Uncategorized

I noticed this when I read Genesis 3 in preparation for a discussion at church yesterday. I found it noteworthy that the serpent did not tell a complete lie to Eve. There was actually some truth in what he told her: “You surely will not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (vv. 4b-5). The first part (that they wouldn’t die) was a lie, but the second part was actually true–the part about knowing good and evil. God Himself confirms this later on, in v. 22: “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil.”

It reminds me of used car salesmen. They’ll never tell you the things that are wrong with the car; they’ll tell you only the good things about it. Only afterward, when you drive the car off the lot and have it for a while, do you notice the problems: oil leak, engine trouble, etc.

The enemy will always mix truth with lies when he tempts us. He’ll attract us with the good things about sin–for example, that it will be fun and thrilling. And that is usually true; but he won’t tell us the negative consequences of that sin: hardness of heart, wounding our conscience, grieving the Holy Spirit, and more.

It’s not just Satan, either, that we have to watch out for. We can deceive ourselves, deliberately blocking out of our minds the negative consequences of the sin we’re contemplating and thinking only of the fleeting thrill it will give us.

We need to be like Job, who, even in the face of great loss and sorrow, which must have tempted him to curse God, “did not sin nor did he blame God” (Job 1:22).

Bible verses from the New American Standard Bible

With Thanksgiving past and the Christmas season fast approaching, I remembered this old post of mine from about five years ago. I decided to repost it now (with some edits) because it is my firm conviction that its message should be read and heeded by Christians everywhere.
————

It cannot be denied that this time of year holds a special place in most people’s hearts. The tinsel, glitter, Christmas trees, gift wrap, exchange of presents, good food, and everything else that our culture has made the indispensable ingredients of the holiday fill our hearts with warm, positive feelings. What is striking, however, is the overemphasis that is placed on these aspects year after year.

As a Christian who understands and values the origins of the holiday, I have long felt an aversion to this overemphasis. Too much focus is placed on these cultural misinterpretations of this very important and meaningful holiday, while too little emphasis is placed on the One from whom the holiday derives its name. I know plenty of others have already lamented the way our culture celebrates Christmas: “Jesus is the reason for the season” and “Keep Christ in Christmas” have practically become proverbs among Christians. I stand in a long line of people who have spoken out against these errors, so it would seem that my dissent would be just another disgruntled voice. This is not the case, though, because I believe that these past criticisms have overlooked the root of the problem: suppression of the truth.

The first chapter of Paul’s epistle to the Romans goes into considerable detail about this. In it Paul describes the downward spiral of human depravity and the reasons for that downward spiral. He wrote:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. (Romans 1:18–23, NASB)

Without the grace of God, when people are presented with clear evidence of God’s existence, they “suppress the truth in unrighteousness.” Not only do they suppress that truth, but they then seek to replace it with a “truth” of their own making. In Romans 1, it is false gods, worshiping creation rather than the Creator.

Our culture’s way of celebrating Christmas is really just another way that fallen humanity suppresses the truth—in this case, the truth that Jesus Christ’s birth was to rid humanity of sin and reconcile a rebellious, fallen human race to a holy God. As Charles Wesley so well put it in “Hark the Herald Angels Sing”:

Hail the heav’n-born Prince of Peace!
Hail the Son of Righteousness!
Light and life to all He brings
Ris’n with healing in His wings
Mild He lays His glory by
Born that man no more may die
Born to raise the sons of earth
Born to give them second birth
Hark! The herald angels sing
“Glory to the newborn King!”

This final stanza is seldom heard, and given Paul’s description of humanity in Romans 1, it is easy to see why. Angels and shepherds are nice, but the idea that people are spiritually dead and in need of a Savior does not appeal to the world. Fallen humanity does not want to hear that it is helpless to save itself, that it is guilty of sin and headed for judgment, and that God mercifully provided a way out of this enormous mess. As a result, this crucial aspect of Christmas is not made clear during the holiday season. What is made clear, however, are precisely those things that have nothing to do with the incarnation of the Word for the salvation of mankind. As nice and quaint as Santa, reindeer, Christmas trees, ornaments, bright lights and all the other popular holiday paraphernalia are, don’t they actually suppress the truth of the holiday? Don’t they actually exchange the truth for a lie? If you don’t think they do, then why isn’t the real reason emphasized just as fervently as these other things? Why is there such a lack of emphasis on Jesus and why he came to earth? How many Christmas cards emphasize this not-so-pleasant reason for Christ’s advent—or even say the word Christmas for that matter? Many cards now avoid using that specific name and instead use deliberately vague expressions such as holiday or season. It is all too clear that Jesus Christ’s relevance to Christmas is suppressed in favor of things that are more palatable to the carnal man.

