Monthly Archives: March 2016

The Protevanglium of James

Posted on by
Reply

At the 1:00:56 time mark, Dr. James White begins reading the Protevanglium of James (a gnostic-influenced document from the 2nd century). He writes:

Just a quick note (and a test at the same time) regarding my reading of the Protevangelium of James on the DL today. I was up against a time deadline so I wasn’t able to comment as much as I would have liked, but I wanted to make sure folks understood the centrality of the story regarding the birth of Jesus to later mythological and dogmatic development. It is hard to say why this story gained such wide “traction” and reading in the centuries after Jesus. I would surmise it is for the same reason the Young Messiah movie is being made: inordinate curiosity into that which God has not chosen to reveal. In any case, the development of monasticism, an unbiblical (and unhealthy!) view of sexuality, joined together with stories like this to develop into the Marian doctrines that eventually led to the Marian dogmas that Rome continues to teach to this day, and in particular, the concept of the “Perpetual Virginity” of Mary.

I hope you noticed the very different “flavor” of this gnostic-influenced 2nd century document. Did you notice how the writer was not familiar with Jerusalem, not familiar with the geography? And how the names lacked the patronyms so often found in the actual gospels that can be traced to the real historical Jesus and His disciples? Yes, obviously, the document was dependent upon the works of Matthew, Mark and Luke, plainly, betraying its allegedly having been written even before the ministry of Jesus. It is likely the original author did not even intend his readers to take him seriously as far as the historicity of the account is concerned. But it is the different worldview, the magical rather than the revelation-based supernatural (as we have in Scripture) that should be noted.

Chesed!

Knowledge in Worship

Posted on by
Reply

In this excerpt from a Ligonier conference message, Alistair Begg reminds us of the importance of knowledge in worship:

Transcript

“Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven not built by human hands.”

We know…we know.

The Christian faith engages our minds. This is something that we ought to keep reminding ourselves of, so that we don’t allow our minds to fossilize, and that we continue to be sharpened and to make progress.

I was at a church in California just a few weeks ago now—back in August I think it was, time flies—and I went there. I had a Sunday free and I was staying with friends, and I went down to the church and I was excited because I get to go now, and I don’t have to do anything at all except do whatever they tell me to do. And so I sat there and I waited for it to begin. And it was quite fascinating actually. They had big screens, and they had a clock on the screens. And when I got in it said “5 Minutes” and I had only been in about 2 seconds, and you won’t be surprised, it said “4 Minutes, 58 Seconds.” And then it counted down, and eventually it counted down, “10, 9, 8, 7, 6…”. And just right on the moment of time, the band began…and I was waiting for David Letterman at that point. I didn’t know what was going to happen next. And then eventually the band did what it did, and then the person who was to lead the praise, his opening gambit was this, “Hey! How do y’all feel this morning?” Well that was enough for me. We could have had the benediction right there that was so good. I thought, what kind of New Testament question is that? How do y’all feel this morning?

If I told you how I feel, especially in light of the last 5 minutes, you would question whether I was even a Christian at all. So don’t ask me that question. Ask me what I know. Ask me what I know. Don’t ask me what I feel about myself. Ask me what I know about God. Ask me what I know about His Word. Ask me what I know to be of verity that can deal with my soul. That’s what I need. Don’t make me sing songs about how I feel. Don’t! These silly repetitive songs again and again, ‘I just want to praise you, lift my hands and say I love you, you are everything to me’. Goodness, at half past eight on a Sunday morning I’m barely ambulatory. I can’t start there. And you want me to say that? I just kicked the dog. I don’t even have a dog. I got in an argument with someone because they took my parking space. I spilled my coffee, I didn’t read my Bible, I’m a miserable wretch, and now you want me to start here—‘how do you feel?’ I feel rotten, that’s how I feel! What do you got for me? The answer, nothing. I got nothing for you.

That’s why you have to get yourself under the control of the Scriptures. That’s why it is what we know—the verities of the Scriptures which fuel our hearts and our emotions, and lead us on. Hence, ‘praise my soul the King of heaven, to His feet thy tribute bring. Ransomed, healed, restored, forgiven. Who like thee His praise should sing?’

Okay, now we’ve got something to sing about, for we have been reminded of truth. You have been ransomed; you have been healed; you have been restored; you have been forgiven. You’re looking away from yourself now. You’re looking out and to Christ. And it is in this that we have something that fuels our praise.

Can a True Christian Be Blotted from the Book of Life?

