PAUL TRIPP-ING - HE REALLY LIKES TO SAY THE "S" WORD...has Piper lost his mind or just forgotten his Bible?

Paul Tripp has discovered the "s" word. He likes to say it; he giggles like a red-faced school girl when he does; he thinks its cool; he thinks he's cutting edge and culturally relevant; he thinks he's being radical; he thinks he's being profound; he thinks he's being biblical, but yet never quotes one verse of Scripture; and Piper has produced this wasteful intestinal discharge (pun intended) and condones what Tripp is saying. Who has spiked the water in Minnesota?

For those of you who are tired of the shallow Driscoll-influenced scatological speech pulpiteers who like to use four letter words and smutty humor in trying to relate to their audience thinking they are making a profound biblical point, then be prepared to be shocked again. Tripp says the "s" word a lot in this short video clip. I don't have virgin ears and I don't have virgin lips. But remember, this is a man who is a well known Bible teacher whom at this conference will be instructing many other pastors as well from the pulpit on this subject. Has preaching God's Word so degenerated to the lowest common denominator of soiled nomenclature that Tripp's words are now considered acceptable speech in describing the glory and wonder of God? Could you imagine Spurgeon, Owen, Watson, Edwards, Paul, Peter, or the Lord Himself using language of this sort? Totally unnecessary; and totally uncool.

From the Meta:

"Hey, I've got two pre-schoolers,

one of which is in the process of leaving diapers.

Trust me--we're knee-deep in scatology here.

But even they know how to be appropriate.

I asked them the other day,

"Where do we talk about [this topic]?"

"In the bathroom," they answered.

"Do we talk about it at church?" I asked.

"No," my 5-year-old said reprovingly.

"We talk about the Lord at church."

FYI: this is one of the promo videos for Piper's upcoming DG Conference "The Power of Words and the Wonder of God" at the end of September produced by his ministry. They had to put a disclaimer at the front of this video because of its bad language. But even then, Piper is Clintonian in not really owning it calling the "s" word "...potentially offensive, four letter language..." Personally... I'm staying home. I don't need to pay 175 bucks to hear some impolitic not preach faithfully the Scriptures and dance around what "wholesome speech" might mean to them so they can wrest the Word to accommodate their own guttural proclivities and justify the use of the "s" word in ministry. Furthermore, when you invite men like Tripp and Driscoll who obviously have this bent in ministry for smutty speech rather than proven expositors of God's Word like MacArthur, Sproul, Mohler, Duncan, or Begg - then something is amiss; or in this case, a mess. I don't need beloved, an excuse by any Bible teacher to use ribald speech and cuss; I need to be challenged to be more like Jesus Christ and obedient to His Word.

However, the one shining light among this otherwise line up of lightweights will be Dr. Sinclair Ferguson. He is brilliant, biblical and reverent. You can order his MP3's and save yourself some hard earned legal-tender and the embarrassment of seeing a few middle-aged men trying to relate to a pomo culture.

Anyone seen the real John Piper lately? If you do, tell him that he is missed and that we want to hear him just preach the Word again and leave behind his fascination with this high-school, emerging, juvenile, lascivious mentality once for all.

Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, 

but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, 

that it may give grace to those who hear. 

-Eph. 4:29

The Emerging Church...by Gary E. Gilley, Pastor-Teacher

Just a few months ago I had the opportunity and privilege to meet Pastor Gary Gilley and minister at his church in Springfield, IL, called Southern View Chapel. It was a tremendous honor to preach the Word of God and worship the Lord in song with that precious congregation. I came to know very quickly from many there that Pastor Gary is a powerful writer and preacher of God’s Word.

At the conclusion of my visit, I asked him if he would be willing to email me and allow me to post his insights on the emerging church. He graciously agreed. This is the first of a three part series on the Emerging Church that I know will be enlightening and stirring to the readers of COT.

In the aftermath of the two part Driscoll articles and one Quote of the Day featuring the Driscoll/Schuller quotes (all three articles generated a significant response of well over 500 comments) I thought these installments by Pastor Gilley would give helpful clarification on the emerging church and the concerns that we both share.

I highly commend his following words to you.

Grace and peace,
Steve
2 Cor. 4:5-7


The emergent church is a rather slippery name for a rather slippery movement. By slippery, I mean that the movement is so new (originated in the late 1990s), so fragmented, so varied, that nailing it down is like nailing the proverbial Jell-O to the wall. There are no official leaders or headquarters; some have said that there are thousands of expressions yet only a few churches have sold out to the concept; and even those claiming the name can’t agree on what is going on. Brian McLaren, the closest thing to a spokesperson for the movement so far states:

Right now Emergent is a conversation, not a movement. We don’t have a program. We don’t have a model. I think we must begin as a conversation, then grow as a friendship, and see if a movement comes of it.

Having said this, there is still much common ground that can be identified. The name “emerging church” speaks of a church which is, guess what, emerging from something. This means, it is coming out of the more traditional understanding of the church and emerging into a postmodern expression. What it will actually become is still a matter of speculation, but its adherents see it as a postmodern church for a postmodern culture. Of course, even this gets tricky because the prefix “post” has become all too trendy. We hear not only of post-modern, but also of post-Christian, post-Protestant, post-analytical, post-liberal, post-conservative, post-everything. The problem with “post” is that it describes what you are not much better than it describes what you are. If you are no longer modern or Christian or liberal or conservative, what are you? McLaren believes that defining postmodern is premature – we don’t yet know what form it will take, so defining the postmodern church is even more problematic. Emergent church leaders do not all agree on where the church goes from here but they all believe that it must go somewhere, for they believe the modern church cannot connect with the postmodern mind. How this fleshes out will be dealt with later in our study; for now we can say the emergent church is a movement chasing a culture.

Dan Kimball, author of The Emerging Church, says this is necessary because “the basis of learning has shifted from logic and rational, systematic thought to the realm of experience. People increasingly long for the mystical and the spiritual rather than the evidential and facts-based faith of the modern soil.” Kimball suggests that the seeker-sensitive church, the church that chased the last generation’s culture, is already out of date: “The things that seeker-sensitive churches removed from their churches are the very things [postmodern] nonbelievers want to experience if they attend a worship service.” The postmodern wants to reconnect to the past. They want traditions and religious symbols rather than slick excellence, polished performance and state-of-the art structures found in modernity. That translates into a very different look and feel. For example it is not likely that you will find a sign along the highway pointing to the First Baptist Emergent Church. Names like Baptist and denominational ties are too modern. Popular emergent church names are Solomon’s Porch, House of Mercy, The Rock, Jacob’s Ladder, Circle of Hope, Ikon, Vintage Faith, New Beginnings and Mosaic. They sponsor websites like vintagefaith.com, emergentvillage.org, and theooze.com. The emerging church appears to be the latest flavor of the day in a church age which allows itself to be defined by its culture rather than by Scripture. D. A. Carson reminds us:

What drove the Reformation was the conviction, among all its leaders, that the Roman Catholic Church had departed from Scripture and had introduced theology and practices that were inimical to genuine Christian faith. In other words, they wanted things to change, not because they perceived that new developments had taken place in the culture so that the church was called to adapt its approach to the new cultural profile, but because they perceived that new theology and practices had developed in the church that contravened Scripture, and therefore that things needed to be reformed by the Word of God. By contrast, although the emerging church movement challenges, on biblical grounds, some of the beliefs and practices of evangelicalism, by and large it insists it is preserving traditional confessionalism by changing the emphases because the culture has changed, and so inevitably those who are culturally sensitive see things in a fresh perspective. In other words, at the heart of the emerging reformation lies a perception of a major change in culture.

How does the Christian community go about chasing down the culture? Either through methods or message. The emerging church does both. Beginning with methodology, the leaders of the movement view the under-thirty generation as profoundly spiritual. They are interested in religious experiences and feelings. They want a sense of the supernatural. They are not interested in systematic theology, tightly woven apologetic arguments or logical reasoning. But they are attracted to spiritual mystery. Kimball quotes Garrison Keillor, who makes no claim of being a Christian, as saying, “If you can’t go to church and at least for a moment be given transcendence, if you can’t pass briefly from this life into the next, then I can’t see why anyone would go. Just a brief moment of transcendence causes you to come out of the church a changed person.” Despite the fact that Keillor could not be more wrong if we are interested in true biblical transformation, the emergent leaders see this as the gateway to reaching the postmodern generations.

