Because everyone else is posting about Strange Fire

You throw rocks at a hornets nest, and you get the hive stirred up. I was on the cripplegate website and found a man jumping in to defend Benny Hinn as serving Christ and being an example of true worship. How dare that John MacArthur.This got me to thinking (since I'm down sick and have the time) on why the two groups are not even hearing each other. And I think I have it, where the difference lies I mean.

The Charismatic group starts with the Spirit, and the, we'll call it, 'baptist' group, starts with the Scriptures. Just listen to how each frames the debate and you'll see it, because the winning and losing happens within the first three seconds.
The Charismatic calls out the Baptist for not believing in the power of God, in the working of His Spirit, and the functioning of the church. "You don't believe God can heal today?" is the first question right out of the gates, and most people actually mean that. In their mind they cannot conceive of anything else being said by the Baptist. It's a direct challenge to the sovereignty of God. That's terrible unfaithfulness to their ears, those people have no respect for God.
Now pay attention to how the baptist frames the debate, their equally unanswerable question out of the gates is something like "Are the Scriptures insufficient? Do we need Apostles today to write more? Are there two foundations for the church?" To their ears, the attack the Charismatic makes is against the sole rule and authority of the Scriptures. It's the same thing they fought Rome for all those years ago.

Having considered this, I think the Baptist way of setting this discussion is right, and here's why. The Charismatic believes that all the gifts are for today, including the prophetic utterances. This necessarily means that God Himself is speaking. Therefore that same infallible, perfect, life yielding voice that spoke the Scriptures is speaking in the same clear, perfect, undeniable way. In other words, every attributes the Scriptures have must necessarily be present in the vision or prophetic movement.

But it's not, so what that is is an addition to the authority of the Scriptures. The Catholics believe their magisterium is equivalent to Scriptures, the Charismatics believe their feelings and visions are.
The 'fringe' TBN Charismatics understand this, their problem is that they accept it and have no regard for Scripture, I suspect that's why you have such ghastly results globally.

Now, the principled Charistmatic, like say, Piper, understands the supremacy of Scripture, and subordinates himself to it. He believes that the ongoing charismatic gifts are the best explanation for what Scripture itself says. I can respect that. I'm a fallen man with fallen sensibilities too.
But that's not the Charismatic movement. JMac should have done a better job pointing out that those men are of the "baptist" persuasion, whether they realize it or not.

The land belongs to Christ

I have posted here before, and mentioned elsewhere, that I think the covenants are about Christ. Abraham was given a refresher in Genesis 15 which prominently featured the land. Genesis even promises it as a perpetual possession.
I have also said earlier that Christs presence is what causes Abraham to be blessed. He is blessed because Christ comes through his line. Judah is blessed because Christ descends from them. Likewise David. The Jews as a people are nothing special, there is nothing deserving about them, but they are uniquely blessed. Why? Because Christ came among them, and to them.
Now in the same way the covenant element of the land is held up.
Why Canaan? Because Christ lived there. Why Jerusalem? Because He died there. The land is the place He walked, taught, died, and ascended. In other words, it's special because He was there. For that reason and no other.

TREK GPS Lesson 1.1 - Why Study the Bible

Opening Activity – A Verbal Quiz

 

• Does the word Bible mean ‘library’ or ‘Book of books?’ Yes
• Does the Bible contain errors?  Yes. Didn’t expect that? You have to know the truth so when the atheists come along you are not caught off guard.
• Do we know exactly what they are and where the errors are? Yes.
•  Do errors in our Bible mean it’s not perfect or trustworthy? No, the Bible is literally breathed out by God. He authored perfect documents because He’s perfect. Copiers may have made mistakes, but no two made the same one, and this has allowed us to almost perfectly reconstruct all the text. This is an ongoing process but the discovery of the dead sea scrolls showed us we have a really solid manuscript before us.
• Is the Bible written by men? Yes.
•  Is the Bible only a work of men? No! God wrote the Bible using human instruments.
•  Is the Bible trustworthy? Yes. God cannot lie.
• If the OT was originally written in Hebrew, because God wanted it in Hebrew, then is it okay to make a translation into another language? Yes, Jesus used the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament.
• What is the Bible about? Jesus Christ.