Posted on by
Reply

Piper11Can I Be Blotted from the Book of Life?

John Piper answers – original source the Bible mentions the phrase ‘the book of life’ about fourteen times, and quite a few of those passages mention getting blotted out of the book of life. How does this NOT mean losing your salvation?” What would you say Pastor John?

When it comes to the doctrine of eternal security or perseverance of the saints, we need to speak with precision. And I think it is not quite precise to say, as Charles does, in quite a few of the Scriptures it mentions you can be blotted out of the book of life. I don’t think it ever says you can be blotted out, at least not in the sense that sometimes God does it. It says we will be blotted out if we fail to meet certain conditions. Now whether that ever happens or in God’s sovereignty can happen is another question. I don’t think so and let me try to show why.

The book of Revelation is the book that refers to this most often and it is the book that has the text that sounds most problematical, I think. Revelation 3:5 says, “The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.”

Now some say: Well, that is a foolproof text against the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints or eternal security. They assume that when Revelation 3:5 says that God will not erase a person’s name from the book of life, it implies that he does erase some people from the book of life, and that these people would once be born again, justified, saved, and, nevertheless, in the end condemned, lost, and perish. In other words, they lose their salvation on that reading of the verse.

But is that a true assumption?

The promise: “I will not erase his name from the book of life” does not necessarily imply that some do have their names erased. It simply says, to the one who is in the book, and who conquers in faith: I will never wipe your name out. In other words, being erased is a fearful prospect, which I will not allow to happen to those who persevere. In fact, there are two other passages in Revelation that teach that to have your name in the book of life means that you will most definitely persevere and conquer and thus meet the condition not to be blotted out.

Revelation 13:8 says: “And all who dwell on the earth will worship [the beast], everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.” Now that verse teaches that those whose names are written in the book of life definitely will not worship the beast. That is what it says. In other words, having your name in the book of life from the foundation of the world means God will keep you from folly. He will cause you to persevere in allegiance to God. Being in the book means you will not apostatize. You won’t forsake the faith.

Revelation 17:8 says: “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.” Now that means having your name in the book of life means you will be kept from marveling at the beast. Those whose names are not written in the book will marvel at the beast, and those whose names are in the book will not marvel. It is infallible as far as the way this author is arguing. To have your name in the book means you won’t marvel, you won’t worship.

So the point is that having one’s name written in the book is effective. It keeps you from making shipwreck of your faith. John does not say: If you worship the beast, your name is erased. He says: If your name is in the book, you will not worship the beast. Now back to Revelation 3:5: “The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life.”

Does that mean God erases some people?

No.

The conquering that keeps you from being erased is guaranteed by being in the book. That is the point of Revelation 13:8 and 17:8. Being in the book keeps you from doing what would get you erased from the book if you did it.

Let me say that again. Being in the book, having your name in the book, keeps you from doing — like worshiping the beast — keeps you from doing what would get you erased from the book if you did it. And that is not a contradiction any more than the way Paul is a contradiction when he says: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:12–13).

It is not nonsense to state the condition: if you conquer, God will not erase your name, and then to state the assurance, if your name is in the book, you will conquer. That is not a contradiction. God’s written down ones really must conquer, really will conquer. They must and they will. One side highlights responsibility, you must. And one side highlights God’s sovereignty, you will.

So the message for us is this: Never, never, never be cavalier or trifling about your perseverance. God uses real warnings to keep us vigilant and to keep us persevering. We are safe. But we are not careless. That is the point. Press on to make salvation your own, as Paul says, because Christ has made you his own (Philippians 3:12).

Concerning Church Discipline

Posted on by
Reply

thinking_manJonathan Leeman (MDiv, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is an elder at Capitol Hill Baptist in Washington, DC. He serves as director of communications for 9Marks and is the editor of its eJournal. He is the author of Church Discipline, Church Membership, and The Church and the Surprising Offense of God’s Love. He has written an article entitled “10 Things You Should Know about Church Discipline” (original source here).

1. Jesus and Paul both command churches to practice church discipline.

Church discipline is not man’s idea, but God’s. Whatever Jesus meant by “You shall not judge” in Matthew 7, he didn’t mean to rule out loving correction between Christians, as he describes it in Matthew 18:15-20. Paul then takes Jesus words seriously and exhorts the Corinthian church to put Jesus’s instructions into practice (compare Matthew 18:20 and 1 Corinthians 5:4). Do we know better than Paul?

2. “Church discipline” goes by different names.

