25.3.09

"If the Lord wills..."

Last Saturday afternoon, I booked my flight for Pittsburgh.

Ugh. Hardest decision to make! I don't think it's quite settled in, yet. It's like deciding to put to sleep your favourite pet that same day you were just taking it to the vet for a check up. You know you must, you know it will be hard, and yet the shock will hit you the hardest later, and you're not very eagerly awaiting that moment.

I'm flying out very early tomorrow morning. Still have most everything to pack (which isn't a lot.) Won't be able to bring most anything with me, but graciously there are some here who can for a little while store the things that I don't need to bring immediately. As a side-note for anyone flying, most airlines charge for even your first checked luggage, now. It's usually around $15 for a bag under 45 lbs.

The prayer and support of those around me is so appreciated and welcomed. While I do not see myself staying in Pittsburgh any later than say ... mid-July, it is still the most difficult thing to do for multiple reasons. First and foremost, I have mentioned that that my church is my life. When you live in a country which is the proverbial, theological desert -- dry of so much good doctrine -- it seems foolish to walk along anything but the river, because it is your only source of food and water. Yet what can you do when you suddenly come to the edge of a valley too high to climb, and you have to walk around it for awhile not knowing when it will carve into the river again? I can only trust God, Whom I know would have me fed on the preaching of His word.

I admit that it is not the only thing making this hard on me. The others are perhaps a bit too personal to mention, but it is just as difficult to leave behind Milwaukee as it is to enter back into Pittsburgh. In all of it, I know that I must keep my heart focused on God, my fellowship with His people, my mind on the sound doctrine of His word, and my desire with holy living, and I must compromise none of this for my own desires. I must also, according to scripture, be diligent in all that I do. After all, what is a Puritan without that esteemed "Puritan Work Ethic"? Be it not simply a denominational trait, but a biblical one. By God's direction, King Solomon and the apostle Paul alike esteemed us to never become lazy but to work hard for everything which we have. I ought to walk accordingly, then.

Relatively short flight. The entire thing shouldn't take more than four hours, three of them in the air (I get to connect in Philly instead of Atlanta, this time!) I arrive in Pittsburgh in the very early afternoon, which is nice. I suspect I'll be a bit dazed and depressed for awhile, and then I'll get over it and be able to look again to a bright hope of returning here. Consider it an extended vacation, of sorts? One with a full-time job, I hope. And as always, I say all of this God-willingly, for scripture is quite direct: "Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit' yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For(V) you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.'" ... In all of it, I am not boasting in arrogance, but hoping with humility. It is for God that I do it all, and so God will do with me as He desires.

Quick Update

I have a couple things on my mind lately that I am biding my time to put in a journal, but in the meantime just an update on the more personal things. Any prayer would be appreciated.

I've been in Menomonee Falls, WI for a couple of months now. The job search seems to fall flat on its face -- which is my own fault. I don't seem to know what I'm doing without a consistent way of getting around. I have my driver's permit now, but it will be a long time before I am comfortable enough to get my license. Further, I have the same dilemma of needing a car to get a job, and a job to get a car. Living in general is becoming very difficult.

It has been a last resort on my mind for awhile now, but I am beginning to wonder more and more whether I will need to go back to Pittsburgh for a season. Going to school drained my finances and gave me little time for a consistent job. Where I am now gives me time for a consistent job -- but puts me too far away from any jobs.

All in all, God is in control. I only hope for the discernment to know what I ought to do, soon.

Heather

10.3.09

...Examine Yourself?...

2Co 13:5 Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?--unless indeed you fail to meet the test!

There is a great matter of controversy surrounding this passage, particularily as it pertains to the evidence of salvation in a believer. It is often used in sermons to urge professing Christians to look at their life and see if they fit the biblical description of a Christian. If they do, it is evidence that they are saved; if not, if they "fail to meet the test," it is preached that they may in fact be a false convert. The title given to the teaching that a true Christian must produce a certain fruit as evidence that they are saved, is deemed "Lordship Salvation." I have also found it to be the biblical view.

Contrary to this is a theology is called "Free Grace," a teaching popular amidst classical dispensational theologians such as Charles Ryrie. "All you have to do is believe!" is the battlecry of many of this theological leaning. They argue that there could never be peace in a Christian who is constantly "questioning his salvation" via such self-examination, and that they must be content to recall that time in their life when they believed in Christ.

Pertaining to the admonition in 2 Corinthians 13:5, they will often proceed to point out the context of the passage:

2 Corinthians 13:5 - Paul notes in 13:3 that the Corinthians are seeking proof that Christ speaks through him. In response, he tells them to "examine themselves" for the evidence in this passage. The the evidence that Paul is speaking from Christ is found in the evidence that they are true Christians, since it was Paul who brought them the gospel of Christ. Thus, if Paul is not truly speaking for Christ, then they themselves cannot truly be Christians. (Citation taken from personal commentary.)

