Author: Manfred

by

“Cavalry” to Rob Bell’s rescue!

Apostate false preachers unite behind Rob Bell! Carlton Pearson to the “rescue”, quoting Wayne Dyer and denying the Bible as the Word of God – he claims it’s the “inspired word of man about God.” He sounds just like Rob Bell and enthusiastically agrees with him in the video below.

Thin ice, a tender strand of a spider’s web – is all that withholds these people from the wrath of God. Their feet shall slip in due time.

From http://apprising.org/2011/03/16/universalist-carlton-pearson-defends-rob-bell/

UNIVERSALIST CARLTON PEARSON DEFENDS ROB BELL

By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Mar 16, 2011 in Current Issues, Emergence Christianity, Emergent Church, Features, Rob Bell, Youth Ministry

I told you in Apprising Ministries: Rob Bell Resources that online apologetics and discernment ministries have been warning you about the warped and toxic teachings of the Emerging Church rock star pastor Rob Bell for years now.

I know I’ve been trying to tell you that Bell himself is under the spell of a ne0-Gnostic corruption called Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM), which is now pandemic within mainstream evangelicalism through its foolish embrace of the sinfully ecumenical neo-liberal cult of the Emergent Church aka the Emerging Church with its quasi-universalism in a new version of postmodern Progressive Christian theology under their spiritual circus “big tent” of empty Emergence Christianity.

And this is the point being missed: Rob Bell’s gospel is essentially the same as the newer postmodern form of progressive/liberal Christianity—Liberalism 2.0—that McLaren began laying out systematically in his last book A New Kind of Christianity (ANKoC). You need to remember that liberal theology, aka modern theology, was the doomed attempt to come up with a verison of Christianity compatable with the modern culture of its day; and with the EC, what we’re dealing with is the same ill-fated idea; only this time to a postmodern culture.

As you can see e.g. in Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Panel Discussion On Brian McLaren Dr. Al Mohler and some of his professors recently held a round table discussion on ANKoC; and Dr. Mohler himself said, “If you actually read the Bible, you are going to end up having to say that this is a dishonest attempt to make the Bible say what is does not say.”

The same thing can now be said about Bell’s mythology concerning heaven and hell in his new book. Currently in the midst of his book tour Rob Bell takes us deep into the postmodern Wonderland of Humpty Dumpty Language where words take on whatever meaning an individual wishes them to have; for example, Bell says he’s not a universalist all the while teaching a form of Christian Universalism in that book.

Even people normally supportive of Rob Bell are starting to notice; today we see a case in point from Ben Witherington in Rob Bell on the Hot Seat, where he says of Bell’s appearance on MSNBC:

What I find troubling about this video, and with the interview Tuesday night in New York that is also making the rounds on YouTube is that Rob  is evasive in both cases.    This is not the same approach he has taken in the past on a variety of complex issues,  and it is troubling indeed.    Whatever else one can say about generous orthodoxy, it should not include suggesting that polar opposite views about God are equally orthodox,  nor that contradictory views on key Scriptures  are equally plausible or possible. (Online source)

It’s now really beginning to appear that Rob Bell has made a real tactical blunder because in Brian McLaren Speaks As A Universalist I showed you that at the corrupt heart of this Liberalism 2.0 is the doctrine of universalism; and the popularity of men like McLaren and Bell within mainline progressive churches is perfectly understandable because — they speak from the world, and the world listens to them (1 John 4:5).

Here’s the crux of the matter, both Brian McLaren and Rob Bell claim to be evangelical all the while espousing a newer postmodern hybrid form of progressive Christian theology that’s completely at odds with evangelicalism, and which is still being cobbled together by such characters as uber-liberal theologian Harvey Cox and his friend panentheist/process theologian Philip Clayton.

However, Dr. Michael Horton is very helpful here as he correctly teaches us that:

The term [evangelical] itself derives from the Greek word euangelion, translated “Gospel,” and it became a noun when the Protestant reformers began their work of bringing the “one holy, catholic and apostolic church” back to that message by which and for which it was created. People still used other labels, too, like “Lutheran,” “Reformed,” and later, “Puritans,” “Pietists,” and “Wesleyans.”

Nevertheless, the belief was that the same Gospel that had united the “evangelicals” against Rome’s errors could also unite them against the creeping naturalism and secularism of the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century. The so-called “Evangelical Awakening” in Britain coincided with America’s own “Great Awakening,” as Wesley, Whitefield, Edwards, Tennant, and so many others centered their preaching on the atonement. (Online source)

Sadly, neither Rob Bell nor Brian McLaren can even see the evangelical neighborhood from where they’ve currently drifted; and in my opinion frankly, I don’t think they even want to see it. With this all in mind, it does speak loudly against the mystical musings of Rob Bell when Word Faith universalist Carlton Pearson decides to come to his defense below with an all-out attack on Holy Scripture, which is the only way one could ever defend Rob Bell’s mythology.

But I have some sobering news for you. Absolutely nothing; I repeat, absolutely nothing on this earth could ever even begin to compare with hell and the wrath of the LORD God Almighty:

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses.

How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?

For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
(Hebrews 10:26-31)

I strongly suggest that you make some time to seriously meditate upon that; before it’s too late…

by

National Association of Apostate Evangelicals

The NAE has long been a friend of the World Council of Churches and false prophets. Ted Haggard did them no favors as president. And now – proving that the doctrine of Total Depravity does NOT mean that people are as bad as they can be, the NAE collectively displays this doctrine of man’s innate sinfulness as they run away from the narrow Truth of the Word of God they purport to serve. May God have mercy on those deceived by this bunch.

From: http://apprising.org

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS SEEKS COMMON GROUND WITH MORMONISM

By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Mar 10, 2011 in AM Missives, Current Issues, Features, Islam, Mormonism

The online apologetics and discernment work Apprising Ministries has been documenting the growing falling away of the mainstream evangelical community.

I’ve also warned you that there is a tsunami of apostasy—pushed along by 1 Peter 4:17 judgments—headed toward the church visible.  Not a few of these judgments have come through evanjellyfish’s foolish embrace of the sinfully ecumenical Emergent Church aka the Emerging Church headed by the unholy trinity of apostates, Living Spiritual Teacher and EC guru Brian McLaren, universalist EC pastor Doug Pagitt, and his friend Tony Jones, the progressive “theologian in residence” at Solomon’s Porch.

Here’s a quick synopsis of how we came to live in this age, which has critically obscured our reverent fear of the LORD God Almighty. Satan finally succeeded in raising up his next generation of what Dr. Walter Martin, who was widely recognized as the “father of modern cult apologetics,” had called the Cult of Liberal Theology. And in an onslaught against the Body of Christ beginning just after the first World War the Devil started playing the heartstrings of mankind’s selfish sinful nature like a master violinist. A veritable symphony of insipid indifference and tepid tolerance, which continues to serve the purpose of amusing the enemy of men’s souls to this very day.