The Baby Busters (born between 1965 and 1983) and Mosaics (born between 1984 and 2002) are tired of “church-lite,” consumer spirituality, church buildings that look like warehouses or malls, CEO pastors, educational programs structured like community colleges and church services that are reminiscent of a Broadway musical. They want the transcendent, as Keillor says. So the emergent church loads up on such things. There is a return to what Kimball calls the “vintage church” which combines some excellent things such as singing of hymns, display of the cross and reading of Scripture with (questionable at best) medieval ritual, prayer stations, labyrinths, candles, incense, icons, stained glass, contemplative prayer, mantras, Benedictine chants, and darkness. Kimball makes the point that postmoderns want to experience God with all five senses – as the vintage church did. It should be pointed out, however, that the vintage church to which Kimball refers is not a return to the New Testament church. The vintage church has been waylaid by medieval Catholicism, which we must remember may have experienced the spiritual through the senses, but nevertheless was an apostate religion. Simply providing an unbeliever with a religious experience, which they might interpret as an encounter with God, may do them more harm than good. But just as the seeker-sensitive church saw felt-needs as the means of linking with unbelievers, so the emerging church sees spiritual experience as that means. The philosophy is basically the same, just the methods have changed.

Emergent leader Leonard Sweet describes the emergent church with the acronym EPIC.

• “E” stands for experiential because postmoderns desire more than listening and thinking. They want to enter into worship as an experience of the senses. This is why medieval rituals appeal to them.
• “P” speaks of participants as opposed to observers. They want an active faith. Rather than a sermon they might hold a “conversation.”
• “I” relates to image-based. Projected images, artwork, film and video are all attractive to this generation. They are sight-oriented.
• “C” means communal. They desire a strong sense of community. They are “people” persons. Instead of going to church they want to be the church. There are some good things here but there are problems in the details, as we will see.

If this was the end of the story we might even find comfort in what is basically a reaction to the stripped-down model of Christianity that the seeker-sensitive church has given us for the last few decades. But as Rob Bell is quick to inform us, “This is not just the same old message with new methods. We’re rediscovering Christianity as an Eastern religion, as a way of life.” This is something new in the cultural-identifying churches. The seeker-sensitive church loudly proclaimed that they were fine-tuning the methodology but were not tampering with the message of the evangelical church (even though they were). The emergent church is concerned about methods but they are even more concerned about the message. They believe that conservative evangelical Christianity has it all wrong. From the Scriptures to essential doctrines to the gospel itself, the church so far just doesn’t get it. And the emergent people include themselves in the same camp. As Brian McLaren states, “I don’t think we’ve got the gospel right yet. What does it mean to be saved?... None of us have arrived at orthodoxy.”

Emergent Philosophy

Before we jump into the doctrinal distinctives of the emerging church we must first detail the philosophy that undergirds the movement. What we see, read and perceive is filtered, at least to some degree, through our presuppositions and worldview. The worldview of the emerging church is decidedly postmodern. Attempting to combine postmodern philosophy with biblical theology is a tricky business, as one might imagine; we should not be surprised that unanimity in the understanding of this attempted merger will not be found. Nevertheless, some common threads are evident throughout the movement.

Truth Claims
Truth claims are held with suspicion within postmodernism and we find a precarious juggling act in emergent circles as they try to reach a wary culture with the claims of Christ. The emerging church is concerned about presenting genuine Christianity in a way the postmodern culture understands. Since the very heart of postmodernity is rejection of absolute authoritative truth, yet Christianity claims to be the proclamation of absolute authoritative truth, a head-on collision is almost unavoidable. What is to be done? Something has to give and that something seems to be truth. McLaren presents their view:

Ask me if Christianity (my version of it, yours, the Pope’s, whoever’s) is orthodox, meaning true, and here’s my honest answer: a little, but not yet. Assuming by Christianity you mean the Christian understanding of the world and God, Christian opinions on soul, text, and culture…I’d have to say that we probably have a couple of things right, but a lot of things wrong, and even more spreads before us unseen and unimagined. But at least our eyes are open! To be a Christian in a generously orthodox way is not to claim to have the truth captured, stuffed, and mounted on the wall.

This is almost a complete capitulation to postmodernity’s concept of truth. After 2000 years of the study of the completed Canon, we Christians find ourselves in a position of having maybe a “couple” of things right – and I am sure that those couple of things would be up for grabs. This uncertainty about the truth carries over to the Scriptures themselves, of course. Rob Bell and his wife Kristen, in an interview with Christianity Today, reflect this view. They started questioning their assumptions about the Bible itself – “discovering the Bible as a human product.” “I grew up thinking that we’ve figured out the Bible,” Kristen says, “that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea what most of it means, and yet I feel like life is big again – like life used to be black and white, and now it’s in color.” To the postmodern mind it is more important to, as Rob Bell says, “embrace mystery, rather than conquer it.”

But how does a truly postmodern Christian live? How do they know what to believe? How do they deal with the issue of truth? How do they assimilate the realities of life? By creating their own reality. McLaren, if he could have his emergent dream come true, would “help students construct their own model of reality, their understanding of the universe and story we find ourselves in. And – this is SO important – we’d teach them that their model isn’t reality; it’s just a model. It must be open to correction, adjustment, improvement, even revolution” (emphasis his). Experience, not Scripture, becomes the basis for truth. “People today,” Leonard Sweet writes, “are starved not for doctrines but for images and relationships and stories.”

There is no absolute truth or ultimate reality in the emergent agenda. Even Scripture is appreciated for its mystery, not its presentation of truth. Yet one has to wonder what Jude had in mind when he wrote, “I find it necessary to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” (verse 3). The emergent church leaders are asking us to embrace a faith without truth, a Bible which has value due to its mystery, and a reality that is individual, subjective and changeable. This is touted as a new and improved version of Christian living. I fail to see the attraction, not to mention that no such understanding of truth is supportable by the Scriptures.

Deconstruction
The scholar would define deconstruction as Carson does: “It has to do with a literary approach, that hunts down tensions and inconsistencies in a text (those who deploy deconstruction insist that all texts have them) in order to set them at odds with each other and thus deconstruct the text, to generate new insights that might actually contradict what a text ostensibly says. At the other end of the spectrum, Humpty Dumpty gave his version, “When I use a word, it means what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.” In everyday language deconstruction means that we can never be certain that we have the right interpretation of words. What matters then is not what the author or speaker said, because that doubtfully can be discerned; rather the important thing is what did the reader/listener experience. Deconstruction guts words of their meaning and redefines them according to one’s own preference. This is obviously convoluted but it is a central piece in postmodern thought.

How does this work out in the postmodern church? In order to be consistent with absolute truth (or, better, lack of truth) the emergent thinkers must dispose of dogmatic truth claims (i.e. doctrines). They must purge the church of an exclusive gospel, an authoritative Bible and irritating doctrines such as hell. Also on the cutting floor is the doctrine of original sin. McLaren writes, “The church latched on to that old doctrine of original sin like a dog to a stick, and before you knew it, the whole gospel got twisted around it. Instead of being God’s big message of saving love for the whole world, the gospel became a little bit of secret information on how to solve the pesky legal problem of original sin.” Before the emergent church leaders are done all the essential teachings of the Bible have been deconstructed, redefined or dismissed. And what has been put in their place? Oddly, but consistent with postmodern thinking, nothing but mystery and questions. Even McLaren admits, “What will appear beyond the deconstruction remains to be seen. Perhaps something better will emerge – that is my hope and prayer, but the outcome is by no means certain even now that I have finished writing this book.”

Pluralistic Relativism
If nobody is right then everybody is right. This is the logical conclusion of the postmodern worldview. The emergent church thinkers are reluctantly willing to accept this concept, at least for a time. McLaren states:

Because I and others, while we aren’t “for” pluralistic relativism, do see it as a kind of needed chemotherapy. We see modernity with its absolutisms and colonialisms and totalitarianisms as a kind of static dream…. In Christian theology, this anti-emergent thinking is expressed in systematic theologies that claim…to have final orthodoxy nailed down…. Emergent Christians see pluralistic relativism as a dangerous treatment for stage IV absolutist/colonial/totalitarian modernity (to use language from cancer diagnosis), something that saves a life by nearly killing it.

Since truth and Scripture have been deconstructed all that is left is relativism. Until we figure out where to go from here we will have to be content with that. We may or may not arrive at a better place some day, but at least objective truth claims are being eradicated – and that is a good thing. So says the emergent church leaders. More next time.

THE BIBLICAL CHURCH THAT GLORIFIES GOD...which one are we known for in America today?

updated

Taking some license by illustration with Stephen Covey's best selling tome, "Seven Habits of Higly Effective People." Here are three very different, but apt discriptions of church models that exist today. These lists are not exhaustive... and they were written with broad brush strokes, intentionally, to include a wide variety of church "experiences" in each category. 

I would like to know what would your lists comprise of? Read Ephesians 4:11-16 to get a glimpse into the church that glorifies God. As a complimentary piece, Pastor Mark Driscoll from Mars Hill Church has written an excellent taxonomy of Christianity in America called "Has Christian America Come To An End?" for FOXNEWS. It is his response to the recent controversial Newsweek cover story by Jon Meacham, "The End of Christian America." Driscoll insightfully compares Christian America and Christendom America from a biblical worldview. 

This is a must read.


Seven highly effective habits of the Contemporary Church that almost always guarantee church growth with very little spiritual impact:
1. Go political, not biblical
2. Go pragmatic, not theological
3. Go psychology, not discipleship
4. Go anthropocentric, not Christocentric
5. Go postmodern, not transcendent
6. Go “share your story”, not preach faithfully His Word
7. Go calling sin sickness and disobedience disease


Seven highly effective habits of the Traditional Church that almost always guarantee church stagnation with very little spiritual impact:
1. Go traditional, not spiritual
2. Go legalistic, not grace
3. Go corporate, not community
4. Go “count converts”, not “make disciples”
5. Go pastoral/elder ruler, not shepherd/servant leader
6. Go moralism, not Christlikeness
7. Go programs, not prayer


Seven highly effective habits of the Biblical Church that glorifies God:
1. Go supremacy of God, glory in Christ Jesus and worship by the Holy Spirit 
2. Go sola fide, sola scriptura, sola gratia, solus Christus, Soli Deo Gloria
3. Go The Great Commission and the Two Great Commandments
4. Go take care of the poor, the widow and the orphan
5. Go preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord and ourselves as a slave to others
6. Go pray without ceasing
7. Go equip the saints for the work of the ministry

Some very good input from one contributor in the meta on this theme
1. Go simple, not complex 

(An authentic church displays their priorities by their financial expenses and by the way they want to appear to the world. In short, they are frugal on non-essentials, but always rich on truth, worship, discipleship and fellowship.)

2. Go theologically passionate, not piously stoic

(An authentic church loves God with their minds by exhibiting careful and deep thinking on the great truths of the Bible and its relation to contemporary life & An authentic church loves God with their affections by displaying the full range of emotions which are in proportion with Biblical truths and which glorify God.)

3. Go 24/7, not just one-day a week

(An authentic church is much more than a Sunday operation. It extends throughout the week as the leadership provides avenues for the ongoing maturity of the people.)

4. Go reverent, not light-hearted or cavalier

(An authentic church is very serious about pursuing maximum satisfaction in Jesus Christ and is very serious about killing sin that blocks true affection for Christ. This reverence is marked as well by a joy in the Lord and His Word.)

5. Go outward missions-minded just as equally as being inward focused

(An authentic church has a global vision of the spread of the Gospel by highlighting God’s triumphant global purposes and by actively sending risk-taking missionaries.)

6. Go risk-taking, not safe haven

(An authentic church will take the necessary safety and financial risks in the spread of the Gospel and thus show the infinite value of Christ to our God-belittling world.) 

7. Go richly Christ-centered, not earthly-dieted 

(An authentic church is permeated with the greatness and glory of Jesus Christ in all things by displaying Him and delighting in Him in all their ministries and gatherings

I thought that these things were well stated in the meta here and I wanted to feature them for your encouragement as well. 

Thank you Elizabeth Davis for posting these things here.

this has been an updated encore presentation

MARK DRISCOLL ON ABC NIGHTLINE FACE-OFF...bringing Mars Hill Church to Mars Hill

Setting Some Wrongs... Right

Some of you seeing me post another article about Mark Driscoll are expecting me to come out of the box swinging, prepared to challenge, do battle against, or slice and dice with some well versed clever sarcasm about Mark and his TV appearance. Well, I hate to disappoint you, but today that will not be happening. 

As many of you know, I have been a very vocal commentator about the scatological pulpit methods that our brother has employed in the past few years. I still firmly believe that a minister of the gospel standing behind the sacred desk to "preach the Word" by divine command in a worship service where the saints are gathered should use words in keeping with that calling. Mark is a gifted communicator and has the platform and skill to really impact this generation for the kingdom. But the man of God's words should reverence the Lord Jesus Christ and reflect His glory; that cut straight His truth to give the sense of it to the people; and yet be palatable for every member of the church; not just those who pass an NC-17 rating. Sound speech is not just the absence of unsavory language; but the presence of that which is grace-filled for the building up of the entire body of Christ in love.

That is where I had failed in addressing these things concerning Mark and his ministry; this is where the Lord convicted me as I reviewed some of my past articles I had written about him. I was not godly in how I used words to speak of those concerns on this blog. IOW, I came to see that in a very real way we have the same problem... just a different manifestation. I find myself identifying with Isaiah in the temple as "a man of unclean lips" that needed to repent of his sin. Unclean lips doesn't necessarily mean here a tongue that uses seedy speech, but rather one that represents a heart that is not right before the Lord - unworthy deserving judgment. That was me; and apart from God's sanctifying grace each day - that is still me. IOW beloved, my heart was not right towards my brother in Christ. I should have been more gracious, charitable and balanced in my words when commenting about his ministry in the Lord. In my zeal to champion reformed biblical theology which I deeply believe, I was blinded to the prideful log in my own eye while blogging about the speck in my brother's eye. For this, I sincerely ask the readers of this blog and those associated with Mark and Mars Hill Church to please forgive me. I have already asked this of Mark privately and he has been most kind to extend to me a heart of mercy. It is my desire to always speak the truth in love and to not carelessly amputate another in that process.

In the wake of this, I am enjoying the beginnings of what I trust will be an ongoing friendship with Mark. My conversation with him has been meaningful and edifying; and he has been nothing short of kind and encouraging. I have come to get a glimpse of the pastor's heart, that is rarely made visible to the wider media-audience, that drives Mark and his passion in ministry. 

The Hearts of the Saints Have Been Refreshed... 

The Apostle Paul says in Philemon 1:7, "For I have derived much much joy and comfort from your love, because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you brother." 

So may I take a moment to encourage you and tell you what I appreciate about Mark and his ministry: 

• his affirmation of Scripture as the infallible, inerrant, sufficient, authoritative Word of God; 
• his burden for the salvation of the lost and passion for evangelism; 
• his commitment to the doctrines of grace and to maintain the integrity of the gospel; 
• his desire to plant churches and dedication to local church ministry; 
• his ability to rightly divide the times and to discern the issues facing our cultural from a biblical worldview; 
• to enter into discussion with nonbelievers in public venues about issues concerning the Christian faith;
• for reaching out and ministering to people redemptively who have been abused, shamed, and defiled by this world;
• and for taking a courageous stand for biblical fidelity and orthodoxy by walking the narrow "road less travelled" away from the liberal turnpike of Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, Karen Ward, Doug Pagitt, Spencer Burke, Rob Bell, etc. 

I look forward to meeting Mark one day and trust that the Lord in His providence affords us seasons of genuine fellowship, a real friendship in the Lord, and an on going encouragement to "one another" in the Word of God. 

My Mom has said to me for many years, "if two people agree on everything, then one of them is unnecessary." Mark and I don't agree on everything - but at the same time, it also makes us "necessary" in each others lives. I am confident we won't see eye to eye on some issues in the future. But by God's grace, I pray that I will address those issues biblically, in humility, and personally; seeking his good... protecting the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. It's good for brothers in the Lord to wrestle through matters of faith, doctrine, theology, and truth; to learn from each other and sharpen each other for kingdom use. But it is also "good for brothers to dwell in unity" as the Psalmist says. So when blogging, may I do so in a way that brings glory to God, protects the integrity of His Word, shows respect for others, forwards His gospel, edifies His church, and to do so from a heart of sincere love, gentleness and humility. I haven't arrived at this in my life beloved; so I would relish your prayers for me to that end. 

