Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Christianity’

In this video, Dr. Sproul explains a crucial difference between Roman Catholic and Reformation teaching concerning salvation.  The phrase means, “at the same time just and sinner.”  This is not a contradiction, as he says in the video:

And so with this formula Luther was saying, in our justification we are one and the same time righteous or just, and sinners. Now if he would say that we are at the same time and in the same relationship just and sinners that would be a contradiction in terms. But that’s not what he was saying. He was saying from one perspective, in one sense, we are just. In another sense, from a different perspective, we are sinners; and how he defines that is simple. In and of ourselves, under the analysis of God’s scrutiny, we still have sin; we’re still sinners. But, by imputation and by faith in Jesus Christ, whose righteousness is now transferred to our account, then we are considered just or righteous. This is the very heart of the gospel.

Dr. Sproul uses the word “imputation” here – imputation means “to declare,” or “reckon,” or “to count as.”  Rome, at the Council of Trent in the 16th Century, declares anathema upon one who affirms the imputation of the work of Christ in this manner:

Canon 11.
If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

This goes to the heart of the differences between Rome and Reformationists – how is a man justified?  Dr. Sproul thus explains:

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Appearing in my Gmail box today….a recommendation from Amazon:

Read Full Post »

If any one, then, chooses to make use of this term without attaching any bad meaning to it, he shall not be troubled by me on that account; but as it cannot be retained without very great danger, I think the abolition of it would be of great advantage to the Church. I am unwilling to use it myself; and others if they will take my advice, will do well to abstain from it.

Institutes of The Christian Religion, Book 2, Chapter 2, Section 8.

Free Will Friday

Read Full Post »

From The Bondage of the Will – Section 26.

Over and over in his diatribe against Erasmus, Luther makes the point that for man’s will to be truly “free,” as Erasmus (and many today) wish to define it, then by necessity the only way it could be such is to fall into a Pelagian definition of “free will,” which has been denounced as heretical going back to the times of Augustine.

You describe the power of free-will as small, and wholly ineffective apart from the grace of God.

Agreed? Now then, I ask you: If God’s grace is wanting, if it is taken away from that small power, what can it do? It is ineffective, you say, and can do nothing good. So it will not do what God or His grace wills. Why? Because we have now taken God’s grace away from it, and what the grace of God does not do is not good. Hence it follows that free-will without God’s grace is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil, since it cannot turn itself to good. This being so, I give you full permission to enlarge the power of free-will as much as you like; make it angelic, make it divine, if you can! – but when you add this doleful postscript, that it is ineffective apart from God’s grace, straightway you rob it of all its power. What is ineffective power but (in plain language) no power? So to say that free-will exists and has power, albeit ineffective power, is, in the Sophists’ phrase, a contradiction in terms. It is like saying ‘free-will’ is something which is not free - as if you said that fire is cold and earth hot. Fire certainly has power to heat; but if hell-fire (even) was cold and chilling instead of burning and scorching, I would not call it fire, let alone hot (unless you meant to refer to an imaginary fire, or a painted one). Note, however, that if we meant by the power of free-will the power which makes human beings fit subjects to be caught up by the Spirit and touched by God’s grace, as creatures made for eternal life or eternal death, we should have a proper definition.  And I certainly acknowledge the existence of this power, this fitness, or dispositional quality and passive aptitude (as the Sophists call it), which, as everyone knows, is not given to plants or animals. As the proverb says, God did not make heaven for geese!

It is a settled truth, then, even on the basis of your own testimony, that we do everything of necessity, and nothing by free-will; for the power of free-will is nil, and it does no good, nor can do, without grace. It follows, therefore, that free-will is obviously a term applicable only to Divine Majesty; for only He can do, and does (as the Psalmist sings) whatever he wills in heaven and earth [Psalms 135:6]. If free-will is ascribed to men, it is ascribed with no more propriety than divinity itself would be – and no blasphemy could exceed that! So it befits theologians to refrain from using the term when they want to speak of human ability, and to leave it to be applied to God only. They would do well also to take the term out of men’s mouths and speech, and to claim it for their God, as if it were His own holy and awful Name. If they must at all hazards assign some power to men, let them teach that it be denoted by some other term than free-will; especially since we know from our own observation that the mass of men are sadly deceived and misled by this phrase. The meaning which it conveys to their minds is far removed from anything that theologians believe and discuss. The term free-will is too grandiose and comprehensive and fulsome. People think it means what the natural force of the phrase would require, namely, a power of freely turning in any direction, yielding to none and subject to none. If they knew that this was not so, and that the term signifies only a tiny spark of power, and that utterly ineffective in itself, since it is the devil’s prisoner and slave, it would be a wonder if they did not stone us as mockers and deceivers, who say one thing and mean another – indeed, who have not yet decided what we do mean!

