New location!!

This blog has moved location!!!

Please head on over to my new location:

http://ryanthecalvinist.blogspot.com/

On the Supressing of the Truth (Romans 1:18)

Romans 1:18-19 (ESV)
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.  For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them."

Recently I got into a rather uncomfortable conversation with a fellow religious studies major.  It actually began by discussing Freud's insane views on the origins of religion, which my 580 class was to read for the following class time.  I will not go into great detail at this time... but Freud's view as to the origin of religion itself has NO historical basis whatsoever.  It is just nuts.

However the conversation somehow got much more uncomfortable.  My classmate, Ben, charged me with not understanding people.  This is somewhat puzzling... as I am a person actually.  But when Ben asked me "what is the number one reason people become atheists," I answered truthfully and honestly:  They are suppressing the knowledge of God.  Ben practically dropped his jaw and stared at me.   He asked me what I thought would happen if I told that to an atheist, perhaps a Pastafarian when they protest on campus.  I recognized that they would punch me and deny it.  OBVIOUSLY if they are suppressing the knowledge of YHWH, they are NOT going to ADMIT they are suppressing that knowledge!!  They claim their IS no God... how could they SUPPRESS what they do not believe even EXISTS?

So will the atheist deny that he is suppressing the knowledge of God?  Totally.  And.... why exactly should I trust the testimony of an atheist as to whether or not he suppresses the knowledge of God over the testimony of that very living God?  I cannot exegete the person's personal experience.  Am I saying there are not other factors that contribute to someone's unbelief?  As far as basic belief in deity (which is NOT the same as belief and trust in Christ to save from sins)?  Sure... there may be conventional notions of that person being "hurt" by legalism or religion, etc.  (Which is not a very compelling argument... I'm not going to NOT use an iPod just because there are a lot of Apple fanboy nuts who are jerks who insult my Windows 7-loving ways!)  However, ULTIMATELY they are indeed engaged in a constant and fairly draining sin.

It must be exhausting for someone to be constantly suppressing the knowledge of God... whether you suppose it is ingrained somehow within us in some God-shaped hole, as Augustine wrote of... or you want to categorize it biblically and recognize the heavens and the sky proclaim God's majestic handiwork.  Yet as you read on in Romans 1, that is just what they did... they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped ANYTHING else they could to help them suppress the guilty knowledge they have of their sin and of the existence of the true living God.  Even looking around today, we see little difference.  The unregenerate believer worships a functional savior rather than repenting and worshiping YHWH, maker of heaven and earth.  Whether they worship technology, relationships, sex, substances, or their job... their idols are in place to blot out the truth of their sin and of the truth of God's existence.

Praise God for his love and is mercy... Christian, even when we were actively denying the very existence of God, he died for us.  And nonChristian, though you are currently suppressing the knowledge of God, you need to know that he died to pay for sins - he actually atoned for sins on the cross, paying the fine for everyone who turns from their sin (repentance) and places their trust in Christ's finished work (death on the cross, burial, and resurrection) to save from sin and God's holiness.

A scandle with God's sovereign plan to save?

Today in my REL 580 "Theories of Religious Studies", Dr. Given brought up something interesting that the Deists and Natural Religion gurus of the 18th century were bothered by. something called "The Scandal of Particularity." This "scandal" deals with their rebellion against the notion of God choosing to save a VERY SMALL group of people throughout History - taking true form in Abraham and throughout to those in the New Covenant today. This seems to be the minority today, in our world of fast and easy communication. But consider how many people have lived on this planet... and in places where the gospel never reached... or even a word of the Torah uttered. It is quite clear that the VAST majority of people, according to biblical Christianity, will be in Hell after the final judgment for all eternity.

These more "enlightened" thinkers (oh brother!) gauge that if there was really any justice in the world, religion must be natural and available to everyone, making salvation available at all times in all places. These men saw it as unjust for a god to only make salvation available to a select few, and to condemn several worlds full of people who do not have an option to be saved. After all, how can those who do not know about the gospel be held accountable for not being saved? Thus, this is the "scandal of particularity." That God would only save a particular people within a particular time. And somehow this doesn't sit well with human beings and their (fallen) concept of what is just and good.

