Response to a Cultural Missionary

Hi Ben, I wanted to respond a bit more formally to your brief remarks on Facebook RE: Cultural Missionary. I've taken a look at your ministry, which is the only picture I have of what you're doing. From that glimpse comes a few questions that I'd like to know more about.

(Starting from the beginning of the main video)

1. Why do you mention that you're 501c3? Granted, this has nothing to do with the "Cultural Missionary" question at all, but it did strike me that you felt the need to mention your tax status to lead off. That also made me wonder how the IRS liked your affiliation with Dr. Ben Carson. As I understand it, open support is not allowed for 501c3 organizations, but as with the law, semantics I'm sure allows you a loophole. Again, beside the point, yet I do want to know what you have to say in response to this article about 501c3 ministries.

2. Though I understand that you're after "seeing and doing" the big things that God could have for someone's life, saying that you're ministry is not about asking or thinking seems to open yourself up for caricature attacks. Especially since culture portrays Christians as non-intellectual.

Aside from that concern, I have to know, what are you doing any different than any other mainstream, world mimicking, rock-concert-at-church type of modern ministry? You say that you're doing things differently, maybe even dynamically, but what does that mean? Are you so different that you're with one bold sweep clearing the table of all New Testament examples in which people were reached one by one through one to one encounters? Essentially, are you saying something like, "That is the old method, we're doing the new method that everyone else is doing, we've got a band, we've got media, we've got this and that conference."

3. You mention that we have to meet ever changing culture with the never changing gospel. What has changed about culture? Ever? It seems to me that ministries such as Ask or Think, and others like it, have constantly tried to change the gospel to make it more palatable to a sin-loving public. What do you think you're doing better with your travelling 150,00 plus miles to reach more than 26,000 people than a group of 10 who reach more than 80,000/year while travelling the distance from Rockford to Chicago, Illinois once a week for 50 weeks?

I'm not against using modern tools, I use them. But those tools can never replace actively seeking out one to one witnessing encounters. That is and will always be the Bible's example for reaching the lost. That being the case, all one needs to know in order to reach a culture is the language. You might say I'm simplistic. Sure, that's the point, it's simple. Everyone can do it.

4. This brings me to this next point. The only way to know a culture is to talk with individuals one to one. I don't subscribe to the collectivist notion that treats people groups as a whole. Every person comprising culture is an individual, and God treats them as such when calling men to repentance. He will also judge each person for his own sin, individually. Culture doesn't concern Him. What the person does in response to the repent from sin/turn to Christ message concerns Him.

On that final note about sin. Why don't you mention sin in any of your videos? Are you afraid of something there? If I were happily walking off of a cliff, you'd warn me, wouldn't you? That'd be true love. Warning one about sin is exponentially more important, wouldn't you agree?

5. I believe you have great intentions for all of your programs. But everyone has great intentions (ultimately) for what they do/believe in. For instance, all world leaders, if pressed, would certainly tell you that what they're doing will be for the good of everyone. Good intentions, however, are not synonymous with good practice, and those leaders have more often than not created disasters through their short-sighted good intentions.

Perhaps you don't realize it, but your entire ministry model exists, because the Modern American Church is a broken model. Churches were ordained by God to handle all of the issues (and more) that you're currently addressing. So, instead of fixing the problems at the God ordained institution level, para-church ministries, with good intentions, begin popping up. They can't focus on the individual, and for that the cultural war is lost one individual at a time, because true, deep, Bible-style fellowship and discipleship can never be accomplished, thus the far-sighted issues become increasingly serious over time.

If elder men trained younger men, and elder women trained younger women like they're commanded to do in Titus 2, then you'd see no need whatsoever for your para-church organization. But the pulpit centered model that hinges upon, "show up, shut up, pay up" leaves the culture desperate for substantive questions and meaningful answers. Bottom line, the harder these modern organizations try, the worse the culture becomes. But that's not quite true is it?Culture/mankind has always been against God. Nothing has changed there. What has changed is that the church and organizations such as yours keep trying to skirt the real issue, namely, dealing with sin up front, while and focusing instead on sin's symptoms. For that alone, you're wrong. No matter how good your intentions are.

Finally, I see that you're diligently networking with a number of people, such as Pensacola's Mayor, Ashton Hayward, and Presidential hopeful, Ben Carson. I don't know anything about Ashton Hayward. I hope he is repentant from sin to trusting in Christ Christian. Ben Carson on the other hand is assuredly not, as his Seventh Day Adventism (a doctrine of devils) bears record. Granted, you don't have Dr. Carson on your website, but I felt the need to address this as it is part of our discussion.

Professing Christians in today's America are all too ready to support this or that candidate, while claiming their choice as a wonderful Christian. This was often done concerning Dr. Carson, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio. I see this as a woefully horrific illustration concerning the state of the culture. Gone are the days that pastors can comprehend doctrinal error, or are willing to point it out (might have something to do with that 501c3 issue above). Gone are the days in which people understood that the current prince of this world is Satan, that Christians fight against principalities and spiritual wickedness in high places. Today these same Christians are wanting to, "Take back America for Christ." Let's be clear here, if a nation was founded upon rebellion, Christ was not for it, or those people. God didn't look sideways and say it's OK, it's America, they can be rebellious, it's for a good cause. I'm all for liberty, don't misunderstand, but free or not, I will still serve Christ the way He commanded. The way described in the New Testament regardless of the type of government.

The fact that you became "Spiritual Adviser" to Seventh Day Adventisst Ben Carson fits with this narrative. You are not different. You are part of the cultural stream. If you truly want to be different then forsake the organizations. Save yourself some time. Reach more by focusing on your neighbors who are right next door, needing to be compelled to repent and believe in Christ. Quit focusing on the forest, and see the trees. Then you will have been counter-cultural like Christ and His followers were.

This Is How I Taught Inherited Sin Nature - The Pro-Sin Nature Position, and A Commentary Refutation

According to the majority of Christian thought, man has inherited a Sin Nature as a direct result of Adam's fall in the  Garden of Eden. Most readers of this blog understand that I am against the Inherited Sin Nature position, but perhaps most do not know that I used to hold to and teach Inherited Sin Nature during my teaching career. Most of the people who debate against my anti-ISN viewpoint assume that I do not know what the doctrine states, and attempt to educate me regarding this quite old doctrine. That being the case, I'm going to attempt  to prove that I have a handle on the issue by writing this post in defense of Inherited Sin Nature. (I have also decided to include a refutation of each point, as will be noted by comments such as these in red).

Why do men sin? According to Genesis 3, Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden, and given one command - Do not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. No one knows how long this couple kept the command, but one day Satan in the form of a serpent enticed Eve to think about eating the fruit of the tree. She knew the command, and refused at first by saying that they weren’t to eat of it, or even touch it lest they die. No matter, Satan then said that God didn’t want the humans to eat of the tree, because they’d become gods. Thoroughly enticed now, Eve eats of the tree. Adam, who according to I Timothy 2 was not deceived by Satan, went along with Eve in eating, and thusly man fell. 

- Adam and Eve were just created by God. They did not have a "sin nature", but were enticed by fleshly desires. Eve was hungry. Adam wanted his wife. Satan used those God-given desires, and tempted man to sin. This pattern is the same today as it was in the Garden. James 1:14-15 illustrates how sin works from temptation to choice of sin to death. Nothing has changed. Further, this does not contradict Romans 5:12, as we shall see below.

God’s voice then comes walking through the Garden, and Adam and Eve hid. Once God uncovers the now sinful humans, He asks a series of questions concerning why Adam and Eve were clothed. “We saw that we were naked”, Adam said. “Who told you that you were naked? Did you eat of the tree?” Immediately Adam blames Eve. God turns to Eve, who then blames the serpent.

God then issues out a series of curses. 1. The serpent is cursed in that he must now slither and eat dust. He is also cursed in that women will hate him, and try to kill him. (There is also a prophetic statement here as well, but it is out of the scope of this article). 2. The woman has to endure greatly increased sorrow in child birth. She also is placed under the husband’s control. 3. The man is cursed in that he must eat of the fruit of the ground in sorrow all the days of his life. Work becomes hard labor. 4. All mankind will taste of physical death, and will return to dust.

- I believe that this is a key moment in the history of man. God punishes Adam and Eve for sin. The key inherited punishment here is death. Romans 5:12 reiterates this point in that Sin entered the world through Adam, because he (Adam and Eve are both called Adam in Genesis 5:2) was the first man to sin. Romans 5:12 then goes on to say that death, not sin as so many read into the verse, passed upon all men because of their sin. Sin being passed down from generation to generation is not mentioned in either Genesis or Romans. Why not? If inherited Sin Nature were part of the Fall and Curse, wouldn't it then be mentioned in Genesis 3?

