Monthly Archives: July 2013

The Bible and Genocide

Posted on by
1

God commanded the Jews to utterly wipe out people groups that inhabited Canaan. If this is so, why didn’t Jesus denounce him? Christians often try to avoid this question, it seems to me.

Response (from monergism.com): Actually, I am surprised that it should be avoided as it gives us one of the clearest pictures of one of the most important truths in the Bible: That not only did God take the lives of those he ordered the Israelites to kill (such as the Canaanites) – He also takes the life of everyone on earth. The peoples of Canaan were perhaps dealt out the death penalty earlier than they may have expected; but in essence, their lot was no different than ours. We are all subject to death. Death, as the Bible reveals, is the just penalty exacted for Adam’s disobedience in the garden (Genesis 2:16-17; Rom. 5:12-14). So not only may God take life as he sees fit – he does take the life of every last human on earth (see Heb. 9:27). We should not lose the shock of this fearful truth: death is not natural, it is not a normal process of time and chance, it is not a necessary mechanism of evolution. Humans were created to live, and the fact that they do not bespeaks a terrifying truth – we are all born under divine wrath and judgment.

Indeed we must therefore yield to the fact that God is God and we are not. He alone is the Creator, the Giver of Life – and so he, too, is the Taker of Life. He takes life from whomever he will, whenever he will, and however he wants (1 Samuel 2:6; Job 1:21; Deut 9:4-6, 10:14; Isaiah 45:5-7). Even if we take nothing else into consideration, that alone is more than sufficient cause for us to “lay our hands upon our mouths” (see Job 38-42, esp. 40:4). Doesn’t the potter have a right to make one vessel for honorable use, and another vessel for dishonorable use, from the same lump of clay (Isaiah 45:9-10; Rom. 9:19-24)? Well then, so does God, who created humans from the dust, have the right to do with all of them however he sees fit?

In Deuteronomy 9:4-6 God himself gives the reason for his command to slaughter the Canaanites; but it is of great importance that we also notice the following passage, where God declares that the Israelites were no less wicked than the Canaanites, and deserved the same fate:

4 “Do not say in your heart, after the LORD your God has thrust them out before you, ‘It is because of my righteousness that the LORD has brought me in to possess this land,’ whereas it is because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD is driving them out before you. 5 Not because of your righteousness or the uprightness of your heart are you going in to possess their land, but because of the wickedness of these nations the LORD your God is driving them out from before you, and that he may confirm the word that the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob 6″Know, therefore, that the LORD your God is not giving you this good land to possess because of your righteousness, for you are a stubborn people.

Deut 7:7″The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, 8 but because the LORD loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the LORD brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.”

This latter passage directly relates Israel’s mandate to destroy the Canaanites and possess their land to what God had done for Israel in Egypt; therefore, it is vital to understand how God had just redeemed the nation of Israel. The climactic event marking Israel’s exodus from slavery was the Passover; and in the Passover, the people all had to paint a lamb’s blood on their doors so the angel of death would pass over their home (Exodus 11-15). If they did not apply the blood of the lamb, their firstborn would have been taken just like the rest of the Egyptians – they deserved the same judgment and only escaped it by the blood of the lamb. Continue reading →

Christianity in Five Verses

Posted on by
Reply

rodrosenbladtGod delights in us whom He put into Christ.

The message of Christianity is so simple, over the years, we’ve had a lot of help.

So, what then is the message:

1. That all children of Adam and Eve (primarily me, you) have sinned. (Romans 3:23)
2. That the penalty for sin is death – bodily first, then forever in hell. (Romans 6:23)
3. That Jesus Christ paid that penalty we have accrued by His death on the cross. (Romans 5:8)
4. That justification before God is pure gift as opposed to a matter of our works. (Ephesians 2:8-9)
5. The assurance that one really is justified before God, now and then forever. (1 John 5:12-13)

I hope you will take the time to listen to Dr. Rod Rosenbladt as he articulates Basic Christianity in Five Verses (approx. 23 minutes):

Theological Idolatry

Posted on by
1

Sproul11This article by R. C. Sproul is © Tabletalk Magazine, and was originally published as “Man — The Maker of Idols” in the March 1989 issue, pages 20–21. For more information about Tabletalk visit: www.ligonier.org/tabletalk; email: tabletalk@ligonier.org; or call toll free: 1–800–435–4343.