Actually, this is Palagianism, run amok

The very "problem" itself is nothing more than the complaining of sinful, wretched, rebellious creatures who HATE their creator and are using this as an excuse to not repent and trust the gospel to save. It if fundamentally flawed. It presupposes that we, as sons and daughters of our first father Adam, are morally neutral (or even good) creatures, who deserve salvation... who are not responsible for their damnation if they can't accept a way out of it.

This is not just unbiblical, it is counter-biblical! It spits in the face of the gospel of divine grace.

Their dichotomy begins with their selfish man-centered concept of "justice" they have cooked up and are forcing upon our Sovereign Lord. Yet while they scream WE WANT JUSTICE!!! they deceive themselves. They do not want justice. They do NOT want JUSTICE!! JUSTICE would mean that Adam and all of his offspring would spend an eternity experiencing God's righteous wrath in Hell! That is what we deserve. By nature we are in fact children of WRATH (Eph 2). We are not morally neutral beings who have gotten a bum deal for being born at a time or place absent from Christianity... we are at enmity with God from birth... nah, from conception, as we are sinful from the moment we are conceived (Ps 51). THAT is what is JUSTICE. That is what we all deserve by our nature.

And yet... God does not give us justice. THANKFULLY he does not. He is a God of justice... but he does not pour out his just wrath on me for my sin... he poured it out 2000 years ago on Christ Jesus, who was the Godman... lived a perfect life... and gave his life as a ransom for many. His righteousness was imputed to me, and my sinful wretchedness was imputed to him. He gave me his righteousness to wear as a pristine pure white coat... and in love he took on my disgusting dung-covered jacket as his own. I do not deserve salvation. It OWED to me or to you or to ANYONE. It is not owed by those living in nations where Christianity is prevalent, nor is it owed by those who live in jungles unaware of the gospel... nor was it owed by those living prior to the free offer of the gospel!

That is the thing about GRACE... it is never earned. Never deserved. It is given out freely, graciously by the giver. God would have been 100% PERFECTLY JUST to not offer salvation to ANYONE. But he chose, because he FELT LIKE IT, because it pleased him to do so, to save SOME. He chose to save a particular people for himself... to give to the Son (Jesus Christ) as a payment for his selfless humiliation - the death on a cross. Because God foreloved he chose to shed his blood for all who repent and believe the gospel - for the elect, chosen before the foundation of the world.

I do not scream out for JUSTICE. Instead I thank God for his glorious, marvelous GRACE. Completely undeserved, applied to my account.

<><

A coherant picture resulting from the Gospel accounts

Yes.  Believe it or not... it is possible.  Actually don't "not" believe it.  If you do (or don't?) then you are just wrong.  So stop it.  Or do it.  I forget. 

Moving on.

One of the "drums" my extremely liberal professor Boyer was banging away at this past intercession course was that there is no way to generalize about an event or teaching of Christ from the pages of Scripture.  We can, according to Boyer, only say with any certainty what Mark says about Jesus doing _____ or how John characterizes Jesus during ______.  Each account exists isolated from each other; it would be foolish to attempt to reconcile these accounts into one coherent account of the life and teachings and death and resurrection of Jesus... as... "Then you would be creating a gospel that is unlike ANY of the four canonical Gospels: a gospel that does not even exist!!" 

Right.  I call shenanigans.

It sounds profound, after all.  I mean, if I were to take clips from various films or television episodes... and attempt to edit them together into one story line... I would not have anything resembling the original... rather I would have some strange concoction of Top Gun/Back to the Future/Batman Forever/The Naked Gun/Monsters Inc/Tin Man... right???  The end result of the edit would be essentially a film freak... not fitting into any of the categories of films we started with.  The end result of the piecing together project would be a NEW story that the films themselves, in their contexts, never attempted to tell.  Any attempt to splice them together would be to rape them from their historical and meaningful and artistic contexts.... RIGHT????

I would put to you, this is the summary of the argument Boyer presented in class concerning ANY (and I do mean ANY) attempt to harmonize the material presented in the four canonical Gospels to arrive at any coherent look at the Gospel accounts.  Pardon me while I throw up... the argument is severely flawed at its core.  The film example he briefly alluded to (and which I have faithfully, i would argue, expanded on) presupposes that the gospel accounts are of completely different events and story lines.  Top Gun has little in common with Back to the Future (aside from the fact they both were made in the mid 80s), and even less in common with Tin Man and Batman Forever!!  Each film is looking at its own fictional story to entertain the audience, completely separate from one another.  And therein lies the error.