Adam and Eve then had children. The first two named in the Bible are Cain and Abel. These boys had special talents, one was a shepherd, while the other was a farmer. One day they were to offer a sacrifice to God based upon His specifications. When Cain offered his sacrifice, God was not pleased. Abel’s sacrifice, however please God, which angered Cain tremendously. Hatred filled Cain to the point that he murdered Abel. This action shows a further affect of Adam and Eve’s sin – namely that sin was passed down to their children. The rest of the next 6 chapters in Genesis are filled with sin, such sin that God had to destroy man, because the imaginations of man’s heart were only evil continually (a great illustration of how sin nature had spread throughout mankind).

- It is commonly taught that because Cain did not have to be taught how to murder that this is a representation of Inherited Sin Nature. How did this sin come to pass? God gave a command. Cain transgressed that command, and it displeased God. Abel's sacrifice pleased God, which set the temptation for Cain into motion. He was tempted and acted upon that sin, hatred, which led to the next sin, murder. Before Cain acted upon the temptation, God gave Cain a choice, do well, and please God, or don't do well, and sin will be his desire and ruler. Cain chose sin. It was at Cain's choosing that sin began to rule over Cain, not at his birth. This issue was personal to Cain, and had no further influence upon mankind, except that now God had to create a new law. (More sin, more laws. Notice the pattern throughout scripture. Adam only had one Law, Moses had 430+).  

God did destroy mankind with the flood, but he spared Noah, his wife, and their three sons with their wives in the Ark. Soon after the Ark settled upon Mt. Ararat, however, that ugly sin nature revealed itself again when Canaan made Noah drunk, and looked upon his nakedness. Another curse, one upon Canaan and his descendants, is levied. Noah’s family then spreads throughout the region in accordance to God’s command to be fruitful and multiply.  But eventually, man rebels against God by congregating together in the plains of Shinar. It is there that Noah’s descendants built Babylon and the Tower of Babel. God then punishes man by confusing their language, which forces the inhabitants to spread outward from one another.

- Canaan sinned here. It was premeditated, and had to take some time, because he would have had to grow grapes from the ground up (a very time consuming process), then cultivated them properly, then harvested, and finally brewed them into the alcoholic drink. This would have taken years of growth and experimentation on Canaan's part. After he settled upon the right concoction, Canaan would have then tricked Noah, and then taken liberties with his grandfather. All of this shows premeditation and blatant action on Canaan's part. His uncles, Shem and Japheth, wanted no part of this wickedness. The curse placed upon Canaan fits with Exodus 20:5 in that God promised to punish the third and fourth generations of them that hate me. Canaan and his descendants certainly knew who God was, but chose to sin blatantly and openly against Him. Any summary study concerning the Canaanite civilizations will reveal just how wicked these descendants chose to be. This is why God commanded Israel to destroy them upon their return to the Promised Land.

Using Canaan, however, as an example of sin nature is unequivocal. Canaan's curse was for him and his descendants only. In spite of that fact, Rahab, a Canaanite from Jericho is listed in the line of Christ (Matthew 1:5). As I will note later, if inherited sin nature can be inferred from here, then Rahab's being in the line of Christ would directly imply that Christ would have inherited that very same sin nature.

These men founded societies and cultures across the planet. Their descendants became the Assyrians, Babylonians, Chinese, Incas, Aztecs, Pashtuns, Russians, Jews, Greeks, etc…. All of them had one thing in common, they were all descendants of Adam, and all cursed with a Sin Nature. This is blatantly evident in how idolatrous, murderous, pornographic, and adulterous these many civilizations became. Sin dominated mankind, but God chose to work through one of these nations, Abraham’s nation, the Hebrews (Jews), in order to bring a Savior, Jesus Christ. The remainder of the Old Testament points to the future coming Messiah, while along the way revealing how wicked man is.

- The only things they all had in common was a free will to choose whether or not to honor God, and death. As nations, they all failed. There were, however, individuals who chose to honor God. The Old Testament has examples of non-Jews who turned to God, such as Rahab, Uriah the Hittite, Ruth the Moabitess, Nebuchadnezzar, Assyria during Jonah's ministry, etc... They all had a choice, and at first chose sin. Later, they would choose God. 

Job, a man praised by God, soon reveals that he has sinned. He declares that men born of woman are a few days full of trouble (14:1). They are sinners from birth! David reiterates this point in Psalm 51:5 when he declares that he was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did his mother conceive him.  He further states that the wicked are estranged from the womb, and go astray as soon as they are born speaking lies (Psalm 58:3). All of this further illustrates how sin had passed down from Adam. Moses even weighs in with Exodus 20:5 by saying that He visits inquity upon the fathers of the third and fourth generations of them that hate me. All of this is to say that man sins from birth, because sin was passed down to them by their fathers.

- Tim and I have already covered Job 14, Psalm 51, and Psalm 58:3 but because I'm commenting on the ISN position here, let me make a few remarks.

Job 14 does not say that man is full of trouble from birth. He says that he is a few days, and full of trouble. Time is indicated here, how much time is not known, but it has to be enough time for the issues listed in Job 11-14 to be completed. A baby does not have enough days to fit that list. 

Psalm 51:5, is usually quoted alone, and well out of context, as are the other two passages. In context, Psalm 51 is a deeply sorrowful outpouring of David's sinful acknowledgement and heartfelt repentance. David is saying that he made the choice. He, and he alone, sinned against God. If he were making the claim that he sinned because he was born a sinner, then he'd have to be blaming God or his mother for making him to be a sinner. It is God who creates babies in the womb (Psalm 139:13, Jeremiah 1:5). Those babies are a gift and an heritage from the Lord (Psalm 127:3). David even goes on to say that he is fearfully and wonderfully made by God (Psalm 139:14). The weight of scripture is against David saying that God formed him in sin. Scripture clearly states that God is the one creating babies in the womb, and those babies are His fearful and wonderful creation. 

Further, if David were blaming someone or something else for his sin, then repentance would be stopped, because he'd have been making an excuse, other than his own willful choosing to sin, as to why he sinned. This is exactly what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden. God did not hear their excuses, nor does he hear any man's excuses. He only hears the broken and contrite heart. David's heart was truly broken and contrite, as seen here and Psalm 38. Bottom line, it was David's fault for sin, and he acknowledged that beautifully.

Finally on Psalm 51, it is dangerous to create doctrines based upon figurative, poetic language. If this passage were entirely literal, then a cure for sin is purging with hyssop, as David asks God to do in verse 7. 

Psalm 58:3 - Once again, be careful of figurative/poetic language and context. David is only talking about the wicked in the passage, as opposed the righteous mentioned in the chapter's ending. To paint his picture, David uses figurative language throughout - poison of a serpent, deaf adder, lion's teeth, etc... Zeroing in on verse 3, David does not say that from birth the wicked are sinful. Babies don't talk (notice the figurative language), they don't have teeth, let alone lion's teeth, they're not full of snake poison. David does not want all babies to melt away and destroyed in order for him to walk in their pools of blood. The passage has even less to do with why men sin. 

Because of Adam, we need a savior. Romans 5:12 declares that we all sinned in Adam. Furthermore Romans 5:19 states that by one man we all became sinners. We are without hope, totally incapable, and lost in sins because of Adam’s choice in the Garden.

- Romans 5:12 says that sin entered the world through Adam, but Death, not Sin, passed upon all men, because all have sinned. Romans 5:19 does say that many were made sinners by one man (Adam). It says many, not all. The second half of the verse goes on to say that many were made righteous by one man (Christ). If many means all in the first part of the verse, then just a few words later in the second part, many has to also mean all. It's not the case, however, that all were made righteous by Christ. That being made righteous hinges upon man choosing Christ, which not all men have done. What is being highlighted here in Romans 5 is that man has a choice, and the greatest choice is Christ. Contextually, as a whole, this passage taught as a support for ISN could only lead to a series of unscriptural doctrines, but that's not within the scope of this article. 

Paul famously illustrates how the flesh wars against the spirit in Romans 7. He shows the saved that though they’re born again, they still have to fight that sin nature until they die, and receive their glorified bodies. He continues in Romans 8 by revealing that the Christian can either be in the Spirit or in the Flesh. Because of this, he must war against the flesh daily. This is one reason (the other two are the world and the Devil) why we need the whole armor of God as listed in Ephesians 6. We need it and Christ in order to fight against the works of the flesh listed in Galatians 5. It is against such sin/carnal/fleshly nature that we must fight in order to please God and fully enjoy the Fruit of the Spirit.

- Mike Miller wrote a series of three articles (here, here, and here) that summarize how Roman's 7 is not supporting inherited sin nature. Please, read those if you've struggled with Romans 7 and this topic. 

Briefly, however, Romans 7 fits in with Romans 1-8 as a whole dialogue. Specifically, Romans 5:12-Romans 8 are to be taken contextually together. Romans 6 talks about sin's being crucified, nailed to the cross, killed, destroyed, etc.... If this be the case, then how could a supposedly born again man be struggling with the dead corpse of sin in Romans 7, while also living a victorious, Spirit-filled Christian life in Romans 8? How could sin abide in a person's life, while Christ also abides? How can one be filled with the Spirit and sin concurrently? Or are we talking about losing salvation and regaining it over and over and over until we, hopefully, die in Christ? Where is the victory promised in Romans 7:25 and the Spirit-filled life of Romans 8? 