The central theme of Romans 1 concerns the general revelation that God makes of himself to the whole world. Paul labors the fact that the revelation of the gospel is to a world that is already under indictment for its universal rejection of God the Father. Christ came into a world that was populated by sinners. The most basic sin found in the world is that of idolatry.

Man is a fabricum idolarum. So wrote John Calvin in an attempt to capture the essence of human fallenness. In Germany, shop a fabrik is a factory. It is a place where products are mass-produced. Calvin’s phrase simply means “maker of idols.”

In cultured civilizations, we tend to assume that idolatry is not a problem. We may complain about the use of statues and focus on certain ecclesiastical settings but where they are absent, we feel relieved from concern about primitive forms of idolatry. In a broader sense, however, any distortion from the true character of God is an act of idolatry. Our theology itself may easily become idolatrous. If our concept of God is incorrect at any point, that point of error is itself an element of idolatry.

The Sin of Theological Error
To commit theological error is to commit sin. We excuse ourselves lightly by appealing to the weakness of the intellect and the difficulty of the subject matter. We pride ourselves in being noble seekers after truth and dismiss our errors as mere “mistakes” along the way. Mistakes are something children make when they err in the sum of 3 + 5. We do not think of such mistakes in moral terms.

God commands us to love him with all of our minds. He calls us to diligent discipleship. We are called to meditate on his word day and night. Our errors in theology are rooted in our pride and our slothfulness. We are satisfied with sloppy views of God. We are comfortable with idols. It is our fallen nature to prefer the idols to the real God. Idols are lifeless and worthless. But they are also harmless. That is why we are comfortable with them. We make our own idols. What we make, we own; and what we own, we can control. We did not make God. We cannot control him. That makes us uncomfortable.

Special Judgment for Teachers
Let me be candid, revealing my innermost thoughts about the problem of idolatry. I am a student of theology. I am also a professor of theology who has taught the doctrine of God in theological seminaries. That is supposed to mean that I know something about the subject. Like most students, however, I realize that the more I learn about God, the more aware I become of what I don’t know about him. I realize that I should know a lot more than I do know about God.

I also know that as a teacher, I am supposed to know more about God than the average Christian. That terrifies me. The Bible warns that not many are to become teachers because there is a special judgment in store for teachers. If I am guilty of leading the little ones astray, that makes me a candidate for a millstone around my neck.

A Major Problem Among Evangelicals
I like to think that my theological errors are mere “mistakes.” The truth is, however, I err because I have not done my homework. I have not applied my mind fully to the love of God. So my own failures in theology haunt me.

There is still another matter that deeply concerns me. I see a problem with idolatry in the evangelical world. There is much that is orthodox within current evangelicalism. Sadly, there is also much that is not orthodox. I see the problem of idolatry, not as a slight deviation here and there, but as a major problem. Idolatrous views of God are rampant within current evangelicalism. I find a God who is not immutable, who is not infinite, who is not holy, and who is not sovereign. Such a god is simply not God. It is an idol.

The Roots of Idolatry
In Romans 1, the apostle Paul traces the root of idolatry. He writes,

… although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him … (verse 21)

The problem with idolatry is not a matter of ignorance. It is a problem of human attitudes toward God. The primary posture of fallen man is one of refusing to honor God.

Somehow it seems that to honor God means to sacrifice the honor of ourselves. I do not want God to get the credit for my achievements. This is our most basic sin, our pride that squeezes out any room for the proper honoring of God. The sin of ingratitude is linked to the sin of dishonoring God. Obviously, if we had a proper sense of gratitude to God for all the benefits he has bestowed upon us we would have an intense desire to honor him. Our hearts would be aflame with adoration.

