Archive for the ‘Christianity’ Category

Christians And Illegal Immigration(Cristianos y la inmigración ilegal)

Christianity | Posted by Will
Apr 29 2010

The recent Arizona Illegal Immigration Law has become a hotbed of controversy in the ongoing debate over immigration reform taking place in the United States today. Christians are every bit as polarized on this issue as the country at large. So the question that has come to my mind regarding this topic, is “how should the Christian respond to the immigration issue?”. Is there a certain response that Christians should have? How should Christians treat those who are in the country both legally and illegally?

There are different facets of the debate that must be looked at. On the one hand, you have many immigrants who simply want to come to America(or their country of choice) to make their life better. But at the same time, you have violent criminals coming across the border, armed with weapons and carrying drugs, and they aren’t afraid to kill American citizens. You have those who view entering the country illegally as nothing major, and you have those who think that all persons entering the country should be documented.

So how do we look at the issue? As Christians, we need to turn first to the Scriptures. We need to understand first and foremost that Christians are to obey the law of the land, as long as it does not run contrary to Scripture.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
(Rom 13:1-7)

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.
(1Pe 2:13-17)

Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people.
(Tit 3:1-2)

So we can see from Scripture that those of us who are Christians, are to obey the government, in all things that do not go against Scripture. Do the laws of the United States regarding immigration go against Scripture? Not that I have seen at this time. They are laws that may not be the best laws, but they do not(that I have seen) seem to run contrary to Scripture.

But what if we think that the laws should be more lenient? I for one, think that our laws should not be as difficult as they are for those who wish to become immigrants and live here in the United States. I think that our laws which an immigrant has to get through in order to legally be able to get into the United States are filled with too much red tape and paperwork. It takes years for someone to legally immigrate into the United States, it takes financial backing, and often it requires them to have contacts in the United States that will vouch for them. Personally, I would prefer to see a loosening of the red tape that prevents people from entering our country legally. I would like to see the process streamlined, to where we perform a background check, have them pay a reasonable amount of money to cover the background checks that are performed on them, and then allow them into the country. Once in the country, as long as they live a life free from legal problems, they should have their ability to live in the country renewed on a yearly basis.

Somebody once asked me, “what about those who are here illegally?” That raises in interesting question, and one I think that should be discussed. Again, the views I am about to present are my own, that I think the United States should implement, and these are not necessarily based on any Scripture.
1. Require all illegals to register with the government, and pay a fine.
2. Require all immigrants to learn English if they play to stay in the country.
3. Illegal immigrants will have to, after registering with the government, go through the citizenship process, and become a citizen within seven years(if they are of age) of having registered. If they do not become a citizen within those years, they will be required to go back home, and re-enter the U.S. legally but from the back of the line.
4. After registering with the government, those of legal age will be required to acquire a U.S. Driver’s License and Insurance if they own a vehicle.
5. Immigrants, legal or otherwise, that commit crimes should be deported to their home country depending on the severity of the crime, and after serving their sentence. Violent crimes should result in deportation without the possibility of ever returning, after their sentence is served. Non-violent crimes such as driving without a license, etc, can be served here without deportation for first offenses. Driving under the influence should result in a fine, a prison sentence, and deportation.
6. Immigrants should not be permitted to get on food stamps or welfare until citizenship is acquired.
7. Put a fence on the border to stop illegal immigration and drug smuggling.

Now, provided that the procedures for entering the country legally were streamlined, I think that my suggestions would be a fine idea. But that’s just me.

But back to how Christians should treat immigrants who are here illegally. I think the answer to this is fairly simple. Treat them like human beings. Treat them well, but do not condone illegal activities.

God did give laws to the nation of Israel regarding strangers in the land(meaning immigrants), that can apply to us as Christians today.

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
(Lev 19:33-34)

“When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, neither shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD your God.
(Lev 19:9-10)

For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe. He executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing. Love the sojourner, therefore, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.
(Deu 10:17-19)

We can see that the Israelites practiced charity for the immigrants, and that they were to treat them as fairly as they treated a fellow Jew. To make a modern-day comparison, you could say that the Jews, when they hired an immigrant in their nation, they did not pay them less than they would pay a fellow Jew. So we as Christians should treat them no less well than we treat a fellow citizen of our fair nation. We should encourage businesses to pay immigrants fair wages. We should encourage immigrants to learn English so they can speak to their neighbors, and to the police and government services. We should also not be afraid to learn their language in order to communicate the Gospel to them. We should stand up for immigrants when they are experiencing violent crime, without stopping to ask them if they are here legally or illegally. But at the same time, we should not encourage illegal immigration, or try to make the issue one of Christian charity in regards to granting amnesty(the Bible says next to nothing about this subject), and we should not make it an issue of “the law of the land is right, so let’s obey that forever.” We are not following some sort of law that can never be changed. The law can be changed, and probably should. But it’s not an issue that should bring out ugliness on any side of the debate.