Bluntly, if Romans 7 is about the daily struggle of a born-again man, then Romans 8:1 is a lie. We'd all still be condemned, even in the Spirit. None of it could make any sense, unless, the traditional view of Romans 7 is incorrect. Romans 7 does teach about a struggle with sin, while under the Law, that is as an un-repentant, lost man. Paul is not saying that while he was unsaved while writing the passage. He's illustrating what his struggle was like as an unsaved, though religious person, long before he wrote the passage. Under the Law he had no victory. Under Grace his life is victorious. He, and those in Christ, are more than conquerors!

This is what Adam’s choice did for all mankind. We need a new Adam. We need Christ, without whom we’d remain dead in our trespasses and sins. We needed Him to redeem us, and declare wicked sinners righteous, even though we don’t deserve such favor. Though He did all of that, we will still have to struggle against sin for the rest of our lives, because of what Adam’s choice brought to mankind. But we will be freed from sin’s power, once we enter glory and receive our glorified bodies. Oh what a day that will be!

- We certainly do still fight a battle. We do have to fight the world, the flesh, and the devil. The world is Satan's structured system. It comprises anything and everything he can use to make a believer stumble, or keep a lost in darkness. The flesh, though not inherently wicked, is weak. It has limitations. It needs food, sleep, drink, and sex, or the human race would cease to exist. All of those desires were present in the Garden of Eden before death, or Satan would have had no way to tempt man. Those desires are God-created and God-given. Our flesh is also God-given, and he expects us to yield our members unto righteousness. 

Simply put, our bodies are tools for his service. In Christ, our bodies become His holy temples on earth (I Corinthians 6:19 and Ephesians 2:21). Essentially, we are not our bodies. Our bodies are where our soul dwells on earth, and we communicate with one another through our bodies. When our bodies cease to exist, we, our soul as Ezekiel 18:20 for example defines our being, continue, either unto life with Christ, or unto death in Hell. 

A tool can be used in any number of ways. A knife can be used to cut meat, or it can be used to kill. The knife is not evil, it had no choice in the matter. It was controlled by the user. Our bodies, likewise, can be used for good, if we choose it, or evil, if we choose it. The flesh isn't evil or good either way. The flesh can only be defined by what we make it. An adulteress has an adulteress body, because she chooses adultery, and so on and so forth. She's yielded her members to unrighteousness, and in so doing is in sin's control and bondage. 

Satan does not want us to use our bodies for Christ, and he actively uses all he can to hinder our yielding to Christ's service. We, spiritually speaking, have to put on the whole armor of God to stand against Satan. What good would protecting our flesh be, if it's our flesh that is the problem? No, the problem is from without, and what we choose to do with the problem is up to us. Choosing righteousness through Christ yields life eternal. Choosing sin brings death. It is up to you to make the decision either way. Once yielded to Christ, He promises victory, fruit, and life eternal, because He crucified sin, and the grave has lost her victory (I Corinthians 15).

(Ok, I don’t think I missed anything here. Granted it is a very brief summary, but that is how Sin Nature was taught to me in Bible College and Seminary, as well as growing up in a Christian home, attending  Christian Schools, hearing thousands of sermons, reading many tracts, witnessing to the lost, and studying the issue extensively from Augustine to Calvin to today’s theologians. It is how I taught it to my students. If I missed anything, please comment below, and let me know). 

Dr. Dave's "Honest Skeptic or Stubborn Scoffer? — Analysis of the Resurrection" (From TruthReallyMatters.com)

Honest Skeptic or Stubborn Scoffer? — Analysis of the Resurrection

Are you an honest skeptic or a stubborn scoffer?

– A historical analysis of the resurrection of Jesus Christ

The resurrection of Jesus Christ was either the greatest event in human history or else a cruel hoax. Where do you stand? As the apostle Paul wrote (1 Cor 15:14): “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” But if he is risen . . . well, that changes everything, if you have the sense to think it through.

Let’s stipulate that Biblical Christianity rises and falls on the historical truth of the resurrection. That’s what this booklet is about: to help you get over whatever intellectual barriers you have so you can come face to face with the Lord Jesus Christ — your Creator, your Judge, and hopefully (if you choose) your Saviour. You may have additional “intellectual” barriers associated with evolution, the origin of evil in the world, what happens to people who never hear the Gospel, etc. Those are easily answered, but outside the scope of this short booklet.

The discussion below is from the following viewpoint: Take the presupposition that the New Testament record is the inerrant, inspired word of God. And then observe whether all the evidence conforms to this foundation, or doesn’t. (It does.) Is this record internally consistent? Does the behavior of the parties involved conform to common sense and human experience? How do the Gospels, the eyewitness testimonies of the four evangelists, serve as a foundation for the early history of Christianity — namely, could the historical events pertaining to the early churches in the first two centuries have any other explanation but that the New Testament record is true? And, not least, do the sum of the parts, and the whole itself, have the “ring of truth” that would serve to transform the life of an individual in the 21st century, as we read of the lives revolutionized in the 1st?

This tract is written for the reader who is seeking truth, and not for a determined scoffer. If you care about the meaning of your life and the certainty of your death and judgment to come, then begin by investing some time in reading the accounts of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as found in the last few chapters of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — 4 eyewitness accounts that transformed the world. Then read a few chapters of Luke’s account of the history of the early churches in the New Testament book of Acts.

By the way, the “textbook” for this mini-course is the King James Bible. Don’t be satisfied with watered down, error-ridden modern translations. The KJB is the only English translation you can trust. We could prove that to you, but that’s another course!

If you’re still a scorner at heart, I don’t expect you’ve read even this far. Until you open your mind a bit, there is no hope, as the Bible repeatedly attests. “A scorner seeketh wisdom and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth.” (Prov 14:6) It is the Lord that “giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.” (Prov 2:6) The promise is made to all persons of all ages: “Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near.” (Is 55:6) The Lord himself implored, “Seek, and ye shall find.” (Matt 7:7) If the Bible is not true and there is no Saviour, then there is no hope for anyone and life itself is short, mean, and pointless.

But what if God’s word is true? What if there is, indeed, “technology” to overcome death? What if the exclusive license for that technology is in the hands of Jesus, God manifest in the flesh. Is it not worth a few hours of your time to explore and see if there is a God who will keep his promise — namely, that if you seek him, you will find him? At the end of this booklet we will explain to you what you must do if you come to believe in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not enough, of course, just to believe in the manner of intellectual assent. If Christ is risen, that must change everything. And you have a decision to make. But first let us turn to various evidences for the resurrection and objections raised by scoffers.

1. Did the disciples steal the body?

This objection was dutifully recorded in Matthew’s Gospel, that the idea of a theft was “commonly reported among the Jews.” The absurdity begins with the picture of a band of terrified disciples, having lost their leader (Jesus) to the public horror and humiliation of Roman crucifixion, quickly regrouping and creating a deception to convince the world that Jesus was risen. After scattering in fright the night before the cross, they now somehow sneak past a band of soldiers to roll (noisily) aside a huge tombstone, and steal away the body.

The practical difficulties are not the main issue, although they should suffice to discredit this charge. The truly unbelievable part of this scenario is the moral character on display throughout the New Testament, in the actions and writings of the very disciples who allegedly create a new cult based on a lie. These men condemned deceit and created a church culture of utter selflessness and honesty. Honesty to the point of yielding their own lives to torture and murder in the years following. Men do not die for something they know to be a lie. Men will indeed die for a lie, such as Islamic suicide bombers. But for the disciples (not just the eleven, but the hundreds who claimed to see the resurrected Christ), to avoid martyrdom, all they had to do was admit that they had been lying. They had every motivation to recant their claims, including loss of family, friends, livelihood, home, health, and life. And no credible motivation to persevere unto death, since they knew whether Christ was truly risen or not. These circumstances are unprecedented in history.

Ultimately, the character of the disciples was just an imperfect reflection of their Master, who walked with them for three years. Jesus affirmed to them repeatedly that He and the Father were one. The Jewish leaders understood that Jesus claimed deity. They tried to kill him several times before he willingly yielded to the cross. Importantly, Jesus told his disciples that he would rise from the dead. This was the preeminent sign that he attached to his life on earth. If Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, his entire life’s testimony would be negated, and it is incredible that his followers would create a new cult from the ashes of a false teacher.

In short, without a resurrection, there would have been no Christianity, no New Testament, no Bible, and the last two thousand years of world history would have been entirely different.

2. Did the Jewish or Roman leaders steal the body?

Let’s dispense with this one quickly. To destroy the credibility of Peter, James, John, and the rest of the disciples, and to squash the new movement at its start, Jewish or Roman leaders had merely to produce the body or circulate the facts of its relocation. By the way, the historical record is vacant of any objections to the fact of the empty tomb. The problem is in the disposition of the body. That leads us to point 3.

3. Why was Jerusalem the focal point of this new religion?

Why not in the friendly neighborhood of Galilee — the spiritual home base of the Lord and his disciples? If the resurrection were a scam, nothing would be harder than to make the case publicly and at the risk of liberty and life in Jerusalem, within a tee shot of the garden tomb. And what of that tomb . . .

4. If the resurrection was bogus, why wasn’t Christianity split?

In the three plus years that Jesus preached in Israel, there were many thousands that followed him from venue to venue and loved his teaching. Multitudes would have been grateful for his healings and compassion. Even if you discount the healings, it is undisputed by historians of all stripes that Jesus had enormous impact on the minds and hearts of the people of Israel. So then . . . if a small cabal formed to claim that a resurrected Christ was behind their leadership, would not many — probably a majority of those thousands mentioned above — have continued to love the memory of Jesus and his teachings, while simply disbelieving the claims of Peter, etc.? The garden tomb would doubtless have enjoyed many pilgrimages to commemorate the life and unfortunate death of Jesus. Rumors of alternative burial sites would have abounded. But there is no record in history of any such splits among the early Christians. The testimonies of the resurrected Christ were evidently so powerful that they overwhelmed any possibility of an alternative faith based on the life of Jesus. In fact, we find the miraculous events recorded in the book of Acts to represent stamps of God’s approval on the testimonies of the apostles.

It was only in the centuries to follow, right on up to modern times, from the gnostics of the 2nd century to the denominational modernists of the last few centuries, that we see splits over the virgin birth, deity, and resurrection of Christ. In the times of the eyewitnesses, church faith, doctrine, and polity were unified on the simplicity of the Biblical record.

5. Maybe Jesus didn’t die on the cross.

No serious student of history and of Roman crucifixion takes the so-called “swoon” fantasy seriously. The scourging that Jesus suffered before he was forced to carry his own cross was sufficient to have killed most men outright. The prophet Isaiah reports that “his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men.” The beatings, the scourging, the crown of thorns, climaxed by the bloody horror of crucifixion — it is simply not credible that Jesus survived the cross. The Romans were indeed experts in meting out death. Please re-read the Gospel accounts. The spear in the Lord’s side produced water and blood. The heart’s sack was already distended with water, a clear indication of death before the soldier thrust his spear.

Admittedly, Pilate was a touch surprised that Jesus had died as soon as he did. Crucifixion was intended to be drawn out as miserably long as possible. But it was Jesus who “gave up the ghost.” He laid down his life when the sacrifice (for you, for me, for the world) was “finished.” The Roman soldiers broke the legs of the two thieves crucified that day to accelerate asphyxiation and death. They merely used the spear to doublecheck in the case of Jesus. If this band of soldiers was somehow incompetent up to that point, the spear settled the issue.

A Biblical aside . . . Note that there were three hours of darkness before the final moments of life. That period was doubtless when Jesus became sin itself, and the wrath of God was visited upon him. The darkness is a kindly veil over what was truly the most horrific period in the universe’s history — when the eternal Son of God suffered hell on the cross for the sins of those who put him there: you and me.

But back to the physical. Suppose that somehow he survived all that no man could survive. How did he recuperate from such deadly wounds to unwrap himself from many yards of tightly bound cloth, head to foot, and escape from the sealed tomb? And in such a pitiable state, how did he fool his followers into thinking that he was resurrected, when he would have required help beyond any conceivable medical technology to recover his strength? And then what — did he hide out until he died, while his disciples risked their lives to spread the lie that he ascended bodily to heaven?

6. Were the disciples a likely group to overturn the world?

Note first that the eleven were unanimous in their testimony. Considering the danger (remember that their leader had just been crucified), isn’t it interesting that there were no defections? (Judas Iscariot was out before the crucifixion.) And then quickly a band of 120 were in fervent prayer together. And then 3000 converts in a day, and then thousands more, to spread, as Frank Morrison termed it: “Only from an intensely heated center of burning zeal could this vast field of lava have been thrown out from a tiny country like Palestine to the limits of the Roman world.”

What a motley band, including simple fishermen, a tax collector, and women of various reputations. We know these people better than we know anyone in ancient history, including kings. These lives were utterly transformed, as were the lives of those who believed their testimony in the years ahead. Over the next three centuries the Romans instigated ten distinct decades-long periods of intense persecution, while the churches grew stronger and stronger. The first major Roman persecution, under Nero and just three decades after the resurrection, was launched not because of threatened Christian insurrection, but because of mere refusal to worship the emperor as a god. Persecutions were systematic and widespread, attesting the pervasive spread of the Gospel. Yet ancient writings (by enemies of the Christians!) admit that the believers were loyal citizens, honest, monogamous, and kind to one another.

The New Testament doctrines center on the love of God manifested through the cross of Jesus Christ, the victorious resurrection, the preaching of this Gospel, and the love of the brethren for each other and for their neighbors. Christianity did not spread through the sword, as Islam did centuries later, and continues to do so today. The Gospel has always spread through the love of God shone through the lives of the followers of the carpenter born in Bethlehem.

The character of the apostles is reinforced by the bald openness of the New Testament accounts. We see the lives of these men displayed warts and all: Peter’s impetuousness, anger, and actions provoking rebuke from the Lord; Thomas’ embarrassing doubts; the cowardly flight of the eleven upon the Lord’s arrest; and the painful details of Peter’s three denials. James, the Lord’s half-brother, was once one of the skeptical siblings of Jesus. But after the resurrection, we see him born again and taking the principal leadership of the church at Jerusalem. If the Bible were merely of man, the flaws of the founders would be covered up or at least “spun”! Compare the revisionist histories associated with the founders of Mormonism, the so-called Jehovah’s Witnesses, and especially Islam.

Christianity did not suffer significant weakening or corruption until Constantine married it to paganism and established it as the state church. That produced far more trouble over the centuries to follow as the Roman Catholic Church came into existence in the 4th and 5th centuries, and in turn began to persecute the true Bible-believing local churches. By the way, the crusades launched by the pagan Roman Catholic Church against Islam (and vice-versa) were fully matched in intensity by the persecutions of the RCC against true Christians for the next 1500 years after Constantine. But back to our main topic . . .

7. Perhaps it was a small plot and the rest can be explained by emotionalism.

Please take the time to study the book of Acts carefully, especially chapters 2 and 17. An emotional following might have been more credible with a launching point in Galilee, as already suggested. But the Jewish center of the universe, Jerusalem, demanded much reasoning and, dare we say it, proof, to create converts. Peter’s sermon in chapter 2, of which we most certainly have the barest outline, is a reasoned argument based on Jewish history and Scripture. Furthermore, if there was any doubt about the tomb being empty, or any serious challenge to the credibility of the disciples, the results would have been failure at best, or imprisonment and death at worst.

Turning to Paul in Acts 17:22-31, we see him making a case for God — the one and only Creator — to a mix of atheists/evolutionists and multi-theistic pagans. Throughout Paul’s ministry we see him reasoning and disputing, working to turn the minds of intelligent men and women to the true God. (Acts 18:4, 17:16-17)

8. Just who was Paul, once Saul of Tarsus?

Glad you asked. As you read the book of Acts and the letters of Paul in the New Testament, you’ll see a highly educated Roman citizen, and yet a zealous Pharisee, of the strictest Jewish sect, a hater and persecuter of the Christians, and a murderer by his own admission. His confrontation with the resurrected Jesus Christ, as recorded in Acts 9 and amplified in chapters 22 and 26, produces a 180 degree turnaround. Paul becomes the lead missionary for the western world, suffering repeated persecution and ultimately giving his life for the testimony of the resurrection. Paul’s conversion must be explained by the skeptic. His legacy is merely the rapid growth of the Christian churches in Asia Minor and Europe during the 1st century.

Two young, well-connected British philosophers of the early 18th century determined to attack the foundations of Christianity, specifically the resurrection of Christ and the miraculous conversion of Paul. Gilbert West committed to undermine the resurrection through extensive historical analysis and Lord Lyttleton explored the case of Paul. Meeting after some time had passed, they sheepishly (and disturbingly) admitted to each other that they had come to conclusions opposite to their presumptions. In 1747 West published the book Observations on the History and Evidences of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. On the flyleaf he quoted “Blame not before thou hast examined the truth.”

9. Isn’t it “unscientific” to believe in the resurrection?

It is true that medical science has no means of reviving a body dead for three days. And that no one outside of the records of Scripture has seen someone so revived. Science is the application of known physical laws to observations in the present. Science involves hypothesis, experimentation, modeling, and synthesis to establish theories and laws that allow us to make sense of this present world. Operational science, however, does not claim to embrace all truth for all time. There are no laboratory instruments, for example, to measure truth, beauty, morality, and all those qualities that make human life meaningful. More importantly, man’s operational science says nothing about the Creator God who made this universe. If you have a fundamental difficulty in believing the resurrection, you likely disbelieve Genesis 1:1 . . . “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Given Genesis 1:1, why is it so inconceivable that God could raise the dead? And given the reality of God as presented in the Bible, why imagine that God has no purpose in his creation? In fact, God invested you as a living soul, made in His image, so that you might live with him in fellowship and glory forever. If you choose.

By the way, arrogance is inbred in the scientific community. The simplest of all physical systems is the hydrogen atom — one proton and one electron. Yet there is no scientist, no PhD, no Nobel prize winner who can tell you just what that electron is doing in that atom. Quantum theory gives us a probabilistic method to make some useful predictions, but the theory is certifiably incapable of specifying what is really going on between the two particles. At the other end of the complexity scale, consider human consciousness. After over a century of intense research, no one has a clue how interactions of neurons, synapses, and the configuration of the brain relates to the “blueness” you perceive when you look at the sky. Or worse, your awareness that you enjoy the blue sky. Could it be that mind — and by extension soul and spirit — go beyond the pitiful limits of human science?

10. Is the resurrection credible to intelligent, well-educated people?

The resurrection of Jesus Christ, not to mention the rest of his life, is the most vigorously investigated topic of ancient history. The greatest of scholars have examined it and many have been converted from skepticism to an active faith in the risen Lord.

Simon Greenleaf, the distinguished professor who put Harvard law school on the map in the 19th century, has been called the greatest authority on legal evidences in the history of the world. When he tackled the case of the resurrection, he concluded without reservation that the event was historical and the Gospel accounts utterly reliable.

Frank Morrison was a British lawyer who set out to write a book repudiating the resurrection. During his research, he became a born again believer, and published the book Who Moved the Stone? to recount his personal transformation and the evidence that convinced him. Lew Wallace similarly intended to write a book to deny the deity of Christ and eventually published the novel Ben Hur, defending the Biblical accounts.

In recent times, Lee Strobel, a skeptical and cynical investigative reporter, was challenged by his newly converted wife to apply his talents to see whether the Bible stands up to reason and criticism. Strobel was first impressed by the awesome changes (for the better) that came over his wife through her conversion. That prompted him to follow the same path that Morrison, Wallace, and many others have taken through history. Strobel became a Christian and has published several books in defense of the faith once delivered to the saints.

This author, too, was once an atheist, a determined skeptic, certain that the Bible was fantasy and that life was to be lived only for self-gratification. When challenged as a young man with the transformed lives of a Christian family who befriended him, he was open to explore the foundations of Biblical belief. He became a Christian whose faith has only been strengthened as he eventually acquired five academic degrees, including a Ph.D. in engineering, and enjoyed a long and successful career in scientific research.

11. Finally, is the resurrection relevant to you?

Perhaps at this point you are willing to believe “the facts” of the resurrection, and the truth of the New Testament record itself. Is that enough? No — intellectual assent just adds to your accountability before God. You see, if you truly believe, your life will change. If you believed that your house was on fire, you would flee. Now, if you truly believe that you are a sinner, one heartbeat from hell, you will do whatever you need to do to escape.

Consider this — in the next 24 hours, your heart will beat about 100,000 times. You don’t control one of those heartbeats. When you die . . . and that’s guaranteed . . . where will you be? Heaven? Hell? Or are you foolish enough to think that you (mind/soul/consciousness) have no reality apart from your present flesh? If you “believe” that, you enter into a contradiction immediately: the atoms of your brain have no capacity to reason. How is it even possible for you to decide between truth and error, logic and illogic, right and wrong? Let’s at least assume that there is a YOU, and you can find out what the truth is about the greatest question facing any man, woman, or child: What lies beyond your death?

What are the facts of your case?

You are a sinner in rebellion against the God of the universe. God is holy, just, and righteous, and must punish sin. Does a good judge let a convicted murderer go free just because the murderer asks sweetly? A good judge must deliver judgment. Read the sermon on the mount (Matthew chapters 5-7) to see whether you stand innocent or guilty in God’s courtroom. Have you been angry without cause or called someone a fool? Jesus pronounces you a murderer at heart. Guilty multiple times? Then you are a serial murderer on God’s books. Murderers are condemned to hell.

Ever tell a lie? Liars will have their part in the lake of fire (Rev 21:8). Ever look on a woman with lust? Pornography is included. Jesus calls that adultery. Adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9-11).

Face it: You have broken God’s laws thousands of times and you deserve hell. You might say, “Hell — that’s pretty severe, isn’t it? It doesn’t sound reasonable.” God didn’t create hell for you and me, but for the devil and the angels that rebelled against him (Matt 25:41). Satan’s sin was simply rebellion — wanting to “do his own thing.” When you sin against God, thousands and thousands of times, you are in the same rebellion. If you die in your sins, you share the devil’s eventual fate. Why should you get any other consideration? God holds together the very atoms of your body (Col 1:17) while you use those atoms to sin against him.

Here is some good news, the very Gospel itself: God loves you so much that Jesus died for your sins, becoming sin itself on the cross. He paid the penalty for your crimes, satisfying fully the infinite justice of God himself. Jesus was buried, then three days later rose from the dead, proving that he is the very source of life, and has power over death.

Your only way out is to humble yourself, confess your sins to God, repent (turn from your sins, seeing them as rebellion against God), and trust in the shed blood of Jesus Christ. If you repent and believe, God will save your soul, give you the gift of everlasting life, and write your name in his book of life. Your sins will be cast into the depths of the sea, to be remembered no more. You will begin to live a life in service to Jesus Christ, a life that shows the fruit of the Holy Spirit of God, who will take residence in your body. This fruit includes love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance. When you die, you are assured an instantaneous trip to heaven, to the very presence of the Lord. You will escape the fires of hell, your only alternative.

Are you willing to let Jesus be Saviour and Lord? It’s a package deal. There is no “fire escape” without a change of heart. Repentance includes a willingness to let God begin to change your mind and heart. You see, we have no strength in our flesh to put away the sin out of our lives and live righteously in a wicked world. We need the power of God to change our desires, give up our addictions and fleshly desires, and add good things to our daily lives. Does salvation end temptation and make you perfect? No, in this flesh we will always battle temptation. But salvation puts you on a different road, one that leads to life. Right now, you are on the broad road that leads to eternal destruction.

What is it going to be? “Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” (Is 55:6-7)

Please contact us if we can be of help to you. Not one of us came to the Lord without someone sharing the good news of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That’s just what we want to do with you. Jesus wants you to be “born again” into his family. Once you are, he will never leave you nor forsake you. If you come to Christ, we want to meet you and befriend you as the brother or sister you are to us, once you too, are part of the family of God.

Bibliography

1. King James version of the Bible
2. Frank Morrison, Who Moved the Stone, reprint of the 1930 edition, Faber & Faber, London, 1971.
3. Josh McDowell, The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Thomas Nelson, Nashville, 1999.
4. Simon Greenleaf, The Testimony of the Evangelists, Kregel Classics, Grand Rapids, 1995, originally published J.C. & Co., New York, 1874.
5. Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1998.
6. D. James Kennedy, Why I Believe, Word Books, Waco, 1980.

- Dr. Dave

Kyle Ford's "The Sinner's Prayer, Four Spiritual Laws, Romans Road, and Other Heretical Gospels" (From NeedfulExhortation.blogspot.com)

Friday, December 13, 2013

The sinner's prayer, four spiritual laws, Romans road, and other heretical gospels

Christianity in America is plagued with multitudes of religious lost – people who are convinced they are saved, but they bear no spiritual fruit. Their lack of fruit demonstrates that they are indeed still lost. (Matt. 3:10, Matt. 7:19). This is a bitter truth that every Christian in America needs to acknowledge before they will even have a chance to help those around them. Just as important, we must identify the root cause that is filling churches with many false converts. This root cause is easy to see: churches have silently replaced the Biblical gospel with watered-down, easy-on-the-ears, but heretical messages. This problem is maintained by an anti-biblical church structure that perfectly houses the religious lost that it creates. This is no coincidence. It's a well-planned system that could only come from the mind of Satan. I've talked a bit about church structure in previous posts. Now, I want to take some time to expose the heresies that are all too common and then discuss how to minister to others in this type of environment.

We'll start with the basics. Among other places, the gospel is defined in 1 Corinth. 15:1-4. The message is that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead. Great news! So far so good – practically everyone gets that part right, even cults. Now, our response to the gospel message, or how we receive it, is by repenting of our sins and putting our faith in Christ (Mark 1:15, Acts 3:19, Acts 26:20). Adding or removing anything anything from the gospel makes it different, makes it 'another gospel', which is condemned in the strongest language (Gal. 1:6-8). This is how heresies are born. You take the gospel and add the keeping of the OT law, good works, baptism, etc. Or, in the case of fundamentalists and evangelicals, you add a sinner's prayer or remove repentance.

The Sinner's prayer is a heresy which promises that you can be saved by asking God for forgiveness or “asking Jesus into your heart”, typically by praying a modeled prayer. Let's be clear. You will not find these ideas anywhere in the Bible. Sinners are always called to repentance and faith. There's nothing wrong with expressing repentance toward God in prayer (Luke 18:13), but the error comes when people are assured that they are saved when and if they recite the prayer. In other words, this modern heresy promises salvation as a result of reciting a ritual prayer, not by repentance and faith in Christ. To make my point, let's look at an example developed and used by Billy Graham published on the Billy Graham Library's website (from the section 'prayer' at the bottom of the page):

Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner, and I ask for Your forgiveness. I believe You died for my sins and rose from the dead. I turn from my sins and invite You to come into my heart and life. I want to trust and follow You as my Lord and Savior.

A few lines after this it goes on to mis-apply Romans 10:13 to suggest that anyone who prayed this prayer is now saved. It all sounds good, doesn't it? But faith and repentance are about actually trusting in Jesus and turning from your sin, not just saying that you will. To suggest that this prayer is sufficient for salvation is to accept lip service where Christ demands the substance.

The sinner's prayer can also be used without suggesting that it saves, but why would you? The prayer does nothing to help bring them to salvation, they need to repent. If the repenting sinner wants to pray, let him, but don't push it. Putting undue emphasis on a prayer can make the issues unclear, and you can make someone believe the prayer is important for their salvation even without explicitly saying so. This is especially true today. Maybe you don't tell the sinner a prayer will save him, but he has probably already heard that from several other pastors throughout his life. So, when you try to witness to that false convert and place the same emphasis on the prayer, he'll assume you're in the same boat. In short, using a sinner's prayer does nothing good, and is almost guaranteed to do some harm. So, if you really don't believe that a sinner's prayer saves, then stop doing it.

The "Romans Road" and "four spiritual laws" methods of sharing the gospel exemplify another type of heresy popular in conservative churches. The main problem of this heresy is that the gospel is proclaimed with little/no discussion of sin, and the need for the sinner to repent is either downplayed or neglected entirely. Yet, in the Bible, God makes it clear that repentance is absolutely necessary for salvation (Matt. 7:21, Mark 1:15, Luke 13:3, Acts 3:19, Acts 26:20). Let's look at some specific examples of this heresy.

The four spiritual laws can be found on the campus crusade website. In short, the four spiritual laws neglect the Biblical focus of sin/justice/hell/repentance/new birth and focus instead on “God has a wonderful plan for your life...you need Jesus so you can experience God's plan.” Sin is presented as a mere inconvenience that prevents the flow of blessings and is never properly defined. Repentance is almost completely neglected. Sure, there's a little cartoon at the end about Christ-directed vs. self-directed life, but their description of sin and repentance is so vague that it is practically useless to any sinner. Contrast this with the preaching of John the baptist, who called out specific sins and told men exactly what they needed to do (Luke 3:8-18). It wasn't just John, Jesus and the apostles did the same thing throughout the NT. So, instead of using the four spiritual laws, use God's laws (the 10 commandments are a great place to start) and show sinners their guilt, that they deserve judgement and hell, and that they need to repent and trust in the savior that died for them.

The Romans road is a very similar approach. Though older and more traditional, it's no better than the four spiritual laws. This approach relies on quoting several verses from Romans without their context. There are some variations, but let's look at the Sword of the Lord's website – a popular fundie resource. The shallow presentation of sin is similar to the four spiritual laws, but the Romans road is even worse because it mischaracterizes the nature of sin. At least the evangelicals talk about sin as a personal choice. In the Romans road, the fundies just talk about how you inherited Adam's sin nature. Too bad. How exactly are you supposed to repent of a sin nature? This description misleads sinners from gaining any concrete understanding of their personal, willful sins. The reality is that they must repent of their personal sins, not just the concept of sin, nor a supposed sin nature. Of course, they wouldn't know that anyway, because the Romans road doesn't even mention repentance at all. Therefore, the preacher robs the sinner of information they need to be saved. This road is just a spiritual dead end.

Now, given the nature and pervasiveness of these major errors, how can you minister to those around you? Realize that the number of religious lost is astounding, more than anyone would like to admit. From years of experience in preaching the gospel one-on-one, I estimate that less than 2% of Americans can give even passable responses to basic questions about the gospel, salvation, and the new birth – things that are necessary for salvation. If you don't believe me, approach some strangers or those lazy people at your church and ask them the following questions:

1) “Can you tell me how to get to heaven?” Probably the best response you'll get on this one is “believe in Jesus”. While not necessarily wrong, this answer is awfully incomplete. They should show some understanding of repentance in their answer to the rest of these questions. If not, they fail the test. Anyone who claims to have been saved for longer than a month certainly should be able to use the word “repent” without prompting.

2) “How is it that Jesus is able to save you?” they should have at least a basic understanding of substitutionary atonement – You are guilty of breaking God's law, but Jesus died in your place.

3) “What changed when you were saved?” Honestly, they should light up at this point. Every real Christian will have at least one story to tell that is very dear to them: loss of desire for formerly loved sins, a new hunger for the Bible, unexplained love for Christians, etc. They should be able to mention something like this which would demonstrate that they had a very real transition from darkness to light. If they have to think about it, you're looking at a lost religious person.

4) “So what are you doing for the Lord these days?” Maybe they're not making the best use of their time, but they should be doing something. Going to church, staying away from sin, reading the Bible, etc. doesn't count. That's no-brainer stuff that we do for ourselves. A person who does nothing for Christ is demonstrating that they do not really know Him (Matt. 3:10, Matt. 7:19-23, Matt. 25:23-30). Can someone recognize their sin and guilt, be saved from death and hell, then move on and not sacrifice and serve their Lord out of love? I don't buy it. There should be a desire to help and reach out to others that manifests itself somehow, ideally by sharing the gospel with others. Expect others to put up strong resistance to this one, as it cuts to the core of what is important.

As mentioned before, familiarity with the major errors that infect churches today is critical in order to minister to others. If you aren't willing to recognize the problems with a sinner's prayer or Romans road, you'll never ask the hard questions that are necessary to get through to the religious lost. This is not just theory. I seriously challenge you to ask the above questions to people around you. If they can't answer these simple questions about the gospel and the new birth, then it is evidence that they do not know Biblical repentance and faith. Treat them like a lost person until they prove otherwise. Specifically, share the Biblical gospel with them. Take away their hope in their superficial religious rituals, declare their need for repentance, and demand that they show the fruits of repentance. Be warned though, this simple Biblical practice will likely cause your friends and your church to turn away from you. But more importantly, you will have a chance to make a difference in their lives, and you will be following in the footsteps of Christ.

Josh Stone's "What Is Christianity?" (From Josh's Blog)

What Is Christianity?
NOV 8TH, 2013
Or maybe, what is it to be a Christian. There are many popular slogans today, “It’s not a religion, it’s a relationship,” for one example. Maybe being a Christian is going to church. Maybe it’s a set of ideas you’ve committed your mind to. Maybe it’s hallmark activities, like reading the Bible, and going to church instead of watching the Super Bowl.

But I look at it a little differently. Theologically, it’s following Christ – repentance and faith, new birth, life in Christ. But I’m not talking about systematic thinking here. I mean, “What does it feel like to be a Christian?” In this post, I present some rambling about what this means. I hope it makes any sense at all.

A relationship

I’ve always heard people say this one, but it bugs me. “Christianity isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship.” But James 1:27 tells us what pure religion is. Shouldn’t we avoid trite little sayings that seem to disagree with a perfectly good Bible verse? If we consult a dictionary, relationships are a way to describe how two things are connected. A religion is the service and worship of God.

As a Christian, I’m connected to God, but so is a non-Christian – it’s just a different kind of connection. We might call the connection I have that of a Father and son. Corporately, Christians are the bride of Christ. That’s another kind of connection. A non-christian has something more like that of the cop and the criminal. Or at least, Creator / creation. For that matter, can you think of a religion that can’t describe itself as a relationship with God? (if not, you’re suffering from something called “group think”) In any case, using a flexible word like that to sum it up is silly. If it could mean anything, then it probably means nothing.

So stop picking on people who use the “r” word. It has a much better definition, anyway.

A lifestyle

Lots of people go to church buildings regularly, and this is an evidence that they’re christians. But you don’t find church buildings in the Bible, so it’s really just a cultural thing. In fact, most of the things people typically point to are not things that fundamentally make someone a Christian. They really just represent a cultural lifestyle. Church buildings, services, pews, devotions, radio stations, potlucks… lots of things that don’t make you a christian.

I think the classic argument about this perspective is that spending the night in a garage doesn’t make you a car. But that really sells this argument short. What we’re really talking about is people who can’t see past the cultural trappings of christian faith, as implemented in the culture, and find the consuming fire inside.

As a house-church proponent, I’ve seen this vividly with people who will mentally assent to the ideas of New Testament ecclesiology, but still refuse to let go of their cultural lifestyle. Many people will agree that church buildings are not biblical… but they still want to go to one. They’ll agree that employing a senior pastor, a paid professional, is frought with temptations and abuses, but they still want one. If they didn’t go sit next to 300 people this weekend, they won’t feel like a christian. And those same 300 people wouldn’t think a person’s still a christian if they gave it up.