Since, therefore, we have lost the meaning and the real reference of this glorious term, or, rather, have never grasped them (as was claimed by the Pelagians, who themselves mistook the phrase) why do we cling so tenaciously to an empty word, and endanger and delude faithful people in consequence? There is no more wisdom in so doing then there is in the modern foible of kings and potentates, who retain, or lay claim to, empty titles of kingdoms and countries, and flaunt them, while all the time they are really paupers, and anything but the possessors of those kingdoms and countries. We can tolerate their antics, for they fool nobody, but just feed themselves up – unprofitably enough – on their own vainglory. But this false idea of free-will is a real threat to salvation, and a delusion fraught with the most perilous consequences.

If we do not want to drop this term altogether – which would really be the safest and most Christian thing to do – we may still in good faith teach people to use it to credit man with free-will in respect, not of what is above him, but of what is below him. That is to say, man should realize that in regard to his money and possessions he has a right to use them, to do or to leave undone, according to his own free-will – though that very free-will is overruled by the free-will of God alone, according to His own pleasure. However, with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, he has no free-will, but is a captive, prisoner and bondslave, either to the will of God, or to the will of Satan.

Read Full Post »

(Poor audio quality until 1:50)


Read Full Post »


Isaiah 10:5–19 (ESV)

Judgment on Arrogant Assyria

Ah, Assyria, the rod of my anger;

the staff in their hands is my fury!

Against a godless nation I send him,

and against the people of my wrath I command him,

to take spoil and seize plunder,

and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.

But he does not so intend,

and his heart does not so think;

but it is in his heart to destroy,

and to cut off nations not a few;

for he says:

“Are not my commanders all kings?

Is not Calno like Carchemish?

Is not Hamath like Arpad?

Is not Samaria like Damascus?

10  As my hand has reached to the kingdoms of the idols,

whose carved images were greater than those of Jerusalem and Samaria,

11  shall I not do to Jerusalem and her idols

as I have done to Samaria and her images?”

12 When the Lord has finished all his work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, he will punish the speech of the arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the boastful look in his eyes. 13 For he says:

“By the strength of my hand I have done it,

and by my wisdom, for I have understanding;

I remove the boundaries of peoples,

and plunder their treasures;

like a bull I bring down those who sit on thrones.

14  My hand has found like a nest

the wealth of the peoples;

and as one gathers eggs that have been forsaken,

so I have gathered all the earth;

and there was none that moved a wing

or opened the mouth or chirped.”

15  Shall the axe boast over him who hews with it,

or the saw magnify itself against him who wields it?

As if a rod should wield him who lifts it,

or as if a staff should lift him who is not wood!

16  Therefore the Lord God of hosts

will send wasting sickness among his stout warriors,

and under his glory a burning will be kindled,

like the burning of fire.

17  The light of Israel will become a fire,

and his Holy One a flame,

and it will burn and devour

his thorns and briers in one day.

18  The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land

the Lord will destroy, both soul and body,

and it will be as when a sick man wastes away.

19  The remnant of the trees of his forest will be so few

that a child can write them down.  

Read Full Post »


 Luke 15:11–32 (ESV)

The Parable of the Prodigal Son

11 And he said, “There was a man who had two sons. 12 And the younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of property that is coming to me.’ And he divided his property between them. 13 Not many days later, the younger son gathered all he had and took a journey into a far country, and there he squandered his property in reckless living. 14 And when he had spent everything, a severe famine arose in that country, and he began to be in need. 15 So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him into his fields to feed pigs. 16 And he was longing to be fed with the pods that the pigs ate, and no one gave him anything.

17 “But when he came to himself, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have more than enough bread, but I perish here with hunger! 18 I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Treat me as one of your hired servants.” ’ 20 And he arose and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him. 21 And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ 22 But the father said to his servants, ‘Bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet. 23 And bring the fattened calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate. 24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to celebrate.