 

The Bible is about Jesus Christ

 

• All our selfish statements can immediately be resolved by remembering this. Can we trust the Bible becomes can we trust Christ? Do we need the Bible, do we need Christ? Why do we evangelize with the Bible when they don’t believe it? They need Christ. Does the Bible give us everything we need to be saved? Doesn’t Christ?
• He’s a God unlike other Gods, so His book is unlike other books. It demands answers out of you. It knows you better than you know yourself. It’s wholly unique.
• In Jerusalem, John 5:39 - “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me”
• On the Road to Emmaus, Luke 24:27 - “And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.”

 

Who is Christ?

 

• Christ means anointed one. In Greek that’s the word Christ. The Jews would use the word Messiah. It speaks of being set aside for God’s purposes.
• There were three offices you would pour oil to anoint the man to:
  o   priest (Exodus 29:7, Lev 21:10)
  o   king (1 Sam 16:13, 2 Kings 9:3)
  o   prophet (1 Kings 19:16, Is 61:1)
• Jesus is therefore a prophet, a priest, and a king.
  o   He brings the very words and truths of God to us
  o   He intercedes to God on our behalf
  o   He rules over us
•   Christians are anointed, because we are in Christ, and share in His body 1 John 2:20

 

How is the Bible arranged?

 

• The Bible is unfolding revelation regarding Jesus
  o   Old Testament: Christ predicted
  o   Gospels: Christ revealed
  o   Epistles: Christ explained
  o   Revelation: Christ expected
•  In this same way that Jesus is prophet, priest, king, the Old Testament is broken up into the stories of the prophets (predominately the books of prophecy), the priests (the Books of Moses), and the Kings (the histories).
• The New Testament picks this idea up too. For example, Matthew is the gospel very concerned with Jesus Kingship. All of its parables start “the kingdom of heaven is like…” while the book of Hebrews goes on at great lengths about Jesus priesthood.

 

How to read the Bible

 

• The New Testament explains the Old. The Epistles expand and explain the narrative of the Gospels. You have to work backwards as you read forwards.
• Read both halves, new and old testament. It’s a two act play, and just like you can’t really start a murder mystery movie half way through, you can’t really just jump into the middle of the Scriptures.
• Pray before you read, and the Holy Spirit, as promised will give you understanding (2 Tim 2:7).
• More important than everything else however, the key to unlock all doors: Christ is in the Bible. It’s about Him. 

 

Christ in the Bible

 

• Genesis 3:15 – “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”
  Jesus would be born of a woman, not a man (the virgin birth), He would destroy Satan. (See Luke 1:27-34) He's the very first promise.
•  Genesis 17:6-8 - “And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God."
  Jesus would be the reason all the nations will be blessed. He is the source of the covenant. See Galatians 3:16
• That’s pretty big, He’s obviously the center of God’s redemptive work. But He’s at the smallest level. When Abraham went to kill Isaac what happened? Genesis 22:13. Instead of dying, a sheep was killed for Isaac instead. A sheep that was caught in thorns. This is Christ, the lamb of God whom they put a crown of thorns on, who died in our place.
• He’s the real Passover lamb – Exodus
• He’s the true sacrificial offering to God to turn away wrath. He’s also the grounds for our salvation, because He is the one who kept the law perfectly. -Leviticus
• He’s the son of David, the promised King, 2 Samuel 7:12
•  He’s the kinsmen redeemer who saves us from ruin by wooing us. He took on our real flesh and made us His treasured possession. - Ruth
•  Sometimes it’s very, very obvious where He is in the Scriptures. Take for example Psalm 2:7 “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” Or Psalm 22, which was about Him on the cross.
•  But He is also in the little passages. He’s the one who ascends the Holy Hill, who may stand in the Holy place, - Ps 24:3.
• He’s the anointed one whom the Lord hears, - Psalm 20:6
• He is the friend who sticks closer than a brother, - Proverbs 18:24b
• He will save us through suffering - Job
• He’s the new and better Job, who intercedes for his friends
• He’s the savor from a far off country who gives up everything to come and restore truth in us –Ezra
• He’s the one who intercedes for us to give us a place, then builds us up – Nehemiah
• The prophets not only predict Him, but demonstrate Him. Jonah for example, lies in a fish for three days to show that Christ in a similar fashion would rise after three days.
• Yet He’s the new and better Jonah who was cast out into the deep, that the rest of his companions may be saved.
• His death is shown in the gospels.
• And what did His death mean? He became sin who knew no sin, that we might become His righteousness. He died for you. The epistles explain it. They explain all the Old Testament too.

