So you fell! So what? Run, Christian, Run!

Phil 3:12 Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. 13 Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

Heb 12:1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith…

After training for this event for months and months, Heather Dorniden faced the unexpected when another racer cut her off – she fell very hard. But when you see what happens next, you’ll be amazed and inspired.

The Spread of AIDS and the Spread of False Doctrine

“Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.” – 1 Timothy 4:16

Here’s an insightful analogy from Tim Challies:

In 1981, the Centers for Disease Control​ and Prevention in Atlanta published a report saying that they had identified, without probable cause, five cases of a rare strain of pneumonia among men in Los Angeles. By the following July, this disease, now appearing in isolated pockets around the world, was given the name Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome​ or AIDS. Just two years later, proclaiming that we would soon be able to inoculate people against this disease, the United States Health and Human Services Secretary said, “yet another terrible disease is about to yield to patience, persistence and outright genius.” Almost twenty years later, we know a great deal more about the disease, but we still have no cure and no inoculation. Since its discovery AIDS has claimed over 25 million lives.

Yet AIDS has never killed anyone; not in the truest sense. As scientists researched AIDS in the months and years after its discovery, they came to see that it was not really a disease itself but was in fact a collection of symptoms and infections stemming from a common cause that they soon identified as what we now know as Human Immunodeficiency Virus​ or HIV.

But HIV does not kill people either. HIV is what is known as a retrovirus—a kind of virus that can insert its DNA into a host cell’s genome and then reside there indefinitely. Transferred through bodily fluids, HIV primarily attaches itself to important cells in the immune systems—cells that defend the body from infection and disease. As infection spreads to greater and greater numbers of certain types of these cells, the body becomes susceptible to infections, tumors and other life-threatening illnesses. Viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi that a healthy immune system can easily defeat soon rage unchecked by the weakened immune system. Eventually most HIV patients develop what we know as AIDS. While it typically takes nine or ten years for HIV to become AIDS, a person with AIDS has a life expectancy of less than one year.

New and promising treatments continue to turn up, but the disease continues to develop resistance to these. What is at one time effective quickly becomes useless as the disease adapts to beat it. Once HIV becomes full-blown AIDS, most patients succumb quickly to lethal combinations of disease and infection. AIDS has a 100% mortality rate. It is an awful, horrific way to die.

Have you ever considered that spiritual discernment functions much as the church’s and the Christian’s immune system? The parallels are crystal clear. It is spiritual discernment that allows us to identify and overcome the disease of false doctrine and false gospels. Like the body’s immune system, discernment responds to “disease,” quickly identifying and destroying what is foreign.

What this means is that without discernment we are like a body without an immune system. We are a like church stricken with AIDS. We are helpless and hopeless; we will be destroyed. It is not the lack of spiritual discernment that will kill us, but the lack of protection that spiritual discernment offers—the kind of protection that allows us to filter truth from error and right from wrong.

And I guess this is the reason I wrote The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment way back in 2007. And it is why wherever I travel I find myself encouraging people to be deliberate in growing in spiritual maturity. The church is in need of discerners, of people who are mature and maturing in the faith, who are skilled in separating truth from error and right from wrong, and who can do it all holding fast to both truth and love. The church needs Christians like this who can protect her from the constant false gospels that rise up against her.

Jesus from the Earth Up

Dr. Darrell Bock (research professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary) is a respected scholar on the Gospels, as well as a very able communicator.

Here’s a presentation he gave concerning the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) which, he says, establish Jesus’ authority one step at a time. The talk, lasting just over 40 minutes, is split up into 4 x 10 minute sessions:

HT: JT

Monopoly Money and the Righteousness of God

Romans 10: 1 Brothers, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

In reading through his commentary on these verses, Dr. James Montgomery Boice used a number of illustrations, one of which particularly caught my attention:

“… a platoon of American soldiers is captured by soldiers from the north during the Vietnam War and put in a prisoner of war camp. The American soldiers have no money and have to barter for whatever one soldier has and another soldier wants, which is not a very satisfactory arrangement. But one day a CARE package arrives, and in it is a game of Monopoly. The soldiers are delighted, not because of the game but because of the money. They divide it up, each man getting an equal number of white, pink, green, blue, beige, and gold bills (except for the sergeant, who gets an extra $500). Now, whenever one soldier has an extra cigarette and a second soldier wants it, the first can sell it to him for $100, or whatever. The money is very useful.

In any group of Americans there is always one who is a born capitalist, and this group is no exception. The capitalistic soldier knows how to buy low and sell high, and as a result of his dealing it is not long before he has accumulated nearly all the money in the camp.

About this time there is a prisoner of war exchange, and this platoon of soldiers is air-lifted to Danang and then to a base in the Hawaiian Islands. Now long after this, our capitalistic solider arrives home in San Francisco. The first thing he does after greeting his family is go downtown to the Wells Fargo Bank, make his way to the clerk dealing with new accounts, and tell her that he wants to open an account in the bank. “That’s good,’ the teller says. “We like to see servicemen coming to the Wells Fargo. How much money would you like to start your account with?”