It is clear that this particular exegete is correct, and it doesn't take much examination of the passage to see it. But does that invalidate the interpretation made by those preachers who then urge their congregation to examine themselves?

In fact, if these preachers are studied enough and know their commentaries -- John Gill, Matthew Henry or the Geneva commentary, for instance -- they are well aware of this understanding, because all three commentaries mention it. Most remarkably, all three were made from men who would also be classified by a belief in "Lordship Salvation" today, and would agree that it is the responsibility of the believer to examine himself and test himself.

Furthermore, after detailing the very context of the passage as summarised above, Henry even mentions and encourages the application that has come into dispute:

"If therefore they could prove themselves not to be reprobates, not to be rejected of Christ, he trusted they would know that he was not a reprobate (2Co_13:6), not disowned by Christ. What the apostle here says of the duty of the Corinthians to examine themselves, etc., with the particular view already mentioned, is applicable to the great duty of all who call themselves Christians, to examine themselves concerning their spiritual state. We should examine whether we be in the faith, because it is a matter in which we may be easily deceived, and wherein a deceit is highly dangerous: we are therefore concerned to prove our own selves, to put the question to our own souls, whether Christ be in us, or not; and Christ is in us, except we be reprobates: so that either we are true Christians or we are great cheats; and what a reproachful thing is it for a man not to know himself, not to know his own mind!" - Matthew Henry commentary on 2 Corinthians 13:5-6

So then, are preachers wrong to use 2 Corinthians 13:5 to urge professing Christians to test themselves to see whether they are in the faith? Absolutely not! It is clear that Paul could have simply said, "You believed the gospel when you heard it from me, so that is evidence that I am speaking from Christ." Yet he did not; instead, he took an extra step and urged the Corinthians to test themselves. Is there not a principle to be applied from this? Would Paul even ask them to question it if it were not a matter that could be questioned?

Continuing into verses 6 and 7, he goes on to explain that regardless of whether they believe Paul, he hopes that they themselves will be found to have passed the test. How? By doing what is right, and not wrong (verse 7.)

Plainly and simply, the need to examine yourself is not a concept foreign to the rest of scripture, nor is the existence of a people who think themselves saved and are not. We are reminded of the oft-quoted scripture in Matthew 7:20-22, where "on that day, many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord' ... And I will say, depart from me, you workers of iniquity! I never knew you." (This is right after He concludes a parable, "you will know them by their fruits!") We also remember that Peter said "Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities, you will never fall." (2 Peter 1:10) And of false converts, John says this: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us." (1 John 2:19)

This should settle the issue. Scripture is abundantly clear, especially throughout the gospels and epistles, that there will be a fruit in the believer's life: that as a result of the work of Christ, there will be a changed life, a brokenness over sin and a striving for righteousness. These are the qualities of a blood-bought believer! With confidence, we should take the admonishment in 2 Corinthians 13:5 to apply to us. We know that Paul speaks from God and that his epistles are God's inspired word, so we not have cause to question that. What is left, then, but that we might see whether Christ is truly in us? Let us never cease to test even ourselves. Do we pass the test, doing what is right and hating what is wrong? Or do we prove to have never been made new creations in Christ?

7.3.09

Does Doctrine "Divide"?

I think well-meaning Christians imply that "we shouldn't overemphasizes doctrine" because "it causes division" and "that's wrong" -- and in the back of their minds they are mistakenly thinking of the following passage:

"I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. For your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, but I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil. The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." (Romans 16:17-20)

It is not sinful nor divisive to promote good doctrine, else Paul would have been scripture's biggest hypocrite: Romans is just that, a booklet of systematic theology! Read carefully -- "those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught." Paul isn't saying that we should "avoid doctrinal disputes" -- he is saying we should avoid those who dispute good doctrine! Logically, then, should we "not care much about doctrine," or rather, does this mean we should care even more about understanding everything the Bible teaches? In light of Romans 16:17, I would strongly suggest the latter; how can you avoid bad doctrine if you don't know what good doctrine is?

In context, the Romans had already been taught good doctrine -- "how much" wasn't even the issue! Yet in this age, many professing to be Christians care more about "unity" and "not offending" and "not judging" and it is considered being too "legalistic" or "pharisaic" for anyone to suggest that we ought to know -- and promote -- the finer points of scripture. It is now disregarded that despite the fact God Himself found it neccessary to inspire 66 books worth of history, instruction and doctrine, people are saying much of it isn't "important" because it doesn't pertain to salvation. (I would also disagree with that.)

It becomes an incredibly foolish kind of thinking ...

Yes, too much attention to doctrine causes division -- but it is not a "wrong" division. Those who promote bad doctrine also divide, for they confuse and lure true believers away from others for a time. This is why the Romans (and we) are told to avoid them that are "contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught." Consider this: how can truth divide except what is true from what is false? Did Christ Himself not say He came not to bring "peace, but a sword"?

It is my powerful advice to many of you, before you say to any particularily theologically minded person, "that's nice but it's not important" or "it's not worth being divided over" to consider what the Bible has to say about the matter, first.

Historical tidbit: It wasn't actually John Calvin who burned Servetus for denouncing the Trinity, as many like to say ... But I suggest that if he had in fact done so, he wouldn't have been incredibly unjustified ...

I fear we've lowered our standards greatly these days, as to what a "Christian" actually is.



2.3.09

Why I am not "tolerant"

... Because a low view of sin is the result of a low view of God.

And I am so absolutely tired of the low view of sin that is so prevalent in the modern following that so many people call "Christianity"! Look! The true Christians are far and few between, seldom if at all found amidst most seats in your watered-down mega churches and worship concerts and youth groups and retreats that have been falsely assumed with Christ ....

Know this: I have not once claimed perfection except that which is Christ's. I am saved only by the grace of God. The inclination of my flesh is toward sin, but I have a desire for God to overcome that because the desire is from God and God will finish what He has started.

... But I am so SICK of what we now call "Christianity"! I am so sick of the "Jesus" that "only loves and never judges" and the "Jesus" who wants everyone to be "just the way they are." This is not Christianity -- you have taken Christ's name in vain and attached it to secular humanism!

"But that's your view of Christianity and this is mine; don't judge me." (Or some variant of this is said to me.)

I have watched friends, good friends, people extremely close to me be shown false in their faith. Did they defect -- lose their salvation? Hardly. They never had it. The fruit was rotten from the beginning, and let me tell you why:

Because even though they "knew" the songs, went to church, could talk about the Bible, about youth group, about all of this junk, their heart was never taken by God.

It was never taken because even in those early days, they had sinful sympathies. Excuses.

If I say, "but isn't that a bit low cut on you?" -- Right response? - "You're right," and put a jacket on. And yet I hear ... "If you got it, flaunt it!" Well, such is flaunted more and more, and suddenly it becomes perfectly moral to post nude pictures online. Because after all, "That's how God made us." Should I be surprised when such a person denounces Christ?

When "I don't judge or 'discern' or whatever you call it, against homosexuals" turns into a sort of empathetic view of the sin, into the "Love is love" battle cry, a watered down faith, a "coming out" of the closet as they say, a greater focus than sexuality than God, and finally a denouncing of Christ ...

When a person "oks" passionate kissing in their relationship, and suddenly "it's ok to snuggle," turns to "anything's ok as long as it's not actual sex," and soon they are living together and giving the appearance of evil, and when the truth is out, "we're getting married anyway." (But it never happens, and Christ is denounced.)

These are just a few examples. Truly I have been privy to some things lately which I cannot even write about, because they are too terrible.

Do think it is a mistake? ... Don't you see that these little things, these little scrutinies which folks continue to justify are what cracks them and gives contemporary application of the very verse, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us." (1 John 2:19 ESV)

I am not a legalist. Drink, but don't get drunk. Play, but don't be given to play. Work, but don't be given to work. Rest, but don't be lazy. Love and do not awaken lust before its time. These things aren't sin, and are good in proper context! But all of this love of darkness, this empathy and defense of sinful lifestyles, this casting off of the gospel for a "seeker sensitive" church, this extremely low view of sin -- when did this become living like Christ?

Do you think that just because Christ did things which contradicted the religious leaders, "all" which seems a contradiction to holiness is Christ-like? If you've percieved that then you have dearly misunderstood the gospels, which are perfectly unified under a solid message if indeed you have the Holy Spirit to discern and study these scriptures well.

Who among you are true to Christ!

Who isn't just in this because it's what you grew up with and are comfortable with? Who isn't in this just because you enjoy the emotional "experience" that some seeker-sensitive megachurch instills sunday morning? ... Who's after more than hanging out with friends in your youth group? More than all of the selfish things that people falsely turn to Christianity for, and are sent away because they were never actually bought by the blood of CHRIST?

Tolerance of what scripture calls sin, has always led to one of two things: absolute repentance or eventual apostasy. Which are you?

I tire so much of seeing those whom I knew and loved as a new convert, one by one be shown false in their belief. How they made excuses and brushed them off years ago and outright spit in the face of Christ today. I hate it!

... And yet I know that as with the days of Elijah, God has kept for himself a people today. Oh, How I pray for you, who are truly His. That you would be encouraged, not to follow in the footsteps of the false converts around you, not to take sin lightly, but to take the scriptures seriously, and to follow the one and only, true and holy God who is King today and forever and ever, Amen.