The term “church discipline” is employed in different ways, and people use different terms for discipline. Broadly, people might make a distinction between formative discipline (referring to teaching) and corrective discipline (referring to correcting sin).

Inside the category of corrective discipline, people might use the term “church discipline” to refer to any act of correction, whether that involves privately and informally warning a friend or formally removing someone from membership in a church. When it gets to this last step, people frequently use the word “excommunication.” Among Protestants, excommunication does not refer to removing someone from salvation (which the church is incapable doing). It refers to removing someone from membership in the church and participation in the Lord’s Supper. To excommunicate is to ex-communion someone, kind of like a reverse baptism.

3. Nearly every organization practices discipline.

In spite of its biblical basis, the idea of church discipline can be controversial among Christians and churches, even though people readily accept the fact that other organizations or group must have some means of correcting or removing its members. A fraudulent lawyer can be debarred. A volatile player in the NBA can be fined. A malpracticing doctor can lose his or her medical license. A teacher can be fired.

Ironically, even “watchdog” websites who decry the practice of church discipline exist exclusively for the sake of correction, or discipline (albeit without any accountability!). This reaction to discipline in the church speaks volumes about the individualistic nature of spirituality and personhood in the West.

4. Churches should practice discipline for the sake of love. Continue reading →

Believe the Prophets!

Posted on by
Reply

In our third look at Paul’s defense before King Agrippa we see him appeal to the Old Testament prophets to prove that Jesus is the long awaited Messiah, and that His suffering was planned by God as well as the glory of His triumph over all of God’s enemies.

Text: Acts 26:12-32

Concerning Domestic Abuse in the Church

Posted on by
1

Original source here:

Jason Meyer, pastor for preaching and vision at Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, gave a powerful and important sermon this past Sunday.

In it, he defined things like “hyper-headship”:

Hyper-headship is a satanic distortion of male leadership, but it can fly under the radar of discernment because it is disguised as strong male leadership. Make no mistake—it is harsh, oppressive, and controlling. In other words, hyper-headship becomes a breeding ground for domestic abuse.

Meyer also addressed the issue of domestic abuse, highlighting three lessons in particular they had learned:

Not all abuse cases are the same, even though they may share certain things in common. If you have seen one abuse case, you have seen one abuse case.
We need to distinguish between two types of marital sinfulness: normative sinfulness and abusive sinfulness.
There are spectrums and varieties of domestic abuse. A good working definition of domestic abuse is “a godless pattern of abusive behavior among spouses involving physical, psychological, and/or emotional means to exert and obtain power and control over a spouse for the achievement of selfish ends” (John Henderson).
Calling it a “draw-a-line-in-the-sand kind of moment” for the church, Meyer read a statement from the elders about domestic abuse:

We, the council of elders at Bethlehem Baptist Church, are resolved to root out all forms of domestic abuse (mental, emotional, physical, and sexual) in our midst. This destructive way of relating to a spouse is a satanic distortion of Christ-like male leadership because it defaces the depiction of Christ’s love for his bride. The shepherds of Bethlehem stand at the ready to protect the abused, call abusers to repentance, discipline the unrepentant, and hold up high the stunning picture of how much Christ loves his church.

The statement goes on to give information about whom to contact when abuse is occurring.

Meyer addressed abusers:

If you are an abuser, I call you right now to repent and bear fruit in keeping with repentance. The only hope is on the other side of repentance—getting out of denial so you can own your sin. That is the only hope because if you confess it as sin, there is a sacrifice for sin. There is no sacrifice for denial.

He addressed victims:

If you are being abused, the bulletin gives information on next steps. Please let us help. God hates abuse, and so do we. We are committed to help. If you have come to us for help before and have been disappointed, please give us another chance. We believe that the tide of awareness has risen on all three campuses and that positive changes are happening.

And he addressed children:

If you are a child and have seen one of your parents abuse the other, it is not right, and it is not your fault. You are not to blame. We want to get you help as well. You may think telling someone will tear your family apart, but it may be the only thing that can bring your family back together. If you are a child and you are being abused, let us help. Don’t walk this road alone. Tell someone. Please tell the children’s pastor or your youth pastor or a Sunday school worker.

He then closed with an address to men in particular:

Men of Bethlehem, let me address you. I will lay it on the line. At first glance, it looks like there are three possible doors the men of this church can take.

Door 1: side with the abusers
Door 2: take no side, or
Door 3: side with the abused and stand up to the abusers.