Practice Christian charity, love your neighbors whether they are natural born citizens, legal immigrants, or illegal immigrants. Present the Gospel to those who are lost. Help those who need help. In this, we imitate Christ.

Tags: , ,
4 Comments »

February Monthly Resource

Christianity | Posted by Will
Feb 20 2010

Tags: ,
No Comments »

What Does It Mean To Follow Christ?

Christianity | Posted by Will
Oct 07 2009

I was thinking, recently, on this question. What does it mean to follow Christ? Here, in America, we have developed a way to pretend that we are following Christ. Perhaps it is because American Christians have never experienced persecution, I mean real persecution, for their faith. We have turned this concept of “following Christ” into political ideology, and into religious habits, but we have failed to actually do what Christ has told us to do. I’ve been thinking about this alot lately, and wondering if my own activities in my own life actually reflect the Christ that I am called to follow. I’ve been doing an assessment of my Christian walk, if you will, and examining the Scriptures to see if I’m actually following Christ, or following the Christ of the culture I was raised in, or simply following the Christ of pop culture.

Truly following Christ is more than showing up to church on Sundays, or going out on evangelism once a week. It’s more than wearing a Christian t-shirt, or owning a Bible. You can’t follow Christ from the fifth pew on the left hand side without getting out in the world and doing what He has commanded.

Hopefully in the next several blog posts, I’m going to talk more about what it means to follow Christ. Being an active follower of Christ means that you care about doctrinal purity. It means that you serve others as Christ did. It means that you actively talk about Christ to those who are bound for hell. It means that you give of your time and finances to the cause of Christ. It means that you help the poor, the fatherless, and the widows. It’s much, much more than we’ve made it out to be in our consumeristic, psuedo-Christian society. Jesus doesn’t want our weekly left-overs, He wants our week to be focused around following Him. Not just on Sunday. We can’t be followers of Christ, but only bother to show up to church on Sundays and live like the world the rest of the week. Christ demands that we do His will on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. Following Christ isn’t about “doing Christian stuff” that is comfortable for YOU. That is idol worship. When you put the focus on you, you are worshiping yourself. Following Christ is about doing what Christ has modeled for us, and what God has commanded, no matter if it’s safe and comfortable, or not.
Check out the following links for the present.

Not A Fan

1 Comment »

On Engaging Culture

Christianity | Posted by Will
Aug 17 2009

A youth pastor friend of mine recently made a note on Facebook about engaging culture, particularly touching on Mark Driscoll. I thought I would repost his thoughts here.

Author: Cam Stevens

It seems “culturally relevant” has become the new buzzwords in Christianity. When I hear this I truly wonder what people mean when they say it because it is really ambiguous. Obviously, our churches need to reflect the culture in some way, for example, you wouldn’t place white baptist church in the middle of Zimbabwe, Africa and expect everyone to conform to that foreign culture. Often times I don’t think this is what is being talked about.

Men like Mark Driscoll argue that to have an impact, we must not only engage our culture, but dive head first into our culture to understand it and only after we have done this can we truly make an impact in it. Driscoll writes on page 103 of his book Radical Reformission, “As a missionary, you will need to watch television shows and movies, listen to music, read books, peruse magazines, attend events, join organizations, surf websites, and befriend people that you might not like to better understand people that Jesus loves.”

I agree that we should engage lost people and build relationships with the lost for the purpose of evangelism, but does that mean we have to immerse ourselves in the same junk they do to understand them. Honestly, I’m not quite sure where Driscoll would draw the line either. This is the man who directs his church to sexual themed websites with pornographic pics to spice up their love life. In his church they watch unedited rated-R movies to teach people how to think critically.

Do you really have to participate in a sinful culture to understand sinful humanity? Over and over again in scripture we are commanded to flee from sin and to strive for holiness. In Proverbs we are commanded to pursue wisdom. In Proverbs 2:11-15, we are told that wisdom will protect us from those “who rejoice in doing evil.” I’m sure the majority of movies and television shows are about people who rejoice in doing evil.

Proverbs 2:11-15
“…discretion will watch over you, understanding will guard you, delivering you from the way of evil, from men of perverted speech, who forsake the paths of uprightness to walk in the ways of darkness, who rejoice in doing evil and delight in the perverseness of evil, men whose paths are crooked, and who are devious in their ways.”

