Theology Matters

Tom in the Box News (fake, satire news) reported on a satirical story, which turn out to be true. The story is about a man in Romania, who filed suit against God. Now many stories exist where man is suing God. That is not unusual. What I find interesting is the reason this man did so.

"Pavel Mircea, who is serving a 20-year sentence for murder, filed a lawsuit in the western Romanian town of Timisoara against God for not protecting him from the Devil. He claimed that he had concluded a contract with God at baptism but God had not kept his side of the bargain. "He was supposed to protect me from all evils and instead he gave me to Satan who encouraged me to kill," he claimed."

Now I am not sure what the views are of the Romania's Orthodox Church would be concerning the nature of Baptism, but I imagine it is the error of many religions. It is the error that physical baptism regenerates in some fashion as to bring one into favor with God.

Keeping this short, I think the obvious needs to be said. Acts of righteousness save no one. It is even admitted by those who hold to baptismal regeneration that men may lose their salvation. These men are in religions which preach a Gospel that is based on human cooperation and effort. They are in a word, Synergistic.

In God's defense from the Romanian Orthodox perspective,

"Constantin Stoica, the spokeswoman for the Romanian Orthodox patriarch in Bucharest, told reporters Thursday that the prison chaplain will be given the difficult task of explaining to the man 'that God does not act without our will and that people have the freedom to choose between good and evil.'"

This kind of synergistic answer just doesn't cut it. In the end, Theology Matters. Without it, giving a proper Apologetic for the faith becomes a lot of fast talking and short on substance. If you doubt me, just ask any Evangelical about 9/11 and listen to the inconsistencies falling from his lips.

Dr. Nettles To Speak At Reformation Weekend Conference

I just received an email announcing the annual Reformation Weekend at First Baptist Church in St. Francis, KS. Here is a portion of that email.

On behalf of First Baptist Church, I want to personally invite you to meet with us for Reformation Weekend October 26-28, 2007. This year’s conference theme is The Glory of God in the Face of Christ. Dr. Tom Nettles, Professor of Historical Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky will be with us to preach from God’s Word. More information regarding the conference, lodging and Dr. Nettles can be found in the enclosed flyer.

When I read the name of the guest speaker, I just have to ask how Pastor Glidewell does it. I truly think he has a way of pinching someone while asking them to willingly come and speak at his church. Keep in mind St. Francis is no big city. For Dr. Tom Nettle to come to North Western KS and preach a series of sermons for the conference is simply to good to be true.

Southern Baptist Seminary gives a brief bio:

Dr. Tom Nettles is widely regarded as one of the foremost Baptist historians in America. He came to Southern Seminary from the faculty of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School where he was Professor of Church History and Chair of the Department of Church History. He previously taught at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary. Along with numerous journal articles and scholarly papers, Dr. Nettles is the author or editor of nine books. Among his books are By His Grace and For His Glory; Baptists and the Bible, the highly influential volume which he co-authored with L. Russ Bush; and Why I am a Baptist, co-edited with Russell D. Moore.

An excellent DVD lecture given by Dr. Tom Nettles explains the basics of Calvinism within Southern Baptist History. The DVD set is Amazing Grace: The History and Theology of Calvinism, which is available at Monergismbooks.com. I have also read several articles by Dr. Nettles in the Founders Journal.

After viewing this DVD set, I am convinced that even though I have never met Dr. Nettles, he seems to be a man of great godly character. I look forward to attending this Conference and hope to see many of you there as well.

For more information click here.

Terrorists Allowed To Speak To Us

Well, it's the news of the day. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University. I must admit, I was shocked to hear the President of the University take the Iranian President to task. I just assumed the typical liberalism of loving our enemies like so many others in the past. Yet the Columbia University President insulted his guest.

Yahoo News reported, "Ahmadinejad rose, also to applause, and after a religious invocation, said Bollinger's opening was "an insult to information and the knowledge of the audience here.""