A perfect example is the EC’s new version of postmodern Progressive Christian theology—a Liberalism 2.0—under their spiritual circus “big tent” of empty Emergence Christianity; now one of its biggest proponents, Emerging Church rock star pastor Rob Bell, is all but Out Of The Closet For Universalism and set to unload what appears to be a form of heretical Christian Universalism right within the heart of the visible church. Spiritually spineless evanjellyfish is actually defenseless against this because for years now it’s been using the warped and toxic teachings of such as these in their own Young Adult and Youth ministries, which has collapsed the pillar of sola Scriptura in its own younger sectors.

Syncretism is the order of the day as evidenced by what seems to be a Chrislamic movement. Take for example the latest book by theologian Miroslav Volf who puts forth the highly subjective postmodern mythology “that Christians and Muslims, notwithstanding their important and ineradible differences, have a common and similarly understood God.”[1] With this in mind let me remind you that Phyllis Tickle, easily the Empress of this Emergence apostasy, has mused that Mormonism Is Arguably The Fourth Great Abrahamic Faith; and she’s not alone. As you can see in SBC’s Richard Land Says Mormonism Fourth Abrahamic Faith Land, who’s President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission for the Slowly Becoming Catholic, dreams that:

perhaps the most charitable way for an evangelical Christian to look at Mormonism is to look at Mormonism as the fourth Abrahamic faith. (Online source)

Only in the postmodern Wonderland of Humpty Dumpty language could this be so; from having studied Comparative Religion and non-Christian cults for 23+ years now, I can assure you that Islam and Mormonism are not Abrahamic faiths. As you’ll read in <a title="Permanent Link to KEEPING YOU APPRISED OF: ISLAM” href=”http://apprising.org/2005/09/05/keeping-you-apprised-of-islam/&#8221; rel=”bookmark” target=”_blank”>Keeping You Apprised Of: Islam, the god of the Quran is not the God of the Bible; and Mormonism teaches polytheism (many gods), which is in complete conflict with the monotheism (one God) of the Bible. Which now brings me to Press Release: Evangelical Leaders Meet in Utah from the National Association of Evangelicals where we’re told:

The National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) Board of Directors, which includes the CEOs of 40 denominations and representatives of a broad array of evangelical organizations and churches, will gather in Park City and Salt Lake City on March 10, 2011 for its semiannual board meeting.

This meeting is the first to be held in Utah, where the majority of its residents are Mormons. In addition to board business, the NAE leaders will meet with Utah Gov. Gary Herbert at the Governor’s Mansion to discuss various issues of concern to evangelicals. The board will also meet with a leader from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

“We hope this time of dialogue with LDS leaders will deepen our understanding of the Mormon faith and contribute to the ongoing work of evangelicals in Utah,” said Leith Anderson, NAE President. “For the sake of Christ and his kingdom, we seek to represent biblical evangelicalism to those who wouldn’t hear or know. We also look for common ground on issues where we can work together.” (Online source)

Yes, that sounds very pious; but I find myself wondering, whatever happened to preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ—God the Son; co-eternal with God the Father? After-all, Anderson et al have the example of the Apostle Paul in Holy Scripture; permit me to show you:

And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks. When Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, Paul was occupied with the word, testifying to the Jews that the Christ was Jesus. And when they opposed and reviled him, he shook out his garments and said to them, “Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.” (Acts 18:4-6)

Notice carefully that God the Holy Spirit doesn’t say anything about the Apostle Paul looking for common ground on issues where they could work together. Instead, God tells the Christian that we shouldn’t be aligned with unbelieving pagan idolators, which is precisely what the Bible teaches they are:

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, “I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you, and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty.” (2 Corintians 6:14-18)

Years ago Dr. John MacArthur was among those who rightly opposed the Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium document, another example of evangelicals compromising of the Gospel; this begs the question: How can we share the Christian mission with people committed to the false gospel of apostate Roman Catholicism? What MacArthur says below also applies to these foolish Chrislam proponents and to those seeking common ground with the non-Christian cult of Mormonism:

[I]f they are already anti-abortion, and pornography, and homosexuality; they are going to use all of their energies within the framework of their system to go after that. We are committed to that, and we are going after that. There is already a collective movement.

Once you then sort of try to define that as “common spiritual mission” built on “common spiritual unity” you just take doctrine and throw it out the window, and perception is violated, particularly because the Catholic Church claims to be true Christianity, and when we reverse 450 years of history, and just throw our arms around the Roman system, which I think we have to say,…in all honesty, is not a group of wayward brothers but is an apostate form of Christianity.

It is a false religion, it is another religion. When you throw your arms around that you literally have to undo any doctrinal distinction. (Online source)

________________________________________________________________________________

End notes:

[1] Miroslav Volf, Allah: A Christian Response [New York: HarperOne, 2011] , 262.

[2] Phyllis Tickle, The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why [Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2008], 127.

by

The Bible

The Bible is described by faithful men of God as self-authenticating and self-attesting; it does not rely on the human recipients to validate it.  Yet sinful man continues to twist and corrupt what God has revealed – this should not surprise us, as He told us this has happened and will continue to happen.  Read 2 Peter 3:15 & 16 for example.

Here, then, are two articles that look at the Bible – one that displays the truth of God’s Word being self-authenticating and self-attesting; the other proving man will try and twist God’s Word to suit his sinful desires and warped theology.

First, the good:

The Book

by John Samson on February 25, 2011

“It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” – George Washington

“England has become great and happy by the knowledge of the true God by Jesus Christ. This is the secret of England’s greatness.” – Queen Victoria

“The Bible is more than a book. It is a living being within an action, a power which invades everything that opposes its extension.” – Napoleon

“I have known 95 of the world’s great men in my time, and of these, 87 were followers of the Bible.” – W. E. Gladstone

As Christians, we believe the Bible is inspired by God, the very word of God, without error, the sole infallible rule of faith for all Christian life, practice, and doctrine. The word “Bible” means “the book.” Its very title makes the claim that irrespective of whatever else you read, only the Bible is ‘THE BOOK’ because of its Divine authorship.

2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is God breathed…”

Jesus Himself had this high view of Scripture. In quoting from the book of Genesis, Jesus said, “…have you not read what was spoken to you by God…” (Matt. 22:31)

But… the Bible would say this kind of thing, wouldn’t it?

All religions and cults claim that their sacred book is inspired. Is there any objective evidence we can point to that would show the Bible to be of a supernatural origin, or certainly more than a book filled with the thoughts and opinions of mere mortal men?

Here’s just a couple of evidences that support the Bible’s claim to being the Word of God, so that we can believe it, beyond doubt.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Most of the Old Testament was written 3,000 – 4,000 years ago. The New Testament was written nearly 2,000 years ago. Interestingly, the other major religious books were written about the same time. For example:

The Koran – written approx. 1400-1500 years ago

Buddhist writings – written approx. 2,000 years ago

The Hindu Vedas – written approx. 3,200-3,500 years ago

HISTORICAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

It is important at the outset to remind ourselves that people have not always believed what we now believe about our world. There is no doubt that scientific knowledge has taken giant leaps forward in the last 2,000 to 4,000 years.

Now this is where it gets interesting. If we read the books of other religions, they all show the scientific thinking of their day – thinking that has huge fundamental errors. For example, the Hindu Vedas teach that the earth is held up on the back of four elephants. When this was written, this indeed was the thinking of the day. The earth was a very heavy object and something strong had to be holding it up. The biggest creatures around who could carry the biggest weights were the elephants.. so the scientific conclusion was obvious wasn’t it? .. elephants were holding the world up… and earthquakes occurred whenever the elephants shivered. When they shook, the earth shook. Obviously! Whenever someone asked, “who or what is holding the elephants up?” the answer was “a huge turtle which carries the elephants on its back while it swims in a gigantic lake.”

I think you will agree with me that science has found this claim to be an inaccurate one! The Hindu Vedas got it wrong.

The Hindu Vedas also teaches that the moon is 1500 miles above the sun, and that it (the moon) shines with its own light, and that the earth is flat and triangular in shape. All of these statements have proven to be false scientifically.

As another example, among many that could be quoted here, was the belief of the Greeks, that a man called Atlas held the earth on his shoulders.

Every other religious book contains statements which, when they were written, were accepted as correct, but have since been proved to be incorrect… every religious book, except the Bible. And here’s where it gets exciting; the Bible contains no such nonsense Scriptures. Even though when the Bible was written most people believed these wild theories, there is no mention of them in the Bible whatsoever… no elephant theory.. no turtle theory.. no moon shining with its own light theory.. no earth is flat and triangular theory..

What does the Bible say…?

“He hangs the earth on nothing…” – Job 26:7

It was Sir Isaac Newton who discovered the law of gravity and that in fact, the world could hold itself up. Science would therefore confirm this statement from the Bible book of Job around 4,000 years after it was written!

Written around 700 years B.C., Isaiah 40:22, declares:

“He (God) sits above the circle of the earth.”

The Hebrew word for “circle” here is the word “chug” and actually means a sphere. Remember, it was only a few hundred years ago that people were burnt at the stake for believing the world was round. Sadly, these people were even called ‘heretics” by the church. The earth being round is a fact that has only recently gained scientific support, but 2,700 years ago, Isaiah, under the inspiration of God, the Holy Spirit, got it right.

How did Isaiah know this? He had no evidence available to him to suggest the world was round.. but God knew, and it was He who communicated that fact to Isaiah.

Selah! (Stop, ponder, think about it)

Now, the bad:

A ROB BELL TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE?

By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Mar 3, 2011 in Current Issues, Emergence Christianity, Emergent Church, Features, Rob Bell, Semi-Satire, Youth Ministry

This just in from Internet News headquarters, where our motto is: If it’s news; it’s news to us.

Dateline Anywhere USA; maybe even Your Town: This just in…the world’s gone mad.

Ok, that’s not so new; however, there’s been some talk around the blogosphere recently about the release of a translation of the Bible that may have been done by the Emerging Church rock star pastor Rob Bell.

Well yeah, I know that we started the talk; but work with me here, k. And our well-trained theological bloodhound defenders of the faith were allegedly able to track down a copy.

Below is 2 Timothy 4:1-2 from this controversial made-up work:

4:1 I suggest to you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who has already forgiven all of the living and the dead, and by his embracing of humanity himself in the incarnation to bring his kingdom on earth now: 2 discuss the word; be in conversation about social justice always; obfuscate, be vague, and raise many questions, with complete patience and love for mankind.

by

Rob Bell – Apostate Universalist

Rob Bell is “pastor” of Mars Hill “Bible church” in Grand Rapids, MI. He is coy, congenial, and evil in his deceptive lies about the word of God and the Lord Jesus. His “Nooma” videos were the rage in many churches for a while. He has written several books, leading shallow thinking or non-thinking people astray from Truth. Now he is out of the closet as one who believes – as does the cult of Rome – that most folk go to Heaven, because Rob and the pope cannot imagine a God Who is Holy and just; nor do they believe that man is depraved and of no profit to his soul. May God have mercy on any who listen to this snake.

From Apprising.org:

ROB BELL OUT OF THE CLOSET FOR UNIVERSALISM

By Ken Silva pastor-teacher on Feb 25, 2011 in AM Missives, Current Issues, Emergence Christianity, Emergent Church, Features, Rob Bell, Youth Ministry

Since squishy evanjellyfish has now followed the mortally wounded mainline denominations out of the closet with its man-love of heart murmur spirituality at the expense the God-centered spirituality of sola Scriptura, Apprising Ministries has been giving you peeks at its bleak future of division and compromise of God’s Word.

Thanks to its embracing the sinfully ecumenical neo-liberal cult of the Emergent Church aka the Emerging Church—with its  its “big tent” Progressive Christianity aka Emergence Christianity—and by using warped and toxic teachings of EC leaders like Emerging Church rock star pastor Rob Bell, evangelical churches poisoned its own young.

As a result we are seeing within mainstream evangelicalism a reimagined version of just about every piece of antibiblical theology i.e. doctrines of demons that seducing spirits have ever attempted to bring with them as they slither into the Christian Church. One that is being openly promoted now is so-called Christian Universalism.

Lord willing I’ll have more on this later; but for now, I’ve told you for years now that Rob Bell embraces a form of universalism. For the person willing to be objective, the video promo below for his new book dispells any doubt that Bell is teaching this heresy:

A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived.

Rob Bell addresses one of the most controversial issues of faith—the afterlife—arguing, would a loving God send people to eternal torment forever…? With searing insight, Bell puts hell on trial, and his message is decidedly hopeful—eternal life doesn’t start when we die; it starts right now. And ultimately, Love Wins. (Online source)

<iframe src=”http://player.vimeo.com/video/20272585?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0&amp;color=66cc85&#8243; width=”400″ height=”225″ frameborder=”0″></iframe><p><a href=”http://vimeo.com/20272585″>LOVE WINS.</a> from <a href=”http://vimeo.com/realrobbell”>Rob Bell</a> on <a href=”http://vimeo.com”>Vimeo</a&gt;.</p>

LOVE WINS. from Rob Bell on Vimeo.

See also:

BRIAN MCLAREN SPEAKS AS A UNIVERSALIST

DOUG PAGITT AND CHRISTIAN UNIVERSALISM

TONY JONES AND CHRISTIAN UNIVERSALISM

by

Parents – Pay Heed!

Many parents who give their children to the government to train up fail to comprehend a doctrine that most government schools operate under – that of in loco parentis: [Latin, in the place of a parent.] The legal doctrine under which an individual assumes parental rights, duties, and obligations without going through the formalities of legal Adoption.

You can read more of the background, use, and implication of this doctrine here: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/In+loco+parentis

Do not neglect the Word of God, as our Lord holds parents (especially fathers) personally responsible for the training up of children – NOT the church (which has a biblical role of support) NOR the unbiblical “public school”.

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.

And for some practical understanding of this, read the following story, reported by OneNewsNow.com and note the issue: while your children are in the custody of the government school, who has parental rights? Pray for the Supreme Court to have wisdom.

High court to decide if parents ‘forfeit’ rights

According to John Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, the case before the high court will determine whether a state human services caseworker and deputy sheriff violated the rights of a nine-year-old Oregon girl in 2003 when they removed the child from her classroom, without parental consent or a court order, to question her about allegations of parental abuse.

John Whitehead (Rutherford)“She was left alone with the sheriff for two hours, and he interrogated her, trying to get her to say that her father had sexually molested her. She became visibly sick…that night… [and] the mother later filed a lawsuit,” Whitehead accounts. “This has wiggled its way up through the court of appeals. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the parents, saying this is an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. And now, the U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear this case.”

So The Rutherford Institute, a non-profit conservative legal organization, has gotten involved and has filed a friend-of-the-court brief.

“What the case really stands for is whether you forfeit your rights as parents if you send your children to public schools,” the conservative attorney reasons. “In other words, do they really have any constitutional rights? Do you have any constitutional rights? Can government officials show up [and] take your children out of school without probable cause [or] without a search warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment? That’s what this case is all about.”
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday, March 1.

by

Mr. Carnal Confidence

STUDIES ON SAVING FAITH – A. W. Pink

Part IV

DIALOGUE 1

Mr. Carnal Confidence

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “Good morning, Mr. Editor, I wish to have a talk with you about those articles on ‘Assurance’ which you published in last year’s Studies.” The Writer: “Be seated, please. First of all, may we courteously but frankly inform you that our time is already fully occupied in seeking to minister unto God’s dear children, yet we are never too busy to do all in our power to help a needy soul.” Carnal Confidence: “O, I am not seeking help; my purpose in calling is to point out some things in your articles where I am quite sure you erred.” The Writer: “It is written, dear friend, ‘If any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know’ (1 Cor. 8:2), therefore I trust that God will ever give me grace to willingly consider and weigh the views of others, and receive through them anything He may have for me. Yet, on the other hand, I am not prepared to debate with any man upon Divine things.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “Well, I am quite sure that I am right, and you are wrong, and I feel it my duty to tell you so.” The Writer: “Very good, I am ready to listen unto what you have to say, only reminding you again that I cannot enter into a debate with you, for the things of God are too holy to argue about; though a friendly discussion, in the right spirit, may prove mutually helpful. Before beginning, shall we seek the help of the Holy Spirit, that He may graciously subdue the flesh in each of us, guide our conversation so that the words of our mouths and the meditations of our hearts may be ‘acceptable’ in God’s sight (Ps. 19:14); remembering that for every idle word each of us will yet have to give an account.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I consider that in your articles you have made a very difficult and complicated matter out of what is really very simple. According to your ideas a person has to go to a lot of trouble in order to discover whether or not he is saved, whereas if a man believes God’s Word he may be sure in a moment.” The Writer: “But are all those who believe God’s Word really saved? Did not the Jews of Christ’s day believe implicitly in the Divine authorship of the O. T.? Do not Russelites (“Jehovah’s Witnesses” – Ed.) and others today insist loudly upon their faith in the Divine inspiration of the Bible? Does not the Devil himself believe the same?” Mr. Carnal Confidence: “That is not what I meant; my meaning is that, if I rest upon some verse of Holy writ as God’s promise to me, then I know He cannot disappoint me.” The Writer: “That is just the same in principle: does not the Romanist rest with full confidence upon that declaration of Christ’s ‘this is my body’? Saving faith is not faith in the authenticity of any verse of Scripture, but rather faith in the Person of Him who gave us the Scriptures, faith in the Christ who is made known in the Scriptures.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “Yes, I know that, and I do believe in God and in His Son, and I know that I am saved because He says so.” The Writer: “Where in Scripture does God say that you are saved?” Mr. Carnal Confidence: “In John 5:24, in Acts 16:31, and many other places.” The Writer: “Let us turn to these passages, please. In John 5:24 the Lord Jesus describes one who has ‘passed from death unto life.’ He tells us two things about that individual, which serve to identify him. First, ‘he that heareth my word.’ That is definite enough. But of course it means far more than simply listening to His Word with the outward ear.” Mr. Carnal Confidence: “Ah, right there you want to mystify what is simple, and perplex souls with what is quite clear.” The Writer: “Pardon me, you are mistaken. I only wish to rightly understand the words God has used, and to do this it is necessary to carefully compare Scripture with Scripture and discover how each word is used by the Spirit.” Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I object; that may be all right for you, but common people do not have the leisure for deep study: God knew this, and has written His word in plain language that ordinary folk can understand: ‘Hear’ means ‘hear,’ and that is all there is to it.”

The Writer: “I believe you are quite sincere in what you have said, and you have expressed the view which a great many hold today; but, if you will allow me to say so, it is a very defective one. God places no premium upon laziness. God has so ordered things that nothing is obtained without diligence and industry. Much work and care has to be devoted to a garden if anything is obtained from it. The same holds good every where else: what time and trouble is required to keep our bodies in working order! Can, then, the eternal concerns of our souls be more lightly dismissed, or more easily secured? Has not God bidden us ‘Buy the truth’ (Prov. 23:23)? Has He not plainly told us ‘If thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding; if thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; then thou shalt understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God’ (Prov. 2:3-5)?”

The Writer: “Mark how the Israelites were fed of old in the wilderness: Exodus 16. God did not provide them with baken loaves of bread ready to eat. No, instead, He gave the manna from heaven, which was ‘a small round thing’ (v. 14). Work and patience were called for in order to ‘gather’ (v. 17) it. Note too ‘when the sun waxed hot, it melted’(v. 21), so that they had to get up early to secure it! Moreover, the manna would not keep: ‘let no man leave of it till the morning’: it ‘bred worms and stank’ (vv. 19, 20) if they tried to preserve it for another day. Then, after it had been gathered, the manna had to be ‘ground in mills or beaten in a mortar’ and baked in pans and made into cakes (Num. 11:8). All of this typified the fact that if a soul is to eat the Bread of life, he must devote himself in earnest, and, as Christ says, ‘Labour . . . for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life’” (John 6:27).

The Writer: “Thus it is in connection with the obtaining of a right understanding of any verse of Scripture: pains have to be taken with it, patience has to be exercised, and prayerful study engaged in. Returning to John 5:24: the one who has passed from death unto life, says Christ, is ‘he that heareth My word.’ Let us turn then to other passages where this term is found: ‘they are turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers, which refused to hear my words’ (Jer. 11:10); ‘because ye have not heard my words, behold, I will send and take all the families of the north,’ etc. (Jer. 25:8, 9); and see 35:17; Zechariah 1:4; Matthew 7:24; John 10:27. In all of these verses, and in many others which might be given, to ‘hear’ means to heed what God says, to act upon it, to obey Him. So he who ‘hears’ the voice of Christ heeds His command to turn away from all that is opposed to God and become in subjection to Him.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “Well, let us turn to Acts 16:31, that is simple enough. There is no room allowed there for any quibbling. God says ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved’: God says that to me; I have believed on Christ, and so I must be saved.” Writer: “Not so fast, dear friend. How can you prove God says that to you?

Those words were spoken under unusual circumstances, and to a particular individual. That individual had been brought to the end of himself; he was deeply convicted of his sins; he was in terrible anguish of soul; he had taken his place in the dust, for we are told that he ‘came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas’ (Acts 16:29). Now is it fair to take the words of the apostles to such a man and apply them indiscriminately to anybody? Are we justified in ignoring the whole setting of that verse, wrenching it from its context, and giving it to those who have not any of the characteristics which marked the Philippian jailor?”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I refuse to allow you to browbeat me, and move me from the simplicity of the Gospel. John 3:16 says, ‘For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.’ Now I have believed on the Son, and therefore am fully assured that I possess eternal life.” Writer: “Are you aware of the fact that in this same Gospel of John we are told ‘Many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did. But Jesus did not commit himself unto them’ (John 2:23, 24)? There were many who ‘believed’ in Christ who were not saved by Him: see John 8:30 and note verse 59! John 12:42, 43! There is a believing in Christ which saves, and there is a believing in Him which does not save; and therefore it behooves every sincere and earnest soul to diligently examine his ‘faith’ by Scripture and ascertain which kind it is. There is too much at stake to take anything for granted. Where eternal destiny is involved surely no trouble can be too great for us to make sure.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I am sure, and no man can make me doubt.” Writer: “Is your faith purifying your heart (Acts 15:9)? Is it evidenced by those works which God requires (James 2:17)? Is it causing you to overcome the world (1 John 5:4)?” Mr. Carnal Confidence: “O I don’t claim to be perfect, but I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.” Writer: “We did not ask if you were perfect; but have you been made a new creature in Christ, have old things passed away, and all things become new (2 Cor. 5:17)? Are you treading the path of obedience? For God’s Word says, ‘He that saith I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him’ (1 John 2:4).”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I am not occupied with myself, but with Christ; I am not concerned about my walk, but with what He did for poor sinners.” Writer: “To be ‘occupied with Christ’ is rather a vague expression. Are you occupied with His authority, have you surrendered to His Lordship, have you taken His yoke upon you, are you following the example which He has left His people? Christ cannot be divided: He is not only Priest to be trusted, but is also Prophet to be heeded, and King to be subject unto. Before He can be truly ‘received,’ the heart must be emptied of all those idols which stand in competition with Him. It is not the adulation of our lips, but the affection of our souls, which He requires; it is not an intellectual assent, but the heart’s surrender to Him which saves.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “You are departing from the simplicity of the Gospel; you are making additions unto its one and only stipulation. There is nothing that God requires from the sinner except that he believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.” Writer: “You are mistaken. The Lord Jesus said, ‘Repent ye, and believe the Gospel’ (Mark 1:15).” Mr. Carnal Confidence: “That was before the Cross, but in this dispensation repentance is not demanded.” Writer: “Then according to your ideas God has changed the plan of salvation. But you err. After the Cross, Christ charged His disciples, ‘That repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations’ (Luke 24:47). If we turn to the book of Acts we find that the apostles preached repentance in this dispensation. On the day of Pentecost, Peter bade the convicted Jews to ‘repent’ (2:38). Reviewing his ministry at Ephesus Paul declared that he had testified both to the Jews and also to the Greeks ‘repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ’ (Acts 20:21); while in 17:30 we are told that God ‘now commandeth all men every where to repent.’”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “Then do you insist that if a person has not repented, he is still unsaved?” Writer: “Christ Himself says so: ‘Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish’ (Luke 13:5). So too if a man has not been converted, he is yet unsaved: ‘Repent ye therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out’ (Acts 3:19). There must be a right-about-face: there must be a turning from Satan unto God, from the world unto Christ, from sin unto holiness. Where that has not taken place, all the believing in the world will not save one. Christ saves none who is still in love with sin; but He is ready to save those who are sick of sin, who long to be cleansed from its loathsome foulness, who yearn to be delivered from its tyrannizing power. Christ came here to save His people from their sins.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “You talk to me as though I were the helpless slave of strong drink or some other appetite, but I want you to know I was never the victim of any such thing.” Writer: “There are other lusts in fallen man besides those which break forth in gross outward sins: such as pride, covetousness, selfishness, self-righteousness; and unless they be mortified, they will take a man to Hell as surely as will profanity, immorality, or murder. Nor is it enough to mortify these inordinate affections: the fruit of the Spirit, the graces of godliness, must also be brought forth in the heart and life; for it is written, ‘follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord’ (Heb. 12:14). And therefore it is a pressing duty for each of us to heed the Divine exhortation ‘Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?’ (2 Cor. 13:5).

“Notice very carefully, dear friend, that the one point pressed upon the Corinthians was ‘that Jesus Christ is in you,’ and not their trusting that He died for them. Just as the Christian can only discover that his name was written in the Book of Life before the foundation of the world, by discerning that God has written His laws in his heart (Heb. 10:16), so I can ascertain that Christ died for me only by making sure that He now lives in me. And it is obvious that if the Holy One indwells me that His presence must have wrought a radical change both in character and in conduct. This, above everything else, is what we sought to make clear and emphasized in our articles on ‘Assurance,’ namely the imperative necessity of our making sure that the Lord Jesus occupies the throne of our hearts, has the supreme place in our affections, and regulates the details of our lives. Unless this be the case with us, then our profession is vain, and all our talk of trusting in Christ’s finished work is but idle words.”

Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I consider all you have said to be but the language of a Pharisee. You are occupied with your own fancied goodness and delighting in your own worthless righteousness.” Writer: “Pardon me, but I rather rejoice in what Christ’s Spirit has wrought in me, and pray that He will carry forward that work of grace to the glory of His name. But we must bring our discussion to a close. I would respectfully urge you to attend unto that exhortation addressed to all professing Christians, ‘Give diligence to make your calling and election sure’ (2 Pet. 1:10). Mr. Carnal Confidence: “I shall do nothing of the sort: I hate the very word ‘election.’ I know that I am saved, though I do not measure up to the impossible standard you want to erect.” Writer: “Fare thee well; may it please the Lord to open your blind eyes, reveal to you His holiness, and bring you to His feet in godly fear and trembling.”

Pink’s complete book on Saving Faith available on-line here: http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Saving_Faith/saving_faith.htm

by

The Power of the Preacher

“Brethren, we shall not adjust our Bible to the age; but before we have done with it, by God’s grace, we shall adjust the age to the Bible.

“We shall not fall into the error of that absent-minded doctor who had to cook for himself an egg; and, therefore, depositing his watch in the saucepan, he stood steadfastly looking at the egg. The change to be wrought is not for the Divine chronometer, but for the poor egg of human thought. We make no mistake here; we shall not watch our congregation to take our cue from it, but we shall keep our eye on the infallible Word, and preach according to its instructions.

“Our Master sits on high, and not in the chairs of the scribes and doctors, who regulate the theories of the century. We cannot take our key-note from the wealthier people, nor from the leading officers, nor even from the former minister.

“How often have we heard an excuse for heresy made out of the desire to impress “thoughtful young men”! Young men, whether thoughtful or otherwise, are best impressed by the gospel, and it is folly to dream that any preaching which leaves out the truth is suitable to men, either old or young. We shall not quit the Word to please the young men, nor even the young women.

“This truckling to young men is a mere pretence; young men are no more fond of false doctrine than are the middle-aged; and if they are, there is so much the more necessity to teach them better. Young men are more impressed by the old gospel than by ephemeral speculations.

“If any of you wish to preach a gospel that will be pleasing to the times, preach it in the power of the devil, and I have no doubt that he will willingly do his best for you. It is not to such servants of men that I desire to speak just now.

“I trust that, if ever any of you should err from the faith, and take up with the new theology, you will be too honest to pray for power from God with which to preach that mischievous delusion if you should do so, you will be guilty of constructive blasphemy.

“No, brethren, it is not our object to please men, but our design is far nobler.”

C.H. Spurgeon

 

by

Is Your Pastor Wimpy?

The Bible tells pastors – those who are called to shepherd the souls within a local church – to preach the whole counsel of His Word. Those who fail to do so will answer to God. Those who fail to do so because they value the opinion of man over the approval of God will be put to shame on Judgment Day.

What follows is good counsel for pastor and flock.

From: http://www.oldtruth.com/blog.cfm/id.2.pid.412

Pastors, is Your Preaching Wimpy?

Quoting James White . . .

When Paul spoke to the Ephesian elders in his final meeting with them, he said these words: “Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.” (Acts 20:26-27) The true preacher of the Word seeks to have this as his ambition as well. God is not honored when men think so little of Him and so highly of themselves that they edit the content of the proclamation for the fear of the face of men and so that they may be considered “successful” in some worldly sense. It is a fearful thing to be unfaithful to the task of preaching “the whole counsel of God.” Keeping this in mind, I would like to point out the fact that there are religious hypocrites in the church. There were even in the days of Paul, as he names some by name. But today one looks for the true believer as the oddity in evangelical churches filled with unregenerate men and women who have been fooled into thinking you can shake a man’s hand, say some magical words that are not joined with any kind of repentance or understanding of the gospel itself, and you have your “ticket punched” and you are on your way to heaven. The result is that any time you would dare to preach the soul-searching passages of Scripture that expose sin and hypocrisy and false faith you will hear the howl of the religious hypocrite from front row to back. Which is why you can observe major “ministries” today that are completely focused upon avoiding any form of offense of the natural man, just so long as they are there on Sunday morning and drop a little something in the plate to help you pay for your massive sports arena. But even the best church will have false professors in its midst, men and women who, for various reasons, may well play the religion game quite well for an amazingly long time. Some do it for family reasons, some just because they were raised that way, some for acceptance–but in any case, they attend services, may even be involved in ministry, but their hearts are unchanged, their faith in word only. …

So the question I have to ask of many who stand behind pulpits today is this: is your preaching so wimpy it would never trouble a religious hypocrite, and never result in such a person fleeing its proclamation so as to run to man’s religions for refuge?

Do you pull back on those elements of God’s truth that are the most offensive to the natural man because you do not wish to see that disdainful look, that annoyed shaking of the head? Do you really distrust the ministry of the Spirit to make the Word of Christ to come alive in the hearts and minds of Christ’s sheep, so that you do not need to worry about those who find offense at His truth? Or have you embraced the spirit of the age which places man’s fragile emotions upon the seat of prominence, and have bought into the idea that to be “loving” means to never give offense to anyone (well, except for God–it is fine to offend Him by thinking yourself so wise you can edit out what shouldn’t be in the gospel in our day)?

Would your teaching and proclamation allow a religious hypocrite to remain safely and comfortably ensconced in the congregation for years on end, never offended, never convicted? Finally, if such a hypocrite does leave and make a show of embracing heresy just to spite you, do you sting with embarrassment, or rejoice that God’s Word continues to work in the hearts of men and women, some to His glory in their salvation, and some to His glory in their damnation? Think about it.

From: Alpha and Omega Ministries Blog
by

“Inner Promptings”

I’ve recently read a most excellent book about how to determine the will of God, titled Just Do Something: How to Make a Decision Without Dreams, Visions, Fleeces, Open Doors, Random Bible Verses, Casting Lots, Liver Shivers, Writing in the Sky, etc.

Available here  http://shop.churchandfamilyreformation.org/Just-Do-Something-BKJDSKD.htm and at Amazon and other places.

About which, this observation by the publisher:

Hyper-spiritual approaches to finding God’s will don’t work. It’s time to try something new: Give up.

Pastor and author Kevin DeYoung counsels Christians to settle down, make choices, and do the hard work of seeing those choices through. Too often, he writes, God’s people tinker around with churches, jobs, and relationships, worrying that they haven’t found God’s perfect will for their lives. Or—even worse—they do absolutely nothing, stuck in a frustrated state of paralyzed indecision, waiting . . . waiting . . . waiting for clear, direct, unmistakable direction.

But God doesn’t need to tell us what to do at each fork in the road. He’s already revealed his plan for our lives: to love him with our whole hearts, to obey His Word, and after that, to do what we like.

No need for hocus-pocus. No reason to be directionally challenged. Just do something.

I cannot recommend this book strongly enough – as I’ve seen people wreck their lives following mystic and gnostic methods of trying to determine who to marry, divorce, etc.

With that current backdrop, here’s a look back at the Great Revival and how George Whitefield learned the hard way what Kevin DeYoung would have us learn the easy way.

The following is from http://www.oldtruth.com/blog.cfm/id.2.pid.234

Continue reading →

by

Changed by God

David Brainerd (1718-1747) was a missionary to the American Indians in New York, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania. Born in Connecticut in 1718, he died of tuberculosis at the age of twenty-nine.  Many people know of his work among the Indians, but in reading his diary (as edited by Jonathan Edwards), I was most struck with the work the Lord did in David Brainerd. 

Early in his short life, Brainerd admits, in his fallen state, to being irritated by 4 specific doctrines of God (pgs 64 & 65):

  1. The strictness of the divine law.  “I found it condemned me for my evil thoughts and sins of my heart, which I could not possibly prevent.”
  2. Salvation is by faith alone.  “God would not come down to lower terms and He would not promise life and salvation upon my sincere and heart prayers and endeavors.”
  3. As one dead in sin, he did not understand saving faith.  “I read the calls of Christ to the weary and heavy laden; but could find no way that He directed them to come in.”
  4. The Sovereignty of God.  “I could not bear that it should be wholly at God’s pleasure, to save or damn me, just as He would.  That passage, Romans 9:11-13, was a constant vexation to me, especially verse 21.”

In all his vexation at his condition, Brainerd records that he “never once prayed from any respect to the glory of God.” (pg 68)  All of his religion had been “nothing but self-worship, and a horrid abuse of God.” (pg 69)

A short time later, having been saved and experiencing manifold witnesses of the Lord working in his life and those of the Indians, he had learned to trust God: “I have been too much laboring for spiritual life, peace of conscience, and progressive holiness, in my own strength; but now God showed me, in some measure, the arm of all strength, and fountain of all grace.” (page 194)

We also see a helpful attitude towards his work and that of God: “Although I could not but continue to use the means by which I thought proper for the promotion of the work, yet God seemed, as I apprehended, to work entirely without them. … I found myself obliged and delighted to say, “Not unto us,” not unto instruments and means, “but to thy name be glory.””  And, “Thus God has begun, thus He has hitherto surprisingly carried on a work of grace amongst these Indians.  May the glory be ascribed to Him, who is the sole Author of it!” This is a man who has found the peace of working with his whole heart and soul for the right reason, trusting wholly in God for the work only He can do.

As one reads about the short life of David Brainerd, we see the young man maturing, yet always falling short.  Progressive sanctification, this is called.

And we see, a few months before his death, a deep understanding of the doctrines of grace that once caused him to hate God. He, weak in body, “Discoursed before the administration of the sacrament from John 1:29 – Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world.” Where upon he considered three points that are well our attention:

I.                    In what respects Christ is called the Lamb of God and is so called (1) from the purity and innocency of His nature; (2) from His meekness and patience under sufferings; (3) from His being that atonement which was pointed out in the sacrifice of lambs, and in particular by the paschal lamb.

II.                 How and in what sense He “takes away the sin of the world: not because all the world shall actually be redeemed from sin by Him, but because (1) He has done and suffered sufficient to answer for the sins of the world, and so to redeem all mankind; (2) He actually does take away the sins of the elect world.

III.               How we are to behold Him in order to have our sins taken away: (1) not with our bodily eyes; nor (2) by imagining Him on the cross; but (3) by a spiritual view of His glory and goodness, engaging the soul to rely on Him.

Would that you and I saw such wondrous Truth in such a simple verse! This is a mark that God has changed the man. No one can be saved and left without a mark from this mighty work of His Spirit. Let the Christian examine himself and see if there be any marks from of the saving grace of Holy God in his life and on his soul. If you be in Christ, rejoice! And know that it is God Himself that wills and performs His good pleasure in and through you – for the glory of His name.

by

The Offense of Biblical Creation & The False Authority of Science

John Piper keeps getting himself into hot water with the reformed folks he has been among for decades.  Latest is his comfort with the unbiblical quasi-scientific perspective on the age of the Earth.

As asked in the article below, “why would there be a need to harmonize the creation account with modern science? To prove it’s true ….or false? Why, to prove it is false of course.”  The child of God knows the Bible is true.  The Bible tells us not to trust the “wisdom” of man, as the “foolishness” of God is above (better than) the “wisdom” of man.  Yet we tend to trust men when they speak with the authority given them by other men – even when it cannot be reconciled with Scripture.

On whatever the Bible speaks, it is Authoritative and trustworthy.  Nothing man can discover or develop is able to disprove the Word of God.  Be careful what you believe.  You say you believe in Christ – believe in the Word of God.

What follows is from: http://5ptsalt.com/2010/07/16/piper-sailhamer-the-offense-of-biblical-creation-the-false-authority-of-science/#comment-4457

Piper & Sailhamer: The Offense of Biblical Creation & The False Authority of Science

Biblical truth is always offensive. The Biblical narrative on creation is certainly no exception. Scripture is quite explicit in how the universe and all that it contains came into being, and since the fall of man it’s description as recorded by God for us has been hated.

Creation is recorded as a series of totally supernatural, perfectly executed, final acts in 6 literal days. Modern philosophy and all social sciences of men have long attempted to refute the biblical account, and were in fact, created for that very purpose, to deny God’s truth.

In so-called modern times, the biblical teachings of creative, final acts by the God of Scripture have been superceded by scientific ‘processes’ so that the results of creation are placed within and are products of history and time (time itself viewed as a process, not a creature of God). In fact, much of modern historical geology is based on the philosophical assumption that the biblical account of creation ex-nihilo is false.

By the early nineteenth century the central presupposition of uniformitarianism that “the key to the past” had been popularized by James Hutton and Charles Lyell (who in turn influenced Darwin). (Douglas F. Kelly, Creation & Change, p. 163)

Perhaps placing some general creation assertions of the Bible against modern philosophical sciences will be helpful:

Bible Modern Sciences
All things, seen and unseen, are the creative final acts of the sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient, Triune God, ex-nihilo. All things are result of processes, placed within  and products of history.
Meaning of history is to be understood in God. Time and history are determined and governed by God. Foundation of history is eternity, not time. Meaning of history is to be understood in the progress of man. Time and history are products of natural processes.
God is Sovereign in all things and holds the very life and breath of created man at His disposal and according to His good pleasure. The only god tolerated is a god working with man for a common purpose, to conquer and control time and history.