The definition of any word has essential attributes, without which it ceases to be an accurate definition, but the popular icons our culture has come to associate inseparably with Christmas are actually nonessential attributes. Would the omission of Santa Claus from the holiday eliminate the reason to celebrate it? What about Rudolph and the other reindeer? What about Christmas trees? You may think that these things are necessary to define Christmas, but the fact of the matter is that they are not.

Now I have to say that most of these things are not necessarily bad in and of themselves. Giving gifts is not intrinsically sinful, and neither are Christmas trees, ornaments and tinsel. But if we emphasize these things so much that they end up overshadowing the truth, then they become tools of suppressing the truth. What we value is made clear by what we emphasize; what we devalue is made clear by what we deemphasize. Do we push Christ into the background while leaving commercialism, materialism and the other nonessential holiday paraphernalia in the foreground?

It is long overdue for Christians to rethink our celebrations at this time of the year. If our celebration of Christmas is no different from that of the world, we need to ask ourselves: Are we helping the world in its suppression of the truth? Let’s celebrate Christmas the way God would have us do so: not by suppressing its underlying truths but by upholding them for the world to see.

The doctrine of Limited Atonement—the teaching that Christ died only for the elect—has been disputed in Christianity for a long time. Some call it Definite Atonement or Particular Redemption, but regardless of what it is called, the doctrine could have some serious implications for the gospel. To be specific, I have thought lately that if one took Limited Atonement to its logical, necessary conclusion, one would have a very weak gospel or no gospel at all—either for oneself or for others.

If you really believe that Christ died only for the elect, then when you share the gospel with someone, you cannot honestly say to that person, “Christ died for you.” In fact, you cannot even say that to yourself, since you cannot know with complete certainty that you’re one of the elect. After all, lots of people have shown great promise in the Christian life only to turn away from Christ later.

Thus, the most that honest adherents of Limited Atonement can say to themselves or others is this: “Jesus might have died for you, so believe in him, and you have a chance that you’ll be saved.” That, of course, is no gospel. What good news is it if the message promises only the possibility that Christ died for me and not rather the certainty that he did? The gospel is good news only when it assures me that Christ died for me personally. On the other hand, if I have no assurance that Christ died personally for me, then how could I personally trust in him for my salvation? There would always be doubt.

Therefore, if you believe in Limited Atonement and are consistent with that belief, it is highly doubtful that you have any good news to share with others, let alone with yourself.

John Calvin

John Calvin

Charles Spurgeon, and others after him, have confidently proclaimed that Calvinism is actually the gospel. When this is said, what is meant by “Calvinism,” of course, is the TULIP, aka the 5 points of Calvinism: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. According to those who make this claim, one cannot preach the gospel truly and accurately unless these truths are also communicated. According to this unusual, innovative view, if you don’t talk about total depravity, unconditional election, and/or the other points of the TULIP when communicating the gospel, then you haven’t really preached the gospel.

At this time, I am reexamining these 5 points—in particular I have grave doubts about Limited Atonement—but even when I accepted them all without question, this kind of dogmatic statement never sat right with me. Nowhere in the New Testament (NT) is the TULIP ever equated to the gospel message. For example, in the accounts of gospel preaching that are recorded in the NT, the apostles never spent time explaining these doctrines of grace.

I can almost hear the objection that will immediately come from those who disagree: “You’re wrong! Paul explained Unconditional Election in great detail in Ephesians 1.” Yes, he did. There is just one problem with this objection, though: He explained these things to established churches, not to people on his missionary journeys to whom he first preached the gospel. There is a vast difference between these two activities. To preach the gospel to people who have never heard it is one thing; to provide pastoral counsel and instruction to those who are already Christians is quite another.

At one point I took an online course in systematic theology at a Reformed seminary. I distinctly recall Joel Beeke warning against interpreting the Scriptures to fit our system of theology. To illustrate this error, he recalled a time when a sermon was preached (either by him or someone he knew) on the basis of a biblical text, and afterward one of his listeners objected by saying something to this effect: “Too much free will in there.” The man who objected in this way was evaluating a statement about a biblical text on the basis of a theological system he held near and dear. In other words, he was subjecting the biblical text to a theological system, not the other way around.