The soldier responds by pushing his Monopoly money across the counter. “1,534,281,” he says. The teller takes one look at it and calls the manager, because it is obvious to her that the soldier is suffering brain damage from his confinement.

The Monopoly money might have helped this man get along very well in the prisoner of war camp, and even in America it could be used to play games. But it is no use at all in the world of American commerce. In that world you need genuine American greenbacks from the U.S. Treasury.”

… the righteousness of God and the righteousness of human beings are different things… Yet I admit that I worry about one thing… Illustrations like this tend to trivialize the issue. They even make the distinction seem fun, when actually the matter is deadly serious, and the failure to distinguish our righteousness has fatal consequences.”

– Romans Commentary, Volume 3, p. 1159-1161

Selah!

My mother wrote a letter…

My mother was following along by reading a wonderful series of short articles at Christina Langella’s “Heavenly Springs” blog and wrote to express her delight and testimony concerning the impact of the story of Lady Jane Grey, a heroine of the Reformation. Christina has graciously written out my mother’s letter for everyone to see here.

Thank you very much Christina. That was so very kind and gracious of you.

I must say that I am very proud to have such a wonderful mother. I love you Mom.

A False Dichotomy

It is a false dichotomy to say that we must choose between the moving of the Spirit OR the preached word of God. If I lived in the time of the early Church and lets say that the Apostle Paul came to my home church, I for one would not want to run around the building, dance, or sing a song 100 times, thinking we were all being “Spirit led.” I would want to sit quietly, reverently, listening to every word to hear the Spirit anointed word of God proclaimed, correctly and with power… and, I would want the exact same thing next time too, and the next. That IS the moving of the Spirit.

We miss the supernatural often times because we look only for the spectacular, and we dont realize what God does through the normal means of grace.

Content Page

Thanks to all of you who have indicated you are praying for me as I wrestle with finishing the book. Here’s the current overview of content (understanding it may be subject to change at anytime).

CONTENTS

FOREWARD BY JOHN HENDRYX
WHY THIS BOOK?
WHAT ‘S THE POINT?
WHO IS THIS BOOK WRITTEN FOR?
THE PLACE TO START: AMAZED BY COMMON GRACE
A SURPRISING JOURNEY
TESTING TRADITIONS
WHAT ABOUT THE LOVE OF GOD?
WHAT ABOUT FREE WILL?
WHAT ABOUT GOD’S FOREKNOWLEDGE?
WHAT ABOUT JOHN 3:16?
WHAT ABOUT 2 PETER 3:9?
WHAT ABOUT 1 TIMOTHY 2:4?
WHAT ABOUT MATTHEW 23:37?
WHAT ABOUT 1 TIMOTHY 4:10?
WHAT ABOUT JOHN 12:32?
WHAT ABOUT REPROBATION?
WHAT ABOUT LOST LOVED ONES?
WHAT ABOUT PRAYER AND EVANGELISM?
NOW WHAT ABOUT YOU?
RECOMMENDED READING

Does Calvinism Make God a “Moral Monster”?

Dr. Michael Horton responds to this highly emotional question (from an article found suffering, sin, and even the fall of humanity itself. In his recent book, Against Calvinism, Roger Olson carefully distinguishes the official teaching of Calvinism from where he thinks it logically leads. However, there are over three dozen statements in his book about Calvinism leading by good and necessary logic to a deity who is a “moral monster,” indistinguishable from the devil.

I respond to this charge directly in my companion volume, For Calvinism. A thoughtful review of my book from an Arminian perspective came to my attention today and this question again rose to the surface. (By the way, Calvinists talk so much about predestination more because of the charges leveled repeatedly against it than because of its alleged centrality.)

If God knew that Adam and Eve were going to transgress his law, why didn’t he change the circumstances so that they would have made a different choice?

Why would God create people he knew would be condemned for their original and actual sin?

The questions multiply.

Taking on this question in a blog post is a little dangerous. For a statement of the Reformed position and its scriptural basis, I’d refer readers to For Calvinism.

However, there is one point that is worth pondering briefly: Non-Calvinist theologies are just as vulnerable on this question. Classic Arminian theology shares with Calvinism—indeed with all historic branches of Christianity—that God’s foreknowledge comprehends all future events. There is nothing that happens, nothing that you and I do, that lies outside of God’s eternal foreknowledge.

Now go back and read those questions above. Notice that they don’t refer to predestination, but to mere foreknowledge. They pose a vexing challenge not merely to Calvinists but to anyone who believes that God knows exhaustively and eternally everything that will happen. In other words, everyone who affirms God’s exhaustive foreknowledge has exactly the same problem as any Calvinist. If God knows that Adam will sin—or that you and I will sin—and could keep it from happening, but does not, and God’s knowledge is infallible, then it is just as certain as if he had predestined it. In fact, it is the same as being predestined. Then the only difference is whether it is determined without purpose or with purpose.