If you are tempted to open Door 2, please know that it is a slide that just takes you to the same place as Door 1. Doing nothing is doing something: it is looking the other way so the abusers can do their thing without worrying who is watching. Saying nothing is saying something—it’s saying, “Go ahead, we don’t care enough to do anything.”

I would strongly encourage you to read the entire sermon, which contains careful definitions of the various kinds of abuse and various principles about abuse. You can listen to the audio here.

For some resources on abuse, see Justin and Lindsey Holcomb’s resources:

Rid of My Disgrace: Hope and Healing for Victims of Sexual Assault
Rid of My Disgrace: Small Group Discussion Guide
Is It My Fault? Hope and Healing for Those Suffering Domestic Violence
God Made All of Me: A Book to Help Children Protect Their Bodies (forthcoming in September)
See also:

Edward Welch, Living with an Angry Spouse: Help for Victims of Abuse
David Powlison, Recovering from Child Abuse: Healing and Hope for Victims
John Henderson, Abuse: Finding Hope in Christ
Deepak Reju, On Guard: Preventing and Responding to Child Abuse at Church
Paul Tripp, David Powlison, Ed Welch, Domestic Abuse: How to Help
Diane Langberg, Bringing Christ to Abused Women: Learning to See and Respond

To the Praise of His Glory

Posted on by
Reply

Steven Lawson: To the Praise of His Glory: God’s Grand Design of Redemption

A biblical view of salvation centers on God. Before the foundation of the world, He graciously chose a people for Himself while justly passing over others “to the praise of his glorious grace” (Eph. 1:3–6). This session will demonstrate why the doctrine of God forms the heart of our understanding of the gospel and the doctrines of grace.

What the Objection Tells us

Posted on by
Reply

seekingMike Riccardi is the Pastor of Local Outreach Ministries at Grace Community Church in Los Angeles. He also teaches Evangelism at The Master’s Seminary. In a recent article entitled “An Objection to God’s Sovereignty that Proves It” he writes:

In Romans 9, Paul discusses God’s absolute freedom in His saving purposes. He uses the illustration of the twins, Jacob and Esau, stating that God’s choice of Jacob over Esau had nothing to do with either of them. Rather, God chose “so that [His] purpose according to His choice would stand.” This choice was “not because of works but because of Him who calls” (Rom 9:11). He goes on to say that salvation “does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy” (Rom 9:16), and then supports that claim by referring to God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart for the expressed purpose of demonstrating His power and proclaiming His name through the events that followed (Rom 9:17; cf. Exod 9:16). Paul then summarizes his point by declaring: “So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires” (Rom 9:18).

Then, Paul anticipates an objection: “You will say to me, then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?’”

First, let us understand the objection itself. Paul’s imaginary (or perhaps not so imaginary) interlocutor has understood all that Paul has said about God up until this point.

He understands that salvation is entirely a work of God’s grace, and owes to nothing in man.

He also understands that it is God’s will, not man’s will, that is determinative and decisive in salvation (again, Rom 9:16; cf. John 1:13). He asks a rhetorical question to underscore this very point: “Who resists His will?” That is to say, “No one resists God’s will.” “Our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Ps 115:3). He accomplishes all His good pleasure (Isa 46:10), and no purpose of His can be thwarted (Job 42:2).

The objector also understands that God still holds man accountable. “He still find[s] fault.”

So the question is, “Since no one can resist God’s will, how is it fair that He still finds fault?”

Making Sense of the Objection

This objection proves very helpful in the Christian’s understanding of the nature of God’s sovereignty in salvation. Because whatever our conclusions are about the doctrines of grace, they must make sense of that objection.

And the fact is: the only way that this objection makes any sense at all is if three things are true: (1) Man ought to repent and be saved as commanded by God, (2) Man lacks the moral ability to repent and be saved, and (3) God still holds man accountable to repent and be saved, and will punish them for their failure to do so. In philosophical terms, this objection only makes sense if “ought” doesn’t imply “can”—that is, if commanding something of someone does not necessarily mean that they are able to do what you command. In theological terms, this objection only makes sense if the doctrines of total depravity, unconditional election, and irresistible grace are true.

But it is repugnant to the natural mind that we could be held accountable for something that we are unable to do—especially if we claim that it is a loving God that imposes this standard. And so different schools of thought devise alternative understandings of God’s sovereignty in an effort to save Him from what they believe to be unfair. However, none of these alternatives make sense of the objection in Romans 9:19). Let’s consider these alternatives. Continue reading →