Ever since hearing that, I have been mindful of avoiding that pitfall because it equates a man-made system with an indispensable message of the Bible, conflating the biblical text with the system. Any responsible Bible interpreter will think twice about doing such a thing.

Before anyone objects by saying that Calvinism is not man-made but is biblical, allow me to explain my meaning. I am not saying that all the doctrines are man-made but rather that the system is. Doctrine and system are not necessarily the same because the latter is a human attempt to interpret the former and consolidate it into a harmonious, consistent system of thought.

Now let’s look honestly at how Paul described the gospel:

Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. (1 Corinthians 15:1–8, NKJV)

It’s vital to note that Paul makes it a point to say that he actually received the gospel he describes. This means that the description that immediately follows has divine origin. It is the true, authoritative gospel, and even a quick reading of the apostle’s description shows clearly that it does not even hint at the TULIP. These facts alone should give anyone who claims that Calvinism is the gospel serious misgivings.

If that is not enough, though, those who make this outrageous claim should turn to the following important warning by the apostle Paul:

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8–9, NKJV)

When someone says that the doctrines of grace are the gospel, but those doctrines of grace are not even hinted at in a biblical, apostolic description of the gospel, one has to wonder if those who proclaim such dogmatic things are in danger of being accursed.

If you don’t understand the significance of the sarcasm in this meme, it’s time to brush up on church history:

If we test/verify everything by Scripture, how do we verify the list of canonical books using Scripture alone? To ask it another way: Since the table of contents in our Bible is not inspired, it must be what Protestants would call a man-made tradition that must be tested by the light of Scripture. But what purely Scriptural test can we perform on that table of contents to determine that the books listed there belong in the Bible? If we cannot verify it using Scripture alone but must go outside the Bible to verify it, aren’t we just accepting a “man-made tradition” as infallible without Scriptural proof?

annunciation2And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. (Luke 1:28, Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

This verse is often quoted by Catholics who wish to provide questioning Protestants Biblical proof for the Immaculate Conception. However, it is highly doubtful that this verse, all by itself, is sufficient to confirm the dogma. At best, it is only one part of what is needed and so is not the one silver bullet that will slay the skepticism of the Protestant once and for all.

The part of this verse that is used to prove the Immaculate Conception is the phrase full of grace. Although this translation renders the angel’s greeting in Luke 1:28 with these words, it is possible that the underlying Greek conveys a meaning that does not go quite as far as that. The phrase is actually a single word in Greek: κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitwmenei), a perfect passive participle that means one having been favored.

It seems clear that the Greek text underlying the phrase indicates something entirely different. We can definitely conclude from that text that she was favored. We can even conclude from the context that she was highly favored, since she was to be the mother of God—truly a unique, special role—and that she should be honored. We can also conclude from the perfect tense that the grace had been given to her at some point in the past and had continued to the present time (from the standpoint of the speaker). But to the best of my knowledge, that is the most that this text tells us.

Does all this mean that Mary was not in fact full of grace and that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception is wrong? No! As a Catholic, I definitely affirm the Church’s teaching on this matter, but I’m not so sure that it can be proven from Luke 1:28 alone. We also need the Magisterium and Sacred Tradition to complete the picture. Therefore, trying to convince the skeptical Protestant with this one verse is a dubious approach, because it is at odds with the Church’s stance that Christian truth is based not on Scripture alone but rather on the three-legged stool of Scripture, the Magisterium, and Sacred Tradition.

Many people contrast the portrayal of God in the New Testament with that of God in the Old Testament and conclude that they were two different deities. They feel that the God portrayed in the Old Testament was harsh, cruel, judgmental and quick to anger, whereas the God of the New Testament is fatherly, loving, tender and merciful. This is actually a false dichotomy. Ironically, it is in the very act which we rightly see as the greatest act of mercy—Jesus hanging on the cross and bleeding for our sins—that we see the same Old Testament holiness, severity and judgment. Christ’s self-sacrifice was the result of both unrelenting judgment and the tenderest compassion: God’s holiness and justice required that the full penalty due humanity for their sins be satisfied, and He gave up His own Son compassionately to accomplish that. Mercy and justice are both seen on Calvary’s cross, just as they are both seen in the Old Testament. God did not change between Malachi and Matthew.