John Piper has been greatly influenced by a book on old earth theories entitled Genesis Unbound by John Sailhamer. In a critical review of the book over at Answers in Genesis, we’re told that Sailhamer “adopts a unique view of the creation account in order to harmonize it with the claims of modern science.”

We are further told in this review that:

“Despite his plea to allow the text of Genesis to speak for itself, Sailhamer fails to take his own advice. He writes: ‘Given what appears to be true about the age of the earth, it is likely that millions or billions of years transpired during this time of “the beginning”’ (p. 105). Such a comment clearly indicates that Sailhamer has allowed the claims of modern uniformitarian science to determine what the text is saying.”

Now why would there be a need to harmonize the creation account with modern science? To prove it’s true ….or false? Why, to prove it is false of course. If it were believed to be true there would be no need for proof. Belief vs. Unbelief.

Another question: What is this uniformitarianism? If John Piper is ‘most at home’ with Sailhamer’s view on creation, as he has stated in his recent video, what does that really tell us? More importantly, what are the ramifications for those who sit under Piper’s teaching at Bethlehem Baptist and the internet?

We’ll take these questions one at a time, but first, let’s define uniformitarianism and show why it’s important that you understand the idea behind Sailhamer’s views:

Uniformitarianism is the belief that the origin and development of all things can be explained exclusively in terms of the same natural laws and processes operating today…Uniformitarianism has been the backbone of modern historical geology and is responsible for the current widespread assumption that the earth is billions of years old…[The Uniformatarians] insist that all geological features and formations, once attributed to geologic cataclysms, can now be satisfactorily explained by ordinary processes functioning over long periods of time. (Scott M. Huse, The Collapse of Evolution, pp 7,8)

Processes. Sound familiar?

1) Why would anyone want to harmonize the creation account with modern science?

Because on some level they reject the biblical account. An argument could be made for curiosity I suppose, but curiosity can be a form of doubt. Either way, it is unbelief isn’t it?

2) If John Piper is ‘most at home’ with Sailhamer’s view of creation, what does that really tell us?

It tells us he is ‘at home’ with allowing modern science (uniformitarianism) to determine what the Bible is saying. In other words, the ‘science’ of natural processes has taken a position of a higher authority than the Word of God itself.

3) Finally, what does this mean, in general, for those who sit under Piper’s preaching and instruction at Bethlehem Baptist and those who follow his teachings on the internet?

It means that there is at least one area of John Piper’s belief system that is not grounded in Scripture: Creation. For the Christian, creation is to be understood as a series of supernatural acts, not processes. Every attempt, either by Sailhamer or Piper, to read or force process philosophies into any Biblical text, to allow the possibility of days being turned to ‘ages’, to allow room for ‘scientific’ interpretations is to yield the authority of God and His inerrant Word to process philosophies of unregenerate man. It is, at the gist, an abandonment of the absolute Sovereignty of God and of the Biblical principle of sola scriptura.

To allow this type of teaching, as harmless as it may seem to so many, is to give a nod of approval to a lie. It is to attribute supernatural powers to ‘natural processes’ rather than final creative acts of God.

This issue my friends, is not about men, it’s about biblical doctrine. It’s about the truth of God. Please do not willingly compromise it. Reject error. Find this error in your own local churches, if it exist, and root it out for the glory of God and His Son Jesus Christ.

John Piper:

Now, when it comes to the more controversial issues of how to construe Genesis 1-2 about how God did it and how long it took him to do it, there I’m totally sympathetic with a pastor who is going to lay his view down, having studied it, and is going to say to his people, “Here is my understanding of those chapters. These six days can’t be anything other than six literal days, and so that’s how long God took to do it. And this universe is about 10 or 15,000 years old. Though it looks old, that’s the way God made it. He made it to look old,” or something like that.

Or he might take another view that these days are ages.

Or he might take Sailhamer’s view, which is where I feel at home. His view is that what’s going on here is that all of creation happened to prepare the land for man.

In verse 1, “In the beginning he made the heavens and the earth,” he makes everything. And then you go day by day and he’s preparing the land. He’s not bringing new things into existence; he’s preparing the land and causing things to grow and separating out water and earth. And then, when it’s all set and prepared, he creates and puts man there.

So that has the advantage of saying that the earth is billions of years old if it wants to be—whatever science says it is, it is—but man is young, and he was good and he sinned. He was a real historical person, because Romans 5 says so, and so does the rest of the Bible.

That’s where I am, and I think every pastor should go ahead and say what he believes. [emphasis mine, ed.] (Online Source)

by

Converted by his own sermon!

If you have read any history of the church, you should be aware that the Church of England went through an extended period (after their separation from Rome) wherein they had difficulty finding regenerate pastors. Wesley and Whitefield and Spurgeon all rubbed up against this. One such pastor in the Church of England discovered this in a rather unique way. Read and enjoy this tale of our Sovereign Lord saving a man.

From: http://www.williamhaslam.org/

The Rev William Haslam was an English country parson whose story is told in two autobiographical volumes – ‘From Death into Life’ and ‘Yet not I’.

One Sunday in 1851 following a period of deep conviction of sin, Haslam ascended into the pulpit of Baldhu church near Truro with the intention of telling his congregation that he would not preach again to them until he was saved and to ask them to pray for his conversion.

However, when he began to preach on the text ‘What think ye of Christ’ he saw himself as a Pharisee who did not recognise that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God. At that moment, the Holy Spirit breathed new life into him and the effect was so obvious and marked that a local preacher who was present stood up and shouted ‘the Parson is converted’ and the people rejoiced ‘in Cornish style’.

Others were also converted on that day, including members of his own household, others fled from the church in fear. A revival followed that blessed Sunday that lasted for three years during which time souls were saved weekly, often daily.

You can visit the discussion board if you want to add any comments, or you can just email us directly.

  

“More charming than any novel…..This is a narrative that must do great good. It is after our own heart in almost every respect, and we wish that thousands may read it”
Spurgeon, Sword and Trowel on ‘From Death into Life’.

“I felt sure, as I said, that if I had died last week I should have been lost for ever. This was a startling and an alarming word to many of my earnest people, who said, “What then will become of us?” I replied, “You will be lost for a certainty if you do not give your hearts to God.”
‘From Death into Life’, page 49