The cultural expression of a christian community is just a shell. There ought to be a core inside, which is really the whole point. The shell is just an interface, to borrow a nerd metaphor. But the people I’m talking about – they’re like someone who eats M&Ms for the candy shell, and doesn’t even realize that there isn’t a chocolate center anymore.

If you peel back the layers of your christian experience, and find out that there’s no chocolate in the middle, you need to find something else. Otherwise, you’re settling for something that’s not the real thing.

An experience

Have I offended you yet? Sorry if I did. I told you I’d be rambling though. If you’re still reading, there’s another one that needs to be added to the list. I met a guy not long ago who says he had a vision of Jesus giving him a hug in a restaurant. And that’s why he’s a christian.

OK, you might think that sounds like an anomaly. But this isn’t just a pentecostal or charismatic thing. It’s not just a modern thing. It’s all over the place, and it’s right here in river city too. It’s trouble with a capital T and that rhymes with E, and that stands for ‘sperience.

Let me give you a Bible-thumpin’, independent, fundamentalist example. This is just to show that it affects even the most conservative of circles. I love sermons. And I don’t want you to miss how much… I collected them. I have thousands. I figured once that before I got married, I had heard over 10,000 sermons. It helped that I was a camp counselor for six years – maybe that was cheating – but nevertheless it’s true.

The way I saw it, a sermon was a message from God, and it was just about the most spiritually exciting thing you could do. But one day, someone asked me to name the 10 most influential sermons I’d ever heard. Out of the 10,000, I think I could list… I don’t know… three? He then asked me to name the 10 most influential people. I couldn’t just name 10 – And then I did the same thing with the 10 most influential books. They just kept coming, and I couldn’t decide (well, you really only get 9 anyway, since the Bible is #1, right?).

As fun as a good pulpit-pounding (nay, pulpit-kicking!), hell-fire, and brimstone sermon is, when you get right down to it, there’s usually not that much there. And it really doesn’t stick. Sometime, try to make a diagram of what’s in a sermon, and it’ll surprise you. There are much better ways to communicate, and much better ways to learn (even a regular lecture has a higher information density).

And it’s the same thing for the praise band. The faith healer. The vision in the restaurant. If you tie your spiritual identity to something that feels awesome, you’re setting yourself up for disaster. Feelings fade quickly, and have to be renewed tomorrow. You pile up enough tomorrows, and you’ll find you are left with nothing but a lot of empty yesterdays.

So if your christianity revolves around the pulpit, or the altar call, or the music (let alone the tongues, the healing, etc.), search your soul, and see if it’s really doing all that you think it is. You may realize it doesn’t make as much difference as you think.

At least one alternative

I want to challenge every professing christian to the most profound adventure you can imagine. At least, that’s the way I think of christianity. It’s the greatest adventure. And if you find yourself in a milieu that doesn’t match that description, cut the cords and start adventuring. Here’s how you do it.

As a christian, you are a special agent. Sometimes, you function as a diplomat – an ambassador for Christ, representing Him to the world. At other times, you are a spiritual infiltrator, like when you preach the Gospel in the synagogue (the way Paul did). Sometimes you’re a warrior on the front lines, like when you’re passing out tracts or trying to figure out how long is too long to argue with an atheist. And maybe occasionally, you’re internal affairs, rooting out corruption and abuse. If this isn’t christianity to you, you might not have it figured out yet.

Also, other christians are real people. They aren’t hands to shake between the songs and the offering plate or targets for your multilevel marketing scam. They’re right sometimes, and they’re very wrong sometimes. And they probably think you’re wrong too. But they’re worthy of the sincerest love and sympathy, all wrapped up in one. Look around at the christians that you know… do you know these things about them? (Oh, and exclude anyone that you’re related to; that’s cheating):

How did they become christians (what’s their testimony)?
What did they think about last week’s sermon?
What is the most important doctrine that they have wrong (guaranteed that there is one)?
How about the least important doctrine they have wrong (these are sometimes fun)?
What do they do on Saturdays?
Do they need help with anything?
Would they go witnessing with you if you asked?
If you can’t answer these questions about your fellow christians, you don’t know them. And I’d argue that you’ve missed the chocolate center for the candy shell.

Yes, christianity is an adventure. This is the most apt metaphor I can think of. Imagine an adventure that you’ve heard of… what things happen in adventures? The hero loses sometimes. People are lost. Battles are fought. Sometimes there’s victory. You go places. You do things – usually of the “interesting” variety. You will be confronted with adversity, challenges, and probably a little evil here and there. You can rescue people. Others depend on you, and you can show your mettle. And usually, you end up getting home in the end. And winning.

You should be scrabbling to get better all the time, hoping that you’ll be prepared for the next step in the adventure. When you encounter an obstacle, you should defeat it. Soundly. With such finality that the next time you hit that obstacle, you won’t even notice. To succeed in this adventure, you need to know where you are, and where you’re going. You need tools. Skills. Heart. And you might have to do it alone, because I can guarantee you that you won’t find many people that will be willing to cast off the pithy sayings that excuse their inaction; the cultural trappings that distract them from the white-hot, burning, consuming passion of the christian adventure; and the trite experiences that keep them locked into spiritual baby-hood.

If this isn’t a picture of your christian life, ask yourself if you wish it was. My experience so far is that it’s apparently very hard to move past those things that hinder. But if you are willing to admit to yourself that christianity is more than almost anyone around you thinks it is, then put feet to it, and do something. Go witness to someone. Challenge 10 of your christian friends to join the adventure (if you find one that will, you’re probably lucky blessy). And regardless of what happens, mix it up until it works.

Recommendations

Join the battle – pass out a tract or argue with an atheist. Nothing will prompt spiritual growth like being part of God’s plan.
Figure out what you really believe, and toss it out if you can’t find it clearly in the Bible somewhere (especially with the cultural practices thing)
Bug other people sometimes, because the worst case is that they rebuff your attempts and they keep coasting. Best case, they join you in the adventure.
Take people seriously. Rebuke someone only because you love them, and really want to help them. Listen to what they say instead of throwing trite sayings and formulas at them.
Email me (yakovdk@gmail.com) because… well… I wouldn’t mind knowing!

Dave Stone's "The Board: A Biblical Model of 'You'" (From TruthReallyMatters.com)

The Board: a Biblical model of ‘you’ – 4/15/14

“The Board” is a brilliant little movie, just 32 minutes long, produced in 2008 by Bethesda Baptist Church of Brownsburg, Indiana, along with Uptone Pictures. The setting is a conference room, specifically a “Board Room.” The six board members are Mr. Mind, Mr. Conscience, Mr. Memory, Mr. Heart, Mr. Will, and Mr. Emotion. The meeting is called to discuss and vote on both “new” and “old business.” The most contentious piece of “old business” is to decide what to do about Mr. Mind’s friend, Ray, who has been challenging them with the Gospel.

“The Board” is a Biblical model of any human being, anyone made in the image of God . . . like you or me. In fact, since I don’t believe our main character’s name is ever actually mentioned, let’s call him “Dave.” In the film, Dave’s Board members interact in ways that I think are quite representative of the way you and I struggle over tough issues, particularly over the life-changing decision to repent and follow Jesus Christ.

Why do I call this a “model”? Models are incredibly useful, as long as they correlate reasonably well with reality, in terms of explanation and prediction. We all use models. For example, I have a model in my mind that I use to go to the grocery store. I visualize a turn here, a turn there, then go straight until I see a stop light, turn at the first entrance, and voila, I’m there. It’s a simple model that neglects thousands of details about the actual journey, for example, the many houses, businesses, and open fields I pass by, bumps on the road, whether the temperature is in the 70s or the 90s, and the infinite variety of typical traffic conditions. What I keep in my head is a simple representation of how to get there. And it works, so the model is useful.

All of science and engineering is based on modeling. If I design a simple low frequency electronic circuit, I model the design mathematically, doing calculations about how the resistors, capacitors, inductors, and transistors will interact. I don’t care about the color of the transistor packages or the weight of the resistors. More significantly, I don’t care about the capacitance of the resistors or the inductance of the capacitors. But if I try to operate this design at very high frequencies, my neglect of spurious capacitance and inductance will certainly produce unexpected behaviors – perhaps even failure. So in a “good model,” I need to take into account what’s important and understand what I can happily leave out for simplicity’s sake.

In my career, I did a fair amount of computational modeling, particularly in the area of laser physics. When I built a good math model, it produced outputs that matched experimental data. A good model allows the scientist to get a “feel” for what’s going on, to understand the “physics” of the situation. The model can then be trusted to predict new situations and even to allow investing in a physical prototype. An optimum model is one which uses as few variables and equations as practical, and yet represents physical reality “well enough.” All significant modern engineering projects are modeled thoroughly before they are built, including electronics, bridges, skyscrapers, fighter aircraft, or a deep space probe headed toward the outer solar system.