The film example uses distinctly different fictional stories and a hack job to attempt to make a brand new story from various pieces.  However, NO ONE would suggest this is the case when reading or watching the daily news.  When reading about an event - historical or current - it is often helpful to gain multiple perspectives on the news piece at hand.  Multiple papers may show a wide array of opinions and perspectives on a single issue or occurrence.  Fox News will include details of a story that are not to be found on CNN... and the BBC or The Telegraph (a British news outlet) are likely to include perspectives on a single story rarely spelled out clearly in an American newspaper. 

I think you see my point, but I will put it to you another way.  I just hope this example is not too crass.

Some of us can probably recount the various camera angles on the World Trade Center crashes on 9/11 by heart.  Different media outlets got a different perspective on the plane crashes.  See bellow (disturbing images)



Now I ask you... is there something particularly wrong or DRASTICALLY INSANE about piecing this footage together to show the unfolding of events on 9/11?  True... camera A did not see things camera B was able to include.  Does this mean that camera B made things up that A did not know about?  This is a stupid question.  The answer is clearly no.  Additionally, you probably know the majority of footage we have of the first plane crash that occurred is not from the major news sources but from independent amateur footage. What of this then?  Using Boyer's (and other liberals') logic... we can not POSSIBLY string together the amateur footage with the footage from Fox News of the second plane crash to arrive at a clearer and truthful look at what happened on 9/11, CAN WE???  After all... Fox News Channel MUST have been meaning to tell the ENTIRE story of 9/11 with their cameras from their perspective, as if it is the only perspective to see the footage from.  Or... is this not the case?

If we are to be HYPER-critical of harmonization of the Gospel accounts to give us a clear and concise record of the life, teaching, death, and resurrection of Christ, then we MUST be consistent and be HYPER-critical of ANY attempt ANYWHERE to harmonize an account of an event or teaching.  Just as the liberal Boyer wants to look at the crucifixion of Christ, and come away from it claiming any form of harmonization does damage to the artistic and cultural context in which the story was composed and told... so we would HAVE to look at different footage from 9/11 and resist putting together that footage to understand what happened that fateful day. 

I am unaware of CNN's cameras claiming to provide the entirity of angles when it comes to a given news story.  I am not familiar with Fox News' declaration that every camera angle it provides DEFINITIVELY tells each and EVERY story to the fullest, with NOTHING left to uncover from any other possible camera angles on a given story.  Similarly, Matthew does not claim to pen the FINAL WORD on the teaching. life, death, and resurrection of Christ.  Luke does not claim for itself that ONLY what is recorded in the pages of his Gospel is what actually happened during Jesus' ministry and mission to redeem a lost people.  Quite the contrary.  Even John wrote in John 21 that Jesus did MANY OTHER things that are not recorded in this particular book.  No gospel is comprehensive in and of itself on the life and death and resurrection of Christ!!  No gospel even claims this for itself. 

Despite what the liberals want you to think/believe... the Gospel accounts CAN be reconciled with each other.  One CAN look at the three "options" for Jesus' final words and come up with a definitive last phrase by Christ:  "It is finished," as described by John. (For more on this, see below)*  Coming so this conclusion is fairly simple once we understand that each of the gospel writers had a unique vantage point of the events which unfolded.  Though the vantage points, or camera angles, differed slightly, there is plenty of evidence to piece the different points in such a way that a fairly clear and accurate depiction of Jesus is carefully edited together to give a clear picture of the historical reality of what occurred, as recorded in the New Testament.  Historical documents and records are often needed to be harmonized to show a complete picture of what happened, as no single account claims to be the final say on said event.  If we are willing to be wisely charitable with other ancient and modern historical accounts... there is absolutely NO reason to not apply this method of harmonization to another ancient document - The Holy Bible.

Of course... seeing as the Bible is literally God's breathed-out Word... this gives even more reason to have trust in the reliability of the documents and in harmonization.  But I suppose that is a slightly separate (though indeed important) issue.



*The last words of Jesus recorded by Matthew and Mark are "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"  This is not to be understood as Jesus' last words, but they are the last words that these two gospel writers, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, recorded.  Mark, for instance, also records that "Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last" (15:37).  Luke, then, gives  the reader WHAT that loud cry was.  "Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!'"  Again... Jesus then, having said this, breaths his last.  So what was uttered with his final breath?  "It is finished."  After this, Jesus bows his head and gives up his spirit, for he is now actually dead, having accomplished redemption.