One day that stern holiness of God will break out against sin forever. It will be the unleashing of a righteous hostility toward evil that will never end—like a massive flash fire that suddenly breaks out and whose fury never ceases. Christ’s shed blood on the cross, however, is a complete satisfaction and appeasement of that righteous anger toward sin. When God sees that blood applied to a believer in Jesus, He has no wrath whatsoever toward that person: “Whoever believes in him [Jesus Christ] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (John 3:18, ESV).

The God revealed in the Old Testament is exactly the same God revealed in the New: loving and merciful and kind, yet also fearful and terrifying in His wrath. He is not to be trifled with. Don’t make light of Jesus’ death and suffering on the cross. If you reject it, you have nothing to look forward to but an eternity of suffering God’s holiness breaking out against you in hell. Repent and come to Christ now!

There are people today who separate themselves from the local church and feel they are perfectly justified in doing so. The New Testament, however, has much to say about this, and when we look at relevant passages, we can see that doing so is a dire sin. The Scriptures know nothing of living the Christian life by oneself, in isolation from the body of Christ.

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him. (1 John 5:1)

If you don’t long for fellowship with other children of God, do you really love God?

As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace: whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:10–11)

It is impossible to obey this passage’s command to use our gifts to serve one another if we are not plugged into a local body of believers and involved on a regular basis. Our spiritual gifts are given to us to “serve one another,” as the text plainly says, not to keep them to ourselves. If we don’t use our spiritual gifts to serve others, are we perhaps like the man in Jesus’ parable who buried his talent and hid it and produced no profit with it (Matthew 25:14–30)?

I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. (Eph. 4:1–6)

This text not only commands us to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, but it says to be eager to do so. That means we should go out of our way to maintain unity in the church. It is obvious that those who separate from the church are doing the opposite because they are contributing to disunity. Breaking off and separating—unless they have good biblical reason to do so—simply fractures the church further than it already is.

But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift. Therefore it says,

“When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,
and he gave gifts to men.”

(In saying, “He ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, … (Eph. 4:7–11)

Continuing in Ephesians 4, we see another indication why separating from the church is sinful. Christ Himself gave gifts to the church: apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers. If we separate from the church, we cut ourselves off from those gifts and essentially say that we don’t need them. That is certainly contrary to God’s will. The gifts mentioned are absolutely vital to the church’s life, health and growth, and so cutting ourselves off from them will result inevitably in a decrease in our own spiritual health. Again, that is something contrary to God’s will.

… to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. (Eph. 4:12–14)

Here the apostle explains why the aforementioned gifts of men to the church are so vital to her health and growth. It is through them that God equips the saints for ministry, builds up the body of Christ, and brings the church to maturity for her protection from error. To separate oneself from the church, then, is to remove oneself from God’s divinely appointed means of spiritual growth and protection. Can that be anything less than dangerous, not to mention an affront to our wonderful Christ, who graciously provided those gifts?

Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Eph. 4:15–16)

Notice that Paul here not only mentions growing up but specifically growing up into the head, Christ. He also mentions that Christ is the source of that growth. There is, then, no growing apart from being connected with the church, and particularly with those men whom Christ has given as gifts to the church.

———-
Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

I never cease to be amazed at the tenderness of God’s fatherly care and love toward me. When I struggle with assurance and doubts and pour out my heart before Him about it, He responds by lightening my burden, as if He stooped down to remove the unnecessary load I was carrying, giving me peace that “surpasses all comprehension” (Phil. 4:7, NASB). When I have asked Him for protection from temptation, and to make me hate evil so much that sin would lose its appeal, He has graciously come to my aid in that regard as well. How can anyone doubt Jesus’ words when He said:

7 “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. 9 Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he? 11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!” (Matthew 7:7–11, NASB).

The parallel passage in Luke 11:9–13 is just as beautiful:

9 “So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks, receives; and he who seeks, finds; and to him who knocks, it will be opened. 11 Now suppose one of you fathers is asked by his son for a fish; he will not give him a snake instead of a fish, will he? 12 Or if he is asked for an egg, he will not give him a scorpion, will he? 13 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?” (NASB)

I like to say to others, “You can’t get to the bottom of God’s goodness.” How true!

I say to all those who don’t know Jesus Christ:

O taste and see that the Lord is good;
How blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him! (Ps. 34:8, NASB)