The most complex system known to man is himself, not just the nano-technology of cellular life, but the human mind / brain. To help us understand ourselves and to make useful predictions of how we behave in various circumstances, requires some kind of model. Secular psychology offers bogus models that assume an evolutionary / animal past, overly simplistic mechanistic constraints from brain chemistry, and a rejection of the ideas of soul / mind / spirit. Additionally, they abhor and scoff at any idea of a personal God who makes us morally accountable for our thoughts, words, and deeds.

“The Board” offers a simple, yet effective and, more importantly, Biblical model for what goes on inside. I won’t make the effort here to proof-text the validity of “The Board’s” model. If you’re a student of the Bible, you’ll recognize it. I do note that the Bible is filled with metaphors . . . simple models . . . to help us understand much about the very character of God Himself. Jesus is described at times as “the door,” “the light,” “the life,” “the way,” “the Son of Man” . . . among many other descriptors. Jesus is not literally “a door.” Yet the metaphor helps us to understand something vital about our opportunity to find God.

A metaphor is an extremely simple model. A model is a very complex metaphor.

I won’t give away key plot elements, but I will make some analytical points about what impresses me both in the film and in the Biblical model. Mr. Mind, for example, is the member who insists that Ray’s evangelistic challenge be dealt with. Mr. Emotion is horrified. The prospect of becoming a “Jesus freak” would derail his desires for pleasure and fun in life. “You’re asking us to give up everything that makes us happy!” Mr. Heart and Mr. Will want the issue tabled yet again . . . far better to ignore the issue than face up to making a yea / nay decision. Mr. Heart rationalizes, suggesting that Ray has ulterior motives. Heart doesn’t address Mind’s logical points, but resorts to insults, impugning Ray’s character.

But Mind makes a compelling case based on Ray’s arguments from history, prophecy, and morality, using God’s law and the reasonableness of Judgment. Conscience chimes in with support. You see, Conscience has “seen the light,” which has re-calibrated and re-sensitized his recognition of good vs. evil, particularly in view of Memory’s report of many of Dave’s specific sinful activities.

It becomes clear that Heart is the de-facto Chairman of this Board. He’s the one that must be swayed. If he converts, Emotion and Will will certainly follow. One thing the film gets spectacularly right is that the Board must be unanimous. Mind and Conscience may be utterly convinced of the truth of the Gospel, but a stubborn Heart will leave Dave lost and on his way to Hell. I have had this experience many times when sharing the Gospel with the lost. I call it “traction” when I can see that the individual “gets it.” He understands that he has sinned against God and will face Judgment. He understands that his only recourse is Jesus Christ. He understands what repentance means and how his life will certainly change with the new birth. Yet nothing happens. Even though he understands everything he needs to understand, his Heart and Will, fueled by his ranting Emotion, DON’T WANT TO CHANGE.

In Matthew 13, His disciples ask Jesus why He speaks to the crowds in parables at times. He explains, “Because they seeing, see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.” He goes on to quote Isaiah, specifically, “For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; Lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.” The Lord is pointing out the willful corruption of the heart of the determinedly lost. The key word is “lest.” It’s not the parables that prevent conversion, and it’s certainly not the Lord! God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. So whose fault? It’s the gross corruption of the individual’s heart, who DOES NOT WANT TO UNDERSTAND, “lest” repentance follow and sins be forsaken.

In Dave’s case, Mr. Will is offended at the accusations by Conscience, as if Will has to share any blame. After all, Will asserts, “My job is to do what this Board gives me the authority to do!” This is not strictly true in real life, of course. (I think the film missed this point by just a tad.) A weak Will may fail to move even if Heart has the right inclination. A strong Will, on the other hand, can help Heart and the rest of the Board embrace repentance and faith.

As the case gets more contentious and the arguments swing in Mind’s favor, Heart appears to capitulate, but reluctantly. Conscience doesn’t buy it. If Heart really believes, “Things are going to have to change around here!” Heart cries out, “I DON’T WANT TO CHANGE!” Aye, there’s the rub! The Heart rules, whether for good or evil.

The arguments get more personal from this point, penetrating the walls, the fierce defense mechanisms that Heart has constructed over the years of Dave’s life. Finally, Heart yields . . . IN AGREEMENT. He sees reality, he sees himself, he sees who Jesus Christ is. The walls are down. Emotion comes to himself. Will is ready to move as soon as Heart casts aside his . . . (I won’t give this one away. It’s quite clever!)

The Board is unanimous. It turns out that there is a large, regal chair at the head of the table, which we haven’t seen before. This chair has been empty. But no more. The Board has a new member . . . a new Chairman.

Regarding “The Board” as a model . . . I find it useful to explain the types of reactions I get to the Gospel message when I engage in 121 evangelism. It is often easy to get someone’s Mind engaged. The challenge is to get all six members of the Board to confront reality. Biblical evangelism (as discussed much on this site) employs God’s laws, confronting specific sins to challenge Memory and Conscience. God’s certain Judgment to come provokes Emotion to a quite rational fear. Now fear cannot save, but fear can provoke the Board to seek a solution, an escape. The Gospel itself, with a clear exposition of the Cross and the substitutionary atonement, is reasonable to a rational Mind, a Mind not perverted and closed by a warped Conscience and a determinedly rebellious Heart.

The glorious Biblical truth of the meeting of love and justice at the Cross satisfies a Mind who is looking for a solution; in fact, it satisfies such a Mind that this can be the ONLY solution. Realization of God’s love moves Emotion and opens the Heart. Will is eager to act on truth that leads toward freedom from addictive sins and a new life . . . indeed, eternal life. The Heart sees that fulfillment is only possible by uniting the Board with a new Chairman, a Chairman who knows the future, whose very character defines love, who is completely in touch with reality because He invented reality, namely the Lord Jesus Christ.

That’s the case when the new birth occurs. Usually, it doesn’t. One or more Board members, usually the Heart, remain stubborn. As a lost sinner ages, the Heart’s stubbornness only grows and the rest of the Board’s members grow more and more surly. Precisely the same types of individuals who will give me a good hearing while in college will, a few years later, walk by me with a sneer, having rejected the Gospel with prejudice, and will despise it all the more as each year goes by. Lost sinners don’t get sweeter with age. If you do 121 work, you know what I’m talking about.

When sharing the Gospel, it’s useful to have a Biblical model in mind. Christians who don’t will mistakenly interpret mental assent as an indication of conversion. The poorly discerning evangelist observes a pattern of sinful acts from a professing Christian and excuses it, not understanding that Mind, Heart, Will, Conscience, Emotion, and even Memory must be converted. Memory, too? The members of a lost man’s Board are corrupt, including Memory. Memory gets increasingly selective, often re-inventing personal history to allow self-justification.

I could multiply examples, but you get the idea. Multitudes of professing Christians have contentious, conflicted . . . unconverted Boards. When you see evidence of that, tell the guy what the problem is: He is lost, unsaved, unconverted, unrepentant. It’s up to him to make a new Heart and a new spirit, as in God’s plea to lost Israelites in Ezekiel 18:30-31. Our “Board” model refutes Calvinism, by the way. There is nothing “irresistible” about God’s grace. The Lord does not take the “Chairmanship” until the Board is unanimous.

With regard to your responsibility in the Great Commission . . . You’ve got to help, being sensitive to the internal struggle of the lost sinner. The religious lost will not figure it out for himself. If you don’t tell him, who will?

Shepherd's Goad Facebook Page

Recently I started a Facebook page for Shepherd's Goad, and I've been using that outlet to post other articles relevant to Christianity. If you have not seen the page, please, visit it and subscribe.

My intention is to use the page as an extra venue for other Christian writers. It should also serve to cause Tim and I to contribute more on this site in the future. That being said, I am going to add the articles I've posted on Facebook this week. Enjoy.

If This Is Your Pastor, Then You Need To Flee!

This video is appalling! But it does illustrate the extent that pastors think they that they are lords over "their flock." If you find yourself "under" someone like this, then all I can say is run. If you in fact believe this man is well within the Biblical parameters set for a pastor, then consider a few passages -

I Peter 5:3 - 

Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.

I Cor. 11:1-3 - 

1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

III John 9-11 - 

9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.

10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.

11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

II Timothy 3:1-9 (Special emphasis on 1-5) - 

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their's also was.

Hebrews 10:24-25 - (Emphasis mine)

24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:

25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

I have always enjoyed my friend Dr. Dave Stone's website, and he offers these ideas concerning church. Also, Paul Howey's website offers much more material concerning the pastor worship cult. Consider this article for example. Please, don't keep harming yourself by placing yourself under men like the pastor in this video. He is, though zealous and even well-meaning, going against God's Word by employing such methods.

PS - This was Jim Standbridge from Immanuel Baptist Church, Skiatook, OK, but it doesn't matter who it is, it could well be your pastor.