Applause? He rose to applause? I have a real problem. It is not even the fact that we have unAmerican Americans applauding. I expect that of brain washed college age idiots, who don't have the slightest idea that the freedom of speech that Mahmoud claims to have in his country simply does not exist. What I find disturbing is that he is here. How does the President of the United States allow a known terrorist to come and speak here? How can the United States allow an avowed enemy spread his propaganda here? How can we seriously allow a man, who would just assume to lop our heads off or blow up more buildings and is currently killing our soldiers in Iraq (as even the President of Columbia pointed out), stand behind a podium and speak with authority? Is this not reinforcing the behavior and beliefs that he has? I agree with David Dykstra's statement that "Muslims hate the fact that they do not have the power or the infuence that they think they should have." [my paraphrase].

Islam is a serious threat. Legitimizing the terrorist by giving him a platform is foolishness. I guess I am just going to have to break down and get Dykstra's book, Yearning To Breathe Free? Thoughts On Immigration, Islam & Freedom. You may listen to David Dykstra's recent interview on Iron Sharpens Iron. It is worth your time.

I am curious though. How long would Columbia's President be alive after his statements today if he were a citizen of Iran?

More Evidence Campolo Is Outside of Orthodox Christianity

A friend of mine just sent me a link to a Blog of Tony Campolo quotes. I just have to sit here and wonder why American Baptists are not able to excommunicate heretics? This is what theological liberalism does. It makes Christians into theological wimps.

Redeemed From Curse of the Law

I have finally finished the first chapter of Morris' book on the study of Redemption. So I thought I'd share a couple of quotes. Quite often I hear Roman Catholics speak of the "legal fiction" of the Protestant's view of Justification. In speaking about the passage in Galatians 3:13:

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"--

Morris had this to say on page 58:

When, therefore, Paul speaks of Christ as having borne the curse of the law, he speaks of our removal from the legal plight into which we have fallen through our failure to keep the law of God.

and again on page 59:

It is wrong to separate the legal status, gained by the complete discharge of the claims the law had upon us, from the resultant life. The only redemption Paul knew was one in which the redeemed had received the gift of the Holy Spirit, and in which they lived as those who had been adopted into the family of God.

Morris is in agreement with Piper's argument against the New Perspective on Paul. It is precisely because we have been legally freed by the justification of God in the imputation of Christ's righteousness to His people that gives the believer true peace with God and the freedom to serve Him.

Jesus "acts in this place as only He can, in our cause and interest, that we cannot add to anything that He does there [in the substitutionary atoning work] because the place where we might do so is occupied by Him, that anything further which might happen can result only from what is done by Him in our place and in our cause."

Praise be to God. Jesus is the Perfect Redeemer of His people.

The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross

I am currently reading Leon Morris’, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross. In the first chapter Morris is demonstrating that different terms, such as redemption, have a specific meaning. In particular he deals with the idea of “Ransom”. The book’s preface states an important observation.

"When the present writer first began to read seriously on the atonement he discovered that some of the great theological words such as ‘redemption’, ‘propitiation’, and ‘justification’ are often used in such a way which seems to indicate that they mean different things to different people. If we may take redemption, the subject of our opening chapter, as an example, some writers, as we there point out, practically equate it with deliverance; others see in it a reference to a substitutionary transaction; while others use it as a comprehensive term for the whole Christian salvation. For some it has a backward reference, pointing to the satisfaction for sin made on the cross, while for others it is essentially forward looking and gives expression to the liberation from sin’s bondage which enable the believer to live the Christ-like life. There is similar uncertainty and ambiguity attaching to the use of some other terms."

With this in mind, the author sets out to see how the terms are used in both secular Greek and in the Old and New Testaments. In doing so he gathers information that gives a clearer understanding of how the New Testament authors use their terminology.

After much study of the term Ransom in its varying forms Morris states on page 39:

"It seems clear that only special pleading can rid these two passages1 of the thought of a ransoming. In each case we find the price mentioned and an evil condition from which the ransoming has freed us. There is a substitutionary thought, for it is Christ, not the sinners, who has paid the price, so that He is acting in their stead in His redeeming death."

The book is technical and difficult. For those seeking a little more advanced theology and Biblical study, for those who have a passion and love for what Christ has perfectly done for His people, for those who love the doctrines of substitutionary atonement and all that entails, this book is worth the effort.

---

1 Mark 10:45 & 1 Peter 1:8 with reference to Titus 2:14

Church Is Birthed By Scripture

James Swan reminded me why I need to pick up the pace in my reading. I own Calvin's Institutes, yet I just can't seem to find the time to read them. Here is a quote from the Institutes that I am copying from his Blog.

