Is there a A Middle Option?
Submitted by theriddles on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 8:46am. To The Evangelical Arminian Web Page.
* Arminianism
* Calvinism
* General
* Hyper-Calvinism
People are often tempted to believe that there is some mediate option which will allow them to avoid the Calvinist/Arminian debate. This inclination comes from a commendable impulse -- to hold fast to Scriptural truth without imposing a man-made system, and avoid being sidetracked in the work of the Gospel by endless doctrinal controversy. These impulses lead people to declare that they are "Biblicist" or that they are both Arminian and Calvinist.
Now, within Calvinist and Arminian frameworks there are many different issues and nuances of dispute. There are systematizers and systemic implications, but there is really only one basic issue: Does God unconditionally choose who will be saved, and who will not? If you believe this you are a Calvinist, if you do not, you are, in the general sense an Arminian. Is it really as simple as that?
Do you believe that your neighbor who died in unbelief was foreordained before the foundation of the world to burn in hell for all eternity? If you can affirm that without blinking, you are a Calvinist. If you simply believe that your neighbor was not chosen, but you were, then you are an inconsistent Calvinist.
I have three sons. If my house were burning down in the middle of the night, and I chose to rescue my oldest and drive off, then I have made a choice about the other two by ignoring them -- a very deadly choice. It is impossible to avoid the moral responsibility associated with intentionally abandoning them in the house. No father who loves his children would ever do this, and yet some are able to sleep at night believing that our Heavenly Father does just this.
If on the other hand you believe that Our Heavenly Father went to the greatest extent by sending his only Son into the burning building to save as many as would follow him out of the fire, then please welcome yourself to the Arminian side. When it boils down, Arminians are simply those who believe that God genuinely wants to save every person from the burning building, just like a fundamentalist believer who is dispensational also believes.
It's just that Calvinists can be intimidating. They can make you feel like everyone since the Reformation was a Calvinist, to be anything other than a Calvinist is suspect, and to proclaim one's self an Arminian is like building your house on sinking sand. Nobody wants that. So why not be neutral? I can't be neutral on whether or not God would rush into the burning building, can you?
Dispensationalists however, believe in a Pretributional Rapture and dismiss the Arminian idea that only those who persevere to the end are saved. KMS
www.livingtruthministry.com
Friday, November 14, 2008
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Rightly Dividing The Word of Truth
This web blog and the focus of our teaching is dispensational in nature. We believe all of the Bible is for us, but not all of the Bible is to us. As such, we also focus on the Apostle Paul who was called to be the Apostle of the Gentiles, and it is in his writings that we find specific instructions for us today as revealed to Paul by the risen Lord, Jesus Christ.
Like Moses and all the prophets in the "Old Testament" who had a specific message to the Nation of Israel, God gave the Apostle Paul a specific message to the Gentiles and Jews during this present dispensation, called the Revelation of the Mystery (Rom. 16:25). This particular teaching is based on "rightly dividing" the Word of Truth — whereby we can, without fail, find exactly where we are in God's plan for mankind and eternity.
We live in a most wonderful time! God, in the sacrificial death of Christ at the cross, has provided for all mankind, without distinction, the opportunity to secure one's own personal salvation — by grace alone! It is a personal decision that has eternal repercussion. God is willing that none perish, and He is long suffering toward that end. What does I Corinthians 4:16 mean and how does this truth apply to the Church which is His Body?
"Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me." Does Paul really mean we are to follow him? Precisely. These are the very words that God inspired Paul to write. It is not Paul's idea that people should follow him, but God's. Why does God want people to follow Paul? It is because God has raised up Paul and made him the apostle to the Gentiles. Before Paul, the Gentiles did not have an apostle. God's attention was directed to Israel ever since God called Abraham out of Chaldea. Not only did God raise up Paul, but he gave him a brand new gospel for the whole world, for Jew and Gentile alike. The instructions for believers in the church, the Body of Christ are found only in the Pauline epistles. The church can learn many truths and important lessons from any part of the Bible, but Paul's epistles are for the Church, the Body.
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: but not all scripture is directed to the church the body of Christ for genuine growth in Christ UNLESS IT IS RIGHTLY DIVIDED. Your comments encouraged...KMS-LTM
Like Moses and all the prophets in the "Old Testament" who had a specific message to the Nation of Israel, God gave the Apostle Paul a specific message to the Gentiles and Jews during this present dispensation, called the Revelation of the Mystery (Rom. 16:25). This particular teaching is based on "rightly dividing" the Word of Truth — whereby we can, without fail, find exactly where we are in God's plan for mankind and eternity.
We live in a most wonderful time! God, in the sacrificial death of Christ at the cross, has provided for all mankind, without distinction, the opportunity to secure one's own personal salvation — by grace alone! It is a personal decision that has eternal repercussion. God is willing that none perish, and He is long suffering toward that end. What does I Corinthians 4:16 mean and how does this truth apply to the Church which is His Body?
"Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me." Does Paul really mean we are to follow him? Precisely. These are the very words that God inspired Paul to write. It is not Paul's idea that people should follow him, but God's. Why does God want people to follow Paul? It is because God has raised up Paul and made him the apostle to the Gentiles. Before Paul, the Gentiles did not have an apostle. God's attention was directed to Israel ever since God called Abraham out of Chaldea. Not only did God raise up Paul, but he gave him a brand new gospel for the whole world, for Jew and Gentile alike. The instructions for believers in the church, the Body of Christ are found only in the Pauline epistles. The church can learn many truths and important lessons from any part of the Bible, but Paul's epistles are for the Church, the Body.
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: but not all scripture is directed to the church the body of Christ for genuine growth in Christ UNLESS IT IS RIGHTLY DIVIDED. Your comments encouraged...KMS-LTM
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
The Two Overarching Covenants
Covenant theology views God's revealed Word through the lens of two overarching covenants.
Covenant theology is a system of interpreting the Scriptures on the basis of two covenants: the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. Some covenant theologians specify three covenants: works, redemption, and grace. Covenant theology teaches that God initially made a covenant of works with Adam, promising eternal life for obedience and death for disobedience. Adam failed, and death entered the human race. God, however, moved to resolve man's dilemma by entering into a covenant of grace through which the problem of sin and death would be overcome. Christ is the ultimate mediator of God's covenant of grace. [4]
However, there is a very serious downside to this approach. Hear Dr. Chafer again:
A theology which penetrates no further into Scripture than to discover that in all ages God is immutable in His grace toward penitent sinners, and constructs the idea of a universal church, continuing through the ages, on the one truth of immutable grace, is not only disregarding vast spheres of revelation but is reaping the unavoidable confusion [fog] and misdirection which part-truth engenders. The outworking of divine grace is not standardized, though the Covenant idea of theology would make it so...
A form of Covenant Theology which would thread all of Jehovah's purposes and undertakings upon His one attribute of grace could hardly avoid confusion of mind [fog] in matters related to His varied objectives. Covenant Theology, in consistency with its man-made premise, asserts its inventions respecting an Old Testament church, which, it is claimed, is an integral part of the New Testament Church and on the ground that, since God's grace is one unchanging attribute, its accomplishments must be the realization of one standardized ideal.
A Covenant Theology engenders the notion that there is but one soteriology and one eschatology, and that ecclesiology, such as it is conceived to be, extends from the Garden of Eden to the Great White Throne. The insuperable problems in exegesis which such fanciful suppositions create are easily disposed of by ignoring them.
Covenantism, which has molded the major theological concepts for many generations, recognizes no distinction as to ages, therefore can allow for no distinctions between law and grace. This dominating attitude of Covenantism must account for the utter neglect of life-truth in all their works of theology. No more representative theological dictum from the Covenant viewpoint has been formed than the Westminster Confession of Faith, which valuable and important document recognizes life-truth only to the point of imposing the Ten Commandments on Christians as their sole obligation, this in spite of the teachings of the Pauline Church Epistles which assert that the law was never given to Gentiles or Christians, and that the latter has been saved and delivered from it--actually dead to it (Gal. 2:19). [5]
For additional lucid comments by Chafer, see Dr. Chafer on Covenant Theology complied by Miles J. Stanford.
A Flawed Foundation
For nearly four centuries, the Reformed/Calvinist tradition has faithfully battled the insidious errors of Christian humanism and philosophic indeterminism--the theological foundation of the entire Anglo-Catholic tradition. The Protestant Reformation's rejection of these grossly distorted views laid the groundwork for a more accurate and biblical view of grace and redemption. However, serious flaws still exist in the Calvinist's soteriological emphasis which in turn result in deficient and unscriptural views. [NOTE: These generalizations serve an important purpose but are not meant to suggest that the issues are clearly black and white. I have met several Reformed/Calvinists who favor the more "moderate" views of compatibilism. See Human Freedom and the Sovereignty of God.]
1) The various creeds of the Reformed/Calvinist realm [e.g., Westminster Standards] rightly mention the "corruption" of man's nature. However, the focus of this tradition is overwhelmingly upon transgression of law, individual sins, and justification by imputed righteousness. For example, hear the words of a contemporary "Reformed" Episcopal minister: Romans 5 basically says that we become Christians in essentially the same way we became sinners: By having the merits or demerits of one covenant head imputed to all those who are in him as their representative. The funny thing is that I never hear any complaints about our sin being imputed to the innocent Christ, or Christ's righteousness being imputed to the guilty sinner. We like that just fine. But we don't like Adam's sin being imputed to us. But if we are not to be regarded as in Adam, we cannot be regarded as being in Christ, either, for the principle of imputation is the same.
While this minister is correct as far as he goes; he doesn't go far enough. The curse of Sola Imputation is its failure to see the ontological effects of the Fall upon the First Adam, and subsequently upon us. Their doctrine of so-called "Total Depravity" is not really total!