25 “Now his older son was in the field, and as he came and drew near to the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 And he called one of the servants and asked what these things meant. 27 And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fattened calf, because he has received him back safe and sound.’ 28 But he was angry and refused to go in. His father came out and entreated him, 29 but he answered his father, ‘Look, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed your command, yet you never gave me a young goat, that I might celebrate with my friends. 30 But when this son of yours came, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him!’ 31 And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. 32 It was fitting to celebrate and be glad, for this your brother was dead, and is alive; he was lost, and is found.’ ”

Read Full Post »


Read Full Post »

 Matthew 6:14–15 (ESV)

14 For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, 15 but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Yesterday we posted the account of forgiveness concerning our son’s best friend.  Today, we will present issues concerning attorneys – and not just the defense attorney.

Six weeks after Jon’s friend was arrested a preliminary hearing was held.  Watching the legal process gave us a small hint of what the men in the prisons whom we deal with on a weekly basis have gone through – and those whom they have victimized.  Throughout the process to this point, we had asked many, many questions of law enforcement and the prosecutor’s office and they had been honest – either they told us what they could or they told us they couldn’t tell us.

The time and the day for the hearing arrived and so did we at the courthouse.  In Michigan, a preliminary hearing is held for the purpose of determining if there is sufficient evidence for a case to be sent on for an actual trial.  We had never been to such a hearing before.

The hearing was held in a courtroom with about four or five rows of seating for the gallery.  We sat near the back and directly in front of us, in the front row, sat Jon’s friend as he awaited the hearing, along with his attorney.  Then something sad happened.  His attorney got up and left.  Here was a young man, in his teens, sitting by himself.  His family was on the other side of the courtroom – and nobody came to sit with him.  Were they prohibited from doing so?  I don’t know.  Perhaps the bigger question was this – were we prohibited from sitting with him?  Looking back, through all this, this is the one regret I have – we didn’t find out whether one of us could sit with him.  There he sat – by himself, a slender young man in his teens, looking at the beginning of a process that could culminate in him spending up to fifteen years in prison – and he looked so, so alone.  He probably sat there for 5-10 minutes, but it seemed like forever.

The hearing finally began.  Arguments were presented.  On closed circuit television, the DNA lady from Lansing gave her testimony.  Others testified.  I sat there, getting angrier and angrier – why?  Because the defense attorney kept saying things about Jon that were preposterous – things that were just plain slanderous and wrong.  Jon could not speak in his defense.  Who was to speak for him?  The prosecutor.  Did he?  Not with regard to the false statements being made.  Why?  In a hearing like this, all the State is concerned with is getting the case bound over for trial and if the deceased is spoken ill of in the meantime, it doesn’t matter.

The deceased was our son.  The boy we had loved through many issues and years.  And now he was being defamed in a public forum and no one was defending him.  I was furious.

It came time for the forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy to take the stand.  This was not going to be pleasant.  It wasn’t.

He was queried about many details of the autopsy, as was to be expected.  Even though you know it’s coming, it’s still difficult – that’s your son they are talking about, having been sliced open and all that.  We knew all that was coming.  What we didn’t know was coming became the problem.

As the pathologist testified concerning the condition of Jon’s body, he was asked a question about marks on his body.  He described something on the underside of Jon’s right forearm.  One of the questions we had asked was whether or not Jon had any indications of defensive wounds – whether there was any indication he had known he was going to be hit by the truck.  We had been told “No.”  We had been told something other than what was in the autopsy report (which we had not been permitted to see or discuss).

The pathologist replied that there was a tire mark on the underside of Jon’s right forearm.  Jon was right-handed.  I remember sitting bolt upright (literally) when the pathologist said that.  My wife said, “What’s wrong?”  I said, “I’ll tell you later.”

Did Jon have a second or two before the truck hit him where he knew it was coming?  Did he know in that brief moment that he was going to die?  That’s all I could think of and I became more furious that we had been lied to.  Do we have a definitive answer to either of those questions?  No, we don’t.  It certainly is a matter of speculation, though.  There was more.

We had asked if Jon died instantly and had been told “Yes.”  The pathologist gave more testimony and in doing so mentioned the fact that Jon had aspirated blood.  There was blood in his lungs?  Yes.  How did it get there?  He breathed it in.  Dead people don’t breathe.  How long was he alive after being run over, his head having been crushed like a melon?  Was he conscious or unconscious during this?  More questions to which we will never have the  answer.  But why were we hearing this for the first time in open court?  We had asked these question prior to all this and had been told differently.  Did they think we wouldn’t find this out during the hearing at some point?  Regardless, my bent toward anger boiled more.