"But a most pernicious error widely prevails that Scripture has only so much weight as is conceded to it by the consent of the church. As if the eternal and inviolable truth of God depended upon the decision of men!"

"But such wranglers are neatly refuted by just one word of the apostle. He testifies that the church is 'built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles' [Ephesians 2:20]. If the teaching of the prophets and apostles is the foundation, this must have had authority before the church began to exist. Groundless, too, is their subtle objection that, although the church took its beginning here, the writings to be attributed to the prophets and apostles nevertheless remain in doubt until decided by the church. For if the Christian church was from the beginning founded upon the writings of the prophets and the preaching of the apostles, wherever this doctrine is found, the acceptance of it — without which the church itself would never have existed — must certainly have preceded the church.

It is utterly vain, then, to pretend that the power of judging Scripture so lies with the church that its certainty depends upon churchly assent. Thus, while the church receives and gives its seal of approval to the Scriptures, it does not thereby render authentic what is otherwise doubtful or controversial. But because the church recognizes Scripture to be the truth of its own God, as a pious duty it unhesitatingly venerates Scripture. As to their question — How can we be assured that this has sprung from God unless we have recourse to the decree of the church? —it is as if someone asked: Whence will we learn to distinguish light from darkness, white from black, sweet from bitter? Indeed, Scripture exhibits fully as clear evidence of its own truth as white and black things do of their color, or sweet and bitter things do of their taste."

Source: Calvin's Institutes I.7.1-2

Did Anyone Know Moses Wrote Scripture?

Well, now that Drive By seems to be ending our conversation, did anyone catch the main problem? He asked in his last response, “"Do you infallibly know what is and what is not even so much as a single line of Scripture?"” What is interesting is that anyone who may read more than just a driving by attitude would see I challenged the idea of infallibility. Simply placing infallibility into the hands of Rome only sets the question back one. It never solves the problem. For who has infallible knowledge except God? To trust in Rome’s ultimate authority is to follow Utah’s line of “feel good in the belly” logic.

Since he wanted me to demonstrate how would I know Scripture was Scripture in AD 38 by using his misunderstanding of Scripture Alone, I’d like to offer another scenario. How would an Egyptian or a Hebrew watching Moses first approach Pharo know Moses was a true Prophet? Drive By raised the question of false prophets and false scriptures. His belief is that without Rome, one could not know which Scripture is true?

When Moses took his staff and turned it into a serpent, did not the Magicians do likewise? How would an Egyptian know which god to believe in? Well, you might say, “Moses’ serpent ate the others.” However, many today would simply ignore such serpent eating tricks. Here is an example of competing authorities claiming to be God. In time and through the demonstration of signs and wonders and the consistency of sound doctrine, we see Moses as being the true Prophet of the One True and Living God.

In time, Moses wrote the Pentateuch. God clearly testified to that work. He brought the chosen people of God to recognize that work as Scripture. The Scriptures were committed to the Hebrew people. There were no infallible indexes within Moses’ books. Yet all claim to be God breathed.

I say all of this because according to Drive By, we simply are not able to know without an infallible source. Why that source cannot be God through His Prophets and Christ and Apostles I have yet to understand. Basically what has happened is that many are seeking the “Infallible Fuzzies”.

Are there competing claims and competing scriptures? You bet there are. That does not mean we need competing infallible authorities to tell us infallibly which scriptures to believe. One comes from the One True God. The others are false. They will all be demonstrated as to their true nature in time. The Christian Scriptures have withstood the test for they are form God. The New Testament is consistent with Moses’ writings. They fulfill prophecy. They are historically accurate. They have the testimony of the Apostles and the reception of the early church. The Resurrection of Jesus Christ and His Spirit ultimately confirmed them. In a phrase, they are Self Authenticating and demonstrably true.

For an excellent book that goes into depth on the Canonical issues and the infallibility problem the Roman Catholic suffers, read James White’s book, Scripture Alone.

Preaching At Shallow Water

This morning I had the privilege to preach at Gospel Fellowship in Shallow Water, KS. Apparently they have a hankering for abuse. Here is the message if you desire to suffer through it. The text is Matthew 4: 1-4, The First Temptation of Christ.

I Love the Trinity

The other night in my church, a volunteer teacher asked a group of children "Who made the creation? Not Jesus, but God made it."

Now obviously some people may still be young in the faith and may not fully grasp who Jesus is. Of course, this may be a good reason why the Bible teaches "that not many of you should be teachers." While trolling through the Blogosphere, I came across an excellent Post, I Love the Trinity, by John Samson at Reformation Theology. Here is the post:

I love the Trinity!

I love the Trinity. That's because I love God, and God is a Trinity.

Very few people have a firm grasp of the concept of the Trinity. It is important therefore to determine what we as Christians mean by the term. The doctrine of the Trinity, stated simply is that there is one eternal being of God, and this one being of God is shared by three co-equal, co-eternal persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God is therefore one in essense and three in personality.

It is necessary here to distinguish between the terms "being" and "person." It would be a contradiction, obviously, to say that there are three beings within one being, or three persons within one person. There is no contradiction though because that is not what is being said at all. There is one eternal, infinite being of God, shared fully and completely by three persons, Father, Son and Spirit. One what and three who's.

All the major cults today (Including the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Latter Day Saints (Mormons), etc.) contend that Christians have simply made up the concept of the Trinity, saying that the term is not even found in the Bible. Though it is true that the actual term cannot be found in Scripture, I would have to say, "so what?" for even the word "Bible" is not found in the Bible! The term "Bible" comes from the word biblos meaning "book," and therefore means "the Book." The Bible is not just "a" book but "the" book, because it is the very Word of Almighty God, and therefore the most important book anyone can ever read; for it is the only one that is inspired by God. (2 Tim. 3:16).

We believe in the Trinity because it is taught in the Bible. How so? While the actual term is not found in the Scripture, the doctrine certainly is.

On the basis of Scripture itself, Christians throughout the centuries have professed belief in the Holy Trinity, affirming the fact that our one God is eternally existent in three Persons: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, who are co-equal, co-existent and co-eternal. This is because the following three things are very clearly taught in Scripture:

(1) There is only one God, who is eternal and immutable (unchanging). (Deut. 6:4; Isa. 43:10; Mal. 3:6; Mark 12:29; John 17:3; 1 Tim. 2:5; Jam. 2:19)

(2) There are three eternal Persons - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another - that is, they are carefully differentiated as distinct Persons. The Father is not the Son, nor the Son the Holy Spirit, and nor is the Holy Spirit the Father. (Matt: 3:13-17; 28:19; Luke 10:22; John 1:1, 2; 3:16, 17; 15:26; 16:7; 17:1-26; 2 Cor. 13:14)

(3) The Father, the Son, and the Spirit, are identified as being full Deity - that is, the Bible teaches the Deity of the Father, the Deity of Christ and the Deity of the Holy Spirit. (Isa. 9:6; John 17:3; John 1:1, 18; 8:58; 20:28; Phil. 2:5-11; Col. 2:9; Titus 2:13; Heb 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1; Acts 5:3, 4; 2 Cor. 3:17, 18)

When someone denies any of these three statements, severe error is the result. Dr. James White states, "if one denies that there are Three Persons, it results in the "Oneness" teaching of the United Pentecostal Church and others. If one denies Full Equality, one is left with Three Persons and One God, resulting in "subordinationism" as seen in Jehovah's Witnesses, the Way International, etc. (though to be perfectly accurate the Witnesses (JW"s) deny all three of the sides in some way - they deny Full Equality (i.e., they believe that Jesus is Michael the Archangel), they deny the Three Persons (the Holy Spirit is an impersonal, active "force" like electricity) and One God (they say Jesus is "a god" - a lesser divinity than Yahweh). And, if one denies One God, one is left with polytheism, the belief in many gods, as seen clearly in the Mormon Church, perhaps the most polytheistic religion I have encountered."

"God eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and each person is fully God, and there is one God." (Dr. Wayne Grudem)

"To all three belong the same eternity, the same unchangeableness, the same majesty, the same power. In the Father is unity, in the Son equality, in the Holy Spirit the harmony of unity and equality; and these three attributes are all one because of the Father, all equal because of the Son, and all harmonious because of the Holy Spirit" (Augustine, On Christian Doctrine: Preface/Book 1 Chapter 5).