In the Reformation there was, through grace, a great deliverance. The ground-work of Christianity was recovered; namely, justification by faith. But though this was restored, it was not maintained that the old Adamic man was crucified on the Cross, and hence they only refused the exaction of Popery, but considered the flesh as still before God. Refusing the exaction was right; but the retention of that on which the exaction could be made, the old man was and is the weakness of the Reformation. JBS
Romans 5:13,14 states that "before the law was given, SIN was in the world" and "death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses." God's adding of a legal or forensic dimension (law) to amplify man's responsibility and our understanding of the gravity of depravity does not fully deal with the problem of our SIN. SIN is the source of our sins--it is the fallen, animating life-force ("flesh") inherited from the first Adam. "When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image..." (Genesis 5:3). "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men..." (Romans 5:12).
2) Many Reformed/Calvinists portray humanity's post-Fall, pre-New Birth condition (Total Depravity) as a state of total unconsciousness and passivity rather than separation from God. This erroneous emphasis is reactive in origin and largely baggage carried over from their century-old battle with Roman Catholic and Arminian heresies. Consequently, it creates serious problems relative to: a) the true condition of lost sinners and the preaching of the Gospel, b) differences between the effectual calling, the New Birth, and the role of faith, and c) the believer's relationship to his indwelling nature of sin (flesh).
a) In Ephesians 2:1, the Apostle Paul tells us, "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient." How is it that the words "dead," "live," and "disobedient" can be used in the same sentence to simultaneously describe our prior lost condition, if the meaning of dead carries the idea of being unconscious or passive. More to the point, Miles Stanford remarks: Their [Reformed/Calvinist] illustration of this total inability [depravity] is a man physically dead, who cannot see, hear, speak or move.
Although the sinner is dead in sins, he is not an unresponsive corpse, he is not annihilated; rather, he is separated from God. He is certainly alive enough to adamantly reject the Saviour! [8]
As mentioned above, the reason our Calvinist brothers overstate their case is due to the manipulative way their (and our) humanistic adversaries have argued in favor of "free will" and their loyalty to defend the biblical truth of the "grace of God." However, this emphasis has proven to progressively causes an imbalance which over time undermines the Scriptural truth of both volition and responsibility. Further, their deficient view of sin opens the door to religious self-righteousness and pride and also closes the door to considering possible error on their part. To suggest that a Calvinist loosen his grip on his theology is like asking King Edward I ("Longshanks") to relinquish control of Scotland.
In time, preaching the Gospel to unconscious sinners makes less and less sense to the logical Calvinist. If he doesn't pull back, he will assuredly slide into hyper-Calvinism and may give up communicating the Good News altogether. But Romans 1:18-23 and others teach us that those who are "dead in transgressions" have retained a level of both consciousness and conscience about God and His creation. His separation from God (spiritual death) and bondage to sin renders him a rebellious inhabitant in a lonely and silent cosmos, a slave to sin and self, but not a cadaver.
b) All Christians who adhere to sovereign grace affirm the truth that "No one can come to Me [Christ] unless the Father who sent Me draws him." (John 6:44). However, Reformed/Calvinists incorrectly view the action of the Father drawing the sinner to the Savior as evidence of regeneration--i.e., the New Birth. No room is allowed for any human response before regeneration, lest some religious humanist get a meritorious 'toe in the door'. Representative of this emphasis Dr. Bob Wright states: Since the Fall of Adam and Eve, all are born spiritually dead in their sin nature, and therefore require regeneration to a life they do not naturally possess.
The doctrine of total depravity states that fallen human nature is morally incapable of responding to the gospel without being caused to do so by divine intervention (1 Cor. 2:12-15). [OK so far] Once the soul is sovereignly regenerated, it willingly responds in saving faith to God's command to repent and believe the gospel, but not before.
He regenerates the human heart, infusing divine life into it, thus enabling the wicked to believe, even though they were formerly enslaved to the habit of rebellion.
God regenerates each elect person so that he or she invariably responds willingly to the gospel. [9]
In spite of many examples from both Old and New Testaments of God controlling the actions of the unregenerate, the Reformed/Calvinists require an "initial infusion of the resurrection life of Christ into the human soul" for John 6:44 to be effective. But think for a moment about the 22nd chapter of Numbers. The false prophet Balaam heard the Lord speak, his ass spoke, and both he and his ass saw an angel all without the benefit of Calvinistic regeneration. Supernatural? yes! New Birth? no. Strangely, while the Calvinist prides himself in being a stalwart defender of God's sovereignty, he limits what God the Father is capable of doing. He erroneously requires that the doctrine of effectual calling be made synonymous with the New Birth. Cannot the Father's enablement of the sinner to "believe the Word in order to accept the Savior" be seen as separate while related, and not confused with the New Birth itself?
c) Given his presuppositions, anemic understanding of sin, and exaggerated view of spiritual death, the Reformed/Calvinist is nearly guaranteed to misinterpret the Apostle Paul's teachings in the New Testament. Often, Paul's epistles are viewed as speaking exclusively to the subject of the believer's justification, while his teaching regarding identification with Christ is ignored, twisted, or treated as an addendum. To help rectify the serious deficiency, the Reformed/Calvinist has invented the doctrine of "Lordship Salvation". The essence of Reformed/Calvinist regeneration is that of change, rather than the biblical view of exchange--the life inherited from the first Adam displaced by the life of the Lord Jesus Christ--the Last Adam. Thus, they claim believers have only one nature (one life changed from old to new) rather than two natures (the old and new, co-resident).