Defining Idolatry
The apostle goes beyond describing the roots of idolatry to providing a solid definition of the nature of idolatry. He writes,

They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. (verse 25)

Idols are not made from scratch. It involves the distortion of already present truth. The truth is changed into a lie. The lie depends upon the truth it is distorting for its power, just as the counterfeit depends upon the authentic for its value. Our idols of God contain truths within them, making them all the more seductive to us. To be sure, God is love. To reduce God to love, however, is to change the truth into a lie.

If evangelical Christianity is to move beyond idolatry, we must do serious study of the character of God. We, of all people, carry that responsibility. That the “liberal” distorts the character of God is no surprise. That ardent evangelicals do it should shock us awake from dogmatic slumbers.

Miscellaneous Quotes (83)

Posted on by
1

quotes“How many times have we prayed that God would make us Christlike, then begged him to take from us the very things he sent to make us Christlike? How many times has God heard our cries when we imagined he didn’t? How many times has he said no to our prayers when saying yes would have harmed us and robbed us of good? “But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you’” (2 Cor. 12:9). – Randy Alcorn, Heaven

“A humble and prayerful person will find a thousand things in the Bible, which the proud student will utterly fail to discern.” – J.C. Ryle

“We are not loving people when we’re telling them that God accepts them as they are without repentance, because we’re lying to them.” – R.C. Sproul

“It was a great design of God to advance all the elect to an exceeding pitch of glory, such as eye has not seen. He intended to bring them to perfect excellency and beauty in his image and in holiness which is the proper beauty of spiritual beings, and to advance ‘em to a glorious degree of honor and also to an ineffable pitch of pleasure and joy. [In all this] God designed to accomplish the glory of the blessed Trinity in an exceeding degree.” (Jonathan Edwards, Personal Narrative, 125).

“There is not the slightest detail that is overlooked by the gaze of God.” – R.C. Sproul

“Humility makes a man richer than other men, and it makes a man judge himself the poorest among men.” – Thomas Brooks

“There is nothing new in theology but that which is false; only the old is true, for truth must be old, as old as God himself.” – C.H. Spurgeon

“We also, by God’s grace, briefly indicated the Word of the Father is Himself divine, that all things that are owe their being to His will and power, and that it is through Him that the Father gives order to creation, by Him that all things are moved, and through Him that they receive their being.” – Athanasius

“Any sin is more or less heinous depending upon the honor and majesty of the one whom we had offended. Since God is of infinite honor, infinite majesty, and infinite holiness, the slightest sin is of infinite consequence. The slightest sin is nothing less than cosmic treason when we realize against whom we have sinned.” – Jonathan Edwards

“Satan will come on with new temptations when old ones are too weak. In a calm prepare for a storm.” – Thomas Brooks

“Why is it that some have believed? It is because the Spirit has sanctified them, has set them apart, has called them out. It is the call of the Spirit; it is the work of the Spirit in conviction, and calling out, and giving power to believe.”- Martyn Lloyd-Jones

“Because of common grace, pagans too can create inspiring pieces of music, breathtaking paintings, and thrilling works of fiction. None of them do it, however, as an act of worship to God and with the recognition that we are using the paint of God with which He makes astounding works of art in natural creation, which is still seen despite the groaning of the scarred universe under the curse of sin.” – Unknown

“…man is still free to choose what he desires, but because his desires are only wicked he lacks the moral ability to come to Christ.” – R.C. Sproul

“In too many churches, exposition has been replaced with entertainment, theology with theatrics, and the drama of redemption with just drama.” – Steve Lawson

Why the Past Matters

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier this week, in what is called a “Google hangout,” Ligonier’s newest Teaching Fellow and church historian, Dr. Stephen J. Nichols, talked about why the past matters today and tomorrow. From the early church, to the Reformation, and recent centuries, these are necessary discussions to avoid what C.S. Lewis called, “chronological snobbery.”

