Powered By Blogger

Sunday, August 10, 2014

Is America Post-Christian?


Is America Post-Christian?

At a recent SC meeting the question was raised, "Are we engaged in the Christian reconstruction of American society and culture, or does the Lord have other intentions for the Church in our country?" We observe much feverish activity among Christians on television and in popular Christian magazines. Charismatic mega-churches are bombarding heaven with demonstrative displays of "spiritual warfare," while in the dusty trenches, zealous saints lay their bodies on the line for social causes. Reconstruction Theology has legitimized the role of political activity for the sleeping church of this century and the so-called "Religious Right" has claimed a certain clout in today's political arena. But for all this frenzied activity, what change has the Church produced in the culture? We still see a rising crime rate, a plague of drug abuse, an abortions industry, unrepentant adulterers and sodomites in high political offices, and an impending quasi-totalitarian government. So, these crucial questions remain, "Are we fostering a naive hope of reestablishing a Christian culture in America when the opportunity for such a restoration has passed?" and "Is America a post-Christian nation?"

The plain fact of the Scriptures is that God deals not only with individuals, but also with families, ethnic groups, communities, and nations. Psalm 33 pronounces blessings upon "the nation whose God is the Lord." And Proverbs 14:34 says, righteousness "exalts a nation" but "sin is a reproach to any people," not just to individuals. Biblical history is replete with God"s many judgments upon whole cities and nations (Sodom, Nineveh, Babylon, Jerusalem, Egypt, Rome, et al.), and the blessings of Abraham were promised long ago to "all the nations of the earth."1 In Matthew 25, the separation of sheep from goats concerns "all nations," not just individuals, and the book of Revelation foretells of "nations" walking in the light of the New Jerusalem as the "kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ" (21:24; 11:15). Indeed, "All nations shall serve Him!" (Psalm 72:11).

This small sampling of scripture attests to the reality of nations being identified as either "Christian" or "non-Christian." So what defines, what distinguishes, a nation as being "Christian?" Must every citizen profess Christ as Savior, Lord and King? Should every person be forced to attend church on Sunday? Can other religions be tolerated, numerous denominations co-exist, and conflicting statements of faith be believed? Can Darwin be taught? Can I read Catcher in the Rye? Will all the saloons, casinos and brothels be shut down? Will I have my MTV? Have I just opened up a Pandora"s Box to the non-thinking, Biblically illiterate Christian?

Historically, the concept of a unified Christian society was not an abhorrent notion, but an accepted norm. In three-hundred short years the "world was turned upside down" by a Gospel that claimed "another King, one Jesus" until even emperor Constantine bowed his knee under the banner of "Hoc Signo vinces" and the Empire christened itself a Holy Empire. The changing forms of civil governmentwhether Empire, Monarchy, Parliament, Constitutional, Dictatorship, or Socialistichave all been secondary, temporary, imperfect and corruptible. The triumph of the Gospel has superseded all human systems of government to advance a pervading Christian civilization in the western world. (This is not to deny the many shortcomings and un-Biblical actions done "in the name of Christ.")

A nation is a corporate body composed of various governmental units (states, counties, towns, cities) themselves comprised of individual people. The individuals are not exactly the same in kind, in thought, nor in belief, yet the corporate body acts as a whole, as "one man." In a human body there may coexist healthy cells, diseased cells, native cells, foreign cells, nourishing cells, and deadly cells, but the body is judged on the whole as being either sick or well, alive or dead. So also a nation can be identified as being Christian, or non-Christian, though its citizenry be varied.





We are commanded, "Go ye into all the world" (Matthew 28:18- 20), and this means we are to assert the Crown Rights of our King in all spheres. To coexist with an evil world is to acknowledge failure: we have a duty to convert it.

Rev. R.J. Rushdoony, "Our Acts," Chalcedon Report, August 1994: 2





The Christian life and faith of a nation is evidenced by the fruit it bears. Acknowledgement that Christ is King is first reflected in the laws a nation legislates and enforces. The worship of the Creator (not the creation) is expressed and appreciated in its arts, music and literature. The wisdom that "comes from above, not beneath" is welcomed and embraced in its educational institutions. Covenantal fidelity, the cohesive element of a society, is exemplified in heterosexual, monogamous, and permanent holy matrimony. Followers of Christ are esteemed as the "head and not the tail," and when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice (Proverbs 29:2). In a Christian nation, Christianity is not considered a subculture, but the culture. These and many other "fruit inspections" expose our naivete if we assume America has a wholesome Christian status.

Yet the desire to be a Christian Nation is not a whimsical wish of some "right wing religious fanatics." Until very recent years, the United States unashamedly considered itself a Christian nation, as John W. Whitehead documents in The Separation Illusion:

"In 1892 the United States Supreme Court made an exhaustive study of the supposed connection between Christianity and the government of the United States. After reviewing hundreds of volumes of historical documents, the Court asserted, "These references...add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a religious people...a Christian nation." Likewise, in 1931 Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland reviewed the 1892 decision in reference to another case and reiterated that Americans are a "Christian People." And in 1952 Justice William O. Douglas affirmed that we are a religious people and our institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" (emphasis mine)."2

As recently as 1982, the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives requested and authorized President Reagan in a joint resolution to designate 1983 a national "Year of the Bible." The resolution claimed that the Bible is the Word of God and "has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people." The Bible led to the early settlement of our Nation and "inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States." The resolution recognized "both the formative influence of the Bible...for our Nation, and our (present) national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy Scriptures."3

So what change in the last half century has allowed America to outlaw the Bible and ban prayer from our classrooms, denigrate the Christian family, promote promiscuity and perversion, and murder over 27 million innocent babies; and why, while all this is going on, does the Church draw a deep yawn? If this is a Christian nation, "Where"s the beef?" If it is not, what are we and what is coming next? We must now ask, "When does a post-Christian nation become Anti-Christian?"

Endnotes

1. Genesis 12:3; Galatians 3:8; Matthew 8:11

2. John W. Whitehead. The Separation Illusion. Michigan: Mott Media, 1977.

3. Verna M. Hall and Rosalie J. Slater. The Bible and The Constitution of the United States of America. San Francisco: The Foundation for American Christian Education, 1983.

Saturday, August 9, 2014

Mark Driscoll has removed the Seattle pastor and his Mars Hill megachurch from membership.


Hoping that "the name of Christ will not continue to be dishonored," the Acts 29 church planting network founded by Mark Driscoll has removed the Seattle pastor and his Mars Hill megachurch from membership.
“It is our conviction that the nature of the accusations against Mark, most of which have been confirmed by him, make it untenable and unhelpful to keep Mark and Mars Hill in our network,” said Acts 29 in an online statement signed by Matt Chandler and other board members of the network of 500 churches.
Acts 29 came to the drastic decision "with deep sorrow," according to the statement. "In taking this action, our prayer is that it will encourage the leadership of Mars Hill to respond in a distinctive and godly manner so that the name of Christ will not continue to be dishonored."
Mars Hill is no longer listed on the Acts 29 church directory page for Washington state. Acts 29 declined to comment further to CT.
No one from the Acts 29 Network contacted Mars Hill leadership before sending the notice, Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability (BoAA) members Michael Van Skaik and Larry Osborne said in a letter to church elders Friday afternoon.
"The Acts 29 decision caught us by surprise," said Justin Dean, communications manager for Mars Hill.
In the letter to elders, which was provided to CT, Van Skaik and Osborne, the board's two non-Mars Hill members, counsel elders to "not become bitter or angry," but "continue to pray for all involved."
"I told the lead pastors at the recent annual retreat that we are making real progress in addressing the serious reconciliation and unhealthy culture issues that have been a part of Mars Hill Church for way too long," says the letter, which was later made available to all Mars Hill members. "And we are. I also told them that more opposition would undoubtedly be coming, and it has. Friendly fire always hurts the most."
In an expanded letter reportedly sent to Driscoll and Acts 29 pastors and obtained by Driscoll critic Warren Throckmorton, Acts 29 board members explain that the church planting network has received "countless shots and dozens of fires" over the past three years for Driscoll's "ungodly and disqualifying behavior."
Thus, even though Acts 29 remains "eternally thankful for what [Driscoll] as a man and Mars Hill as a church have meant to our network," board members decided to remove Mars Hill churches from the network because the association "discredits the network and is a major distraction."
"Based on the totality of the circumstances, we are now asking you to please step down from ministry for an extended time and seek help," board members told Driscoll.
Driscoll, whose provocative preaching style has proved surprisingly successful in secular Seattle, has already apologized for the steady stream of controversies over the past few years. Most recently, he came under fire when crude, 14-year-old comments he made in a church forum resurfaced in the blogosphere. Driscoll apologized, as he had in a 2006 book, telling his congregation that the posts were a bad idea. “I was wrong to respond to people the way I did, using the language I used, and I am sorry for it and remain embarrassed by it,” Driscoll said.
Acts 29 has supported Driscoll during recent controversies while relying on Mars Hill's BoAA to address the problems, the letter states.
"We have both publicly and internally tried to support and give you the benefit of the doubt, even when multiple pastors in our network confirmed this behavior," the letter says. "But we no longer believe the BoAA is able to execute the plan of reconciliation originally laid out. Ample time has been given for repentance, change, and restitution, with none forthcoming. We now have to take another course of action."
Van Skaik and Osborne disagreed, saying Mars Hill's BoAA has actively investigated charges.
"Be assured of this, the formal charges that were filed were serious, were taken seriously and were not dismissed by the board lightly," the letter says. "There is clear evidence that the attitudes and behaviors attributed to Mark in the charges are not a part and have not been a part of Mark's life for some time now."
Pastor James Macdonald recently stepped down from the accountability board, but defended Driscoll's repentance, stating:
I have great love and affection for Mars Hill Church and I want to make clear this change is not because I am unhappy with Mark’s response to board accountability. On the contrary, I have found him to be exemplary in his current readiness to live under the BOAA oversight. I am not resigning because I doubt Mark’s sincerity in any way. I believe in Mark Driscoll and his heart to leverage difficult lessons in service to Christ and his church in the years ahead. I am excited to continue to support that trajectory as Mark’s friend, as I focus my efforts on Harvest Bible Fellowship.
Driscoll stepped down as president of Acts 29 in March 2012, appointing Texas pastor Matt Chandler as president and moving its headquarters from Mars Hill in Seattle to Village Church in the Dallas area. Driscoll remained on the network's board for a time before leaving its leadership completely.
At the time, Driscoll pointed to publishing success with his Real Marriage book (which also came under fire recently amid news that Driscoll paid a marketing company more than $200,000 to ensure its success) as well as a new Resurgence conference as reasons to step away from Acts 29 leadership. At the same time, he resigned from the council of The Gospel Coalition, stating, "The men remain friends who are welcome to speak into my life, and I’m transitioning for no other reason than I find myself at the end of my tether with time and energy."
Today, Driscoll's Twitter account stated, “Unforgiveness will poison everything you do.” The tweet is likely an ironic mistiming, given that Mars Hill staff have been running the account this summer after Driscoll declared he was taking a break from social media for the rest of the year. Recently, Jonathan Merritt made waves for writing how he has accepted Driscoll’s apology, and how Christians should be “as generous with the salve of forgiveness as we are with the acid of criticism.”
As the news spread through social media early Friday afternoon, evangelical leaders affected by Driscoll’s ministry reacted to the network's decision.
“Thankful to be a part of the ‪@Acts29 network. Join us in praying for ‪@PastorMark and ‪@MarsHill,” tweeted Juan MacLean, pastor of Redemption City Church, a church plant in Boston.
Another church planter, Aaron Loy, wrote, “I can't believe what I'm reading about Mark Driscoll & Mars Hill removed by Acts 29. My heart is really heavy today.”
A coalition of aggrieved former Mars Hill members announced that it will delay its plans to bring additional charges against Driscoll. Spokesperson Rob Smith stated:
It is with a mix of sadness and relief to see that Acts 29 has taken these actions. We hope and pray that the call for Mark Driscoll to step down from ministry is heeded. We would therefore rather wait and withdraw our plans to file new charges if he steps down, or file them in due course if he chooses to ignore the call of the Acts 29 board. We are in prayer for Mark and his family. We pray that he will find comfort, restoration, and hope in the Christ that he loves. We are committed to love him well and stand ready to support him and his family through these difficult days. We echo the call of the Acts 29 board.
CT has previously covered Acts 29 and its influence in the evangelical world, including the appointment of Matt Chandler as president and how Acts 29 requires church planters to meet leadership standards. CT also profiled Acts 29 leader Matt Chandler, addressing how he is relationally different than Driscoll, and how his churches operate in a more decentralized manner than Mars Hill churches.
CT will update this story as more information becomes available.
Below are both the Acts 29 letter obtained by Throckmorton, and the Mars Hill response sent to CT:
Mark,
As the Board of Acts 29, we are grateful to God for the leadership, courage, and generosity of both you and Mars Hill in not only founding the network but also sustaining it through the transition to this board three years ago. The very act of giving away your authority over the network was one of humility and grace, and for that we are grateful.
Over the past three years, our board and network have been the recipients of countless shots and dozens of fires directly linked to you and what we consider ungodly and disqualifying behavior. We have both publicly and internally tried to support and give you the benefit of the doubt, even when multiple pastors in our network confirmed this behavior.
In response, we leaned on the Mars Hill Board of Advisors & Accountability to take the lead in dealing with this matter. But we no longer believe the BoAA is able to execute the plan of reconciliation originally laid out. Ample time has been given for repentance, change, and restitution, with none forthcoming. We now have to take another course of action.
Based on the totality of the circumstances, we are now asking you to please step down from ministry for an extended time and seek help. Consequently, we also feel that we have no alternative but to remove you and Mars Hill from membership in Acts 29. Because you are the founder of Acts 29 and a member, we are naturally associated with you and feel that this association discredits the network and is a major distraction.
We tell you this out of love for you, Mars Hill, Acts 29, and most significantly, the cause of Christ, and we would be irresponsible and deeply unloving not to do so in a clear and unequivocal manner. Again, we want you to know that we are eternally thankful for what you as a man and Mars Hill as a church have meant to our network. However, that cannot dissuade us from action. Instead, it gives added significance and importance to our decision. We hope and pray that you see this decision as the action of men who love you deeply and want you to walk in the light—for your good, the good of your family, and the honor of your Savior.
Shortly after sending this, we will be informing the members of Acts 29, your Board of Advisors and Accountability, and your elders, as well as putting out a public statement on the Acts 29 website. It brings us no joy to move forward in this direction, and we trust that the Lord will be at work in all of this.
In sorrow and with hope,
The Board of the Acts 29 Church Planting Network
Matt Chandler
Darrin Patrick
Steve Timmis
Eric Mason
John Bryson
Bruce Wesley
Leonce Crump
Here is the full Mars Hill response:
Update from the Board of Advisors & Accountability
Earlier today our board chairman, as well as many of our other pastors, received a letter from Matt Chandler, the president of Acts 29. The letter notified us that the board of Acts 29 has removed Pastor Mark and Mars Hill from membership in the Acts 29 church planting network. Our board responded to the letter with the following update to our elders, and we wanted to share it with you as well.
Men, I told the lead pastors at the recent annual retreat that we are making real progress in addressing the serious reconciliation and unhealthy culture issues that have been a part of Mars Hill Church for way too long. And we are. I also told them that more opposition would undoubtedly be coming, and it has. Friendly fire always hurts the most.
I have never in my life spoken with Matt Chandler or any of the A29 board members for that matter (except Darrin Patrick, once about 4 years ago as part of Pastor Mark¹s employment review process which he used to be a part of). In addition, no one from Acts 29 contacted Larry Osborne of our board prior to this decision. And perhaps most significantly, Pastor Mark was not personally contacted by the A29 board prior to receiving this announcement.
So I am not quite sure what Matt means by "leaning on the board to take the lead in dealing with this matter."
Be assured of this, the formal charges that were filed were serious, were taken seriously and were not dismissed by the board lightly. There is clear evidence that the attitudes and behaviors attributed to Mark in the charges are not a part and have not been a part of Mark¹s life for some time now.
Our board’s decision is final regarding these charges, although will no doubt continue to be played out in the courts of public opinion. Again, I am deeply saddened that the A29 board would make such a decisive and divisive conclusion without speaking directly to the board or Mark prior to their public announcement.
My counsel to you is to not become bitter or angry. Continue to pray for all involved. Continue to love and lead the people God has brought to your churches. They need a pastor right now and God has given them you!
Michael Van Skaik Chairman, Board of Advisors and Accountability
Larry Osborne Board Member

Friday, August 8, 2014

Two Errors Regarding Repentance


Two Errors Regarding Repentance

There are two common errors regarding repentance, both of which I believe are quite dangerous.
That is is a purely intellectual activity. Sometimes people with a little knowledge of Greek misunderstand how language works and pull apart the Greek word for repentance: metanoia and claim it means a change of mind. Well of course that is part of it, but only part. The danger of this teaching is that it puts a lot of emphasis on the feelings

The second error is to make repentance a work that has to be done before coming to Christ.
I believe that a combination of these two ideas delayed my own salvation for years since I found myself unable to work up a strong feeling of guilt for sin, and thought that I could not come to Christ until I had these feelings of repentance.
In order to understand what metanoia means, we should first examine the use of the equivalent Hebrew word in the Old Testament.

A. Repentance in the Old Testament
The Hebrew word shûb (pronounced shoove) occurs 1058 times in the Old Testament. It simply means to turn, either literally changing direction (returning) or as a metaphor for a radical change in lifestyle and behaviour. It is not used of a mere change of intention, unconnected with behaviour.
Another point to note is that whenever you turn, you turn from one thing and turn to another.
The constant refrain of the prophets is calling Israel to repent from their idolatry and return to their God. Here is an example from Jeremiah 4:
“If you return, O Israel, declares the LORD, to me you should return. If you remove your detestable things from my presence, and do not waver,
and if you swear, ‘As the LORD lives,’ in truth, in justice, and in righteousness, then nations shall bless themselves in him, and in him shall they glory.”
In Jeremiah 35, repenting is equated to amending their deeds:
I have sent to you all my servants the prophets, sending them persistently, saying, ‘Turn now every one of you from his evil way, and amend your deeds, and do not go after other gods to serve them, and then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to you and your fathers.’ But you did not incline your ear or listen to me.
Ezekiel continues this very concrete concept of repentance in chapter 14:
“Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: Repent and turn away from your idols, and turn away your faces from all your abominations.
The Ninevites in Jonah 3 repented by actually ceasing from the evil behaviour (which was what God was looking for):
Who knows? God may turn and relent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we may not perish.”
When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it.
For more examples, see Jer 3:13,14; 18:11,12; Zech 1:3,4 and many other places.

B. Repentance in the New Testament
The first mention of repentance in the New Testament is in the preaching of John the Baptist. John is sometimes called “the last of the Old Testament Prophets” and his preaching of repentance is in line with theirs. It is translated by the Greek word metanoia, which must be interpreted in line with Biblical usage. (There is a popular fallacy that you tear Greek words apart and obtain a definition from the bits, but this is as much nonsense as is would be in English with words such as “butterfly”. Words are always defined by their usage and context.)
It turns out that John the Baptist has the same concept of turning from and to. The from is from unrighteous behaviour, and the to is to the “Lamb of God”
An example of the practical and concrete nature of John’s repentance is found in Luke 3:
Bear fruits in keeping with repentance....
And the crowds asked him, “What then shall we do?”
And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”
Tax collectors also came to be baptized and said to him, “Teacher, what shall we do?”
And he said to them, “Collect no more than you are authorized to do.”
Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”
John’s teaching on repentance formed the foundation for the preaching of Jesus, e.g. Matt 4:
From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
Jesus didn’t redefine “repentance” from John’s meaning (that would have made a nonsense of John’s role in preparing the way)
The Apostolic gospel had a strong emphasis on repentance, and we can see from Acts 26 that Paul used an identical expression to refer to the need for deeds that were the visible expression of repentance.
“Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision,
but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.
In 2 Corinthians 12 Paul talks about sin and repentance. In v.20 they are still sinning and in v.21 they “have not repented”. Paul uses the terms interchangeably. It would make no sense at all if in v.21 he meant that they had mentally resolved not to sin but were still regularly practicing it.
For I fear that perhaps when I come I may find you not as I wish, and that you may find me not as you wish—that perhaps there may be quarreling, jealousy, anger, hostility, slander, gossip, conceit, and disorder.
I fear that when I come again my God may humble me before you, and I may have to mourn over many of those who sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual immorality, and sensuality that they have practiced.
Finally, there is no doubt that in Revelation 2:5, repentance implies actually replacing one set of behaviours with another:
Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lamp-stand from its place, unless you repent.

C. So is Repentance a Work?
The error in the “Lordship Controversy” was that salvation was defined as “taking Christ as your Saviour” which hopefully would be followed by “taking him as your Lord”, i.e. bringing your life into line with Christ’s demands. The argument was that any kind of requirement placed on the sinner other than faith would violate the grace of the Gospel and turn it into works.
Yet this can actually be a danger and many of the Puritans fell into this trap. The error is known as “Preparationism”, the teaching that you cannot come to Christ exactly as you are, but a work of preparation needs to be done in you, making your heart repentant. The danger of this position is that it ends up denying free grace.
The Marrow Controversy

This issue blossomed into a full scale controversy in the Puritan Church of Scotland, and it became known as the Marrow Controversy (see this link for description). Thomas Boston and eleven other faithful men stood firm on the position that “It is not sound and orthodox to teach that we must forsake sin in order to our coming to Christ”, because it is only once we have come to Christ we have the power to deal with sin.
These twelve men were expelled from the church for holding determinedly to grace. As John Newton later said, “If you tarry ’til you’re better, you will never come at all.”
Faith linked to Action

So what is repentance if we can’t do it? The answer, of course, is that it is a miracle. But it is not a miracle in which we are passive. Most of the supernatural healings of the New Testament involved the person who was sick attempting to do what was impossible in response to a command. This was the response of faith.
A good example would be the man with the withered hand who stretched it out to Jesus. Was the healing before or after he stretched it? It could not have been after, but equally could not have preceded faith. They were actually simultaneous—as he began to exercise faith by beginning the attempt to move the arm, so miraculously he was enabled to do so.
This helps us to understand how salvation works. We call on someone “dead in trespasses and sins” to repent, and the gift of faith and repentance come simultaneous with their response, giving them both the desire and the power to turn from their old lifestyle and follow Christ.
Spiritual healing works the same way as the physical. Jesus called Zacchaeus to faith, he responded immediately in repentance, “If I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold”, and Jesus’ reply was “Today salvation has come to this house” (Luke 19:8,9).
Nobody can ever claim that they can’t repent because they lack the power, because God will always supply it. He says “Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and make your hearts pure, you two-minded.” (James 4:8)
So the answer is no, repentance is not a meritorious work in any sense. It is simply a turning away from our old direction as we turn to Christ. It is the other side of the coin of faith, inseparable from it. Nevertheless, just as it is true with faith, so it is equally true that repentance without works is dead.

Thursday, August 7, 2014

Church or Cult?

Church or Cult?
The Control-Freaky Ways of Mars Hill Church
by BRENDAN KILEY

Church or Cult?


Aug 4, 2014
To become a "member" at Mars Hill Church requires more than attending church. Becoming a full-fledged member—a process highly encouraged, and sometimes thunderously demanded, in Pastor Mark Driscoll's sermons—requires months of classes and a careful study of Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe, Driscoll's 463-page Mars Hill textbook. To seal the deal, the prospective member must formally agree to submit to the "authority" of the Mars Hill leadership.

Driscoll, the church's cofounder and public face, has made a name for himself with his strutting, macho interpretation of Christianity, one in which men are unquestioned heads of their households and "chick-ified church boys," as he calls them, need not apply. He rails against mainstream Christians who imagine a "Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ... a neutered and limp-wristed popular Sky Fairy." Instead, he has molded a doctrine based on manliness, sexual purity, and submission to authority: wives to husbands, husbands to pastors, and everyone to God.

Lance, a soft-spoken ex-military guy whose real name is not Lance, started attending Mars Hill Church in early 2008, became a full member before the year was out, and by October of 2010 was deeply and happily immersed in the life of the church. It was, he says, "like a second family." Around that time, Lance says he "did something I shouldn't have done." (I told Lance I wouldn't divulge his "sins," but they were amorous indiscretions that anyone who isn't a fundamentalist Christian, Jew, or Muslim would find extremely minor.) Lance said he "felt like a hypocrite," so he voluntarily confessed and submitted to six months of counseling and spiritual probation.

In August 2011, a few months after his full restoration to the church, Lance was enjoying life in a Mars Hill house, living with other men and paying his rent in volunteer labor. But that autumn, he had a disagreement with one of his pastors over a building-safety issue during a church party. As Lance tells it, the pastor said Lance was being overcautious, Lance disagreed, and the disagreement metastasized into a weeks-long debate—not about the safety issue, per se, but about whether Lance was being "insubordinate" and refusing to properly "submit."

"I began to question their authority," Lance says, "and their ability to make good decisions."

In the midst of this, Lance had begun a long-distance relationship with a young woman in Colorado. Lance says that his pastor instructed him to end the relationship, even though their relationship was not yet physical and nothing improper had happened. Lance balked, but his pastor insisted: "I'm the authority over you," the pastor said, according to Lance. "You agreed when you became a member that I am your authority, and you have to obey us." Lance was torn—on one hand, he had signed that membership contract.

On the other hand, this was ridiculous.

In a final, tense meeting, Lance got fed up with the leadership's harping about submission and authority. "How is this not a Jim Jones theology?" Lance remembers asking. "We don't even think you were a Christian to begin with," the pastor retorted, according to Lance, and left the room. The church told him to move out and, if he wouldn't submit to church demands, to cut off any communication with members of Mars Hill.

Lance quit the church.

But the church didn't quit him. Not only was he barred from speaking with his now-former friends at the church, Lance says his pastor threatened to contact any future church that he might attend. And then Lance's pastor took the extra step of calling the father of Lance's girlfriend in Colorado. "They were warning him how dangerous I was," Lance says. "That I was on a path of destruction that could result in the death of his daughter."

That father, Lieutenant Colonel Mike Hanyok, is a retired marine and evangelical Christian who says the Mars Hill leadership overstepped its authority. "There is church leadership to guide and provide order," he says, "but not lordship over the congregation." Hanyok spent 21 years in the US Marines and says, "Poor leadership is one of my pet peeves... the church isn't to come in and tell me how to manage my family." Hanyok says he used to watch Driscoll's sermons online, but doesn't anymore.

Lance calls the church culture "manipulative" and says, "I don't want this to happen to other people... It's how people wound up drinking Kool-Aid." He adds, "I still love Jesus. But I can continue my spiritual walk just fine at a different church... Mars Hill seems crazy to me now."

Last week, a similar story from a former Mars Hill member named Andrew erupted into an online firestorm that left some church critics, including longtime members who've since departed, wondering aloud whether Mars Hill is crossing the line from church to cult.

On January 23, Andrew released some internal church disciplinary documents to the blog Matthewpaulturner.net. Andrew had sinned by kissing a woman who wasn't his fiancée and then confessed the sin to his community-group leader. In Mars Hill parlance, "community groups" are breakout sessions that happen throughout the week. Everyone attends a weekend service at one of the 11 Mars Hill campuses to watch a live broadcast of Driscoll preaching from his Ballard church, and then attends various community groups—often in people's homes—to discuss the week's lesson.

After Andrew confessed his sinful kissing to his community-group leader, he says he was asked to step down from church responsibilities, forced to attend lots of meetings and confessions over the course of a month about his sinful action, and asked to agree to a "discipline" plan, which included the following acts of repentance and submission: "Andrew will not pursue or date any woman inside or outside MH; Andrew will write out in detail his sexual and emotional attachment history with women and share it with [redacted]; Andrew will write out in detail the chronology of events and sexual/emotional sin with [redacted] and share it with [redacted] and Pastor [redacted]..."

After thinking it over, Andrew refused and quit the church—but just like with Lance, the church didn't quit him. In a letter Andrew says is from Mars Hill, one pastor told members to shun Andrew because he refused to "submit to his church leaders" and to not discuss anything with him besides repentance. It even offered a few helpful lines for awkward encounters: "Andrew, I would enjoy time with you, but I can't because you're under church discipline. You can join me if we can talk about your refusal to listen to God and the church."

Once Andrew leaked the documents, the Christian blogosphere exploded with indignation. People were furious about the church's invasive demands: to stop dating until told otherwise, to write "in detail his sexual and emotional attachment history with women," to cut off ties with his friends at Mars Hill. It seemed less about getting right with God than public humiliation and congregation control.

Blog posts appeared with titles like "Never Mind Andrew's Sin, What About Mars Hill's Sin?" And "Spiritual Abuse Must Stop." And "Mark Driscoll: Worst Pastor Ever?" The blog Marshillrefuge.blogspot.com was launched, full of stories similar to Lance's and Andrew's. "This," the blog's preamble says, "is meant to be a safe haven for those who have been wounded by their experience with Mars Hill Church."

The woman who runs the blog is an on-fire-for-the-Lord type who tried, with her husband, to join one of Mars Hill's new spin-off churches. They were frustrated by what they saw as demagoguery and poor leadership by the young, inexperienced men running the community groups: "EVERYTHING," she writes, "always comes back to DOCTRINE, not JESUS." Eventually, the couple left. Even though they had not become full-blown members, their community-group leader demanded an explanation from the husband anyway. When the husband said, in essence, it's none of your business, he says the group leader questioned his faith in Jesus and ability to lead his family, and accused the couple of stirring up division (a common charge from Mars Hill). "We have never again heard from any of our friends from that group," his wife writes.

Mars Hill pastor Jeff Bettger responded to queries from The Stranger about these stories with a long, heartfelt e-mail. He confirmed some of the stories, did not deny the rest, and wrote:

I personally have never known anybody at Mars Hill who would harass, blackmail, verbally abuse, or belittle ex-members. I would actually say that over the last few years Mars Hill has increasingly become more loving, kind, generous, and humble. I have been seeing this over and over from leadership at Mars Hill, and from members. We know we are not perfect, but we believe in an active God who loves us... The way God is growing this Church, I don't believe anybody would even have the time, let alone the interest, to follow ex-members around. We have a difficult enough time maintaining all the work that needs to get done from week to week as well as meeting with all the people who want counsel and are hurting.
The Stranger attempted to contact several current members of Mars Hill, but none of them responded to requests for comment.

The music critic Chris Estey, who used to attend Mars Hill in the early days, remembers the moment he started drifting away from the church. He was walking out of one especially long-winded service by Driscoll and joking to a friend: "Hey, that guy needs an editor!" He says he was "accosted" by other churchgoers: "They were saying, 'How dare you! He has vision and you have no idea!' I kinda started separating then. That was the first time I'd had that culty feeling."

Mars Hill began in the late 1990s, bouncing between apartments, parks, and spare rooms. It appealed to young people who felt out of place in other churches. By 2008, it was the 23rd-fastest-growing church in the United States, with a 38 percent bump in attendance in a single year, according to Outreach magazine. New campuses opened across the city. The Acts 29 Network, founded by Mars Hill and led by Driscoll, "planted" dozens and dozens of new churches across North America, creating a dense network of churches that are not tied to a denomination, but to Mars Hill. In 2006, Mars Hill claimed $31,110,000 in assets. (According to a church-generated report—since it's a church, Mars Hill is not required to publicly disclose its tax returns.)

As the church grew, Driscoll became more visible, landing high-profile gigs (like an appearance on Loveline with Dr. Drew) where he drew more criticism. Also in 2006, he infamously commented on Ted Haggard's meth-and-prostitute scandal by casting aspersions on Haggard's wife: "A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband in the ways that the Song of Songs is so frank about is not responsible for her husband's sin, but she may not be helping him either."

Around the same time, one of Mars Hill's three cofounders suddenly left the church with little explanation and started a pizza restaurant in Redmond. Two prominent and well-liked pastors (Paul Petry and Bent Meyer) were fired during a debate over how to restructure the church—one for "displaying an unhealthy distrust in the senior leadership," and the other for "disregarding the accepted elder protocol for the bylaw deliberation period" and "verbally attacking the lead pastor." In other words, for not being submissive. (When contacted for this story, Petry simply said: "I don't really have anything to add at this time.")

The congregation was in an uproar. "That was a wild time," says Dusty Wisniew, who has since left the church but says he still respects it. "There were tons of people asking a bunch of questions." Driscoll answered questioners in a sermon: "Some adults are just always questioning... these are people with critical spirits. These are people that if you answer their question, they've got 25 more questions, and they'll have questions forever. And it's not that they have questions, it's that they're sinning through questioning. The heart is not good."

All church memberships were suspended, Wisniew says, and people were encouraged to reapply under the new organizational structure, with new requirements—or quietly leave. One day during that period, Wisniew delivered some money from the Wedgwood campus to the Ballard campus. "All over the place, there was this poster that said 'membership = discipleship.'" He decided not to renew his membership. He's still close to many at Mars Hill and still admires Driscoll. But, he says, "I believe that what unites us isn't a piece of paper. It's the blood of Jesus."

Last Sunday morning, a few hundred people filled the downtown branch of Mars Hill Church to hear Pastor Mark Driscoll deliver a sermon titled "Men and Marriage." It was the third in an 11-week series based on his new book ($12.49 at Amazon.com) and DVD curriculum ($24.99 at Christianbook.com), cowritten with his wife, Grace, called Real Marriage. I attended to see if Driscoll was going address the recent storm of criticism online.

After the band played two indie-rock hymns, Pastor Driscoll appeared on a live video feed from his Ballard church. His "Men and Marriage" sermon was relatively tame: A husband should be the firm and responsible head of his household, the leader of a "little flock called home and family." He should think of his wife as "a garden" and himself as "the gardener." If you look at your garden and don't like how it looks, Driscoll preaches, just remember: "You are the gardener."

He said he knows his views are unpopular—that he's even been called a misogynist. "And I don't even know how to give a massage," he joked, his eyes twinkling roguishly toward the camera that was beaming his image to 11 screens in 11 churches across the city, as well as churches in Oregon, New Mexico, and California.

The thing his sermon didn't address—the thing I came hoping to hear about—was when submission to human authority goes too far.

Whatever the controversies, Driscoll shows nothing but confidence in himself and in the future of Mars Hill, including a plan for the next generation called "Mars Hill Kids." "I want to start preparing our children for ministry at age 2," he said in a video last summer. He has proposed building a "Nickelodeon-type studio" to broadcast kids' shows and indoor play structures at every Mars Hill property to attract kids, "especially the boys, the kinesthetic learners, so they can get a little activity." (Imagine being the gay kid—or the kid everyone thinks is gay—at that playground.)

There would be special child worship time conducted by adults and handpicked child apprentices. That cadre of children would grow up through the ranks, studying a children's version of Doctrine, along with DVD classes and Doctrine-related homework to ensure, Driscoll says, "an integration between church and home." Driscoll has also said he wants to commission a new illustrated children's Bible. "Kinda cool, dark, a lot of the bloody Old Testament stories so the boys'll like it, too," he said on one video, winking. "We're gonna do it Mars Hill–style."

The point of Mars Hill Kids, Driscoll says, is continuity:

So that when the kids grow up, they don't do like most kids and just leave after high school, but they realize: "Well, I'm ready for the Doctrine class. I can become a member. I've been doing this curriculum since I was 2! Of course I'm going to join a community group: I've been in one since I've been in a diaper. And I know how to sing songs, and I'm okay with video because that's what I've been doing for a really long time—so I'm an old-school, 18-year-old veteran."
What does it mean that Driscoll imagines keeping people, who've been studying his Doctrine from the age of 2, in Mars Hill after high school? Does he want to keep kids from growing up and moving away from Seattle to go to college, start jobs, and begin their own lives? Or does he imagine that, in 20 years, Mars Hill churches will be everywhere?

Either way, Driscoll imagines his flock—the membership model, the community groups, the Doctrine—as permanent. Womb to tomb. Just as long as you don't ask too many questions. recommended

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Prayer and the Difference It Makes


Prayer and the Difference It Makes
byRobert Velarde

"Hear my prayer, O LORD, listen to my cry for help." –Psalm 39:12 (NIV)[i]

"Lord, teach us to pray." –Luke 11:1

"After Jesus said this, He looked toward heaven and prayed." –John 17:1

"They all joined together constantly in prayer." –Acts 1:14

"And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests." –Ephesians 6:18

"Pray continually." -1 Thessalonians 5:17

Throughout the Bible, believers are called to pray. But what is prayer? What does it mean to "pray without ceasing?" And does prayer really make a difference? Before delving too deeply into the topic of prayer, it will be beneficial to first define the term, as well as the focus of our prayers—God.

Prayer and God's Nature
Let's start with the second part. In order to develop a clear idea of prayer, we must first have a clear idea of God. Biblically speaking, God is a personal being. This is critical to prayer because it means that God is a person we can interact with, that He has a will and that we are able to relate to Him on a meaningful level. If He were impersonal, then prayer would not be meaningful. If He were personal, but uncaring and distant, prayer wouldn't serve a purpose.

Not only is God personal, He is also loving (1 John 4:8, 16; John 3:16). This is also important in relation to prayer. If God were personal, but uncaring or unkind, then prayer might do us more harm than good! But God is not only loving, He is all loving (omnibenevolent). In relation to prayer, this means that God always desires the best for us because He loves us.

God is also all powerful (omnipotent), meaning that no prayer is beyond His ability to answer, "For nothing is impossible with God" (Luke 1:37). If God were less than all powerful, then we would have no assurance that He could answer or even hear our prayers.

The fact that God is all-knowing (omniscient) is also significant to the concept of prayer. If God were limited, then He would not know all that is happening in His creation. If this were the case, He might overlook our prayers because they might be beyond His knowledge. Fortunately, the Bible is clear that God knows everything (see, for instance, Psalm 139:2-4; 147: 4-5; Isaiah 46:10). In relation to God's omniscience, Jesus said, "Your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:8).

God is also wise and holy. He knows what is best for us, as well as what will lead us to holiness rather than sin. He is also immanent, meaning that God is active in His creation in a personal way, not only directing greater matters of history, but also involved in the life of everyone. This means that no prayer is too great for Him, but also that no prayer is too small for Him.

While we cannot explore all of God's attributes here, one final one to note, of utmost importance to prayer is God's sovereignty. God is supremely in charge of everything that happens in His universe. Nothing takes Him by surprise and nothing happens in our lives without the knowledge of God, even though we may not always understand His actions: "'For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,' declares the LORD. 'As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts'" (Isaiah 55:8-9).

In hearing and responding to our prayers, then, we are assured that God will do so on the basis of His many attributes. His personal nature, love, power, knowledge, wisdom, holiness, immanence and sovereignty all play a role in how we relate to God in prayer and how He relates to us.

What Prayer Is Not
Now that we have a clearer understanding of God's nature, it may be tempting to delve right into a definition of prayer. But first let's take a brief look at what prayer is not (this is by no means an exhaustive list):

Prayer is not magic. We cannot summon God as though He were a genie, waiting to grant our wishes without regard for our circumstances or the consequences.
Prayer does not make demands. While we can make requests of God in prayer, we dare not make demands. God is the Creator of the universe and does not take orders from us.
Prayer is for our benefit, not God's. We need a relationship with God, available to us through Jesus Christ and engaged primarily through prayer, because we were made to function best when we are in a proper relationship with our Creator.
Prayer is not a guarantee against suffering. "In this world you will have trouble" (John 16:33); "Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed" (1 Peter 4:12-13).
Prayer is not an opportunity for us to show off. "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men" (Matthew 6:5).
What is Prayer?
So what is prayer? Prayer is a relationship, wherein we humbly communicate, worship, and sincerely seek God's face, knowing that He hears us, loves us and will respond, though not always in a manner we may expect or desire. Prayer can encompass confession, praise, adoration, supplication, intercession and more.

In addition, our attitude in prayer is important. We must not be haughty, but humble (Ephesians 4:2; James 4:10; 1 Peter 5:6, etc.). Seen in this light, to "pray continually" (1 Thessalonians 5:17) means, in one sense, that we must always strive to have a prayerful attitude. Our prayers must come often and regularly, not from legalistic duty, but from a humble heart, realizing our dependence on God in every aspect of our lives.



[i] Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the New International Version of the Bible.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

PROLIFE: Scripture & the Sanctity of Life: Bible Study


PROLIFE: Scripture & the Sanctity of Life: Bible Study

Creation
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
Revelation 21:1-2, 5 New creation: "I am making everything new."
John 1:3 Jesus identified as Creator: "Through Him all things were made . . ."
2 Corinthians 5:17 "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation."

God as Creator is fundamental to the Christian faith. We worship Him (Isaiah 45:9; Romans 9:21; Psalm 95:6), and recognize His authority to rule and govern our lives based on His prior work of creation. Any attack on God as Creator is an attack on His authority and His worthiness to be worshipped.


Satan's Attempt to Usurp God's Authority as Creator
Jesus came to save, restore, and renew life. Satan comes to steal, kill, and destroy. John 3:16-17; 8:44; 10:10

The most dramatic picture of Satan's declared war against the offspring: Revelation 12:1-17
"Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring - those who obey God's Commandments . . ."

Demonic worship in the Old Testament often involved child sacrifice. Jeremiah 19:4-5; Psalm 106:36-38 (See God's reaction in Ezekiel 16:20-22: "You slaughtered My children . . .")

The births of both Moses and Jesus were accompanied by a massive slaughter of the innocents. Satan has generated widespread infanticide in an attempt to eradicate the people of God. Exodus 1:15-15; Matthew 2:13-18

"All who hate Me love death." Proverbs 8:36b


The Humanity of the Pre-born in the Old Testament
God had plans for us before we were born. Jeremiah 1:4-5; Isaiah 49:1, 5

David discusses the spiritual state he was in before he was born (his personhood began at conception). Psalm 51:5

Jacob and Esau were distinct individuals before birth. Genesis 25:22-28

Scripture gives identity to unborn human life. Psalm 139 - notice the spiritual relationship the psalmist has while in the womb "The psalmist surveys his life in four stages: Past, present, future, and before birth, and in all four refers to himself as 'I.' He who is writing as a full-grown man has the same personal identity as the fetus in his mother's womb." (John R.W. Stott)

Samson's mother is told to alter her diet while pregnant because Samson, the child in her womb is to be consecrated unto the Lord. Here we have a direct concern for the life of the preborn. Judges 13:2-5

These verses do not distinguish between "potential life" and "actual life" when referring to the pre-born. Genesis 16:11; Isaiah 46:3-4; Psalm 22:9-10 (Notice in Psalm 22:10. "From my mother's womb you have been my God.")


Old Testament Law and the Sanctity of Life
Human life is valuable. Genesis 1:26-27; Psalm 8:4-5

There is a serious punishment for anyone who takes an innocent human life. Exodus 20:13; 21:12.

R.C. Sproul writes. "The punitive measures against murder underscore the gravity of the crime precisely because of the value of the victim. Life is regarded as so sacred that it must never be destroyed without just cause."

Homicide is "an implicit attempt to murder God." Genesis 9:5-6

R.C. Sproul comments, "This test is not a prophecy. It is not saying simply that those who live by the sword will die by the sword. Rather, the passage is a divine mandate for capital punishment in the case of murder. The significant point is that the moral basis for capital punishment in Genesis is the sanctity of life. The Biblical ethic is that because man is endowed with the image of God, his life is so sacred that any malicious destruction of it must be punished by execution. Note that this Scripture implies that an assault against human life is considered by God an assault against Himself. To murder a person is to attack one who is the image-bearer of God. Homicide is regarded by God as an implicit attempt to murder God." (Abortion: A Rational Look at an Emotional Issue, p 33.)

The pre-born are protected in Old Testament Law. Exodus 21:22-25

Permitting the murder of innocents pollutes the land. Numbers 35:33-34

Believers are charged with defending life. Proverbs 24:11-12

God hates those that shed innocent blood. Proverbs 6:16-17

Cursed is the man who accepts money to kill an innocent person. Deut. 27:25

One of the sins of Ammon that resulted in God's wrath was killing pre-born children. Amos 1:13

It is worse to kill the innocent in a protected place. 2 Sam. 4:11: "How much more - when wicked men have killed an innocent man in his own house and on his own bed - should I not now demand his blood from your hand and rid the earth of you!" (John MacArthur comments in a sermon. "How can you tell me that isn't a description of an unborn child. A righteous person in his own house upon his bed . . . Sure it means a good man, but if it means a good man it certainly would imply a protected child.")


The Humanity of the Pre-born in the New Testament
Paul was set apart from his mother's womb. Galatians 1:15

Jesus is spoken of in the womb. Matthew 1:20-21 (Note: The incarnation is the most compelling Christian apologetic for the sanctity of unborn human life. To argue that life does not begin at conception must lead one to assume that the human Christ was at one point a "potentially human" Christ. Those who say that life does not begin at conception are in direct opposition to the Apostles' Creed and in almost certain agreement with an early heresy, "adoptionism." which claimed that Jesus became God at some later point in life. The early church refuted this, and affirmed in the Apostles' Creed that the eternal Son became incarnate in Mary's womb, choosing the phrase, "conveived by the Holy Ghost." That which was conceived by the Holy Ghost was not an "it," a "potential human," or a "blob of tissue." It was our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.)

John the Baptist is spoken in the womb. Luke 1:15-17 - Filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb. Luke 1:39-44. John's reaction to the pre-born Christ entering the room. (Note that Luke 1:36 tells us Elizabeth was six months along when Jesus was conceived in Mary's womb. Verse 56 tells us that Mary stayed with Elizabeth for three months until Elizabeth gave birth to John the Baptist. This means that Mary was literally in the first weeks or even days of her pregnancy when she approached Elizabeth, was called the mother of the Lord, and carried the embryo Christ who elicited John's leap in the womb.)

The Greek word brephos (lit. "babe" or "baby") is used to describe the pre-born and the born. Born: Luke 2:12, 16; Acts 7:19; 1 Peter 2:2. Pre-born: Luke 1:41, 44.


The Value of Human Life in the New Testament
Human life is more valuable than animal life. Matthew 6:26; Matthew 10:29-31

God's work invests human life with value. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; John 3:16

Jesus cared for people who had a poor "quality of life" rating. Matthew 4:23-25; 8:1-3; 9:1-8

Jesus valued little children. Matthew 18:1-14

We should have a Biblical attitude toward poor children. James 1:27; 2:5-9


Children
The first charge given to men and women was to be fruitful and multiply. Genesis 1:27-28

Children are a blessing. Psalms 113:7-9; 127:3; Deuteronomy 7:12-14

"Spiritual adoption" is a model for physical adoption. Ephesians 1:5; Romans 8:15;9:4-8; Galatians 4:4-5

Jesus loved children. Matthew 18:1-14; 19:13-15


The "Hard Cases" and Christian Decision-Making
One basis for Christian action is love. Matthew 22:36-40 (See also John 13:34-35, Romans 13:8-10, and Galatians 5:14.) Can a decision in favour of abortion, by Christian standards, ever be an act of love?

We are to care for and respect the disabled. Exodus 4:10-12; Leviticus 19:14; Isaiah 45:9-12

Regarding abortion in the case of rape: Children should not be put to death for the sins of their fathers. Deuteronomy 24:16

Incest and adultery in Christ's bloodline: God can redeem even the tragic events of sin. Genesis 38 (incest of Judah and Tamar); 2 Samuel 11 (adultery between David and Bathsheba)
Responding to "freedom of choice:" Christians should not use freedom to cover-up evil. 1 Peter 2:16

We do not have an "unqualified right" to our bodies. Ezekiel 18:4; 1 Corinthians 3:16-19; 1 Corinthians 6:18-20; 2 Corinthians 6:16-17.
"Do not follow the crowd in doing evil." Exodus 23:2
Daniel includes himself in confession, though he did not personally participate in the sin mentioned. Daniel 9:4-11

"Blood-guilt" is on a land that sheds innocent blood. Numbers 35:33; Leviticus 20:2,4,5; Deuteronomy 21:7-8

We have a responsibility to speak out. Ezekiel 33:8; Proverbs 31:8-9

We should respond to needs with ministry (not just prayer). Luke 10:25-37


Encouragement for Those Facing a Crisis Pregnancy
"Blessed is the man who perseveres under trail, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love Him." James 1:12

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose." Romans 8:28

"You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." Genesis 50:20


Life Principles
1. God created life, making man in His own image and likeness to rule over the rest of creation. (Genesis 1:26-28)
2. God loves and cares for human life, including the pre-born, transferring His image to them. (Psalm 139)
3. Jesus, in His incarnation, identified fully with humanity, sanctifying conception through His participation in it. (Hebrews 2:14)
4. Man was made to live forever. Death is the result of, and the punishment for, sin, and was never offered by God as a solution to problems. (Genesis 2:15-17)
5. Human life is precious to God. Its wanton destruction is forbidden by God and invites His wrath. (Genesis 9:5-6; Revelation 21:8)
6. Child sacrifice is particularly abhorrent to God, combining the shedding of innocent blood and idolatry. (Psalm 106:37-38)
7. Man is commanded by God to reflect His view of human life by protecting it from wanton destruction. (Proverbs 24:11-12)
8. Man is obligated to use law to reflect God's love and justice, providing alternatives to the destruction of human life. (Jeremiah 22:1-3; Matthew 22:37-40)
9. Children are a gift from God for blessing the family, the Church and the world. (Psalm 127 and Psalm 128)
10. God is in control of the "hard cases," using them for our good and His glory. (Exodus 4:10-12; Isaiah 45:9-12; John 9:11-13)

Monday, August 4, 2014

Weapons for Spirtual Warfare


Read the Scripture: 2 Corinthians 10:1-4

Each of you must have asked yourself at some time, "What can I do about these problems that are so widespread and serious these days?" And, "How helpful can I really expect to be as an individual?"

The Scriptures have an answer to these questions. We might expect that they would, for they are designed to perfect the man of God, that he may be perfect, completely furnished unto every good work 2 Timothy 3:17). So we should expect that there would be ample guidance given in the Scriptures to enable us to handle the problems and questions which pursue us on every side.

The passage we are to center our thoughts upon these next few weeks is Second Corinthians, Chapter 10, the first six verses. Here is another of those pockets of condensed wisdom which you find frequently throughout the pages of the Scriptures, both in the Old Testament and New alike, and which it is very unwise to hasten through. This kind of a passage must be gone through slowly and thoughtfully, and, therefore, I propose that we take ample time. I want to make these messages as practical and as helpful to as many as possible.

The introduction to this section of Second Corinthians is found in Verses 1 through 4. The Apostle Paul, writing to his friends in Corinth, probably from the city of Ephesus, says.

I, Paul, myself entreat you, by the meekness and gentleness of Christ -- I who am humble when face to face with you but bold to you when I am away! -- I beg of you that when I am present I may not have to show boldness with such confidence as I count on showing against some who suspect us of acting in worldly fashion. For though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds. (2 Corinthians 10:1-4 RSV)
In these verses we have brought before us the primary theme of this section. The background of it is a challenge to the authority of the Apostle Paul by the Corinthians. There were some among them who were seeking to undermine the effect of Paul's words, both in his letters and in his preaching to them. That is not surprising for it is still going on today. There are many today who object strenuously to what he teaches. In certain circles we are told that the Apostle Paul actually changed the teachings of the Lord Jesus, and thus changed Christianity from a simple, easily understood message to a highly complicated theological treatise, difficult to understand and completely different in intent and content from that which was preached by Jesus.

Something of that had already started in the early church. When these Corinthians had received letters from Paul, some were angered by them and resisted strongly what he had said. Specifically, as this passage reveals, certain Christians in Corinth were saying that Paul was, essentially, no different than anyone else. His apostleship really gave him no more right to speak with authority than anyone else had, and his motivations were essentially the same as anyone's; i.e., he is out to get what he wants by whatever policy will work. Paul was quoting them when he writes, "I who am humble when face to face with you, but bold to you when I am away."

They were saying this was his procedure, his maneuver, to try to get us to do what he wants. In other words, they were saying, he is simply another religious figure who is playing the old game of "power politics," so we do not need to pay any more attention to him than we would to anyone else who came in and tried to take advantage of us for his own purposes.

This the apostle promptly and powerfully repudiates. He says, in effect,

"This is not the case. You Corinthians are quite wrong. You have failed to recognize the fundamental change which occurs in a Christian. When a man becomes a Christian, something fundamental, something absolutely radical, occurs in him so that he cannot see things as he once did. Furthermore, you do not understand the radical difference with which an apostle (who is, by virtue of his office, a model Christian, a pattern for others) must face life. If you think that I act like other people, that my motives, purposes, and goals are no different than ordinary men and women, then you have fundamentally misunderstood the whole matter."
"For," he goes on to say in Verses 3 and 4, "though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds."

In the literal Greek the Apostle Paul does not say quite what is said here. The phrase, For though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, is actually, "For though we walk (or live) in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh." The revisers here have substituted the word world, for flesh. Yet this is not exactly wrong. They are recognizing the close affiliation between what the Bible calls "the flesh," and "society" or "the world." These two are closely combined and associated.

What is the flesh? You who have been studying the New Testament for years know that the flesh is essentially inherited selfishness. It is what is basically wrong with human nature. It is the monkey wrench which was inserted into the machinery of humanity at the very beginning and which we all inherit from our ancestors. It is responsible for the fact that all of us began life with a taint, a twist in our mechanism. It is not very long before it is quite apparent that we are fundamentally selfish. You do not have to teach a baby to be selfish. You do not have to send him to a private school to learn how to be naughty, to resist his parents, or to be inherently selfish. This taint crops up in any individual no matter what kind of a background, exposure, or environment he is subjected to; it is in the bloodstream of humanity. This is the unpleasant fact which society constantly resists, which man does not want to face, but which the Word of God bluntly and clearly states.

If that is the flesh, that tendency to evil in every individual, then if you put all these flesh-centered, flesh-governed people together into a society, you have what the Bible calls "the world." It is society governed by the flesh; society, with all the power structures with which we are so familiar in this day, all built upon self-interest. This, any observer of human life can see, pervades the world of our day; self-interest is back of everything.

That is why the revisers have substituted the word "world" here. In a sense, they are right. This is clearly the idea the apostle has in mind. He says, "We are not acting like other people. We do not operate from the same motives; there is something quite different about us. If you try to judge us on the same basis you judge others you are going to be very far off -- you will miss the point entirely."

He is declaring also the fundamental tension in which a Christian lives. He says, "We live in the flesh, in the world of normal society, but we do not fight on those terms. We are not carrying on a worldly war." Perhaps it might be helpful in this connection to review the rendering of certain other versions. J. B. Philips puts it this way:

The truth is that, although of course we lead normal human lives, the battle we are fighting is on the spiritual level. (2 Corinthians 10:3 J. B. Philips)
The New English Bible puts it:

Weak men we may be; but it is not as such that we fight our battles. (2 Corinthians 10:3 NEB)
Perhaps the most helpful is the Living Letters translation, which says,

It is true that I am an ordinary weak human being, but I don't use human plans and methods to win my battles. (2 Corinthians 10:3 Living Letters)
Notice the exquisite balance and sanity of that. The Apostle Paul is speaking not only for himself, but for all Christians. Remember that an apostle is a pattern Christian. He is what all Christians are supposed to be. And he says, first, we live in the world. We don't run away from it. Monastic life has appealed to many through the centuries. History is full of men and women who have retreated to quiet places and tried to shut away all the mundane prattle and care of life. Count Tolstoi, of Russia; Rousseau, of France; Gauguin, the painter -- all tried to run away from life. There are many who seek to do so yet today. What astonishes me is the number of Christians who have this attitude. There has grown up in our time what I call the "Bible-city syndrome," which attempts to create a Christian hothouse, an atmosphere which is thoroughly Christian from the womb to the tomb, and permits no invasion of secular ideas or forces. It seeks to insulate and isolate as much as possible the Christian from the world.

This is basically unbiblical and sub-Christian because it is contrary to this clear word of the apostle, who says, "We Christians live right in the midst of the world." That is where we are supposed to be. The Lord Jesus himself put it this way: "Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves," (Matthew 10:16 KJV). It must be a crazy sheepherder who would do a thing like that! Yet that is how radical is the difference between true Christianity and the false version so evident in many places today. This "Bible-city syndrome" is producing thousands of Christian dropouts today. I understand there is a group in this very area that is suggesting something of this nature in the mountains near here. I do not know the whole story and therefore I am not trying to judge it, but I would certainly be against a Christian isolation ward if that is what they have in view. It is thoroughly unbiblical. "No," says the apostle, "we live in the flesh: we live in the world." That is where we are intended to live. It is well expressed in the old hymn,

Where cross the crowded ways of life.
Where sound the cries of race and clan.
Above the noise of selfish strife.
We hear thy voice,
O Son of Man.
"Yet," says Paul, "though we live in the world and do not run away from society, still we do not use human plans and methods to win our battles." It is important that we understand that, because here is where all the problems has come. Many have recognized that Christians are to live in the world, but they go on to assume that a Christian living in the world must be like the world, that he must think like the world, that he must depend upon the thoughts, philosophies, ideas, and writers of the world, and draw all his arguments and his solutions to problem from these sources. "No," says Paul, "you are quite wrong there. If you judge me as doing this then you have not understood the Christian position at all. We do not use human plans and methods to win our battles."

Here, in my judgment, is the fundamental error of those who seek to make social concern the primary task of the church today. They are opposing the right enemy but with the wrong weapons. They are seeking to employ the weapons of the world, which Paul renounces; he repudiates them entirely. He says, "we do not war a worldly warfare, we do not use human plans and methods to win our battles."

What are these weapons of the world, these human plans and methods to win battles? Well, you can hardly escape them today. They are on every side, in every newspaper, every magazine you pick up. These are full of approaches to the solution of human problems. They are all perfectly sincere, often characterized by tremendous dedication and zeal and commendable in the extreme; but they are worldly. They are of the flesh; they are limited. These weapons are power politics, action blocs, organized programs, demonstrations, boycotts, picketing; even violence and arson.

Let us face some facts plainly. These are clearly worldly weapons, are they not? They are what would be suggested by any non-Christian who is confronted by these problems and is trying to find a solution, men like Saul Alinsky or Stokely Carmichael. These men openly, clearly, and unequivocally propose these kind of solutions, and you cannot blame them. That is all they can see; that is all they know to do; that is all they have confidence in. They cannot see beyond the material, the visible, the physical situation.

Anyone who reads the New Testament sees that this is always the way of the world. Its solutions are fundamentally shallow and superficial, because they are essentially one-dimensional. I was interested recently to learn that there is a new book out, written by a secular writer, called, The One-dimensional Man. It is an attempt (I gathered ) to come to grips with some of the social issues today. But even worldlings can see that their approach lacks something -- it is one-dimensional.

Yet this is not what you have in the New Testament. This is not how a Christian should approach these problems. As the Apostle Paul put it in this very letter, just a few chapters back, "We look not at the things which are seen, but also at the unseen; we look not only to the temporal, but also to the eternal," 2 Corinthians 4:18). There is a new dimension that must come in here. The Christian approach to any basic problem, whether of society or in an individual life, must be different than that of a worldling if he expects to win any battles.

The wonderful thing about the Scriptures is that life is constantly confirming them. Life is a kind of laboratory in which all these scriptural principles are being tested, worked out for us. We can then see for ourselves, if we observe enough of life over a long enough span, which is right and which is wrong -- the worldly solution, or the scriptural solution. History confirms the fact that the world's weapons do not win battles.

On my recent trip around the world I had to spend long hours on a plane, sometimes eight, ten, or eleven hours at a time. I tried to take advantage of this flight time by carrying with me a very weighty volume (in fact, I was on the verge of having to pay overweight charges on it several times!). It was a volume of Will Durant's tremendous study, The History of Civilization. I took the volume, "Caesar and Christ," and, though I did not get through it entirely, I only had to read part of it to be aware that the ancient world struggled with exactly the same problems that we struggle with today. There were the same intrigues, the same political maneuvers, the same plots, the same programs, the same solutions to problems. It was remarkable to see that long before Christ people were struggling with exactly the same problems that oppress us today. There are no secular solutions that work; at best they only temporarily rearrange the symptoms of the problem. That is the most we can hope for from worldly approaches.

"No," says Paul, "the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, they are not fleshly, they are not worldly. But they are mighty! They have divine power, unto the pulling down of strongholds. They work. They win. They destroy strongholds, they overthrow entrenched evil, they strike off shackles, they set men free. That is what they are for. If they do not do that they are worthless, they are no better than any other program. But these work. They may not be evident, but they are effective." Well, what are these weapons? That is the major issue I want to face with you now. What are these weapons? If they are not normal human plans, what are they? If they do not include these approaches that are so common today, then what are they?

I wonder what you are answering in your own minds to that question? How many Christians can answer this question? What are the weapons with which we are to encounter the problems, the battles of life? The interesting thing is that Paul so takes it for granted that his readers would know that he does not even list them. We must read them into the text from other places. He takes it for granted that they would know what his weapons are.

All of us face problems, normal, common problems -- depression, discouragement, ill health, lack of money, social pressures, family troubles, in-laws, greed, guilt, shame. As a society, we face problems together -- race tensions, war, poverty, air and water pollution, inflation, death, taxes, all these common problems.

These are the battles of life, are they not? Very few of us will have to fight on the battlefields of Vietnam, some will, but not all. Here are the battles of life. These are what Paul calls in this passage, strongholds. We shall look at that word more closely next week, but these are the strongholds he mentions, situations where evil is entrenched and powerful.

Yet he has adequate weapons for these. That is the thing I wish to convey to you now. The Christian is not inadequate to deal with these things: He is the only one who is adequate to deal with them! Therefore, let us not waste our time with things that have proved their inadequacy long ago. We have adequate weapons. I can only briefly list them in this message. I shall have to develop them more as we go on in this passage, but it is important to have them before us at this moment. They come not from any one specific passage but from the general thrust of Scripture, supported by many, many passages. I shall list for you four weapons of the Christian by which we can face the battles of life, and which, if he faces them with these weapons, will win. Not only will he win in his individual life, but he will be a tremendously powerful factor to solve them on the level of society as well.

First, we must place truth: Truth is the chief weapon of the Christian. I do not mean education. Education is usually seized upon by those attacking the problems of society as the most effective way of solving them. That very fact indicates that people see that knowledge of reality is a very important thing in solving problems, it is a powerful weapon. The only difficulty is that worldlings in general (and many Christians as well) equate education with knowledge of reality. But we must not do so. Secular education is a compound of truth and falsehood, both equally powerfully taught. Error is often conveyed as powerfully as truth, therefore education oftentimes serves only to enhance the problem. It does not always separate between the chaff and wheat; it is not always true.

But I am talking now about truth. The glory of Christianity is that it introduces truth into any situation. It reveals reality. Jesus Christ came, in the words of this present generation, to "tell it as it is" -- and he did so. Invariably, always, he told it as it is. He let people know the facts about life, and about man. He unveiled reality, he tore away the illusions and delusions under which men labor. He ripped off veils. You can watch him exposing the faulty thinking of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and all the other groups with which he came in contact, including his own disciples. Here, in the Word of God, in the truth as it is in Jesus, we have a powerful weapon, the greatest one there is in many respects, telling things the way they are.

One of the reasons why the group of laymen from this area who have been traveling to college campuses have found such an effective ministry is that they do not try to impress the students with displays of erudition and worldly wisdom. They simply talk about life as the Scriptures reveal it. It is surprising how this grasps, moves, and captures the minds and thoughts of this present generation.

Truth is the stock in trade of a Christian, that is, if he accepts the Word of God as the truth about life, and if he proclaims it, and demonstrates it in his own life, he himself is a mighty weapon for setting men free and for solving the ills of society. Not only truth proclaimed, but truth demonstrated: The weakness of the church is that it has often been too content to simply proclaim a portion of the truth and never give itself to the demonstration of it. But a Christian, above all others, ought to be characterized by openness and honesty. Let me quote to you a paragraph or two from an article in Eternity magazine entitled: The Slickest Gimmick of All:

There is a potency and wholesomeness in living life transparently rather than endlessly erecting poses and postures and fraudulent pieties.
That is a descriptive word for much of Christianity, isn't it? Fraudulent pieties!

This modern world of ours is generously supplied with pitchmen and con artists and those who have axes to grind. These are enthusiastically and persistently using the big lie on us. Hence, it is an arresting and refreshing experience to meet a person or a group that is authentic and transparently open.

That is what every Christian ought to be, and every Christian group. I was distressed this week to learn of an evangelical church that is teaching its people that they have the right to privacy in their lives. No Christian has the right to a private life. Our lives are to be lived openly before all men, transparent, a spectacle unto all the world. We have no private lives and we must not expect to have. This is basically and fundamentally wrong. Christians are to be demonstrations of the truth. This article goes on,

The church where Jesus Christ is openly and honestly confessed is a potent commodity particularly needed in our disillusioned, jaded civilization. Many weary people want to find a place where God's Word is revered, taught, and translated into daily life. At least that's the kind of church I want for my family. Not a church posing this week as a circus, next week as a sociological supermarket, next month as a pietistic political polarization within the ecclesiastical community; but a church which purports in its proclamation to be what it is -- the body of Christ -- a fellowship where Christ's people come together for renewal, for instruction in God's word, and for sharing in the spread of the gospel.

Jesus said, "You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free." (John 8:32 NIV)

The second weapon is love. I know this is the most overworked word in our vocabulary today, but let's be specific: I am not talking about the Hollywood slush that passes for love, nor of the bleeding heart tolerance of anything that comes along, I am talking about biblical love, the kind that requires no return from the individual loved. That is love, the kind that is described in First Corinthians 13, the kind that loves for Christ's sake. If you cannot love that way then you are not a Christian, no matter what kind of a creed you subscribe to. If you can, then you must begin to show acceptance, courtesy, and concern without partiality or merit, without regard to the background or the color of skin or anything else about an individual, except that he or she is a man or woman loved by God for whom Christ died. Your love must go out to them, not your momentary interest until you gain their adherence to your creed; but your genuine love, demanding nothing in return.

That is love, and that is a mighty weapon. That is the way the early church won their way against councils and governors, kings and edicts, and everything else. They won it by the demonstration of a warmth of acceptance that made their meetings such glorious occasions of fellowship that the whole world hung around, drooling, wanting to get in.

The third weapon is righteousness. Fundamentally, that means obedience to both truth and love. It is what we call integrity. It is the refusal to yield to expediency. As Paul writes to the Ephesians, "You must no longer live as the Gentiles do," (Ephesians 4:17b). You cannot go on excusing your weaknesses. There are no excuses left to you; you have all that it takes to be all that is needed. You cannot go on justifying your failures. You have no reason for failure. You must stop your lying, your stealing, your cursing, your immorality, and your harshness toward one another, your unforgiveness, your jealousy and your petulance. But in its place, because righteousness is never just negative, you must show tenderheartedness, acceptance and forgiveness for Christ's sake -- the warmth of love. It is true that if all you can hold up on behalf of your righteous standing is that you don't smoke, drink, gamble or go to movies, etc., you are a pitiful spectacle of a Christian. If you are a Christian there must be about your life a quality that cannot be explained in terms of your personality -- a positive glow, a warmth, and a radiance which cannot be explained except by the fact that God is at work in you.

The fourth weapon is a compound one. I shall put it this way: Faith-prayer. I put the two together because they are almost indistinguishable. Faith is reliance on the direct activity of God in human life. Prayer is the request for that activity; faith is the expectation that God will do it. These two things link together. If you do not think they are powerful, I suggest you read through Hebrews 11. There is a list of the achievements of faith in society, in terms of government, warfare, social ills, and battles of every kind. Faith is the expectation that God has not dismissed society, nor does he exist remote from it, but he is involved in it, and is active in it. He is moving; he does things; he changes; he arrests; he thwarts; he overthrows; he builds up and exalts; and he does all this in answer and through the medium of prayer. I do not know how to put it any stronger, but in the coming messages on this I want to outline more fully to you what prayer is, and how it works. What a mighty weapon is put in our hands in these days through this means!

There they are: truth, love, righteousness, and faith-prayer. These are the weapons of our warfare. They are not carnal, they are not of the flesh, they are not of the world; but they are mighty. They have divine power to the eliminating of strongholds, pulling down high things that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God, bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ. They all work together. You can hardly isolate the one from the other; they are all necessary. And when the church begins to major on these weapons she will once again become a mighty power in society, a tremendously potent force, a ferment let loose which will rapidly change the outward circumstances, the face of things as they are. Then the church will once again be what God designed it to be -- in those glowing words in the Song of Solomon, an army "Bright as the moon, glorious as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners," Song 6:10)