I’m not saying we should throw out our tv’s and only listen to Gregorian chants, but I do think we need to be cautious about how much culture we try to take on. Justo Gonzalez writes in his book “History of Christianity” regarding Roman historian Tacitus, “Tacitus believes the rumors, and thinks that Christians hate humankind. This last charge makes sense if one remembers that all social activities – the theatre, the army, letters, sports – were so entwined with pagan worship that Christians often felt the need to abstain form them. Therefore, to the eyes of a Roman such as Tacitus, who loved his culture and society, Christians appeared as haters of humankind.”

The early Christians abstained from overly engaging in their culture because they recognized it’s influence and the sin that it was entwined with and they were hated for it. Driscoll has to me always seemed like one who forsook personal holiness at the expense of being culturally relevant (or cool). Is being culturally relevant a genuine mode for reaching people, or is it an excuse to sin?

Note: My thoughts not necessarily endorsed by Cam Stevens.

I must add a hearty “Amen” to this post. It seems that the excuse of “engaging culture” is being used to excuse just about anything being done in the church today. What exactly does it mean to engage culture? I believe that much of the argument for engaging culture by living and acting like the unsaved is based on Acts 17. In this particular chapter, Paul was walking around Athens, and his spirit(the Holy Spirit moving in him) was troubled by the fact that the city was wholly given over to idolatry(Acts 17:16). Farther on, in verse 21, Paul stands on Mars’ Hill, and preaches to the crowd of idol worshipers and philosophers. In verse 28, Paul quotes one or more Greek poets to make a particularly salient point.

The question then arises, how much do we have to delve into the culture to be able to engage the culture? Do we have to watch the same dirty movies, watch the perverted television shows, and listen to the songs filled with anti-Christian philosophy over and over to be able to engage culture effectively? And furthermore, when did we start basing doctrines in the book of Acts? Is the book of Acts meant to be prescriptive for the church, or is it simply descriptive of the early church? That’s not to say that the book of Acts is useless to the church today, heaven forbid. There is much good to be gleaned from the book of Acts. But that doesn’t mean that we have to run out and do everything that occurred in the early church, especially if there is no real basis for it outside of some descriptive passages.

It seems that far too often, those who cry that they are “engaging culture” are simply copying and consuming culture. They use methods that are decidedly outside the boundaries of Scripture to draw a crowd through copying what culture does, and keep that crowd by encouraging them to consume much of what culture creates. The problem with this, is that the great majority of what is produced by American culture is so against God and holiness and Christianity, that it isn’t worth being consumed by believers.

Christians should engage culture, but not at the expense of personal holiness. They shouldn’t be crude or vulgar in their speech or actions. Rather than simply sitting in condemnation of culture(which does need to be done often), or consuming culture(which is done more often than not), Christians should be actively working in the redemption of our culture and pointing culture back towards Christ. Engaging culture, for the Bible-believing Christian, should be more than condemning it. And it should be more than consuming it. Christians should be working in the culture around them, starting in their own neighborhood, pointing people to the Savior. They should encourage those within their church body towards personal holiness. Engaging culture needs to be more than what many people want it to be.

3 Comments »

"My Former Church Is A Cult" Blogging

Blogs, Christianity, Church Abuse | Posted by Will
Apr 20 2009

In recent years, a new phenomena has sprung up in Christian culture. That of embittered former(and sometimes current) members of a church making blogs to speak out against their church and attempt to characterize it in the absolute worst light possible. In interest of full disclosure, I am a former Fundamental Baptist. I believe that certain aspects of IFB culture and theology are far off the mark, go against Scripture, and in some cases are cultic(anybody heard of Steve Anderson?). However, I attempt to be fair in my criticisms of IFB’s. There are things that IFB’s do right, that I wish we would see more of in broader Evangelicism. However, these blogs that I’m talking about, see no good in their former church.

I recently came across such a blog. The blog owner made a post in the comments section of one of my posts on Mark Driscoll. It seems that this blog owner is against all things Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church. While I myself am no fan of Driscoll, I have found some of these things that the blogger is angry about to be rather…interesting. I’m not sure if this blogger is a medical professional, but she(I’m assuming-based on her biggest gripe with the church) continually posts about the signs of a manipulative or narcissistic person. So I’m guessing that she is attempting to make a diagnosis of Mark Driscoll. Which, if she is a medical professional, is highly unethical, and even if she isn’t, opens her up for a lawsuit.

Here’s the blog, “Mars Hill Church Abuse, Driscoll and Spiritual Abuse.”