His unworthy servant in His unfailing love,

Steve

Col. 1:9-14

ABCNEWS Nightline Face Off - "Does Satan Exist?"

With that said, I wanted to briefly post about Mark's appearance last week on ABC's Nightline Face Off which addressed the potentially explosive and controversial theme of "Does Satan Exist?" There were four panelists for this debate: philosopher Deepak Chopra and Bishop Carlton Pearson faced-off against Pastor Mark Driscoll and Annie Lobert, founder of the Christian ministry "Hookers for Jesus" about the existence of the Devil.

Not many pastors would welcome such a diverse panel and a biased, national news program like ABCNEWS Face-Off into their sanctuary. Nor would they host a debate on an issue concerning an aspect of the Christian faith that allows voices who are violently opposed to biblical Christianity to have a seat at the table. And then still speak with unashamed boldness about the gospel, the Scriptures and its truth while showing reverence and respect for those who oppose biblical Christianity (1 Peter 3:15-16). This is what I call: bringing Mars Hill Church to Mars Hill.

Though the aired portion of this broadcast was edited by ABC beyond even sound bit status, when you listen to the unedited videos of the complete interview (ten in total) you come away with an appreciation for our brother's presence and acumen in this discussion.

Mark was a faithful voice on this broadcast for a few key reasons:

1. He constantly drove the discussion back to the truth of Scripture; the gospel; the person of the Lord Jesus Christ and the overall worldview of Creation, Fall, Redemption, Restoration. He didn't fall into the trap of a theological dualism (god of evil vs. the God of good). He clearly represented Jesus Christ as the only true God and the only way to salvation. He was not favored as one of many ways among the other gods; but the only living and true way in which there is no other God besides Him.

2. He did not use ribald language nor scatological innuendo in cutting through the philosophical pabulum and skubalon of his counterparts. But his use of well-placed sarcasm and biblical truth in unmasking the extensional meanderings of Deepak Chopra for example was brilliant. He remarked at one point, paraphrased: that if man were to invent the story of redemption he wouldn't have come up with the biblical account, but would have made salvation by "eating wings and napping."

3. The ABC interviewer within minutes went immediately to the theodicy question (theodicy deals with the problem of evil in this world. IOW, how can a good, perfect, loving, and holy God create sin, evil, and an imperfect world and still remain Omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent?) This is where I thought the discussion would ultimately go and I thought Mark answered the question in a solid, orthodox, reformed tradition. God made man in His image, and gave him moral freedom, pre-fall, to make choices. Man disobeyed God, sin entered this world, and God sent Jesus on our behalf to redeem man from his sins and give him eternal life and complete forgiveness by grace through faith in Christ alone. Again, he didn't get lost in the minutia of some heady theological construct that wouldn't have been profitable in this venue. I thought he was clear that pre-fall free will is not meant to "let God off the hook" for the existence of evil. But that culpability lies with Satan for his rebellion in heaven; and with our first parents Adam and Eve for their rebellion in the garden. 

God is sovereign over all His creatures and has decreed not only the certain existence of evil but (as my friend James White says so well) "has also decreed the secondary means by which it would come into existence." Clearly, on this prominent issue his comments were God conceived (sound doctrine), Christ centered (exalting to the Savior), and Spirit controlled (done with propriety befitting Christ).

4. Mark has a rare ability to take complex spiritual truth and say them in a simple and pedestrian way that communicates the core meaning (while staying true to Scripture) to those who don't speak Christianeeze or have never darkened the door of a church before. This is a gift; and one I wish more pastors had.

5. He was bringing Mars Hill Church to Mars Hill. In Acts 17 we read the account of where the Apostle Paul was in Athens ministering. He was in the marketplace preaching about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ and His gospel. He was in the synagogues reasoning with the Jews and God-fearing Gentiles. And lastly, he was invited by the Stoic philosophers and Epicurean leaders to come to the Areopagus to come and explain to them this strange teaching they were hearing (i.e. concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead). 

Mark was invited by ABCNEWS to address this issue of the problem of evil in this world and about the nature and existence of Satan. He was on "Mars Hill" to proclaim the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ through the Face-Off Program. He was not offering an opinion on just another view, but heralding the only true view - biblically.

6. His exchange with apostate church leader, Carlton Pearson - was nothing short of brilliant. I knew Carlton in the past and it was very sad to hear him speak of the Christian faith in ways that were clearly heretical. He was in a real way teaching doctrines of demons. Mark was challenging a man who was once one of the glory boys on TBN; a leader within the Word/Faith movement; Oral Roberts' son in the faith; and one of Pentecostalism's favorite sons. Though that heritage is troubling enough, what Carlton is now teaching is clearly from convictions that would render him as apostate. He no longer holds to the authority and perspicuity of Scripture; he doesn't believe in a literal hell or even a literal devil. He denies the importance of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead; and also would deny penal substitutionary atonement. He also believes that Christianity is the sacred junkyard of borrowed myths from other philosophical systems. Mark really addressed him and Deepak as one pleading with them to come to the Lord Jesus Christ.

7. Lastly, he by example demonstrated in real time Paul's admonition to the Corinthian church: "I sought to know nothing among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified." (1 Cor. 2:2). Don't miss this beloved. It is very difficult in this kind of venue and interview that is highly edited and stripped of most of its content to keep Christ and His Word central and prominent in the discussion. Mark used the theme of "Does Satan Exist" to speak about the Lord of all creation at almost every opportunity.

Equipping the Saints

I would encourage you if you are a pastor, Bible student, or lay-leader in the church to really watch these videos several times, study them if you please, to learn how to engage non-Christians on issues of faith. Now I know that there are some who would have desired for Mark to go into the depths of theodicy theologically; to use more reformed buzz words and doctrinal nomenclature. But this would have been fatal. We are to be salt and light to a dying world - and our brother represented the Lord and His gospel well.

March on Your Knees

As these videos are watched more and more by thousands of unregenerate people around the globe in the coming weeks, please pray for them that the Lord was use them in presenting the gospel. I would also encourage you beloved to pray for Deepak and Carlton. Pray that the Lord would grant them saving faith to believe the gospel and repentance from sin to confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of their lives. Pray for Annie that her ministry to the streets of Las Vegas as a former drug addict and prostitute would bring the gospel of grace to many there. And continue to pray for Mark and his ministry at MHC that the Lord would continue to honor his faithfulness to His Word.

Satan maybe mighty, but our Lord Jesus Christ is Almighty; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against us.  Amen?

I want to end this post the same way that Mark ended his closing remarks on the Face-Off broadcast - by quoting this text from the Word of God:

"We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life" (1 John 5:19-20).

The Pride and Presumption of Men Upon Grace...how the contemporary church embraces worldliness

updated

"The church has lost her testimony. She has no longer anything to say to the world. Her once robust shout of assurance has faded away to an apologetic whisper. She who one time went out to declare now goes out to inquire. Her dogmatic declaration has become a respectful suggestion, a word of religious advice, given with the understanding that it is after all only an opinion and not meant to sound bigoted."

"Pure Christianity, instead of being shaped by its culture, actually stands in sharp opposition to it." 

-A.W. Tozer

"Bars" Hill Church - Serving Up 100 Proof Culture

This post is my initial response to Mark Driscoll's and the leadership of Mars Hill Church's lack of wisdom in the New Years Eve bash they held 12 days ago (some pics from last year's event); which among other things featured an open champagne bar to toast in the New Year (if you had a proper ID).  I'm not a teetotaler, but in a public gathering of God's people other considerations should take precedence (Roms. 14;15).  BTW, whatever happened to sparkling white grape juice?  I do like the fact that Mars Hill had something going on in their church on NYE.  That is something that is missing in too many churches today.  But you can still have a great night of celebration without the revelry.  Why not a great contemporary worship concert that includes a sit down dinner; share testimonies of what the Lord has done over the last year by people in the church; followed by a communion service where the Word is read and the gospel proclaimed; and then pray in the new year together with more music?  IOW, why not make Jesus the center and honor of the celebration?

Pulpit Porn?

This is also my initial response to Mark's unfortunate scatological message he gave this past Sunday, and the vulgar Q and A that followed, addressing his first question on his ask-anything promotion concerning child birth. Mars Hill rated the Q and A, MH-17, and even Mark personally called it "really offensive."  (BTW, he said they have broken down their content into only two categories: "offensive and really offensive."  How about "biblical or unbiblical?")  My primary concern here is not should we ever talk about this subject; but in addressing them in the fashion he did, there was little or no fear of the Lord or reverence for God - two staples that should always mark biblical preaching.  Graphically unfolding individual sins as opposed to powerfully unfolding the victory offered through Christ Jesus the Lord was, IMHO, an error in judgment. 

Muslims and Christians Together - The New Evangelical Ecumenism

And this is also is my initial response to the A Common Word Between Us (Muslims and Christians Together) document signed by several leading evangelical leaders trying to promote peace and unity among our faiths.

Charles Spurgeon and The Presumptuous Man

My heart is too heavy today to say more about these things. We don't need to just squabble about these things, we need real answers for these things.

I want to direct you to two places for those answers: 1. The Word of God; and 2. Pastor Charles Spurgeon. The excerpt below from this sermon is one of the most convicting I have ever read and I highly commend it to you. May we all keep our hand to the plow and not look back; and may the Lord keep us from being a presumptuous people. (You can read the entire sermon by clicking on "Pastor Spurgeon" above.)

Time is too fleeting to spend away our days on trivial pursuits and our own reputations. We should spend them serving the Lord and for His glory. Let us redeem the time today.

For Christ and His glory alone.

From the crucible of grace...
Steve
2 Cor. 4:5-7

A Caution to the Presumptuous

"Let him that thinketh he standeth
take heed lest he fall."
—1 Cor. 10:12

By Charles Spurgeon
IT is a singular fact, but nevertheless most certain, that the vices are the counterfeits of virtues. Whenever God sends from the mint of heaven a precious coin of genuine metal, Satan will imitate the impress, and utter a vile production of no value. God gives love; it is his nature and his essence. Satan also fashioneth a thing which he calls love, but it is lust. God bestows courage; and it is a good thing to be able to look one's fellow in the face, fearless of all men in doing our duty. Satan inspires fool-hardiness, styles it courage, and bids the man rush to the cannon's mouth for "bubble reputation." God creates in man holy fear. Satan gives him unbelief, and we often mistake the one for the other. So with the best of virtues, the saving grace of faith, when it comes to its perfection it ripens into confidence, and there is nothing so comfortable and so desirable to the Christian, as the full assurance of faith. Hence, we find Satan, when he sees this good coin, at once takes the metal of the bottomless pit, imitates the heavenly image and superscription of assurance, and palms upon us the vice of presumption.

We are astonished, perhaps, as Calvinistic Christians, to find Paul saying, "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall;" but we need not be astonished, for though we have a great right to believe that we stand, if we think we stand through the power of God—though we cannot be too confident of the might of the Most High, there is a thing so near akin to true confidence, that unless you use the greatest discernment you cannot tell the difference. Unholy presumption—it is against that which I am to speak this morning. Let me not be misunderstood. I shall not utter one word against the strongest faith. I wish all Little-Faiths were Strong-Faiths, that all Fearings were made Valiants-for-Truth, and the Ready-to-Halts Asahel's Nimble-of-Foot, that they might all run in their Master's work. I speak not against strong faith or full assurance; God giveth it to us; it is the holiest, happiest thing that a Christian can have, and there is no state so desirable as that of being able to say, "I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him." It is not against that I speak, but I warn you against that evil thing, a false confidence and presumption which creepeth over a Christian, like the cold death-sleep on the mountain-top, from which, if he is not awakened, as God will see that he shall be, death will be the inevitable consequence. "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall."

My first business shall be to FIND OUT THE CHARACTER intended by the presumptuous man, the man who thinks he stands. I could find a multitude of such if I might search the wide world o'er. I could find men in business filled with an arrogant hardihood, who, because they have in one speculation been successful will wade far out into the stormy sea of this contending life, risk their all—and lose it too. I might mention others who, presuming upon their health, are spending their years in sin and their lives in iniquity, because they think their bones iron and their nerves steel, and "all men mortal but themselves."

I might speak of men who will venture
into the midst of temptation,
confident in their boasted power,
exclaiming with self-complacency,
"Do you think I am so weak as to sin?
Oh! no; I shall stand.
Give me the glass; I shall never be a drunkard.
Give me the song; you will not find me a midnight reveller.
I can drink a little and then I can stop."

Such are presumptuous men.

But I am not about to find them there; my business this morning is with God's church. The fanning must begin with the floor; the winnowing must try the wheat. So we are to winnow the church this morning to discover the presumptuous. We need not go far to find them. There are in every Christian church men who think they stand, men who vaunt themselves in fancied might and power, children of nature finely dressed, but not the living children of the living God; they have not been humbled or broken in spirit, or if they have, they have fostered carnal security until it has grown to a giant and trampled the sweet flower of humility under its foot. They think they stand. I speak now of real Christians, who, notwithstanding, have grown presumptuous, and indulge in a fleshly security.

Pride is the most pregnant cause of presumption. In all its various shapes it is the fountain of carnal security. Sometimes it is pride of talent. God has endowed a man with gifts; he is able to stand before the multitude, or to write for the many; he has a discerning mind, he has a judgment, and such like things. Then says he, " As for the ignorant, those who have no talent, they may fall; my brother ought to take care: but look at me. How am I wrapped in grandeur!" And thus in his self-complacency he thinks he stands. Ah! those are the men that fall. How many that flamed like comets in the sky of the religious world have rushed into space and been quenched in darkness! How many a man who has stood like a prophet before his fellows, and who would exclaim as he wrapped himself in his conceit, "I, only I am alive, I am the only prophet of God;" and yet that only prophet fell; his lamp was quenched, and his light put out in darkness. How many have boasted of their might and dignity, and have said, "I have built this mighty Babylon," but then they thought they stood, and they fell at once. "Let him that thinketh he standeth," with the proudest talents, "take heed lest he fall."

Others have the pride of grace. That is a curious fact; but there is such a thing as being proud of grace. A man says, "I have great faith, I shall not fall; poor little faith may, but I never shall." " I have fervent love," says another man, "I can stand, there is no danger of my going astray; as for my brother over there, he is so cold and slow, he will fall, I dare say." Says another, "I have a most burning hope of heaven, and that hope will triumph; it will purge my soul from sense and sin, as Christ the Lord is pure. I am safe." He who boasts of grace, has little grace to boast of. But there are some who do that, who think their graces can keep them, knowing not that the stream must flow constantly from the fountain head, else the bed of the brook shall soon be dry, and ye shall see the pebbles at the bottom. If a continuous stream of oil come not to the lamp, though it burn brightly to-day, it shall smoke to-morrow, and noxous will be the scent thereof. Take heed that thou neither gloriest in thy talents nor in thy graces.

Many are worse still; they think they shall not fall because of their privileges. "I take the sacrament, I have been baptized in an orthodox manner, as written in God's word; I attend such and such a ministry; I am well fed; I am fat and flourishing in the courts of my God. If I were one of those starved creatures who hear a false gospel, possibly I might sin; but oh! our minister is the model of perfection; we are constantly fed and made fat; surely we shall stand." Thus in the complacency of their priviledges they run down others, exclaiming, "My mountain standeth firm, I shall never be moved." Take heed, presumption, take heed. Pride cometh before a fall; and a haughty spirit is the usher of destruction. Take heed; watch thy footsteps; for where pride creepeth in, it is the worm at the root of the gourd, causing it to wither and die. "Let him that thinketh he standeth," because of pride of talent, or grace, or privilege, "take heed lest he fall."

I hope I have touched some here; I trust the lancet has been sharp; I have taken the scalpel, and I hope I have discovered something.

YOUR WEEKLY DOSE OF GOSPEL...beware of the subtlety of spiritual treason

Updated

"I sought to know nothing among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified." -1 Cor. 2:2

"We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord; and ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake." -2 Cor. 4:5

"Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." -Phil. 2:5-11

Keeping the Lord Jesus Christ preeminent in ministry is at great tension today. Pragmatism seems to be the official plumb-line that most use to measure and govern the efficaciousness of their local church and/or public ministry.

Tragically, politics marks the day as well. I'm referring to ER2 (Elephant Room 2) where under the undiscerning eye of some key nationally respected pastors, the doctrine of the Trinity was casually abandoned and bartered away for lessor concerns. The culmination being, the one propagating doctrines of demons was confirmed by the new evangelical stamp of a "fist pump." Though I appreciate and love some of the men and ministries associated with this event, I am saddened by their skewed actions and lack of discernment which trumped the Word of God and their loyalty to the Lord of the church.

Here's the concern: organizations like The Gospel of Coalition and Band of Bloggers (though not sponsoring ER2) were publicly silent on this travesty due to their political alliance with those who were involved. They exhibited nothing less than a cowardly demeanor on an essential doctrinal issue - the doctrine of the Trinity. Unfortunately, two evangelical leaders, Pastors James MacDonald and Mark Driscoll (who participated at ER2), foolishly affirmed Modalist, Word/Faith heretic, Bishop T.D. Jakes, as being orthodox. This was done even though to date Wolf-Jakes denies the biblical doctrine of the Trinity vehemently and has never repented of his beliefs. This has profound impact, for it means that he worships another god than the One Triune God of the Bible. Which means he is not saved, but a false teacher, making his converts twice the sons of hell as he is. To add insult to injury, if you dare challenge any of those listed above on this issue as to their theological folly, you will be quickly blocked, unfriended, etc.  Mark it down beloved, error never wants to be challenged, but truth will always invite scrutiny (Acts 17:9-11).

With their tacit approval of Bishop T.D. Jakes as being now orthodox on Trinitarian doctrine, they have redefined successful ministry to three things: 1. influence of public platform  2. numbers and 3. financial benefits. Therefore, to be clear, ON THIS ISSUE, I find these men complicit to heresy, compromised, self-protective, unable to defend essential gospel truth biblically, political, willing to accommodate false teachers, doctrinally facile and theologically timid. Civility it seems (not truth, sound doctrine, biblical theological or loyalty to the Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ and His gospel) defines their actions. In short, they are milksop, cream of wheat, milquetoast poltroons seemingly more sold out to their religious agendas and alliances, then to the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ!

Language of that spoken by the Apostle Paul is foreign from their current narrative when he says,

"But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God." Acts 20:24

Consider this:

Some emerging churches justify their scatological and irreverent techniques due to the number of people they claim to add to their fold under a neoreformed banner. Their acceptance by blinded evangelical leaders to their popularity is their stamp of approval - not the Word of God.  Christian bookstores will knowingly carry everything from faulty translations of the Bible, to unsound doctrinal authors, plus Christian-trinkets; and will justify doing so for pragmatic and bottom line considerations. It is the same reasoning used by the CCM companies and Christian book publishers for selling their entities to nonbelievers. They have become "unequally yoked" in a spiritual ministry or enterprise with unsaved people; but will do cartwheels to justify surrendering their spiritual autonomy for the sake of widening their distribution to increase revenue... though Scripture forbids it (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1)..

Such is the time we live in; what works in the marketplace, not what is true, rules the day in today's commerce-driven evangelicalism.  Even Christian bloggers are now selling advertising space on their blogs to generate some kick-back revenue from those they advertise.  Making retail of the truth is done with the blink of an eye these days beloved.  And here I was naive enough to think that the blogosphere was actually going to be the last pure commercial free arena for the proclamation of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and doctrinal discussion.  The evangelical pragmatists seem to win every time.  

This faulty methodology has now given way to the acceptance of unsound theology; because the audience (not the Savior nor the Scriptures) is the new "sovereign" in Christian ministry (I.e. consider the embracing of an anti-Trinitarians like T.D. Jakes and Phillips, Craig and Dean. Their market influence has trumped biblical truth even among those who know them to be in error.)

This sea-change was inevitable.

Postmodern Procrustean Beds

In Greek mythology there is portrayed a villainous son named Procrustes, of his father Poseidon, who would arbitrarily prescribe ruthless, torturous phenomenon for patrons of his hostel. He would force his travelers to fit into his "procrustean bed" by stretching his victims or severing off their limbs.

In much the same way, there have been men throughout the ages, many who also today, are passing abhorrent doctrine and skewed theology off as authentic Christianity, that have abandoned the truth of God's Word (1 Tim. 4:1), having laid it upon the "procrustean bed" of deceived, depraved minds (1 Tim. 6:5; Titus 1:15) stretching its truth or lopping it off to suit itching ears (2 Tim. 4:3), wayward hearts (2 Pt. 2:2), and perverted religious systems, creeds, rituals and ceremonies (Col. 2:6-18). This is spiritual treason at its core!

The Apostle Paul warns of such treason and pronounces sentence on those who promulgate this distortion of doctrine and desertion of Christ for a different gospel when he says:

"I AM AMAZED THAT YOU ARE SO QUICKLY DESERTING HIM
WHO CALLED YOU BY THE GRACE OF CHRIST,
FOR A DIFFERENT GOSPEL; WHICH IS REALLY NOT ANOTHER;
ONLY THERE ARE SOME WHO ARE DISTURBING YOU,
AND WANT TO DISTORT THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.
BUT EVEN THOUGH WE, OR AN ANGEL FROM HEAVEN,
SHOULD PREACH TO YOU A GOSPEL CONTRARY
TO THAT WHICH WE HAVE PREACHED TO YOU, LET HIM BE ACCURSED.
AS WE HAVE SAID BEFORE, SO I SAY AGAIN NOW,
IF ANY MAN IS PREACHING TO YOU A GOSPEL CONTRARY
TO THAT WHICH YOU RECEIVED, LET HIM BE ACCURSED."
-GALATIANS 1:6-9

Spiritual Treason
Doctrines of demons abounded in the Apostles day (1 Tim. 4:1). Endless genealogies (Ibid 1:4), myths (Ibid), strange doctrines (Ibid 1:3), worldly fables (Ibid 4:7f), and hucksters peddling the Word of God for profit (2 Cor. 2:17) - but Paul was called for the defense of the gospel (Phil. 1:16) and he would not shrink from the duty of "declaring the whole council of God" (Acts 20:27). Though some were out to make retail of the truth and sell it for whatever worldly prominence, power or paragon they might obtain, truth was a non-negotiable to this great saint as it was to Polycarp, Ireneaus, Ignatius, Athanasius, Augustine, Basil, Ambrose, Tertullian, Chrysostom and other great church fathers. These men sacrificed their lives for the Lord Jesus Christ and His gospel. They took there stand firmly on the Word of God without compromise and without regret.

Athanasius knew this cost when he said,

"The calumniating Greek ridicule us and set up a broad laugh at us, because we regard nothing so much as the cross of Christ."

IOW, they guarded the trust! (1 Tim. 6:20)

The church should not be the place where sin is entertained, scandals abound and disobedience is tolerated, but the church should be what Paul had declared that it is, "the pillar and support of the truth." (1 Tim. 3:15) This is the purpose of all theology, of all ecclesiology, of all music and of all history to preserve, promote, protect and preach the Word! But since Lucifer is a subtle and twisted foe, he will try to pervert all sound doctrine into damning apostasy. "[He, the devil] ...does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him" (John 8:44).

All false systems throughout church history will have an appearance of orthodoxy, but are in reality "white-washed" tombs of abhorrent prevarication. Whether it be the additional revelations of the Montanists; the dualistic and demiurgic mediatorial intellectualism of the Gnostics; the subordinationist Trinitarian theology of the Arians; the kenotic iconoclasm of the Ebionites and Socinians; or the debauched sacradotalism of the greatest of all "angel of lights" (2 Cor. 11:14) - the Roman Catholic Church; the genuine gospel was always blended with the leaven of error to produce heresy. As Louis Berkhof notes when commenting on this syncretism, he so profoundly says,

"Gnosticism...is a stealing of some Christian rags to cover heathen nakedness!"

A Workman Unashamed
Paul declared, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved,[a] a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." This is the duty of every faithful pastor--to rightly divide God's Word--to cut it straight. If he does so, he will be a workman unashamed and approved unto God. This should produce godly fear in every under-shepherd of the flock of God. Wrongly dividing the Word will bring judgment upon you (James 3:1) and cause the body of Christ to suffer. Think of Paul's exhortation to young Timothy; warning the church of two men who failed in this task and their skewed sermons were nothing but cancerous to the body of Christ. ”But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some. (2 Tim. 2:16-18a) When one is injured and gangrene sets in, the only hope to stop the gangrene from spreading further and protect the health of the rest of the body is to amputate the diseased limb. In the same way, when gangrenous teaching finds its way within the church that can damage and disease the entire body, the only remedy for this disorder of doctrine is the amputation of aberrancy so that its poison will not effect the rest of the body of Christ!

As Tertullian so insightfully says, "truth is just as much opposed by an adulteration of its meaning as it is by a corruption of its text."

This, however, presupposes an authoritative "rule and standard" that could be "adulterated... and corrupted." Schaff writes penetratingly when saying,

"The heretical canon of the Gnostic Marcion, of the middle of the second century, consisting of a mutilated Gospel of Luke and ten of Paul's epistles, certainly implies the existence of an orthodox canon at that time, as heresy always presupposes truth, of which it is a caricature."

Heresy always has an element of truth to it and that is why the Councils and Synods, the development of the Creeds had to not only unmask the impostor of the genuine faith but also contend for and reaffirm the truth of authentic faith (Jude 3).

Contend for THE Faith
These were not casual intellectual ping pong matches these men engaged in as though they were the next target on "Firing Line" with William Buckley, Jr. The preservation of truth, the development of the canon, the stance for sound doctrine (uncorrupted and unadulterated) cost many of the early Fathers (from the time of the ascension of Christ to the time of Constantine- and in some cases beyond) their reputations, separation from their families, exile and banishment, torture, persecution and ultimately their lives. The pages of church history cannot be studied dispassionately when the very pages of that history are written with the blood of the saints that held fast the faithful word and did not recant! The Bible is the most sacred thing we will ever hold in our hands in this life. The early church leaders did not shrink from declaring the whole council of God (Acts 20:27) and rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15). May we not dishonor them nor our Lord by taking lightly the task of preserving orthodox historical biblical Christianity.

To develop a biblical perspective of history a few considerations are necessary: a proper view of God; a proper view of man; and a proper view of truth. History can be and is didactic, political, sociological, biographical, economic, geographic and synthetic. But most importantly history is first and foremost theological. Newman says, "the Christian scholar rejoices in all that is Christlike and heroic, laments the corruptions and perversions of the past, and is most deeply concerned for the honor and purity of Christianity of the present and future.”

Our faith is not built upon the opinions of the early church fathers, their traditions or councils, letters or debates apart from the attestation of Scripture. Though we today owe “the fathers—the divines” a tremendous debt for the faithful warrant and witness preserved on biblical truth; but we must be careful to fathom that our faith is built solely upon the authority, sufficiency and exhaustiveness of Holy Scripture. Truth must always take precedence over tradition - and tradition must always be examined in light of truth! If not, then we are in danger of turning the wonderful recognized traditions of these divines into what I call, "Protestant Popery!" God forbid!

No Creed but Christ
Samuel Davies, that tremendous 18th century divine said,

"I may indeed believe the same things which Luther or Calvin believed: but I do not believe them on the authority of Luther or Calvin, but upon the sole authority of Jesus Christ, and therefore I should not call myself by their name, as one of their disciples, but by the name of Christ, whom alone I acknowledge as the Author of my religion, and my only Master and Lord."

"Follow me as I follow Christ" (1 Cor. 11:1) is the echoing call of redemptive history.

As the early church fathers followed Christ, we follow them. As they affirmed the Scriptures we accept them and their teaching. As the councils affirmed and upheld biblical truth in the creeds, without addition and without deletion, we receive them. As the Puritan divines held fast the faith without compromise, we embrace them. But remove the standard and rule for all conduct of God’s Word and depart from the heavenly plumbline (Amos 7:8), which governs our souls' security and surety for eternity and insures our daily duty and ecclesiastical obligations to elders and laity, from the essence of their dogma; then we must jettison their teachings in obedience to Scripture.

Amen?

Read carefully the words of Luther that follow and heed the warning of the Apostle Paul to not defect to another gospel. Truth, foundationally, should always trump all other concerns in ministry. These are serious times, needing serious answers, by serious men, who remain uncompromised in the Word of God and in the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

by Martin Luther
from his Galatians Commentary
"Galatians 1:6-9"

Galatians 1:6. "I marvel."
How patiently Paul deals with his seduced Galatians! He does not pounce on them but, like a father, he fairly excuses their error. With motherly affection he talks to them yet he does it in a way that at the same time he also reproves them. On the other hand, he is highly indignant at the seducers whom he blames for the apostasy of the Galatians. His anger bursts forth in elemental fury at the beginning of his epistle. "If any may," he cries, "preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Later on, in the fifth chapter, he threatens the false apostles with damnation. "He that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be." He pronounces a curse upon them. "I would they were even cut off which trouble you."

He might have addressed the Galatians after this fashion: "I am ashamed of you. Your ingratitude grieves me. I am angry with you." But his purpose was to call them back to the Gospel. With this purpose in his mind he speaks very gently to them. He could not have chosen a milder expression than this, "I marvel." It indicates his sorrow and his displeasure.

Paul minds the rule which he himself lays down in a later chapter where he says: "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted." Toward those who have been misled we are to show ourselves parentally affectionate, so that they may perceive that we seek not their destruction but their salvation. Over against the devil and his missionaries, the authors of false doctrines and sects, we ought to be like the Apostle, impatient, and rigorously condemnatory, as parents are with the dog that bites their little one, but the weeping child itself they soothe.

The right spirit in Paul supplies him with an extraordinary facility in handling the afflicted consciences of the fallen. The Pope and his bishops, inspired by the desire to lord it over men's souls, crack out thunders and curses upon miserable consciences. They have no care for the saving of men's souls. They are interested only in maintaining their position.

Galatians 1:6. "That ye are so soon."
Paul deplores the fact that it is difficult for the mind to retain a sound and steadfast faith. A man labors for a decade before he succeeds in training his little church into orderly religion, and then some ignorant and vicious poltroon comes along to overthrow in a minute the patient labor of years. By the grace of God we have effected here in Wittenberg the form of a Christian church. The Word of God is taught as it should be, the Sacraments are administered, and everything is prosperous. This happy condition, secured by many years of arduous labors, some lunatic might spoil in a moment. This happened in the churches of Galatia which Paul had brought into life in spiritual travail. Soon after his departure, however, these Galatian churches were thrown into confusion by the false apostles.

The church is a tender plant. It must be watched. People hear a couple of sermons, scan a few pages of Holy Writ, and think they know it all. They are bold because they have never gone through any trials of faith. Void of the Holy Spirit, they teach what they please as long as it sounds good to the common people who are ever ready to join something new.

We have to watch out for the devil lest he sow tares among the wheat while we sleep. No sooner had Paul turned his back on the churches of Galatia, than the false apostles went to work. Therefore, let us watch over ourselves and over the whole church.

Galatians 1:6. "I marvel that ye are so soon removed."
Again the Apostle puts in a gentle word. He does not berate the Galatians, "I marvel that ye are so unsteady, unfaithful." He says, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed." He does not address them as evildoers. He speaks to them as people who have suffered great loss. He condemns those who removed them rather than the Galatians. At the same time he gently reproves them for rather themselves to be removed. The criticism is implied that they should have been permitting a little more settled in their beliefs. If they had taken better hold of the Word they could not have been removed so easily.

Jerome thinks that Paul is playing upon the name Galatians, deriving it from the Hebrew word Galath, which means fallen or carried away, as though Paul wanted to say, "You are true Galatians, i.e., fallen away in name and in fact." Some believe that the Germans are descended from the Galatians. There may be something to that. For the Germans are not unlike the Galatians in their lack of constancy. At first we Germans are very enthusiastic, but presently our emotions cool and we become slack. When the light of the Gospel first came to us many were zealous, heard sermons greedily, and held the ministry of God's Word in high esteem. But now that religion has been reformed, many who formerly were such earnest disciples have discarded the Word of God, have become sow-bellies like the foolish and inconsistent Galatians.

Galatians 1:6. "From him that called you into the grace of Christ."
The reading is a little doubtful. The sentence may be construed to read: "From that Christ that called you into grace"; or it may be construed to read: "From God that called you into the grace of Christ." I prefer the former for it seems to me that Paul's purpose is to impress upon us the benefits of Christ. This reading also preserves the implied criticism that the Galatians withdrew themselves from that Christ who had called them not unto the law, but unto grace. With Paul we decry the blindness and perverseness of men in that they will not receive the message of grace and salvation, or having received it they quickly let go of it, in spite of the fact that the Gospel bestows all good things spiritual: forgiveness of sins, true righteousness, peace of conscience, everlasting life; and all good things temporal: good judgment, good government and peace.

Why does the world abhor the glad tidings of the Gospel and the blessings that go with it? Because the world is the devil's. Under his direction the world persecutes the Gospel and would if it could nail again Christ, the Son of God, to the Cross although He gave Himself into death for the sins of the world. The world dwells in darkness. The world is darkness.
Paul accentuates the point that the Galatians had been called by Christ unto grace. "I taught you the doctrine of grace and of liberty from the Law, from sin and wrath, that you should be free in Christ, and not slaves to the hard laws of Moses. Will you allow yourselves to be carried away so easily from the living fountain of grace and life?"

Galatians 1:6. "Unto another gospel."
Note the resourcefulness of the devil. Heretics do not advertise their errors. Murderers, adulterers, thieves disguise themselves. So the devil masquerades all his devices and activities. He puts on white to make himself look like an angel of light. He is astoundingly clever to sell his patent poison for the Gospel of Christ. Knowing Satan's guile, Paul sardonically calls the doctrine of the false apostles "another gospel," as if he would say, "You Galatians have now another gospel, while my Gospel is no longer esteemed by you."

We infer from this that the false apostles had depreciated the Gospel of Paul among the Galatians on the plea that it was incomplete. Their objection to Paul's Gospel is identical to that recorded in the fifteenth chapter of the Book of Acts to the effect that it was not enough for the Galatians to believe in Christ, or to be baptized, but that it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses, for "except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." As though Christ were a workman who had begun a building and left it for Moses to finish.

Today the Anabaptists and others, finding it difficult to condemn us, accuse us Lutherans of timidity in professing the whole truth. They grant that we have laid the foundation in Christ, but claim that we have failed to go through with the building. In this way these perverse fanatics parade their cursed doctrine as the Word of God, and, flying the flag of God's name, they deceive many. The devil knows better than to appear ugly and black. He prefers to carry on his nefarious activities in the name of God. Hence the German proverb: "All mischief begins in the name of God."

When the devil sees that he cannot hurt the cause of the Gospel by destructive methods, he does it under the guise of correcting and advancing the cause of the Gospel. He would like best of all to persecute us with fire and sword, but this method has availed him little because through the blood of martyrs the church has been watered. Unable to prevail by force, he engages wicked and ungodly teachers who at first make common cause with us, then claim that they are particularly called to teach the hidden mysteries of the Scriptures to superimpose upon the first principles of Christian doctrine that we teach. This sort of thing brings the Gospel into trouble. May we all cling to the Word of Christ against the wiles of the devil, "for we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."

Galatians 1:7. "Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you."
Here again the apostle excuses the Galatians, while he blames the false apostles for disturbing their consciences and for stealing them out of his hand. How angry he gets at these deceivers! He calls them troublemakers, seducers of poor consciences.

This passage adduces further evidence that the false apostles defamed Paul as an imperfect apostle and a weak and erroneous preacher. They condemn Paul, Paul condemns them. Such warfare of condemnation is always going on in the church. The papists and the fanatics hate us, condemn our doctrine, and want to kill us. We in turn hate and condemn their cursed doctrine. In the meanwhile the people are uncertain whom to follow and which way to turn, for it is not given to everybody to judge these matters. But the truth will win out. So much is certain, we persecute no man, neither does our doctrine trouble men. On the contrary, we have the testimony of many good men who thank God on their knees for the consolation that our doctrine has brought them. Like Paul, we are not to blame that the churches have trouble. The fault lies with the Anabaptists and other fanatics.

Every teacher of work-righteousness is a trouble-maker. Has it never occurred to you that the pope, cardinals, bishops, monks, and that the whole synagogue of Satan are trouble-makers? The truth is, they are worse than false apostles. The files apostles taught that in addition to faith in Christ the works of the Law of God were necessary unto salvation. But the papists omit faith altogether and teach self-devised traditions and works that are not commanded of God, indeed are contrary to the Word of God, and for these traditions they demand preferred attention and obedience.

Paul calls the false apostles troublers of the church because they taught circumcision and the keeping of the Law as needful unto salvation. They insisted that the Law must be observed in every detail. They were supporters in this contention by the Jews, with the result that those who were not firmly established in faith were easily persuaded that Paul was not a sincere teacher of God because he ignored the Law. The Jews were offended at the idea that the Law of God should be entirely ignored by Paul and that the Gentiles, former idol-worshippers, should gratuitously attain to the station of God's people without circumcision, without the penitentiary performance of the law, by grace alone through faith in Christ Jesus.

These criticisms were amplified by the false apostles. They accused Paul of designs to abolish the law of God and the Jewish dispensation, contrary to the law of God, contrary to their Jewish heritage, contrary to apostolic example, contrary to Paul's own example. They demanded that Paul be shunned as a blasphemer and a rebel, while they were to be heard as true teachers of the Gospel and authentic disciples of the apostles. Thus Paul stood defamed among the Galatians. He was forced to attack the false apostles. He did so without hesitation.

Galatians 1:7. "And would pervert the gospel of Christ."
To paraphrase this sentence: "These false apostles do not merely trouble you, they abolish Christ's Gospel. They act as if they were the only true Gospel-preachers. For all that they muddle Law and Gospel. As a result they pervert the Gospel. Either Christ must live and the Law perish, or the Law remains and Christ must perish; Christ and the Law cannot dwell side by side in the conscience. It is either grace or law. To muddle the two is to eliminate the Gospel of Christ entirely."

It seems a small matter to mingle the Law and Gospel, faith and works, but it creates more mischief than man's brain can conceive. To mix Law and Gospel not only clouds the knowledge of grace, it cuts out Christ altogether.

The words of Paul, "and would pervert the gospel of Christ," also indicate how arrogant these false apostles were. They were shameless boasters. Paul simply had to exalt his own ministry and Gospel.

Galatians 1:8. "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."
Paul's zeal for the Gospel becomes so fervent that it almost leads him to curse angels. "I would rather that I, my brethren, yes, the angels of heaven be anathematized than that my gospel be overthrown."

The Greek word anathema, Hebrew herem, means to a curse, execrate, to damn. Paul first (hypothetically) curses himself. Knowing persons first find fault with themselves in order that they may all the more earnestly reprove others.

Paul maintains that there is no other gospel besides the one he had preached to the Galatians. He preached, not a gospel of his own invention, but the very same Gospel God had long ago prescribed in the Sacred Scriptures. No wonder Paul pronounces curses upon himself and upon others, upon the angels of heaven, if anyone should dare to preach any other gospel than Christ's own.

Galatians 1:9. "As we said before, so say I now again. If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
Paul repeats the curse, directing it now upon other persons. Before, he cursed himself, his brethren, and an angel from heaven. "Now," he says, "if there are any others who preach a gospel different from that you have received from us, let them also be accursed." Paul herewith curses and excommunicates all false teachers including his opponents. He is so worked up that he dares to curse all who pervert his Gospel. Would to God that this terrible pronouncement of the Apostle might strike fear into the hearts of all who pervert the Gospel of Paul.
The Galatians might say: "Paul, we do not pervert the Gospel you have brought unto us. We did not quite understand it. That is all. Now these teachers who came after you have explained everything so beautifully."

This explanation the Apostle refuses to accept. They must add nothing; they must correct nothing. "What you received from me is the genuine Gospel of God. Let it stand. If any man brings any other gospel than the one I brought you, or promises to deliver better things than you have received from me, let him be accursed."

In spite of this emphatic denunciation so many accept the pope as the supreme judge of the Scriptures. "The Church," they say, "chose only four gospels. The Church might have chosen more. Ergo the Church is above the Gospel." With equal force one might argue: "I approve the Scriptures. Ergo I am above the Scriptures. John the Baptist confessed Christ. Hence he is above Christ." Paul subordinates himself, all preachers, all the angels of heaven, everybody to the Sacred Scriptures. We are not the masters, judges, or arbiters, but witnesses, disciples, and confessors of the Scriptures, whether we be pope, Luther, Augustine, Paul, or an angel from heaven.