I have a terrible temper.  During college (as a non-Christian) I did some real stupid things due to this temper.  In those years I played shortstop on a softball team that traveled around Michigan each weekend playing in tournaments.  Here are a few examples of my stupidity as expressed through anger.  During one game being played on a field where there was no grass on the infield and the surface was baked hard like concrete, covered with very fine gravel, a ball was hit to me on two skips (not “hops” – this was a bullet) and I used good technique, getting “down on the ball,”  and the ball took a bad skip on the second one and came up and hit me square in the mouth.  Softballs, to be sure, are not “soft.”  It hurt.  Some players on the opposing team thought the bad skip rather humorous and were laughing in their dugout along the first base line, which was an open dugout, not recessed into the ground at all and it had no protection in front.  It was just a concrete block shelter with sides and a top.  I heard them laughing.  My temper kicked in.  Back in those days I had a very good arm and could throw rockets (even at 40, our youngest son said to me when I threw hard as we played catch, he could “hear the ball coming.”  Those days are lonngg gone…).  I picked up the ball, which was at my feet and threw a rocket.  Not back to the pitcher.  I threw it at the players in the opposing dugout.  Two of them ducked out of the way just in time as the ball hit the blocks behind them with a loud “Crack!”  Needless to say, they were not amused and this almost started a fight.

In another tournament, I was coming across second base taking a throw from our second baseman, trying to turn a double play.  The runner coming from first went 6-8 feet out of the baseline to take me out, rolling my knees in the process.  One problem.  This guy was about 6’5″ and must have gone about 275.  I was 5’10″ and 175.  What do I do? I jumped up and got in his face and start screaming at him.  In God’s providence, I was blessed he didn’t pick me up and break me like a twig.  My teammates came and tore me away from him before I did anything else stupid.  That’s the latent temper that manifested itself as I listened in the courtroom.  I was livid.

It came time for the one break in the five-hour hearing.  We asked if there was somewhere we could go by ourselves and were directed to a small room adjacent to the courtroom.  My wife and I went in and sat down.  She asked what was wrong.  I told her.  I was so angry I did something I had never done before and hope to never do again:  I was so angry I cried tears of anger.  Does this circumstance permit me to retain my anger?  Am I given license to hold onto this rage because “God understands?”  No.  The Bible tells us – commands us – to do what is cited in the passage at the top of this post.  There are no extenuating circumstances where the Christian is permitted to disobey the charge of Matthew 6.  My choice that day was the same as we all have every day as we encounter life and its pitfalls and foibles: do I or don’t I forgive?

It took a while that day but I did forgive.  It was more important to me to rid myself of the anger than to retain ownership of it.  Was it hard or easy?  It’s only as hard as we make it.  God equips His people to do what he commands.  Our challenge is to be obedient regardless of experience of circumstance.

By the end of the hearing, where Jon’s friend was bound over for trial, forgiveness had been granted to both attorneys, by the grace of God.  There was another opportunity to obey or disobey the command to forgive as it relates to an attorney.  That’s in the next post.

Read Full Post »

In Part 3, we gave an account of a visit to Kinross Correctional Facility (KCF), where prisoners surrounded me physically and in prayer, with one particular prisoner’s prayer being quite touching.

Back in 2002, the prisoners at KCF were publishing a monthly newsletter entitled, “The Keryx Journal,” an eight-page assemblage of essays, poems and other items written/submitted by prisoners.  The prisoner who prayed that night in the cafeteria the night after Jon died wrote a brief essay about what had happened and it appeared in The Journal a couple of months later.  We were unaware that he was going to do this and were quite surprised when we were handed our copy of The Journal upon publication.

What happened subsequent to this was more surprising.

Late in 2002, upon arriving at KCF, the prisoner in question was very excited.  Why?  He had sent out the essay he had written for publication and had received a response from Mennonite Publishing in Pennsylvania.  They had agreed to publish his essay in their monthly Sunday School bulletin (and pay him about $30 in addition, which is a lot of money for a prisoner).  It was our understanding that around 12,000 copies are distributed monthly.   It was published early in 2003.

Someone somewhere read it, because not too long afterward the prisoner received a letter from Nazarene Publishing House in Kansas City, asking if they could republish the essay.  The prisoner agreed and received another small stipend for the essay.  They published it early in 2004.

A couple of years later, I was at a church about 100 miles from El Rancho Reformado in casual conversation with a small group of people and one who knew us mentioned Jon’s death and the prisoner having written about i and the others inquired further, so I elaborated.  When I did and mentioned the Mennonite publication, one lady blurted out, “That was real?!?!?  I read that and thought it was just another story somebody had made up!”  I said, “Yeah, it’s real.  That guy was me.”  ”Really?  I really thought it was a made-up story.”  ”No, ma’am.  It’s all real, just like he wrote.”