Christ's Pefect Obedience for My Account

Toying w/ this idea... so hang in there with me...

If the work of Christ was limited to the cross in the forgiveness of sins and the wrath of God being transferred to Christ on my account... this does me ZERO amount of good. Ok, I'm forgiven of my sin by God, and God isn't justly furious with me because of my sin... so what? This would do me NO good because ... if I only had my sins forgiven and wrath for me staved off... that doesn't mean I get anything GOOD out of it. Nothing inherently positive. Sure, God not being mad is ok. But is it good?

Think about it. Just because someone isn't pissed at you doesn't mean you have a good relationship with that person, does it? You can not hate someone, but then again not have that individual be your favorite person. Just because you don't want to burn their face with a hot iron doesn't mean you want to give them a hug and let them use your favorite robe when they come over for a late night of pizza & Star Wars (the real trilogy, not that prequel nonsense).

Christ's death on the cross was marvelous. Christ was our substitute!! He died the death we should have died. God's wrath abides on us, but Christ took the punishment for us. Amazing love.

And yet, there is more to justification than that.

The cross doesn't just put me "not on God's bad list" anymore. It actually puts me on the "good" list, if I can call it that (though it is not MY goodness). How? Because Christ didn't just die the death I should have died... He lived the life I could not live.

Romans 5:19 speaks greatly of this truth. "For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

Through Christ's perfect obedience - his sinless life - he wasn't ONLY able to fulfill the requirement of the sacrificial lamb without blemish as a symbol... His blemish-less life BECOMES mine. His life of perfect law keeping - something NO mere man has a hope of accomplishing - is what is granted to me and all who repent and trust in Christ for their salvation from sin and the wrath that is to come.

Again, I know this is orthodoxy... but I'm trying to put it all together in my head. Hope I'm on the right track in understanding this glorious doctrine of justification.

I love this glorious gospel of grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone, as detailed in Scripture ALONE.

Are You Wasting Your Life?

Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?  But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised.  And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.  We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised if it is true that the dead are not raised.  For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised.  And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.  Then those who also have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.  if in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
- Paul, 1 Corinthians 15:12-18 (ESV)

Paul said if Christ ain't resurrected then we wasted out lives /
  but that implies that our life's built around Jesus being alive.
-Lecrae, "Don't Waste Your Life"


The lyric penned by Lecrae above should really cause you to think.  It really causes the passage in 1 Corinthians 15 to stand out I think.  I was aware of the portion very well that says if Christ is not resurrected, we should be pitied.  If it could be shown that Jesus was not actually raised, then we are FOOLS for worshiping to resurrected Jesus!  Heck, if Jesus was not raised... would you still be a Christian?  If it could be proven... there is no way I would persist in the faith.  Hedonism, I would greet thee with open arms!  If Christ has not been raised, we are the dumbest people to walk the planet.

But the second line from Lecrae caused me to think about the Scripture in a clearer way.  For us to be considered fools for thinking Jesus has been raised, if he had not been raised in truth, our lives would HAVE to be FOCUSED on Jesus actually being risen!

I wonder how many professing Christians would affirm with their mouths that this is true- that Jesus is risen, but they do not have their life truly centered ON that wonderful truth?  What we do is to be focused on Christ.  What I do should be focused on Christ.  God has given me the ability to write for the cause of Christ... yet I have not blogged in quite a while... have not used this God-given tool to proclaim Christ and him crucified for our sins and resurrected from the grave for the glory of God.  God has given me the mouth to speak, but how often have I remained silent about the gospel I cling to for my salvation?

It is certainly easier to sit and not work for the cause of Christ.  Personally I dream often about building a better computer... getting a new iPod... seeing the next movie I am interested in... etc.  So many distractions are available to us.  But our lives are but a flash in the pan of eternity.  And I'm not interested in wasting this life the God has graciously given me.

I am not trying to be legalistic about this or come down on anyone else's case.... I'm talking about where I'm at in this point in my life.  I really don't want to waste my life chasing the wind.  I want to be working for the cause of Christ... to grow in His righteousness.

<><

A helpful resource would be checking out John Piper's book "Don't Waste Your Life."




"Don't Waste Your Life" - Lecrae

The Gospel Is Not To Be Compromised.

I am pretty much on the verge of leaving the congregation my parents attend. This may seem of little importance, but with the exception of college, I have faithfully been with them in the church I was raised, the mega church, and finally now the small Bible church. However, something has happened that has caused me to question my role in the congregation, so to speak.

I do not want to go into details... who knows who will be reading this post... and I don't want to bore you or gossip.

So here's the gist, as it were.

June 7, 2009 - guest speaker "preaches" at the church. his gospel is an urgency message of sorts, charging us the importance of being fishers of men to spread the gospel, by fishing and catching men for God, essentially. the problem came though from his lack of gospel in the sermon. he told more stories about himself than I thought possible. Much of the sermon was him preaching about himself, rather than him preaching about forgiveness of sins in Christ. In fact, the cloest thing he ever even came to the "gospel" was his mentioning he shared with one gentleman "the four spiritual laws." If you are unfamiliar, law #1 is "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life." ::tries not to puke:: This is NOT the gospel! It is not really even true for that matter... but anyway.

Well I messaged the church group I started on Fb and told them that s sermon where the man preaches about himself and tells jokes is not a sermon. One where Christ crucified is not proclaimed is not a sermon. But the person who spoke apparently is an alumni, so to speak, of the congregation, and so no one saw it fit to out and out identify what (if anything) was wrong with the sermonette. My reaction in the message was a bit harsh, i recongized that and repented. Only then my repentance was called (unjustly) into question, and I found out that the leadership felt "more action" should be taken. They wanted to meet with me, but I declined. They seem to want me to repent of not just HOW I said what I said, but for SAYING what I said.

NO. The Gospel if of FAR more importance than man's feelings.

So as a result, I am looking at various churches... some Acts 29, Reformed Baptist and Presby in America for the summer. I don't want to be a loser and up and leave like that over something that may seem so trivial. But then again, the gospel is not trivial... it is CENTRAL.


I know I haven't written much lately. But I don't have the processes anymore to write really long blogs. And If i can't produce GOOD material... why produce half-thought out crud? lol.

On the Marketing of God's Word...

 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (ESV)
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.


I am a big fan of the ESV.  I find it to be a very word-for-word accurate translation yet understandable.  I like that while it is similar to the NRSV, the version the Religious Studies Dept. uses here @ MSU, it reflects much more theologically conservative and faithful readings of many a passage that the NRSV... well... theologically butchers.  I've often wondered back and forth on the issue, however of the TNIV - Today's New International Version.  I know some personally who use this version... but I know there is quite a bit of controversy surrounding the translation, and not from just the KJV-Only nutjobs.  Many of the men I respect most - Al Mohler, John Piper, J.I. Packer, etc. are very distrusting of the TNIV for various reasons.  (One of the more damning aspects of the TNIV is its translation of Psalm 34:20 in such a way that actually REMOVES the prophetic reference to Christ - "[God] protects all their bones, not one of them will be broken," changing the singular "his" to the generic plural "their".)

However, this post is NOT about the TNIV.  (though I have spent too much time already rambling about it!)

While listening to a podcast by Rev. Al Mohler (here), I noticed something that the good Reverend pointed out.  The Bible is the Word of God, yes?  to equip for every good work... to teach... etc.?  Well...   


  
   
 
    
   

 
 
 
  
 
 
 


Do you get the point???

SO many "specialty" Bibles to fill market niches...

I have, for instance an NIV Student Bible... something more or less for teens with its level of notes... but I have it LEATHER BOUND.  I even had my name engraved... for WHAT?  a Bible that basically "expires" after I turn 18 or 19??  Does that seem... off to anyone?  It does to me.

There is NOTHING wrong with study bibles.  I have an ESV Study Bible AND an ESV Reformation Study Bible... both of which are amazing tools for study!  I often feel lost if I do not have either of those Bibles with me, ESPECIALLY when I am working through the Old Testament, with so many cities and terminologies I am unfamiliar with.  However many MANY of these I am skeptical of go beyond the scholarly emphasis.  They often will have study notes that focus on... well... me.  The Bible for the 12 yr old boy who plays Nintendo Wii... where does it end???  The focus isn't on helping the reader understand the given Bible passage.  It is on meeting the individual's felt NEEDS. 

Scholarship and theology has been exchanged for self-help Bible programs. ... and i'm not even TALKING about the "translations" themselves... from the TNIV to the NLT...  I'm not saying we have to have NO study notes and NO designs on the Bibles... that is fine.  But a camo Bible?  I mean really...

What are your thoughts??

If the law has not passed away, what then of grace?

Personally, I am in the process of working my way through the Gospel of Mark in preparation/repentance as we move closer and closer to Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday. However, a question came up today from a professor of mine that I had to address.


Matthew 5:17-20 {ESV}
[Jesus taught, saying:] "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever laxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."

Late last year I did a rather lengthy blog about the later portion of this verse -- "exceeding the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees." This post however will look at the earlier portion of this verse, particularly v 18-- the bit about NOTHING of the law is passing away with Christ's coming.

What exactly brought about the gears in my head turning in regards to this verse? I started focusing a bit on this verse as a result of a brief conversation I had with one of my professors and a fellow Religious Studies Major. I do not exactly know HOW we got to talking about it... but Travis mentioned a student in his youth group had asked about why they were no longer bound to the levitical law. Travis gave the answer, "Because we are under the new covenant," yet admitted he did not have, at that moment, a better answer than that and began to wonder a bit for himself what the answer was. My Prof. alluded to Matthew 5 in stating that Jesus had said he did not come to do away with the law, and not one "jot or tittle" would pass away from the law.

The next words (as close as I can remember) were "Now, this is in complete contradiction to what is written in Galatians! Yes it is -- Complete contradiction... [Christians] pick-and-choose which rules to follow and which ones to not."


For better or for worse, I did not respond to that comment. Possibly for worse. I had no desire to get into a theological discussion /argument with her however. Not only does she come at scholarship from a more secular angle, her coming at the conversation from a... well... NOT Reformed tradition means we are coming to the table from utterly different presuppositions about what the purpose of the law is, how man is saved, etc. Furthermore, if I do not chew on something for a while, my tendency to stutter really gets in the way. Either way, I figure I could pseudo-respond in blog-fashion. Certainly my prof's noting that Jesus said that not one bit of the law would pass away. However, I would take GREAT exception to the rest of her statement. To claim Jesus' words are contradictory of Paul's?

So what is my response?

I will first state the presuppositions I hold. I and a Reformed Christian and hold to the inerrancy and infallibility of the Holy Bible. I hold to the actual authorship of the Bible-- that is, if a book in the cannon says it is written by St. Paul... it WAS written by St. Paul. This goes for ANY book of the Bible, btw... even Daniel! I believe the Bible as being, as Paul wrote to Timothy, "theopneustos" -- breathed-out of the mouth of God. And as it is theopneustos, and our God is a God of order, not confusion or contradiction, then the Bible never contradicts itself. Any "contradiction" that we may observe IS either able to be harmonized with clear Scripture or may be beyond our comprehension as fallen man to understand. Again... no true contradictions in the Scripture. No double-talk from the Holy Spirit.

Now that that's out of the way...

Again, Jesus DID say that not one bit of the law is to be thrown away with the coming of Christ. This only makes sense with what Jesus was doing in the sermon of the mount - showing the TRUE nature of the law in the first place! Again, the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5, 6, & 7) is NOT some sweet little sermon about good morals. Not at all. You think you're only guilty of murder if you actually KILL a guy?? HAH! If you even are P-Oed with someone, you are a murderer at heart! You think you can get a divorce?? If you get any sort of divorce other than sexual immorality, you are an ADULTERER! You think you are to only love those you like? Love EVERYONE! Oh and by the way... adultery isn't only what you do ... it includes your THOUGHT LIFE!! Not the nicest most encouraging sermon I've ever read, I'll tell you that! But this is completely in line with what Christ himself said about the law. Not only was he not abolishing it... he was showing that the TRUE nature of the law is SO MUCH more tedious and demanding on man than once thought! What does the law demand? Jesus tells us: "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Mt 5:48).

Just in case his disciples and those listening to his sermons thought Christ had come to do AWAY with the laws, he makes them IMPOSSIBLE to follow, by saying that through the law, Christ demands PERFECTION!

So... How does this fit in with salvation by grace, apart from the law? Easy. The law was never meant to save anyone. It was to point toward the Savior-- Christ Jesus. "Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes the knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:19-20). Paul writes here that the law was NOT to justify anyone in the sight of God; it can't be done!

How then are we justified? Romans 5:9 - "Since, therefore, we have now been justified by [Christ's] blood, how much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God." Galatians 2:16 - "We know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified."

Romans 5:18-21:
"As one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Furthermore, as written throughout Paul's letters and in Hebrews, we know that Christ's sinless perfect life allowed him to be the perfect atoning sacrifice for our sin to be made "once for all," as in NO more sacrifices are needed. That's it -- "it is accomplished/finished" as Christ said on the cross. His death atones for our sin, and HIS righteousness in life becomes OUR righteousness, imputed to all who repent of sin and place their trust in the gospel!

There is NO contradiction between what Christ spoke of concerning the law in the Sermon on the Mount -- that not one part of it would be done away with -- and the gospel of grace through faith, apart from the law. The law has not passed away... but its purpose was never to save us through obedience. For salvation via obedience to the law, PERFECT OBEDIENCE is required; this is something we are utterly unable to accomplish because of our utter sinfulness.

The law has not passed away. Its purpose is now what it always has been -- to bring about the knowledge of our sin. It is a signpost pointing toward Christ Jesus. The law points out our utter sinfulness and inability to obey the law perfectly and be righteous of our own doing. However... there is one who DID fulfill the law by perfect obedience -- Christ Jesus. And his righteousness and death on the cross purchases salvation for all who will repent and believe. This salvation is by grace through faith, not a result of works... so that no one may boast (Ephesians 2:8-9).

The law is still there... still showing us our need for the Savior. And the fulfillment of the law is Jesus Christ-- our needed Savior. Salvation is not through the law that condemns. It is in the lived-out righteousness and perfect atoning sacrifice paid in full on the cross for the sin of all who would repent and believe.

It is a beautiful and glorious gospel.


<><

Grood Stuff @ Boulevard Baptist

1 Corinthians 2:1-5 (ESV)
And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.

If truth be known, I would probably be accused of being a "church hopper" by some (or many). This is unfair. I have not been hopping for the sake of hopping or until I find a church that has the right color of carpet or that only sings Charlie Hall praise choruses ('cause Chris Tomlin is better anyway... lol), etc. Someday I will write a lengthy blog about my journey through (more or less) Evangelical churches, starting with my parents being raised in the Oneness cult and then onto a Pentecostal-Evangelical church, then to a watered-down-gospel-less mega-church, and beyond. But not tonight.

I think I mentioned in a previous blog that Kacey and I were looking at churches, trying to find a good one (rare in any town I am convinced, Springfield or no). Well, without going into too much detail about the search (which consisted of mostly MAJOR misses, and only two good hits), I think we have finally found the congregation God would have us be in for the dividing of His Word. Boulevard Baptist Church.

Kacey and I have been attending there for about a month now or so, and we are really happy there. Even though I am not really Baptist (I would consider myself a "Baptistyrian"), but I recognize good Christ-centered preaching. Pastor Doug Shivers definitely preaches a Christ-centered gospel. I will admit, I am a HUGE fan of expository preaching - going into the meaning of the text with the Greek and Hebrew. Currently, Boulevard is not doing this. However, this is because they are doing an overview series on the ENTIRE Bible - one book a week. One cannot go into every Hebrew or Greek term in a book in an hour long sermon. However, he does give a very succinct overview of the book the congregation has been reading the past week, picking out the key passages that sum up the author's intention in writing the book.

There is something else that is amazing about Boulevard though, something rare in Evangelicalism today. Pastor Doug preaches Christ in every sermon. Yes, every sermon includes the gospel. I am not talking about a mere invitation at the end of the hour. I mean, he shows the book's place in God's redeeming a people unto Himself, and points to the gospel - Christ and the atoning work of the cross. A couple of weeks ago, Pastor Doug pointed this out as something pastors rarely do, and how it is needed for preaching. I did not want to be overly skeptical, but I wanted to be discerning and asked myself, "Okay, so he gives this principle lip-service. But does he actually do it in his sermons?" YES!! He does! Take today's sermon on Jeremiah. After giving the core of the book, he focused attention to Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is a CLEAR presentation of the gospel and God's promise of a new covenant!! So many could have missed this. But this church's focus is on proclaiming Christ and him crucified.

This church feels as though it could be a home for Kacey and I, and this is something I consider a blessing. Next weekend, Kacey and I will start attending Sunday School there, as they start a series through the Book of Hebrews. (I will be sure to bring my ESV Study Bible for help... )


<><

	Currently Listening To: Live Unplugged By Jeremy Camp see related