Here’s a few of her complaints:

Controlling Pastor with “Yes Men” Elders;

.

No Talk Rule;

.

No Dissent;

.

Emphasis on Submission and Obedience;

.

Shunning of “Unrepentant” Former Members;

.

Dis-fellowshipping “Questioners” and Critical Thinkers;

.

By-Laws Removing Accountability of Pastor/Elders;

.

Mind and Thought Control; Membership Covenant and Financial Giving Pledge Required;

.

“Biblical” Counseling Only, if Referred Out, Must Sign Release Form (no confidentiality allowed);

.

Kangaroo Court Firing of Two Elders Who Dared to Question;

.

Extreme Gender Role Enforcement;

.

Members Must Attend Accountability/”Community” Groups

The issue most troubling to this blogger, is that of “Extreme Gender Role Enforcement”. I’d like to know exactly what this blogger things that the role of genders within marriage is, and how she Biblically defines them. Because her biggest problem is that Mark Driscoll teaches that women should submit to their husbands. Problem for her is, that this is Biblical. It is absolutely Biblical that the husband should take the lead in the home, and that the woman should submit to his leadership. The husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church, and the wife is to submit to her husband.

Furthermore, in regards to this blogger taking issue with “shunning of former members(who are under Church Discipline)”, this again is Biblical. One is not to fellowship with those under Church Discipline(1 Cor 5, Matt 18).

Back to the issue of gender roles again, which is a frequent theme of this woman’s blog. The Bible is quite clear what the role of women within the marriage is. Now, I would probably disagree with Mark Driscoll on some aspects, but I’m not familiar enough with his stance to make a fair judgment at this point. However, the Bible teaches that the wife is to submit to her husband, and that her primary duty is to care for the home(which involves caring for the children, as well as doing business so long as her husband is behind her in this and it doesn’t take away from her duties at home[Prov 31]). This, however, grates against the “liberated feminist” culture that is so heavily embedded in American Christianity. In fact, let’s read one of the blog posts that this blogger made about this, where she bemoans the fact that a young, incredibly selfish woman now finds herself trapped in a marriage where she has to submit to her husband and care for her children. This is the story of a woman who does not have a submissive heart either towards her husband or towards Christ. And it’s astounding that this blogger would post this, bemoaning Mark Driscoll’s teachings of submission, and at the same time holding up this selfish woman as some sort of victim.

In another post, this blogger seems to applaud a woman who rebelled against God, and got a divorce from her husband because he was “dominating” and she “wasn’t submissive”. The blogger uses this woman yet again to try and build a case against Mars Hill, by pointing out that this woman was placed under church disciple when she sought a divorce(which is quite right, a man or woman who divorces without Biblical reason should be placed under Church Discipline).

What I have not seen on this blog yet(I’m still reading through it), is sufficient reason to accuse Mars Hill or Mark Driscoll of being “spiritual abusers”. Nor have I seen any reason to assume that Mark Driscoll’s teachings on submission are in error.

Much of this “My former church is a cult” blogging is done by persons who fixate on a handful of issues that they believe their former church is wrong about teaching. Some of the people who do this have little to no understanding of the theological issues that they are handling, and attack the issues from their cultural point of view, rather than a Christian point of view. I’ll have to look in this particular blog more, and look into Mark Driscoll’s teachings as well, but so far, I haven’t seen sufficient reason with evidence to come to the conclusion that Mark Driscoll is a cult leader.

Tags: ,
6 Comments »

Downfall

Christianity, Persecution, Politics | Posted by Will
Mar 11 2009

No, not the movie(although it was a good movie), I’m talking about the Downfall of American Evangelical Christianity. iMonk had an op-ed piece in the Christian Science Monitor this week that has hit the blogosphere with all the speed and rage of an out-of-control brush fire in the wilderness. The big question is, is Michael Spencer on target? It seems that many would agree with his assessment, and the more I thought about it, the more I think I do as well, although I’m not convinced that his timeline is accurate. But let’s look at what he has to say on the subject.

Links:

The Coming Evangelical Collapse(as seen in the Christian Science Monitor)

The Original Posts on Michael Spencer’s Blog

Evangelicals have identified their movement with the culture war and with political conservatism. This will prove to be a very costly mistake. Evangelicals will increasingly be seen as a threat to cultural progress. Public leaders will consider us bad for America, bad for education, bad for children, and bad for society.

The evangelical investment in moral, social, and political issues has depleted our resources and exposed our weaknesses. Being against gay marriage and being rhetorically pro-life will not make up for the fact that massive majorities of Evangelicals can’t articulate the Gospel with any coherence. We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith.

