for preaching and had me "fill-in" for him on a Sunday morning worship service. It was Pastor Lynne who gave my name to the denomination to be a substitute in churches without a pastor or a fill-in.

When my son saw his need to follow the Lord in Baptism, it was Pastor Lynne who spoke with my son over several weeks. It was Pastor Lynne and I who Baptized my son.

When major issues that arose in our church, it was Pastor Lynne who sought the Lord in prayer. Pastor Lynne spent much time in sermon preparation. Pastor Lynne spent much time visiting his people. Pastor Lynne drove perhaps over a million western Kansas miles to hospitals. Pastor Lynne was there when our family met a crisis.

God's shepherds know their people. Pastor Lynne knows everyone's name. Pastor Lynne loves his flock. Pastor Lynne gives all to the people the Lord has placed under his care.

It is 2006. Pastor Lynne has retired today from official duties and is moving back east in Kansas.

Pastor Lynne, you mean a lot to my family and me. You mean so much to our church. You are salt and light in our community. You will be sorely missed. May God bless you.

McLaren Endorses Campolo

I have been wanting very much to do a series of Blogs on the church and the importance of local church membership. But things keep coming to my attention. Yesterday I finished listening to a lecture series given at Masters Seminary on the Emerging Church Movement (click here). Once again the name Tony Campolo was directly linked to bad theology.

I had shown in past Blogs the dangers of Campolo's low view of Scripture and his understanding of salvation as being more of saving society. The picture seems to be becoming clearer for me as to why. Liberal theology as it is being expressed in the Emerging Church movement has Campolo's approval.

Brian McLaren is a leading proponent of the Emerging Church movement. He has written an endorsement for abook called Speaking My Mind written by Campolo. Critics of McLaren's books have shown his disdain for Historical Orthodox Christianity. Yet read Brian''s endorsement of the book:

“If you paid the full price for this book and only got chapter 8, you’d be getting a great bargain. The same is true for chapters 4,6,9,10, and 11. At a time when the term ‘evangelical’ is up for grabs, Tony’s voice needs to be heard”.

It is ironic that Emerging Church prophets are willing to literally embrace anything except for...yup, you guessed it...conservative Christianity. People who believe the Bible to be God-breathed and inerrant are seen as being dangerous.

It gets even better though when Shane Claiborne interviews Campolo. He asks, "When we talk about inter-religious cooperation [with Muslims], does that mean that we need to stop trying to convert each other?" Campolo responds:

We don't have to give up trying to convert each other. What we have to do is show respect to one another. And to speak to each other with a sense that even if people don't convert, they are God's people, God loves them, and we do not make the judgment of who is going to heaven and who is going to hell.

I think that what we all have to do is leave judgment up to God. The Muslim community is very evangelistic, however what Muslims will not do is condemn Jews and Christians to Hell if in fact they do not accept Islam.

Isn't that just wonderful? God loves the Muslim just like He loves Christians.

Doesn't Paul say men outside of Christ have God's wrath abiding upon them, building up until the day of wrath? I guess warning sinners of their impending doom is not as big of a concern as it is in building inter-faith relationships (whatever that may mean).

Campolo goes on to say in another portion:

Catholicism would say that at the moment of death every person is confronted in that split moment with Christ and is given the opportunity of saying yes or no. To say otherwise is to say God has got to be a pretty unfair deity, to condemn three quarters of the human race to hell without them ever having a chance.

God is unfair if he doesn't give everyone a chance? Chance for what? To reject God some more? God is being unfair if he judges a sinner for his sin? Whatever happened to Romans 1-3? Truth is, what is unfair is that God would give anyone a chance! Grace by definition is radically unfair.

So you might be asking by this point, "Why do you care about this Tony Campolo guy?" Well, Tony Campolo is a very well known pastor with a lot of influence. He made the cover of American Baptist Men Ministies periodical. He is an American Baptist. Therefore, he is as dangerous as any liberal theologian within my own denomination's walls.

As a Christian who loves the Word of God, I would simply encourage you to listen to the lecture series. You will especially be blessed by McArthur's opening lecture. Christians may not remain ignorant of the inroads theological liberalism has made. Campolo's attacks on the faith do not come from without but within the crumbling walls of evanjellyism.

Can Non-Christians Enter Heaven?

Another shameless plug. Last summer on Long Island, the great Debate X took place. Dr. James White debated Bill Rutland on the question "Can Non-Christians Enter Heaven?" You can buy it here for a couple of bucks.

I am always amazed at how many times Christians wonder about this. Usually the question is "What happens to those who never hear the Gospel of Jesus?" It is just not fair in their minds that God would not give everyone a chance.

I have had Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Roman Catholics, Christadelphians and many Protestants raise the objection to me that it is not fair for God to not give everyone a chance. It is one thing for a non-Protestant to think that way, but for Protestants it is quite another. Simple reason is Mormons and JWs and RCs all have one thing in common...extra Biblical Authority that surpasses Scriptural Authority. Protestants however claim to only believe in the Bible.

Protestants seem to forget what their life was like before the Spirit of God converted them. They seem to forget passages such as Romans 1 & 2, John 6, Ephesians 1 & 2 and Romans 8 and 9. In fact, it seems they don't really understand the nature of God, the Gospel and man at all.

It is the current view of the Romans Catholic church that Muslims adore the one true God with Christians. If a Muslim is truly following the dictates of his conscience to the best of his ability, then he can enter heaven. God will be gracious enough for those kinds of people who just didn't get a chance.

It is simply un-Biblical to think that the God of the Bible has chosen to unite a people with Christ, predestined them to be conformed to His image, chosen them and called them, send ministers to evangelize his people, calls them from darkness to light and yet somehow is NOT ABLE to get them the chance to repent and believe. It should not be surprising for Rome to make this claim since they do not possess the Gospel.

I thought I'd put up one of the cross examinations. Cross examination is always the best part of a debate, and this is no exception. In this short clip, Bill Rutland cross examines Jame White. It is obvious how Mr. Rutland views the nature of man as opposed to the Biblical view of man. How would you answer his questions? Do you think White's position is correct?

Look forward to seeing some of your responses.

Our Local Church

Since I read the first book, I had to read the second. Again it is a short 58 pages of very helpful material for the professing Christian and the local body of believers called the local church.

The book explains in the introduction that:

"Many insist that churches will prosper only when certain biblical doctrines and practices are marginalized or refitted to mesh with the surrounding culture. In contrast, we are convinced that the local church will be strongest when biblical doctrines and practices are clearly defined and then faithfully upheld, despite the expectations of those around us and in humble submission to the Head of the Church, our Lord Jesus Christ."

With conviction, the book goes on to explain the purpose for a church's statement of faith. The explanation is quite good. In a day when creeds are despised and church unity is done at the expense of truth, this was a welcomed section.

The book however does seem to reinvent the wheel by writing a new statement of faith when there are already such great Creeds that have come down to us from our reformed baptist forebears. Creeds such as the London Baptist Confession are very good at summarizing the faith. Obviously, Pastor Elliff's intention is to keep the book short. Thereby writing a new shortened summary was necessary.

The next major section was on the importance of local church membership and the importance of church discipline. This is sorely missing in the preaching of many pulpits today. In a day when preachers touch topics as "Healthy Churches", the major biblical texts are ignored or glossed over. Almost no exegesis is ever offered. Yet, Jesus and the Apostles deal with the subject many times throughout the New Testament.

The last section gives key passages regarding church discipline. This is extremely helpful as well. Although the book is hardly exhaustive, it belongs on the shelf of every layman. It is what it set out to be...a pamphlet on the local church.

WCC Follows Far Left

Yahoo News gives a story and many reasons why Christian conservatives should steer clear of the World Council of Churches.

The Rev. Sharon Watkins, president of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), worried that some may interpret the statement as undermining U.S. troops in Iraq.

Really? Opposing the war would be seen as undermining U.S. Troops? What would give this Reverend that idea? (sarcasm)

"Hurricane Katrina revealed to the world those left behind in our own nation by the rupture of our social contract," said the statement.

I think these liberal churches and ministers need to realize that liberal Christianity has nothing of substance to offer the world. Simply preaching a gospel of subsidizing the poor doesn't address the issues that men need to deal with. The Gospel is not merely dealing with societal blues. The Gospel must deal with the heart of man. Preaching a Jesus that is only spiritually alive in our collective memory is a false Gospel and a false hope.

Liberalism has failed Katrina victims, not American ideals. If liberalism is so great and the true answer, Louisiana should have been a panacea, since it was run by liberals for the last 40 years or more.

The truth is this country is at war. I have said it before, and I guess I need to say it again. Liberalism and Christian liberalism can NOT withstand Islam in any form (radical or otherwise). Only the Biblical Gospel can deal with man's sin and as a result, society's problems. Without the Trinitarian/Christian Biblical worldview as the foundation for government, the World Council of Churches would cease to exist under persecution or worse yet, become even farther left-wing liberal.

I realize that for many, the Liberalism of the WCC is well known. The fact that they are called Christians while denying many essentials of the Historic Christian faith is indeed troubling. The media will simply refer to them as Christians, and many conservatives may be fooled as we have seen already.