 

Summarize

·        

•  Next week we will get into deeper waters and we’ll do a more scholarly, or in-depth treatment of why the books are where they are and what it means.
•   For this week I want you to remember that the Bible is about Jesus Christ. His Kingship, His priesthood, His prophetic work. Prophet, priest, king.

 

Conclude

 

• Does anyone have any question about anything theological? It’s time for payer and small group.

The book is done!

It's uploaded at Amazon. I have low expectations and high hopes. It took me a very long time to get the whole thing in order and being that I'm a nobody, I just can't picture it selling well.
However, it's a source of pride. I poured everything I knew into it, and if I do say so myself, it's amazing.
It's everything I think a good commentary should be- it's engaging, easy to read, has some depth and heft to it, and has a great deal of cross references. So whether it sells well or not, I'm happy about having reached the end of the journey with such a polished result. I suppose the thing to do is get back to work on the next one.

Hagar the Egyptian

It's pretty well understood that Abram leaving for Egypt because of the famine was the first act of disobedience. It was wrong. God said to go to Canaan, He didn't say anything about leaving it. Therefore Egypt was a point of failure.

Gen 12:10 "And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land."

But then, while in Egypt Pharaoh began blessing Abram, giving him all sorts of stuff because he loved Sarai "And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels."

Abram then leaves, but it seems, has now acquired a new servant: Hagar.

Genesis 16:1 "Now Sarai Abram's wife bare him no children: and she had an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar." v3 "So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife."

Twice, Twice, the Scriptures call Hagar the Egyptian. I can't help but think this is Abram revisiting his failure in Egypt, compounding his error.

The tribalism of Calvinism

The internet is inherently tribalistic. Let's face it. There's so much out there, it's so big, that you have to know what you want to see or you will not get anything out of it.
Calvinists know there are groups out there for them, and they go and seek them out, particularly because in the church they are so very rare. It's a very human thing to do.

Here's another one: it's very human to sense the true state of things, even if you don't acknowledge it. Atheists are so belligerent because they know in their heart that the Christians are right. They hope that by attacking and going on the offensive it will hide their insecurity and buttress their position. High Calvinists know that their views are unstable, and threaten to give way at any moment into hyper-Calvinism. Hyper-Calvinists sense the instability as well- if God does not desire to save men, why would He save you? And once you begin tossing out Scripture you don't like, you've sort of abandoned the principle of submission to Christ.

Here's the last very human thing to do: not think clearly. TULIP has been able to so completely dominate because it's easy to remember. It perfect for forming a tribe around because the markers are easily defined. But if you actually think about dividing the whole Bible, or even salvation, up in that way for more than a few minutes you will be taken aback. It's blankets all ability to think independently. It's really bad for making a man into a theologian, but it's a great little device to get people to remember. It's handy for the administrators too, because that's a useful tool for them to measure everyone by.

It's for this reason I got booted from the Reformed Baptist group. You are not a part of the tribe, you must go. You challenge our TULIP, by definition you seek our destruction both as a community, and as a believer. If we were to accept your position the boundaries between heterodox and orthodox would be erased.Only the thing is, our modern brand of tribalistic TULIP internet Calvinism can rise no higher than a simplified, over-reduced battle cry.

But you know what? The church isn't that way. Oh sure a local body of believers might nose dive into it, or a man who is a complete jerk might be appointed elder, but the bride of Christ isn't that way. She is warm and inviting, smart or stupid, articulate or inept, it makes no difference. She calls all to come. And for me, that's enough.