How Badly Did Scribes Change the New Testament Text?

Posted on by
Reply

In former decades, the main question asked of the Bible was “Is it true?” Now it has become, “Did God really say that?”

Questions concerning the transmission of the text of Scripture used to be something only highly trained theologians needed to know. Yet now, because the attacks on the Bible are so mainstream, every Christian needs to know something about the issues involved. We need to know what we believe and why we believe it.

Dr. Dan Wallace, who many view as the leading textual scholar in our time helps us understand something of what we need to know:

Peter, the first Pope?

Posted on by
Reply

Augustus Nicodemus Gomes Lopes is a Presbyterian minister, theologian, professor, international conference speaker, and bestselling author. Augustus holds a BA in theology from North Presbyterian Seminary in Recife, Brazil, a ThM in New Testament from the Reformed University of Potchefstroom, South Africa, and a PhD in biblical interpretation from Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. He is also an associate pastor of the Presbyterian Church of Santo Amaro in São Paulo.

In an article entitled, “From Peter to Francis: A Biblically Misguided Route” found here, he writes:

The resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and the election of Argentine Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio to replace him brings up, once again, the Roman Catholic claim that the pope is the successor of the apostle Peter as the head of the church of Jesus Christ here on earth. To the Catholic, Francis now sits on Peter’s throne.

prostrate-to-popeThe first question to be determined, of course, is: Did Peter have a throne? If he really was the early church’s proto-pope, then it’s reasonable to assume he had a throne—or at least something like it. And if he left a successor, who in turn left a successor and so on, then I suppose it’s reasonable to say Francis is now the throne’s rightful owner. This is the first question to consider since the mere fact of the office’s existence deserves to be examined in light of the Word of God. After all, Catholics and Protestants take Scripture to be authoritative and infallible. A concept with such incredible import, then, must have some kind of biblical foundation. But does it?

To be fair, it’s true the Lord Jesus distinguished Peter from the other disciples on several occasions. He was among the first to be called (Matt. 4:18) and his name always appears first on lists of the Twelve (Matt. 10:2, Mark 3:16). Jesus includes him among his closest disciples (Matt. 17:1). It was to Peter that Jesus said, “Feed my sheep” (John 21:17), and it was to Peter that he spoke the famous words: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt 16:18-19).

However, it’s not apparent in Scripture or church history that Peter had preeminence over his colleagues or other Christians. It’s also not apparent that his fellow apostles, other local churches, or even Peter himself recognized his role in the church as exclusive in its representation of Jesus Christ. Certainly he was respected and revered as a leader, but these readily admitted realities do nothing to bolster Rome’s contention that the pope functions as an infallible mouthpiece of God.

The Bible is clear on this point. The apostle Paul felt perfectly comfortable confronting and scolding Peter publicly when he acted improperly toward Gentile believers in Antioch (Gal. 2:11-14). Moreover, it was the apostle James—not Peter—who served as the leader at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) and when a decision was made it was sent on behalf of the “apostles and elders.” Clearly, first-century Christians didn’t esteem Peter in a separate category.

Matthew’s Gospel corroborates this point, such that Jesus’ promises to Peter were never understood as an exclusive delegation to Peter alone. In fact, just a few chapters later Matthew applies the same responsibility to the entire congregation:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them. (Matt. 18:15-18)

It’s instructive to note how Paul viewed Peter. Along with Apollos and himself, Paul views Peter as a mere instrument through which God accomplishes his work (1 Cor. 3:22). He certainly recognizes Peter as a leader in the Jerusalem church—but among other apostles (Gal. 1:18-19). He mentions they were pillars of the church, but then proceeds to narrate the episode in which he openly confronted Peter (Gal. 2:11). Quite revealing is what Paul writes about his own calling: “For he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles” (Gal. 2:8). According to Paul, then, the same Spirit enables these two apostles; no apostolic hierarchy exists. Continue reading →