Roger Olson states his own view: “God is sovereign in the sense that nothing at all can ever happen that God does not allow” (100). So, if the fall happened, then God allowed it. The fall “was not a part of [God’s] will except to reluctantly allow it” (99). OK, but then the fall was in some sense a part of God’s will. Calvinists acknowledge that it was not part of God’s revealed (or moral) will, but that he willingly permitted it as part of his plan. Yet Roger is looking for something in between: God “permits” it, but it is not a “willing permission” (64). Aside from the fact that any act of God in permitting something is already an act of will—a choice, my main point here is that Roger’s weaker claim is still strong enough to get him into the same hot water with the rest of us. Roger agrees that God knows everything that will happen. God even supervises everything that will happen. Nothing escapes his oversight. “I believe, as the Bible teaches and all Christians should believe, that nothing at all can happen without God’s permission” (71).

And yet, Roger rejects R. C. Sproul’s statement, “What God permits, he decrees to permit” (78). Now, what could be more obvious than the fact that when someone with the authority to do otherwise permits something contrary to his revealed will, he is deciding, choosing, decreeing to allow it? Here again, Roger’s notion of a presumably unwilling permission is an oxymoron. To permit something is to make a positive determination, even if it in no way makes the one permitting it responsible for the action. So what is the substantive difference between saying, with Roger, that “nothing at all can ever happen that God does not allow,” and with R. C. Sproul, “What God permits, he decrees to permit”?

There is indeed a trail of hyper-Calvinism on the fringes of Augustinian Christianity that turns God’s decree to permit into a decree to accomplish or bring about. There, then: God is the author of sin. Next question? That certainly solves the intellectual riddle. Or, one can untie the knot in the other direction. Some have moved beyond Arminianism into the Socinian view that God doesn’t even know the future actions of free moral agents. Known as “open theism,” this denial of God’s omniscience recognizes that Arminianism and Calvinism are unable to resolve this dilemma. They rightly see that if God foreknows everything from eternity, including our free acts, then these acts are certain to come to pass. Foreknowledge entails predestination, so they reject the classical Christian doctrine of God’s omniscience.

Hyper-Calvinists and hyper-Arminians share the same impatience with mystery. Neither position bows reverently before God’s revelation, acknowledging its clear affirmations of divine sovereignty and human responsibility without answering all of our philosophical questions. Contradictions are abhorrent to the faith, but every important docrine in Scripture is shrouded in mystery. Hyper-Calvinism and hyper-Arminianism are willing even to set Scripture against Scripture, rejecting some clear teachings in favor of others, for the sake of rational satisfaction. Yet both, in different ways, represent deadly errors—indeed, blasphemies—against the character of God.

Happily, the debate between Roger and me is not hyper-Calvinism vs. hyper-Arminianism. The real difference between Calvinism and Arminianism is whether God has a purpose when he allows sin and suffering. Again, both views affirm that nothing happens apart from God’s permission. However, Calvinism teaches that God never allows any evil that he has not already determined to work together for our good (Rom 8:28). Nothing that he allows can terminate in evil. What would we say of a deity who “reluctantly permitted” a terrible disaster or moral tragedy, without a determination to overcome that evil with good? But that takes a plan and that plan must necessarily comprehend the evil that he is to conquer.

Any view that makes God the author of sin does indeed turn the object of our worship into a moral monster. However, any deity who merely stands around reluctantly permitting horrible things for which he has no greater purpose in view, is equally reprehensible. In the one, God is sovereign but not good; in the latter, God is neither. Once you acknowledge that God foreknows a sinful act and chooses to allow it (however reluctantly) when he could have chosen not to, the only consolation is that God never would have allowed it unless he had already determined why he would permit it and how he has decided to overcome it for his glory and our good. Mercifully, Scripture does reveal that God does exactly that. Roger agrees that God “chose to allow” suffering and sin (72). The Calvinist says that God chose to allow them for a reason. It’s permitting rather than creating, but it’s permission with a purpose. Permission without purpose makes God a “moral monster” indeed.

Reformed theology has maintained consistently that Scripture teaches God’s exhaustive sovereignty and human responsibility. God does not cause evil. In fact, God does not force anyone to do anything against his or her will. And yet, nothing lies outside of the wise, loving, good, and just plan “of him who works all things after the council of his own will” (Eph 1:11). That God’s sovereignty and human responsibility are true, no serious student of Scripture can deny. How they can be true is beyond our capacity to understand. As Calvin put the matter, following Luther, any attempt to unravel the mystery of predestination and human responsibilty beyond Scripture is a “seeking outside the way.” “Better to limp along this path,” says Calvin, “than to rush with all speed outside of it.”