Arguing for the sincere offer of salvation

My favorite argument against the Sincere moral offer goes like this:

Unbeliever: "How can I be saved if Christ died only for some, and not all? Doesn't that mean that I'm in the same position as the demons? Doesn't it mean that even if I believe I won't be saved? I mean if I'm not elect then no provision for salvation was even made for me, right?"
Hyper Calvinist: "If you believe, you will find sufficient provision."
Moderate Calvinist: "If you believe you will find salvation" is only valid for the case where you are elect. Therefore you've told him a false statement. The actual conditional is: "If you are elect and you believe, you will find salvation."
Unbeliever: "Well then... how do I know I'm elect?"
Hyper Calvinist: "I told you, If you believe, you will find salvation."
Moderate Calvinist: "You have just equated election with belief. You just told him if he believes it will turn out he was elect."
Hyper Calvinist - "YES IF YOU BELIEVE YOU WILL BECOME ELECT!!1!!111!"

And that's it. Under Owenistic Limited Atonement the only way the non-elect can be saved is if they are elect, belief is irrelevant. But the hyper insists that it's possible in theory for them to be saved, which means it's possible for them to become elect. Which is both amusing and absurd.

The plague of Pentecostalism

I was thinking about this interesting thing that's sweeping not only the New World, but has overtaken Africa with full force - Pentecostalism.
Forty years ago something like 3% of Christians in Brazil were Pentecostals, now it's up to something like 30%.
But is this really a wave of true Christianity sweeping over them, or is it merely a reaction against a Catholicism culture? I wonder.

It used to be that you paid monies to the Church in the form of tithes, indulgences, etc.
Now make God pay you! He's concerned about not just the eternal, but the here and now right? He wants us to be happy and have stuff.

It used to be that you looked forward to heaven, and regarded the eye blink of life with suspicion and patience.
Now that's all well and good, but shouldn't we also let the good times roll?!

It used to be that you had to empty yourself of your own evil passions and sinful desires, and press toward the goal.
Now forget that empty business, just pour in the good stuff and don't worry about all that stuffy repentance business.

It used to be that you said quiet, and overly still, and had to exercise tremendous self control.
Now you don't have to do any of that, if you want to bark like a dog, go ahead. If you want to roll around on the floor, go ahead. Let it out.

So I'm not a Catholic, and I'm not an Charismatic either. While I'm at it, I'll just go ahead and admit I don't fully understand either from the inside. But I do wonder if this surge of popularity is one part a cultural change like a pendulum swinging, and one part a result of making the gospel more attractive in all the wrong ways.
Now it might be that the Spirit of the Lord is moving powerfully among them, in which case they will begin to export excellent theology, deep sermons, and tremendously Godly pastors to minister to the world. But I have my money on it being a culture change that's tantamount to running in place.

Do it, if you can Abraham

Genesis 15:5 - And He brought him forth abroad, and said, "Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them."
And He said unto him, "So shall thy seed be."

There is an important pause here that merely looks like bad story telling when you read quickly.
I've inserted a line break to show the pause that indicates Abrahams obedience and reflection. He was given a command by God: consider, count, try.
And Abraham is completely unable to do it.

Now I think that the point of this passage is not on the number of offspring, but on his total inability to do the task. He flatly can't count that high and obey God. It's beyond him, above him, and God knows that. And in that way, that humble, hopeless way, his offspring shall come. Not by human ability, nor scheming, but by God's power. Abraham is being told of what is to come, not so much of how numerous his offspring would be, but of how the Messiah would come into the world, and into hearts. And once Abraham got that, once he pondered it and understood his helplessness, God told him the rest, "so shall thy Seed be."
 We are like Abraham in the same way that we can't do it. Justification is not by might nor by power, but by His Spirit. And once we understand that, we have Jesus right there to save us.

Man by nature

Men are born with two arms, two legs, two eyes, a mouth.
We have a propensity to wiggle, to look, to yell, right from the womb, putting these things to use instinctively as soon as we are able.