I agree at least partly with iMonk here. American Christians far too often associate their politics with their Christianity. And unfortunately, American Christians far too often are better able to defend their political beliefs than their religious beliefs. Many Christians can’t tell you what they believe and why they believe.

We Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. Ironically, the billions of dollars we’ve spent on youth ministers, Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it. Our young people have deep beliefs about the culture war, but do not know why they should obey scripture, the essentials of theology, or the experience of spiritual discipline and community. Coming generations of Christians are going to be monumentally ignorant and unprepared for culture-wide pressures.

Well, I really think this one is kind of a “duh” moment. Most Christian parents are incapable of articulating their beliefs and giving a defense for what they believe. So why should we expect their children to be able to do so? Especially when parents have simply allowed their child’s youth minister to do the training without doing any of it themselves. This is why there were so many against the concept of Sunday School and youth ministries when they first started coming out. Are youth ministries and Sunday Schools a bad thing? Not when used properly! But it seems that the majority of Churches use Sunday School to teach the same Bible stories over and over and over to children without really ever getting into Scripture. Many youth ministries are nothing more than a dog and pony show, in which the teenagers are given pizza and ice cream, and a watered down version of Christianity, “because they can’t handle learning things of theological importance, or apologetics”. To which I reply, “balderdash!”

There are three kinds of evangelical churches today: consumer-driven megachurches, dying churches, and new churches whose future is fragile. Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive.

I disagree. There are growing, thriving churches out there that aren’t consumer-driven. I happen to attend one of them. This is a bit of broadbrushing here iMonk.

Despite some very successful developments in the past 25 years, Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism.

I’m not entirely certain that this point is totally accurate, but it is fairly on target for much of evangelical Christianity.

We will soon see that the good Evangelicals want to do will be viewed as bad by so many, and much of that work will not be done. Look for ministries to take on a less and less distinctively Christian face in order to survive.

I agree with this point. I have heard on multiple occasions, people lament the fact that Christian ministries are going into an area where there is a need, and evangelizing as they give out aid. The horror!

Even in areas where Evangelicals imagine themselves strong (like the Bible Belt), we will find a great inability to pass on to our children a vital evangelical confidence in the Bible and the importance of the faith.

I happen to live here in the Bible Belt, and I’ve found that there is a massive number of young people down here who claim to be Christians, but who are engaged in a lifestyle counter to Christianity. In America, and the Bible Belt particularly, Christianity has been not much more than a cultural norm for many people. The problem is, that Christians don’t catechize their children, they simply expect their children to convert by osmosis.

Expect evangelicalism to look more like the pragmatic, therapeutic, church-growth oriented megachurches that have defined success. Emphasis will shift from doctrine to relevance, motivation, and personal success – resulting in churches further compromised and weakened in their ability to pass on the faith.

Precisely the reason that I stand against the church marketing techniques of men like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren, and all the others. They are all about marketing the church to consumers, and giving them “purpose”, but not giving them any sort of real theology. These are castles built on sand that will come crashing down.

Two of the beneficiaries will be the Roman Catholic and Orthodox communions. Evangelicals have been entering these churches in recent decades and that trend will continue, with more efforts aimed at the “conversion” of Evangelicals to the Catholic and Orthodox traditions.

I’ve seen this already. A good friend of mine from back home joined a Greek Orthodox church a year or two after I left. We had both attended a church together for some time, that was a member of the Conservative Mennonite Conference in name, but was more non-denominational in how it operated–and not really in a good way. Although I love the people in that church, I can’t help but think that if there had been stronger teaching of the Word, this problem could have been avoided. And yes, I believe that people leaving Evangelical Christianity for the RCC or Orthodox churches is a problem.

A small band will work hard to rescue the movement from its demise through theological renewal…Nonetheless, I believe the coming evangelical collapse will not result in a second reformation, though it may result in benefits for many churches and the beginnings of new churches.

On Spencer’s blog, he identifies this small band as being those of the Reformed persuasion, and I do think he’s fairly on target as far is it being the Reformed who will be working extra hard when the Downfall begins. Will we see a second reformation? Who knows.

Aggressively evangelistic fundamentalist churches will begin to disappear.

This has already begun. In the 70’s, many of the largest churches throughout America were Fundamentalist churches. Today, there’s only one in the top 25 that I know of, and that’s the First Baptist Church of Hammond.

Charismatic-Pentecostal Christianity will become the majority report in evangelicalism. Can this community withstand heresy, relativism, and confusion? To do so, it must make a priority of biblical authority, responsible leadership, and a reemergence of orthodoxy.