People do read those little publications and those who read need not think they are fictional accounts.  Ours is decidedly real.

The story of what happened in a remote prison, in a cafeteria with three volunteers and 40-45 prisoners ended up being spread around the world.  Was that my intent when I called and asked if I could go to the prison with those other two men that night?  No.  I just knew I needed to be with some men who loved me and my wife and who were going to be hurting from what they had heard the day before.  The words of a hurting dad, spoken to men who reside in contemporary society’s version of a leper colony, saw the light of day far beyond that old cafeteria and perhaps ministered in some small way to a hurting soul whom we would never see this side of heaven.

God’s providence shines forth again.  Praise God.

The prisoner’s essay is shown below, for ease of reading.  The links can be clicked to see the original publications.  The Mennonite publication is Copyright 2003 by Faith and Like Resources.  The Nazarene publication is Copyright 2004 by WordAction Publishing Company (the photo accompanying that version is not the prisoner who wrote it).  The prisoner’s name has been redacted for reasons of security and confidentiality.

———————————————-

Through Death The Gospel Came Alive

Last night my son was killed by a hit-and-run driver,” said Jeff Peterson in a voice cracked raw with emotion. Before a room instantly quiet, Jeff continued, “Today has been the hardest day of my life. I know many of you have been praying for my son, and have heard my wife and me talk about our difficulties with him over the last year and a half. I’m here tonight because I felt I needed to tell you in person about his death.

“A lot of people feel finding out who was responsible and making them pay is what is important,” said Jeff, opening his heart even deeper. “I’m here to tell you, I don’t care about that. Knowing who did this won’t change what happened, and punishing the person responsible won’t bring my son back to life. All I know is that my son is dead and nothing will change that.”  Strong words—words made even stronger because they were spoken to a room full of convicted felons. Words spoken to men who themselves had committed acts of violence and caused the kind of pain they heard and saw in Jeff’s trembling voice and shuddering shoulders. Yet, because a man standing fast in his faith at such an emotional time spoke them, they were also words of great healing. They were words that shook a fist in the face of intense emotional pain and shone forth triumphant.

As a volunteer involved in prison ministry since the mid ‘90s, at the Kinross Correctional facility in Kincheloe, Michigan, Jeff knows that prisons are filled with men and women deeply hurt over the crimes they have committed and the subsequent pain they realize their crimes have caused to others. Understanding this, Jeff went into a prison on the hardest day of his life, not to face men in anger, men onto whom he could project the face of the perpetrator who had taken his son’s life. But rather he entered the prison knowing his pain would be understood and he, himself, could be ministered to through his own act of spiritual kindness.

“Jeff really needed you guys last week,” said his wife Cheryl, a week later during another gathering at the prison. “He knew you guys would help him to get through his crisis. You guys sure didn’t fail him there. For that we will always be grateful.”

The pain of losing a loved one is a devastating, life-threatening experience.  As your soul cried out questions no one can answer, solace can only be found in acceptance that God, who is at work, will one day explain why all our pain was necessary. However, this acceptance cannot he passive. Jeff knew that, and he also knew that for his healing to begin he had to look his son’s death in the eye. He did this by seeking comfort from men whom most would consider the least prepared to give it. Through this simple act of faith, seeking solace from men who had caused the kind of pain he was feeling, not only was Jeff’s healing process begun, but the men who ministered to him felt their healing begin too!

“What has been slowly pressed upon my spirit as this day has worn on,” said Jeff, as he sought to put his son’s death into perspective, “is how much God loves me. Loves us. To willingly send forth his son to die. That was an act of love so deep. Until today I guess I always knew that, but I never really understood it. However, after experiencing what it actually feels like to lose a son, well, all I can say is, my eyes have been opened, and I see that God’s love for me—for us—is an amazing, humbling reality.”

Drawn irresistibly by the Spirit to surround Jeff and lay hands upon him, the men humbled themselves before God and sought his in mercy in prayer. As these prayers were spoken the gospel was brought to life, and once again, death was conquered by hope.  Proving without question that all of Iife—even the hard, incomprehensible stuff—is surely worth living, and that healing can come even when it is sought where it normally isn’t found. For it’s not the physical places where we seek healing that matter, it’s the source. And when the source is God, he is bound only by the limitations we place upon him.

PURPOSE:  Purpose coverPurpose essay page 1Purpose essay page 2

STANDARD: Standard coverStandard essay

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 108 other followers

%d bloggers like this: