The Message of Islam vs. The Gospel of Jesus

Islam7Don Carson, Douglas Sweeney and Harold A. Netland have co-written an article entitled “The Message of Islam vs. The Gospel of Jesus” – original source here.

Questions about relations between Muslims and Christians continue to receive widespread attention in the media and society at large. In particular, “Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?” has become especially controversial among Christians in the United States. Responses have often been polarizing, with one side insisting the answer must be affirmative and the other vehemently denying this. But the question itself is highly ambiguous and conflates different issues in an unhelpful manner. Thus, rather than trying to answer directly whether Christians and Muslims worship the same God, it’s more helpful to consider similarities and differences in the beliefs of Muslims and Christians, noting areas of both agreement and disagreement.

There are some clear similarities between Christian and Muslim beliefs. For example, both Islam and Christianity are monotheistic religions that maintain the universe was created by God, that God has given humanity a special revelation, and that there will be a final judgment.

But there are fundamental differences as well—differences that take us to the heart of the Christian gospel and the New Testament teachings about Jesus Christ. What follows is a very concise introduction to some aspects of Islam and Christianity, focusing on several significant points at which the Christian gospel is different from what Islam traditionally has maintained. Highlighting differences shouldn’t be taken as minimizing important similarities between the religions. Since the basic differences concern the core of the gospel, though, appreciation of similarities must be framed with awareness of the differences. Continue reading

Speculation and the Absence of True Scholarship

I just have to say that this is the kind of teaching so typical in the charismatic/word of faith movement. Firstly traditional scholarship (coming from those with true academic credentials) is dismissed out of hand as having missed the entire point of the passage. With that out of the way, with almost apostolic announcement, the “true” meaning of the passage is given. There is never a reference to other scholars who have come to the same conclusion. The teacher has spoken and all we hoped to understand is now revealed, and of course, the “revelation” leaves the listener/reader totally dependent on the charismatic teacher to understand this and any other passage.

Rick Renner (the man in the above video) writes, “Just about the time Jesus finished healing the ear of the servant of the high priest named Malchus, the Gospel of Mark tells us a naked young man was found in the Garden of Gethsemane. Mark 14:51,52 says, “And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him: and he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.” Who was this young man? Why was he following Jesus? Why was he naked? Why was he draped in a linen cloth instead of wearing normal clothes? And why was the Holy Spirit so careful to include this unique story in Mark’s account of the Gospel? What is the significance of this event? Take a moment today and watch this short clip, I think it will really give you something to THINK ABOUT today!”

The two fold problem with all this:

1) The supposed insight he gives is the height of speculation rather than revelation. To use an analogy from the world of building construction – a sky scraper doctrine is built on a just a dime of real estate.
2) The conclusion reached is complete and utter blasphemy. In this case, Rick Renner states that Jesus raised a naked boy from the dead by accident! Yes! You read that correctly!

R C Sproul summed up the problem well: “Although tradition does not rule our interpretation, it does guide it. If upon reading a particular passage you have come up with an interpretation that has escaped the notice of every other Christian for two-thousand years, or has been championed by universally recognized heretics, chances are pretty good that you had better abandon your interpretation.”

Hermeneutics, Exegesis and the Ordo Salutis

“The ordo salutis, Latin for ‘the order of salvation’ is the theological doctrine that deals with the logical sequencing of the benefits of redemption as we are united to Christ which are applied to us by the Holy Spirit.”

Dr. James White speaks to the issue of a consistent hermeneutic derived from sound exegesis of the Biblical text and takes us on a journey looking closely at the constructions in 1 John 2:29, 1 John 4:7, and 1 John 5:1, then responding to comments made by Leighton Flowers which attempt to avoid the weight of what 1 John 5:1 teaches about faith and regeneration.

Starts at the 40:00 minute mark:

Though You Slay Me

Though You Slay Me by Shane and Shane (featuring John Piper)

Lyrics:

I come, God, I come
I return to the Lord
The one who’s broken
The one who’s torn me apart
You struck down to bind me up
You say You do it all in love
That I might know You in Your suffering

Though You slay me
Yet I will praise You
Though You take from me
I will bless Your name
Though You ruin me
Still I will worship
Sing a song to the one who’s all I need

My heart and flesh may fail
The earth below give way
But with my eyes, with my eyes I’ll see the Lord
Lifted high on that day
Behold, the Lamb that was slain
And I’ll know every tear was worth it all

Though You slay me
Yet I will praise You
Though You take from me
I will bless Your name
Though You ruin me
Still I will worship
Sing a song to the one who’s all I need

Though tonight I’m crying out
Let this cup pass from me now
You’re still all that I need
You’re enough for me
You’re enough for me

Though You slay me
Yet I will praise You
Though You take from me
I will bless Your name
Though You ruin me
Still I will worship
Sing a song to the one who’s all I need
Sing a song to the one who’s all I need

Reaching out to Mormons

This is the actual footage of my friend Jeff Durbin in a witnessing encounter outside of the Mormon Temple in Mesa, ailment Arizona (March 17, 2016). I love the spirit in which the discussion takes place – gentle, courteous and respectful. If you watch one encounter between a Christian and a Mormon, please allow me to recommend this one.

Distinguishing Marks of a Call to Gospel Ministry

steve_lawsonSteve Lawson: Original source: http://www.ligonier.org/blog/6-distinguishing-marks-call-gospel-ministry/

If there is anything else a man can do other than preach, he ought to do it. The pulpit is no place for him. The ministry is not merely something an individual can do, but what he must do. To enter the pulpit, that necessity must be laid upon him. A God-called man, he believed, would rather die than live without preaching. Lloyd-Jones often quoted the famed British pastor Charles H. Spurgeon: “If you can do anything else do it. If you can stay out of the ministry, stay out of the ministry.” In other words, only those who believe they are chosen by God for the pulpit should proceed in undertaking this sacred task.

“Preachers are born, not made,” Lloyd-Jones asserted. “This is an absolute. You will never teach a man to be a preacher if he is not already one.” It was clearly the case in the life of Lloyd-Jones. He realized he was not joining a volunteer army.

What constitutes this call to preach? Lloyd-Jones identified six distinguishing marks of this divine summons to the pulpit. He himself had felt the gravity of each of these realities weighing heavily upon his own soul. He believed the same spiritual forces should come to bear on all preachers.

First, Lloyd-Jones affirmed there must be an inner compulsion within the one called to preach the Word. He stated there must be “a consciousness within one’s own spirit, an awareness of a kind of pressure being brought to bear upon one’s spirit.” He identified this as an irresistible impulse, as “some disturbance in the realm of the spirit” that “your mind is directed to the whole question of preaching.” This inner coercion becomes “the most dominant force in their lives.” Lloyd-Jones explained, “This is something that happens to you, and God acting upon you by His Spirit, it is something you become aware of rather than what you do.” In other words, the drive to preach becomes a burden upon the heart that must be fulfilled. It is a holy preoccupation within the soul that causes the one called to step out in faith and embrace the work.

This divine calling, Lloyd-Jones believed, grips the soul and governs the spirit. It becomes an overwhelming obsession that cannot be discarded. It will not go away nor leave a man to himself. He explained that there becomes no way of escape. Such a strong force lays hold of the man that he is held captive. Lloyd-Jones recognizes this when he states:

You do your utmost to push back and to rid yourself of this disturbance in your spirit which comes in these various ways. But you reach the point when you cannot do so any longer. It almost becomes an obsession, and so overwhelming that in the end you say, “I can do nothing else, I cannot resist any longer.”

Second, Lloyd-Jones emphasized there will be an outside influence that will come to the one called. The input and counsel of other believers becomes influential to the one destined for the ministry. It may be the feedback of a pastor or the affirmation of an elder. It could be the encouragement of another believer. When they hear this person speak the Word, perhaps in a class or Bible study, they are often the best discerners of the man who is called into the ministry. In other words, observant people often recognize the hand of God upon that person before he senses it. Those who best know God and most love His Word often can detect who is being set apart for this work. They give insightful affirmation to the individual being called.

Third, Lloyd-Jones asserted the one called will experience a loving concern for others. God gives to the one chosen to preach an overwhelming compassion for the people. As part of this divine choice, the Holy Spirit imparts a consuming desire for the spiritual welfare of others. Lloyd-Jones wrote: “The true call always includes a concern about others, an interest in them, a realization of their lost estate and condition, and a desire to do something about them, and to tell them the message and point them to the way of salvation.” This love for others includes the distinct realization that countless people are perishing without Christ. What is more, there is a concern that many of these lost souls are in the church. The one called to preach feels compelled to awaken them to their need for Christ. He is constrained to reach them with the saving message of the gospel.

In Lloyd-Jones’ life, he experienced this growing concern for others. He said, “I used to be struck almost dumb sometimes in London at night when I stood watching the cars passing, taking people to the theatres and other places with all their talk and excitement, as I suddenly realized that what all this meant was that these people were looking for peace, peace from themselves.” His growing concern was now not for their physical health, but for their spiritual welfare.

Fourth, Lloyd-Jones affirmed there is an overwhelming constraint within the one called to do this work. He maintained there will be “a sense of constraint,” meaning he feels hemmed in to do this work. It is as though God will not let him be released from his duty to preach. There is nothing else he can do but pursue this inner drive to preach. Necessity is laid upon him, and he must preach regardless of what others may say. He must minister the Word, no matter what obstacles must be overcome.

Fifth, Lloyd-Jones believed the man who is called to preach comes under a sobering humility. He believed that this person is overwhelmed with a deep sense of his own personal unworthiness for such a high and holy task and is often hesitant to move forward to preach for fear of his own inadequacies. Lloyd-Jones writes, “The man who is called by God is a man who realizes what he is called to do, and he so realizes the awfulness of the task that he shrinks from it.” Though he is compelled to preach, he is at the same time fearful of doing so. He is sobered by this weighty assignment to speak on behalf of God. He trembles at this stewardship entrusted to him and the accountability that comes with it.

Sixth, Lloyd-Jones added that a corporate confirmation must come to the one called to preach. The man who is chosen by God to preach, he argued, must be observed and tested by others in the church. Only then may he be sent from the church. Lloyd-Jones reasoned from Romans 10:13–15 that preachers are “sent,” which he understands to mean a formal commissioning by a sending church. The leaders of the church must examine the qualifications of the one set apart to preach and affirm the validity of this call. Hands must be laid upon him in recognition of what God is doing in his life.

According to Lloyd-Jones, these are the distinguishing marks of a call to gospel ministry. To one extent or another, each of these six realities must be present in the life of one who has been set apart by God to preach. Each of these factors is necessary in order to ascertain one’s call to preach. Lloyd-Jones had experienced each one of these in his life. Further, he encouraged others to discern the presence of these hallmarks in their lives.

This excerpt is taken from The Passionate Preaching of Martyn Lloyd-Jones by Steven Lawson.

Error and Heresy

2016

More than ten years ago, Al Mohler wrote a seminal blog post outlining what he called “theological triage.” Borrowing the term from the emergency room, Mohler discussed the need for Christians to prioritize certain doctrinal issues over others.

In what can be the chaos of an emergency room, medical professionals need to know how to weigh the urgency of various patients’ needs against one another; that is, a gunshot wound should be prioritized over a sprained ankle. Similarly, in the theological world, Christians must understand the difference between (a) “first-order” doctrines—where to hold an errant position actually precludes one from being a true brother in Christ—and (b) “second-” and “third-order” doctrines—issues on which two genuine Christians can disagree and nevertheless be truly saved. In other words, we need to be able to discern the difference between erroneous teaching (on non-fundamental issues) and heresy.

All biblical doctrine is important. I would go so far as to say all biblical doctrine is essential. It is difficult to put any doctrine into a second or third tier, because it somehow feels as if to do so is to say it’s not important. But employing theological triage doesn’t mean that everything that’s not first-order is unimportant, any more than a doctor’s prioritizing a gunshot wound necessarily thinks a sprained ankle is unimportant. But the fact remains: genuine Christians can disagree on things like the mode and recipients of baptism; but if two people disagree on the triunity of God, one is a Christian and the other isn’t.

The Reality of Damning Error

Some people reject the very notion that disagreements about doctrine could preclude someone from salvation. After all, no one has perfect theology, and we’re saved by believing in Christ, not by believing in doctrine, they say. And it’s true, regeneration does not promise protection from all error. But it does promise protection from some error—that is, the kind of error which, if believed, indicates you’re not a child of God at all. We know that that kind of theological error exists because the Apostle Paul wrote Galatians 1:6–9:

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

Paul wrote that about the error of the Judaizers, which, if you think about it, by some evaluations was quite a fine point of doctrinal disagreement. Think about everything the Judaizers shared in common with the faith once-for-all delivered to the saints. They believed in one God, who exists eternally in three Persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They believed in the deity and humanity of Christ. They believed that He was Israel’s Messiah in fulfillment of the Old Testament. They believed in penal substitutionary atonement—that Christ bore the punishment of God’s wrath against the sins of His people when He died on the cross, so that they might be free from sin’s penalty and power (and one day its presence). They believed that He was buried, and that He rose on the third day. And they believed that repentance and faith in Christ was absolutely necessary for forgiveness of sins and fellowship with God in heaven. That is a lot of really important doctrine that they got right! Continue reading