I would agree with iMonk’s thoughts that the Pentecostals will need to make a priority of Biblical Authority and Orthodoxy. Right now, for the most part, they don’t. They are easily swayed by feelings and alleged “word’s of knowledge”. I recently read an article by a missionary in Latin America, who said that the Pentecostal movement had made a large boom of numbers in the church. But just as quickly as the boom came, these so-called believers apostasized after realizing that the “Christianity” taught in these Pentecostal churches wasn’t true, and they became Atheists and Agnostics. The writer lamented that it would have been better had the Pentecostal church never come to Latin America. So my response to Spencer’s prediction here is “Dear God, I hope not!” The RCC tends to be more orthodox than most of the streams of Pentecostalism, a frightening thing to think about here. The possible exceptions to this would be the Reformed Charismatic groups, who are Reformed theologians who believe that the sign gifts are still active today.

How do we as American evangelical Christians survive this, presuming that all this is true? Or better yet, what can we do to prevent it? The answer to the second question is “probably not much”. Public favor is already heavily against evangelical Christians in North America and Western Europe.
What Christians need to do, is work on catechizing themselves and their children. For those of us who are Baptists, and who have no idea what a Catechism is, click here, and start teaching it to your children.

What Evangelical Christians need to start doing:

  • Teach correct theology to their churches and young people.
  • Teach apologetics, and use it as more than simply a tool to witness to the lost, but use it to demonstrate error in Christians who have strayed from Scripture.
  • Practice Church Discipline
  • Get rid of the prosperity (false)gospel, and toss out the 40 Days of Self-Help gimmickry that has infested the Evangelical church with poison.
  • Stop making politics the work of the church.

    • Michael Spencer is not speaking prophetically here, he’s simply stating that which is so obvious. The tide of public opinion is rapidly turning against Evangelical Christianity. Members are leaving our churches in droves, and many are turning to the Emergent church or the Catholic church, that is, if they’re not apostasizing altogether.

    Places outside of the Baptist Belt are already feeling the strain of this collapse, and I think it will be some time before the effects are truly felt in the Bible Belt like they are in other places of the country. Which means that we in the Bible Belt have some time to prepare for what is coming. And how do we prepare? Education. Education in theology, apologetics, and ministry. If we intend to survive the persecution that is coming, we need to ensure that we are standing o solid ground when the storm comes.

    Tags: , , ,
    1 Comment »

    Mark Driscoll And Phil Johnson

    Christianity | Posted by Will
    Mar 10 2009

    Phil Johnson, who is John MacArthur’s “right hand man” of sorts, spoke at the Shepherd’s Conference this year. His sermon has hit the blogosphere hard and fast. Very quickly, the battle lines were drawn. Supporters of Mark Driscoll have started coming after Phil Johnson, while those who don’t approve of Mark Driscoll’s salty language have praised Johnson for his message. You can listen to Phil Johnson’s message here. Today, Phil Johnson posted on the TeamPyro’s blog some of his thoughts, and some comments/questions from listener’s about his sermon.

    For those unfamiliar with Mark Driscoll, he’s the pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, Washington. Mark Driscoll has made a name for himself through his occasional use of profane language from the pulpit, and his frank discussions of sex from the pulpit–some of these discussions seem to be more of a lewd joke using Scripture as a punch line. I’ll give an example below. Be warned, this video is rated by Mars Hill Baptist Church itself as being “Really Offensive/MH-17″.

    [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbxkQw-FEVw[/youtube]

    The above “joke” used in this sermon was also told on the DL Hughley show on CNN in a conversation about sex between Mark Driscoll and comedian DL Hughley.

    Driscoll has defended his use of salty language, by appealing to Christ, the Apostle Paul, and the Old Testament Prophets as being examples of doing such. However, as Phil Johnson points out in his sermon, this seems to be a bit of a red herring, as the examples we see in Scripture are a little different than how Driscoll does his thing, especially in regards to Driscoll’s joke regarding a certain act.

    However, one of my first thoughts in regards to this sermon, is one that was echoed by other compadres of mine who have been inhabitants of a certain forum where Phil Johnson was once a member. Phil Johnson created a sockpuppet that was a parody of IFB Evangelists/Pastors, and even created a little website for his Sockpuppet and Sockpuppet’s family. Phil Johnson’s sockpuppet was none other than the famous Dr. Hugh Jass.

    To be fair to Mark Driscoll, he tends to be very on-target in most of the sermons that I’ve listened to of his. I’ve not listened to very many of his sermons, because his unabashed use of lewd or salty language isn’t something that I think is right or proper of a minister. And his speaking is such that I would not recommend him to most of my friends, especially those friends who are female.

    I really wish that Mark Driscoll would tone down his language. His language, is frankly more fit for a locker room than for a church. Were he to clean up his language, I think that I would be more willing to listen to him and what he has to say. I find that Mark Driscoll has a tendency to be irreverent, coarse in his language, and borders on the blasphemous at times. Phil Johnson however, is none of those things. Driscoll’s descriptions of Scriptural passages and people are demonstrative of a mind that is not fixated on the Holiness of God and Scripture, but that is fixated on being “relevant” to a generation that has no fear of God.

    Mark Driscoll needs to clean his act up, no doubt about it. Until and unless he does, he’s going to only be relevant to those who would rather dwell on the gutter language and locker room talk. Mark Driscoll, I believe, has a sincere love for God, but he’s not on Scriptural ground with how he speaks. I truly hope that Mark Driscoll will take Phil Johnson’s words(which weren’t necessarily aimed totally at him) as being good, Biblical counsel, and will start obeying Scripture in the realm of speech.

    Tags: , ,
    4 Comments »

    They Love Jesus…It's Christians They Don't Like

    Christianity | Posted by Will
    Mar 08 2009

    Ever heard that before? I hear it on occasion from believers, who are trying to do more to get Christians to reach this group, or that group. They’ll say something like “These people don’t hate Jesus, they love Jesus! They just don’t like his followers.” Now, granted, sometimes the latter part is true. Probably far too often. However, the first part is never true. The world does not love Jesus, the world hates Jesus. Or at least they would if they knew what Jesus taught and said. In our American culture, we’ve got this idea in American folklore, that Jesus was this really great guy that went around making people happy, and never got angry or upset or called people out on their sin. No, Jesus was just this fun-loving dude who totally accepted everything and everybody. He hung out with the worst of the worst, because man, those church people were real downers.

    I started thinking about this because of some articles and links in the new Lifeway Sunday School material for my age group’s Sunday School class.
    Click on the video on the top right of this page.

    Unfortunately, the Lifeway Sunday School material for my age group seems to be starting to add filler from those who hold to Liberal and Emergent theology, and those who just have extremely shallow theology. One of the articles was by Margaret Feinberg, and appears to have been  a book excerpt. She, in her article, condemns Christians for being too judgemental. She stated that “love is the agenda” for Christians. I possibly could partially agree, except she took a verse wildly out of context, John 13:35.

    Joh 13:35  By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

    This text is not saying that “love” is the agenda for Christians. It is saying that the world will recognize that we are Christ’s disciples by our love for other Christians. Not by our love for everybody else, but by our love for one another as believers. Now does this mean that we as believers should not have love for the unsaved? Not at all! In fact, I believe that Christians have much more love for the unsaved than Margaret Feinberg realizes. We love homosexuals enough to point out that repentance of sin and faith in Christ is what they need. Yes, we condemn homosexuality, but very few Christians actually condemn homosexuals. I think that the confusion comes in because many Christians are very vocal in their condemnation of homosexuality and the homosexual movement. Margaret suggests that we should have close homosexual friends in order to ‘combat our extreme judgmentalism’ of homosexuals. That would depend entirely on what she thinks we’re going to base that friendship, and how she thinks that two people with radically different value systems can have enough common ground to truly be close friends. I have known very few professing homosexuals who were able to develop friendships with believers(who actually believed the Bible literally) because of their radically different worldviews.

    But enough about Margaret Feinberg and Lifeway’s Sunday School material. We’ll get back to Margaret later. This blog post is about this idea that unbelievers can truly love Jesus, and the answer is that they cannot. Jesus has already made that clear Himself.

    Joh 3:19-21 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil. (20) For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. (21) But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been carried out in God.”

    Joh 7:6-8 Jesus said to them, “My time has not yet come, but your time is always here. (7) The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil. (8) You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.”

    Joh 15:18-20 “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. (19) If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. (20) Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.

    The unsaved, regardless of what they think, do not love Jesus Christ. I find that few of those who claim that they love Jesus but not Christians actually know anything about what Jesus lived and taught. Jesus taught of heaven and hell, Jesus condemned sin, and when He did so, He got to stepping on people’s toes. He confronted both the religious leaders who were hypocritical, and the everyday sinners who ignored Him.

    One cannot look at Jesus, and love Him without accepting Him as savior. The unsaved cannot love Christ, because Christ demands something of them that they are unprepared and unwilling to give. Christ demands that they give up their all and follow Him. They must put off their disbelief and believe Him as the ONLY way. In the link that I gave above to a page from Lifeway, there’s another link to a book, called “Lost and Found”. The page seen and this book are linked together, because it’s from this book that they are trying to draw their conclusions. But if you read this book(as I am doing), you’ll find that some or many of these same people that they polled would be less likely to attend a church that didn’t allow women pastors, or that were against homosexuality. These are teachings of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is God, the author of Scripture. One cannot separate Jesus from the teachings of Scripture.

    I think that it’s far too easy for us to sometimes sit back, put together some statistics, and come out and say “the unsaved just don’t like Christians.” Do we as Christians have some problems in that area? Sure do. Christians can be every bit as mean and ugly as everybody else at times. But do we need to simply try and be as nice as possible to make Christianity more palatable to the unsaved? Is that all there is to it? Nope. Not even close. The unsaved are hostile to the message of Christ. It is a message that they are sinners, that they can only be saved through faith in Jesus Christ. Nothing they do is good enough, and people don’t like that. Jesus Christ, presented undiluted to the unsaved, is offensive. His message, is offensive. They hate Christ because of His message, blaming Christians is simply an easy dodge at best, and ignorance of what Christ taught. The unsaved don’t love Christians, and they don’t love Christ.

    Tags: , ,
    1 Comment »

    What Is Reformed Theology?

    Calvinism, Christianity, False Religions, Fundamentalism, Pastors, Politics, Religion, Singleness, Theology | Posted by Will
    Mar 01 2009

    Tags: , ,
    No Comments »

    But For The Grace of God go I…

    Christianity, Fundamentalism | Posted by Will
    Feb 14 2009

    I was thinking the other day, about my post on Singleness and Sexual Integrity. In the first IFB College that I went to, the issue of sex was one of the most preached about topics. It was right up there with how women should dress, how women should act, the King James Bible, and “doing things for Jesus”. As I mentioned in my previous post, one of the things that was stressed was that young people should remain virgins to their wedding day. Now if they had stopped there, that would have been okay. Because really, we as Christians should be promoting abstinence. Makes sense, no? But they didn’t stop there, they went on to say that if w young lady had sex before marriage, she shouldn’t be permitted to wear white on her wedding day, or that when she did get married, it should be to the guy she had sex with, in the pastor’s office. Or, that virgins should only marry virgins, leaving the non-virgins to the scraps that the proper authority figures determine they are worthy of receiving. The concepts of forgiveness and grace were severely lacking here, particularly in regards to ladies who had sex outside of marriage.

    I don’t remember exactly when it happened, but at some point well after leaving that college, I came to the conclusion that their ideas about sex and marriage could be summed up in the word “stupidity”. But then there is also the word “hypocritical”, because their stringent standards in this area tended to be applied primarily to the women-folk.

    But the fact is, we all do things in our lives that we aren’t proud of at all. We are all(if we are believers) saved by God’s grace, and through none of our own merit. But for the grace of God, we would all be wallowing in our sin. God has forgiven us of our sin, how can we hold something against someone else who has been forgiven their sin by God? And that is where the light had clicked on for me. If God has declared them righteous, if God has called them his own, then where do I or anyone else get off holding their prior sin against them? If God has forgiven both them and me of sin, then how dare I hold their sin against them? Anyone of us is capable of falling into sin, and to work so hard to make someone “pay extra” for their sin is not simply foolish, but wholly against Scripture.

    And I say all this because I was talking to an acquaintance just the other day who is still at that college. We got to talking about marriage and such, and as I am not married, he inquired as to whether or not I was discouraged at all “because of the lack of good marriage material” at my age. Because, “most single, Christian women at our age are divorced, or single mothers, or are otherwise damaged.” But that’s not the way to look at the children of God. Unfortunately, this mentality is bred in those Christian circles. God is gracious to forgive all of us of our sins. As sinful men, we look at the sins that others commit, and think that “our sins aren’t so bad are they?” But how can we stand before God and give an account for our judgmental attitudes towards other believers who had screwed up at some point in their past, and expect God to simply accept that our attitude was the right one to have? What this is, is an attitude of self-righteousness and unforgiveness to our brothers and sisters in Christ. Following is what God has said about those who fail to forgive their brothers and sisters in Christ.

    Mat 18:22-35  Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.  (23)  Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants.  (24)  And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents.  (25)  But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made.  (26)  The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’  (27)  Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt.  (28)  “But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’  (29)  So his fellow servant fell down at his feet and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’  (30)  And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt.  (31)  So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done.  (32)  Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me.  (33)  Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’  (34)  And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him.  (35)  “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”

    Tags: , ,
    1 Comment »