And just as surely as there are physical characteristics that make up a man there are invisible ones. By nature we all have a conscious to tell us right from wrong. We have natural language skills, able to grasp symbolic concepts by the combination of sounds. We are free moral agents, we cannot be coerced by others, our will is our very own. We have eternity put in our hearts by God, it causes us to see Him and known that at our deaths we will see Him for good or ill. We resent and despise authority, we go wayward speaking lies. We have lusts for sin. We are by nature little rational beings who over time come into full use of our faculties.

And this must be understood to rightly raise children. The crooked things must be straightened, the natural blessings must be fanned into true gifts. It is dependent on us as parents to treat them as the adults they will one day become, and give grace until they do. This is our calling.

Getting off my duff

The new house has been a mess. We (by this I mean I) laid laminate floors, panting, fixing broken water pipes in our house, fixing the electrical problems, the window problems, the mechanical problems, moving the stuff from a pile in the garage. Stringing wires for the internet, among other things, and though I have things to blog about, only one thing could get me off my duff: Matt Rose's blog.

(Gotta step in and discipline a trantruming infant, hang on)

Matt is my emergent friend (of a friend) who is helping edit my Romans book. Why not go for an outside perspective I thought, let the man have a chance at it, see what it looks like to him. Can't hurt, and I always appreciate the help.
Well, my guess is that while reading my treatment of Romans 9 it looks like my brand of Calvinism is unhideable, and he has posted his thoughts on it.

(Gotta bring the mower, and hang these pictures.)

I just realized he's a former Calvinist turned partial universalist. Well whattya know.

(Gotta put this kid to a nap so he stops screaming)

He raises a couple of good points. I particularly liked the bit about the use of 'everyone' to open a meeting. We might say 'is everyone here' and we don't mean 'everyone in the whole world without exception.' That particular arrow hit home against the junk Calvinists.

But I think his premise, that God can't be love if some perish, is flawed, and universalism is a large sign post on the way to total disbelief.

(Okay, it's been four hours later and after numerous interruptions, I think I have a chance to finish this thing)

Now this isn't against Matt, because he doesn't hold to full universalism (I asked), but I it got me thinking anyway. The first problem with universalism is that it denies the Scriptures. Jesus speaks of hell in a number of places, Mark 9:46, Matt 13:41-43, 25:41. John speaks of hell in Revelation 20:15. For example. Additionally God is spoken of as not only love, but as 'a consuming fire.' Not someone who messes around with sin. If God lets any old sinner into heaven He's no longer just, and the justifier of the one who believes in Him.
The second problem of universalism is that it corrodes and undoes absolutely everything. It must result in a faithless liberalism as sure as day follows night. The doctrine of hell itself is of course, unpleasant. It's a string that looks like it should be pulled out, because it's out of place, and hard to accept. It's the wrong color. It doesn't jive with a God of love.
But if you take it into your own hands to correct this, you have to pull out some other doctrines too. First is the substutionary atonement of Christ. Without hell there really is no sense in the cross, because everyone is going to make it anyway. The cross then becomes at best God's highest expression of love. That is a kind of sentimentalism- looks how God loves us, we should love like that too.
And once you have given up that doctrine (because it's now cosmic child abuse) you have to give up the person of Christ. Because if He was God then why did He so needlessly die? A real God wouldn't have done that. If He's God then His love is not accessible, but if He's a man, then we could be like that too. So He's not really God. He's a man. A man who loves everyone equally, Hitler, Stalin, the Pope, the Apostles, anyone.
You might be saying 'bah, look at that jump in logic!' But consider it for a moment - if Christ is not necessary to get to heaven, then why is Christ necessary? He's not, He's a vestigial organ that is better removed.

Universalism may be a small heresy, a little seed of disbelief founded on the idea of making much of God's love. But in the end it matures into a mighty oak of obstinance and faithlessness. It must be dug up and poisoned with round up if the Christian is to survive.
After all, if sin (including sins of the mind and belief) wasn't lucrative, nobody would believe it.