3) The Reformed emphasis in regeneration (drawn from the wrong age) focuses the new-creation Christian largely upon justification and forgiveness of sins. Their concept of sanctification is one of change (amelioration) and the goal is keeping the Ten Commandments--albeit supernaturally. Representative of all Reformed theology, David Wendt quotes Greg Bahnsen as saying,
"There is also a greater confidence to approach God and the glory of the [Israel's] New Covenant is permanent not temporary like that of the Old [Mosaic]. As for power, the New provides 'further and stronger motivation to obey the law', and that obedience is empowered by God."
Due to its erroneous amillennial perspective, Reformed theology to one degree or another sees the Body of Christ fulfilling Israel's New Covenant. Consequently, they attempted to apply the future millennial regeneration promised under that covenant to members of the Body of Christ--now!
To the degree that they embrace law as their "rule of life", they reject the Lord Jesus Christ's teaching via Paul's in his Epistles regarding SIN and identification. In spite of their doctrinal superiority over both Romanists as well as all-flavors of Arminians, the Calvinist's impoverished view of depravity, together with the misapplication of Israel's New Covenant regeneration, seriously cripples believers and twists their understanding of Christ's work of redemption.
From time-to-time, a Calvinist will loosen his grip on his theology or maybe it's the other way around. Reformed pastor Leonard Verduin became suspicious of this deficiency. Regarding the central tenet of the Reformation, he wrote: We meet in Luther, to put it theologically, a very heavy emphasis on the forensic aspect of salvation and a correspondingly light emphasis on the moral aspect. Luther was primarily interested in pardon [for sins], rather than in renewal [of life]. His theology [Reformation] was a theology that addresses itself to the problem of guilt [of sins committed], rather than to the problem of pollution [of life inherited from the first Adam]. There is an imbalance in this theology... [6]
Dr. L. S. Chafer stated it even more precisely:
The holy character of God is the final and only standard by which moral values may be accurately judged. To the one who disregards God, there are no moral standards other than social custom, or the dictates of an uncertain and perverted conscience. And even these, it will be observed, though indirect, failing, and feeble, are nevertheless reflections of the standards of God. Sin is sinful because it is unlike God.
The Larger Catechism (Westminster) declares: "Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature." However, inasmuch as the law of God may not incorporate all that God's character is and inasmuch as anything will be sinful which contradicts God's character, whether expressed in His law or not, this definition is strengthened when the word character is substituted for the word law. It is true that disobedience of God's law is sin, but it does not follow that sin is restricted to disobedience of law.
There is a justification for the fact that the two great doctrines--sin and redemption--go hand in hand. It is sin that has drawn out redemption from the heart of God, and redemption is the only cure for sin. These two realities, in turn, become measurements of each other. Where sin is minimized, redemption is automatically impoverished since its necessity is by so much decreased. The worthy approach to the doctrine of sin is to discover all that is revealed about the sinfulness of sin and then to recognize that God's provided Savior is equal to every demand which sin imposes. It is one of Satan's most effective methods of attack upon the saving work of Christ to soften the voice which is set to proclaim the evil character and effect [and extent] of sin. [7]
Is it any wonder why the Reformed/Calvinist tradition reduces the Christian life to embracing "law as a rule of life"? Since sin is limited to the concept of law-breaking, their antithesis--holiness, take the logical form of law-keeping. Add to that, their reinforcing concept of Millennial regeneration--i.e., law written on the heart, and it all seems so right!
Further, their non-dispensational, even anti-dispensational, bent guarantees a law-bound experience. In their fleshly effort to keep the law, various forms of ascetic discipline or humanistic psychology have been added to facilitate reaching their goal. And thus the popularity and truck loads of Puritan, neo-Puritan, and behavioralist writings.
However, as Paul clearly states, "the strength of sin IS the law". Placing Christians under law only results in a protracted Romans 7 experience or even descent into the dark realms of Romans 2:17-24. MJS
Covenant theology is a system of interpreting the Scriptures on the basis of two covenants: the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. Some covenant theologians specify three covenants: works, redemption, and grace. Covenant theology teaches that God initially made a covenant of works with Adam, promising eternal life for obedience and death for disobedience. Adam failed, and death entered the human race. God, however, moved to resolve man's dilemma by entering into a covenant of grace through which the problem of sin and death would be overcome. Christ is the ultimate mediator of God's covenant of grace. [4]
However, there is a very serious downside to this approach. Hear Dr. Chafer again:
A theology which penetrates no further into Scripture than to discover that in all ages God is immutable in His grace toward penitent sinners, and constructs the idea of a universal church, continuing through the ages, on the one truth of immutable grace, is not only disregarding vast spheres of revelation but is reaping the unavoidable confusion [fog] and misdirection which part-truth engenders. The outworking of divine grace is not standardized, though the Covenant idea of theology would make it so...
A form of Covenant Theology which would thread all of Jehovah's purposes and undertakings upon His one attribute of grace could hardly avoid confusion of mind [fog] in matters related to His varied objectives. Covenant Theology, in consistency with its man-made premise, asserts its inventions respecting an Old Testament church, which, it is claimed, is an integral part of the New Testament Church and on the ground that, since God's grace is one unchanging attribute, its accomplishments must be the realization of one standardized ideal.
A Covenant Theology engenders the notion that there is but one soteriology and one eschatology, and that ecclesiology, such as it is conceived to be, extends from the Garden of Eden to the Great White Throne. The insuperable problems in exegesis which such fanciful suppositions create are easily disposed of by ignoring them.
Covenantism, which has molded the major theological concepts for many generations, recognizes no distinction as to ages, therefore can allow for no distinctions between law and grace. This dominating attitude of Covenantism must account for the utter neglect of life-truth in all their works of theology. No more representative theological dictum from the Covenant viewpoint has been formed than the Westminster Confession of Faith, which valuable and important document recognizes life-truth only to the point of imposing the Ten Commandments on Christians as their sole obligation, this in spite of the teachings of the Pauline Church Epistles which assert that the law was never given to Gentiles or Christians, and that the latter has been saved and delivered from it--actually dead to it (Gal. 2:19). [5]
For additional lucid comments by Chafer, see Dr. Chafer on Covenant Theology complied by Miles J. Stanford.
A Flawed Foundation
For nearly four centuries, the Reformed/Calvinist tradition has faithfully battled the insidious errors of Christian humanism and philosophic indeterminism--the theological foundation of the entire Anglo-Catholic tradition. The Protestant Reformation's rejection of these grossly distorted views laid the groundwork for a more accurate and biblical view of grace and redemption. However, serious flaws still exist in the Calvinist's soteriological emphasis which in turn result in deficient and unscriptural views. [NOTE: These generalizations serve an important purpose but are not meant to suggest that the issues are clearly black and white. I have met several Reformed/Calvinists who favor the more "moderate" views of compatibilism. See Human Freedom and the Sovereignty of God.]
1) The various creeds of the Reformed/Calvinist realm [e.g., Westminster Standards] rightly mention the "corruption" of man's nature. However, the focus of this tradition is overwhelmingly upon transgression of law, individual sins, and justification by imputed righteousness. For example, hear the words of a contemporary "Reformed" Episcopal minister: Romans 5 basically says that we become Christians in essentially the same way we became sinners: By having the merits or demerits of one covenant head imputed to all those who are in him as their representative. The funny thing is that I never hear any complaints about our sin being imputed to the innocent Christ, or Christ's righteousness being imputed to the guilty sinner. We like that just fine. But we don't like Adam's sin being imputed to us. But if we are not to be regarded as in Adam, we cannot be regarded as being in Christ, either, for the principle of imputation is the same.
While this minister is correct as far as he goes; he doesn't go far enough. The curse of Sola Imputation is its failure to see the ontological effects of the Fall upon the First Adam, and subsequently upon us. Their doctrine of so-called "Total Depravity" is not really total!
In the Reformation there was, through grace, a great deliverance. The ground-work of Christianity was recovered; namely, justification by faith. But though this was restored, it was not maintained that the old Adamic man was crucified on the Cross, and hence they only refused the exaction of Popery, but considered the flesh as still before God. Refusing the exaction was right; but the retention of that on which the exaction could be made, the old man was and is the weakness of the Reformation. JBS
Romans 5:13,14 states that "before the law was given, SIN was in the world" and "death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses." God's adding of a legal or forensic dimension (law) to amplify man's responsibility and our understanding of the gravity of depravity does not fully deal with the problem of our SIN. SIN is the source of our sins--it is the fallen, animating life-force ("flesh") inherited from the first Adam. "When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image..." (Genesis 5:3). "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men..." (Romans 5:12).
2) Many Reformed/Calvinists portray humanity's post-Fall, pre-New Birth condition (Total Depravity) as a state of total unconsciousness and passivity rather than separation from God. This erroneous emphasis is reactive in origin and largely baggage carried over from their century-old battle with Roman Catholic and Arminian heresies. Consequently, it creates serious problems relative to: a) the true condition of lost sinners and the preaching of the Gospel, b) differences between the effectual calling, the New Birth, and the role of faith, and c) the believer's relationship to his indwelling nature of sin (flesh).
a) In Ephesians 2:1, the Apostle Paul tells us, "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient." How is it that the words "dead," "live," and "disobedient" can be used in the same sentence to simultaneously describe our prior lost condition, if the meaning of dead carries the idea of being unconscious or passive. More to the point, Miles Stanford remarks: Their [Reformed/Calvinist] illustration of this total inability [depravity] is a man physically dead, who cannot see, hear, speak or move.
Although the sinner is dead in sins, he is not an unresponsive corpse, he is not annihilated; rather, he is separated from God. He is certainly alive enough to adamantly reject the Saviour! [8]
As mentioned above, the reason our Calvinist brothers overstate their case is due to the manipulative way their (and our) humanistic adversaries have argued in favor of "free will" and their loyalty to defend the biblical truth of the "grace of God." However, this emphasis has proven to progressively causes an imbalance which over time undermines the Scriptural truth of both volition and responsibility. Further, their deficient view of sin opens the door to religious self-righteousness and pride and also closes the door to considering possible error on their part. To suggest that a Calvinist loosen his grip on his theology is like asking King Edward I ("Longshanks") to relinquish control of Scotland.
In time, preaching the Gospel to unconscious sinners makes less and less sense to the logical Calvinist. If he doesn't pull back, he will assuredly slide into hyper-Calvinism and may give up communicating the Good News altogether. But Romans 1:18-23 and others teach us that those who are "dead in transgressions" have retained a level of both consciousness and conscience about God and His creation. His separation from God (spiritual death) and bondage to sin renders him a rebellious inhabitant in a lonely and silent cosmos, a slave to sin and self, but not a cadaver.
b) All Christians who adhere to sovereign grace affirm the truth that "No one can come to Me [Christ] unless the Father who sent Me draws him." (John 6:44). However, Reformed/Calvinists incorrectly view the action of the Father drawing the sinner to the Savior as evidence of regeneration--i.e., the New Birth. No room is allowed for any human response before regeneration, lest some religious humanist get a meritorious 'toe in the door'. Representative of this emphasis Dr. Bob Wright states: Since the Fall of Adam and Eve, all are born spiritually dead in their sin nature, and therefore require regeneration to a life they do not naturally possess.
The doctrine of total depravity states that fallen human nature is morally incapable of responding to the gospel without being caused to do so by divine intervention (1 Cor. 2:12-15). [OK so far] Once the soul is sovereignly regenerated, it willingly responds in saving faith to God's command to repent and believe the gospel, but not before.
He regenerates the human heart, infusing divine life into it, thus enabling the wicked to believe, even though they were formerly enslaved to the habit of rebellion.
God regenerates each elect person so that he or she invariably responds willingly to the gospel. [9]
In spite of many examples from both Old and New Testaments of God controlling the actions of the unregenerate, the Reformed/Calvinists require an "initial infusion of the resurrection life of Christ into the human soul" for John 6:44 to be effective. But think for a moment about the 22nd chapter of Numbers. The false prophet Balaam heard the Lord speak, his ass spoke, and both he and his ass saw an angel all without the benefit of Calvinistic regeneration. Supernatural? yes! New Birth? no. Strangely, while the Calvinist prides himself in being a stalwart defender of God's sovereignty, he limits what God the Father is capable of doing. He erroneously requires that the doctrine of effectual calling be made synonymous with the New Birth. Cannot the Father's enablement of the sinner to "believe the Word in order to accept the Savior" be seen as separate while related, and not confused with the New Birth itself?
c) Given his presuppositions, anemic understanding of sin, and exaggerated view of spiritual death, the Reformed/Calvinist is nearly guaranteed to misinterpret the Apostle Paul's teachings in the New Testament. Often, Paul's epistles are viewed as speaking exclusively to the subject of the believer's justification, while his teaching regarding identification with Christ is ignored, twisted, or treated as an addendum. To help rectify the serious deficiency, the Reformed/Calvinist has invented the doctrine of "Lordship Salvation". The essence of Reformed/Calvinist regeneration is that of change, rather than the biblical view of exchange--the life inherited from the first Adam displaced by the life of the Lord Jesus Christ--the Last Adam. Thus, they claim believers have only one nature (one life changed from old to new) rather than two natures (the old and new, co-resident).
3) The Reformed emphasis in regeneration (drawn from the wrong age) focuses the new-creation Christian largely upon justification and forgiveness of sins. Their concept of sanctification is one of change (amelioration) and the goal is keeping the Ten Commandments--albeit supernaturally. Representative of all Reformed theology, David Wendt quotes Greg Bahnsen as saying,
"There is also a greater confidence to approach God and the glory of the [Israel's] New Covenant is permanent not temporary like that of the Old [Mosaic]. As for power, the New provides 'further and stronger motivation to obey the law', and that obedience is empowered by God."
Due to its erroneous amillennial perspective, Reformed theology to one degree or another sees the Body of Christ fulfilling Israel's New Covenant. Consequently, they attempted to apply the future millennial regeneration promised under that covenant to members of the Body of Christ--now!
To the degree that they embrace law as their "rule of life", they reject the Lord Jesus Christ's teaching via Paul's in his Epistles regarding SIN and identification. In spite of their doctrinal superiority over both Romanists as well as all-flavors of Arminians, the Calvinist's impoverished view of depravity, together with the misapplication of Israel's New Covenant regeneration, seriously cripples believers and twists their understanding of Christ's work of redemption.
From time-to-time, a Calvinist will loosen his grip on his theology or maybe it's the other way around. Reformed pastor Leonard Verduin became suspicious of this deficiency. Regarding the central tenet of the Reformation, he wrote: We meet in Luther, to put it theologically, a very heavy emphasis on the forensic aspect of salvation and a correspondingly light emphasis on the moral aspect. Luther was primarily interested in pardon [for sins], rather than in renewal [of life]. His theology [Reformation] was a theology that addresses itself to the problem of guilt [of sins committed], rather than to the problem of pollution [of life inherited from the first Adam]. There is an imbalance in this theology... [6]
Dr. L. S. Chafer stated it even more precisely:
The holy character of God is the final and only standard by which moral values may be accurately judged. To the one who disregards God, there are no moral standards other than social custom, or the dictates of an uncertain and perverted conscience. And even these, it will be observed, though indirect, failing, and feeble, are nevertheless reflections of the standards of God. Sin is sinful because it is unlike God.
The Larger Catechism (Westminster) declares: "Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature." However, inasmuch as the law of God may not incorporate all that God's character is and inasmuch as anything will be sinful which contradicts God's character, whether expressed in His law or not, this definition is strengthened when the word character is substituted for the word law. It is true that disobedience of God's law is sin, but it does not follow that sin is restricted to disobedience of law.
There is a justification for the fact that the two great doctrines--sin and redemption--go hand in hand. It is sin that has drawn out redemption from the heart of God, and redemption is the only cure for sin. These two realities, in turn, become measurements of each other. Where sin is minimized, redemption is automatically impoverished since its necessity is by so much decreased. The worthy approach to the doctrine of sin is to discover all that is revealed about the sinfulness of sin and then to recognize that God's provided Savior is equal to every demand which sin imposes. It is one of Satan's most effective methods of attack upon the saving work of Christ to soften the voice which is set to proclaim the evil character and effect [and extent] of sin. [7]
Is it any wonder why the Reformed/Calvinist tradition reduces the Christian life to embracing "law as a rule of life"? Since sin is limited to the concept of law-breaking, their antithesis--holiness, take the logical form of law-keeping. Add to that, their reinforcing concept of Millennial regeneration--i.e., law written on the heart, and it all seems so right!
Further, their non-dispensational, even anti-dispensational, bent guarantees a law-bound experience. In their fleshly effort to keep the law, various forms of ascetic discipline or humanistic psychology have been added to facilitate reaching their goal. And thus the popularity and truck loads of Puritan, neo-Puritan, and behavioralist writings.
However, as Paul clearly states, "the strength of sin IS the law". Placing Christians under law only results in a protracted Romans 7 experience or even descent into the dark realms of Romans 2:17-24. MJS
Monday, September 22, 2008
WILL THE EMERGENT CHURCH SUBMERGE YOURS?
by Jan Markell
I was recently contacted to do a radio interview by Elwood McQuaid of Friends of Israel. I have had Elwood on my radio program several times on issues related to Israel. I assumed he, also, wanted to talk about Israel. Wrong. He was troubled about the massive inroads of what is known as the Emergent Church and how little Christians know about it.
So, if the Emergent Church is about to submerge your church, you might not even know it!
I am borrowing some thoughts from my good friend Roger Oakland who I consider an authority on this topic.
Here are some warning signs. There still may be time to stop your church from "submerging" to "Emerging" but only if you act decisively and in union with others in your church who feel the same. A delegation of one or two will never impress church leadership who already think this "new way of doing church" is better than warmed bagels and who have swallowed the Emergent deception. And make no mistake, it is deception.
* Scripture is no longer the ultimate authority as the basis for the Christian faith.
* The centrality of the gospel of Jesus Christ is being replaced by humanistic methods promoting church growth and a social gospel.
* More and more emphasis is being placed on building the kingdom of God now and less and less on the warnings of Scripture about the imminent return of Jesus Christ and a coming judgment in the future.
* The teaching that Jesus Christ will rule and reign in a literal millennial period is considered unbiblical and heretical.
* The teaching that the church has taken the place of Israel and Israel has no prophetic significance is often embraced.
* The teaching that the book of Revelation does not refer to the future, but instead has been already fulfilled in the past or is allegorical.
* An experiential mystical form of Christianity begins to be promoted as a method to reach the postmodern generation.
* Ideas are promoted teaching that Christianity needs to be reinvented in order to provide meaning for this generation.
* The pastor may implement an idea called "ancient-future" or "vintage Christianity" claiming that in order to take the church forward, we need to go back in church history and find out what experiences were effective to get people to embrace Christianity.
* While the authority of the Word of God is undermined, images and sensual experiences are promoted as the key to experiencing and knowing God.
* These experiences include icons, candles, incense, liturgy, labyrinths, prayer stations, contemplative prayer, experiencing the sacraments (for Protestants), particularly the sacrament of the Eucharist.
* There seems to be a strong emphasis on ecumenism indicating that a bridge is being established that leads in the direction of unity with the Roman Catholic Church. This will ultimately lead to the one world religion of Revelation.
* Some "evangelical" Protestant leaders are saying that the Reformation went too far. They are reexamining the claims of the "church fathers" saying that communion is more than a symbol and that Jesus actually becomes present in the wafer at communion.
* Some suggest there are many ways to God.
* Members of churches who question or resist the new changes that the pastor is implementing are reprimanded and usually asked to leave. If you are over age 50, your opinion will not even matter.
When some of the following are lauded from the pulpit or Sunday School class, get very nervous: Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt, Dan Kimball, Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, Dallas Willard, Erwin McManus, and many others too numerous to name. You may think it harmless to have a pastor just give a quote from one of these men, but when you understand that they represent the above bullet-points, it should be a huge red flag.
It is imperative you understand this movement and do what you can to not let "Emerging" submerge your church; however, if and when you see it is hopeless to turn the tide, move on to safer ground!
I was recently contacted to do a radio interview by Elwood McQuaid of Friends of Israel. I have had Elwood on my radio program several times on issues related to Israel. I assumed he, also, wanted to talk about Israel. Wrong. He was troubled about the massive inroads of what is known as the Emergent Church and how little Christians know about it.
So, if the Emergent Church is about to submerge your church, you might not even know it!
I am borrowing some thoughts from my good friend Roger Oakland who I consider an authority on this topic.
Here are some warning signs. There still may be time to stop your church from "submerging" to "Emerging" but only if you act decisively and in union with others in your church who feel the same. A delegation of one or two will never impress church leadership who already think this "new way of doing church" is better than warmed bagels and who have swallowed the Emergent deception. And make no mistake, it is deception.
* Scripture is no longer the ultimate authority as the basis for the Christian faith.
* The centrality of the gospel of Jesus Christ is being replaced by humanistic methods promoting church growth and a social gospel.
* More and more emphasis is being placed on building the kingdom of God now and less and less on the warnings of Scripture about the imminent return of Jesus Christ and a coming judgment in the future.
* The teaching that Jesus Christ will rule and reign in a literal millennial period is considered unbiblical and heretical.
* The teaching that the church has taken the place of Israel and Israel has no prophetic significance is often embraced.
* The teaching that the book of Revelation does not refer to the future, but instead has been already fulfilled in the past or is allegorical.
* An experiential mystical form of Christianity begins to be promoted as a method to reach the postmodern generation.
* Ideas are promoted teaching that Christianity needs to be reinvented in order to provide meaning for this generation.
* The pastor may implement an idea called "ancient-future" or "vintage Christianity" claiming that in order to take the church forward, we need to go back in church history and find out what experiences were effective to get people to embrace Christianity.
* While the authority of the Word of God is undermined, images and sensual experiences are promoted as the key to experiencing and knowing God.
* These experiences include icons, candles, incense, liturgy, labyrinths, prayer stations, contemplative prayer, experiencing the sacraments (for Protestants), particularly the sacrament of the Eucharist.
* There seems to be a strong emphasis on ecumenism indicating that a bridge is being established that leads in the direction of unity with the Roman Catholic Church. This will ultimately lead to the one world religion of Revelation.
* Some "evangelical" Protestant leaders are saying that the Reformation went too far. They are reexamining the claims of the "church fathers" saying that communion is more than a symbol and that Jesus actually becomes present in the wafer at communion.
* Some suggest there are many ways to God.
* Members of churches who question or resist the new changes that the pastor is implementing are reprimanded and usually asked to leave. If you are over age 50, your opinion will not even matter.
When some of the following are lauded from the pulpit or Sunday School class, get very nervous: Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt, Dan Kimball, Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, Dallas Willard, Erwin McManus, and many others too numerous to name. You may think it harmless to have a pastor just give a quote from one of these men, but when you understand that they represent the above bullet-points, it should be a huge red flag.
It is imperative you understand this movement and do what you can to not let "Emerging" submerge your church; however, if and when you see it is hopeless to turn the tide, move on to safer ground!
Thursday, September 18, 2008
What is the Social Gospel?
Let's all make a note to thank T.A. McMahon of The Berean Call at: www.thebereancall.org for his gripping Newsletter article titled "The Shameful Social Gospel" Vol. XXIII No. 9, September 2008.
Just an excerpt of that article for your reading enjoyment follows:
"The history of the social gospel is, in nearly every case, a sincere attempt by Christians to do those things that they believe will honor God and benefit humanity. In every case, however, the practical working out of "benefiting humanity" has compromised biblical faith and dishonored God. Why is that? God's Word gives no commission to the church to fix the problems of the world. Those who attempt to do so (Rick Warren et all) are starting out under a false premise, "...a way which seemeth right unto a man," not God's way. So where can it go from there? "the end thereof are the ways of death," i.e.., destruction (Proverbs 14:12). Furthermore, the problems of the world are all symptoms. The root cause is sin." (Rick Warren et all) added in parenthesis by KMS.
We cannot tell what is true or false about any organization or its methodologies used to incorporate and promote the gospel by man's methods. All efforts must be viewed through the grid of scripture and proper exegesis, especially in these tumultuous times when few if any Christian "Rightly Divides the Word of Truth correctly." All truth is not God's Truth, and every method void of the Holy Spirit of God will fail regardless of the zealous attempts of the individual, no matter how the gospel is repackaged.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
KMS, www.livingtruthministry.com
Just an excerpt of that article for your reading enjoyment follows:
"The history of the social gospel is, in nearly every case, a sincere attempt by Christians to do those things that they believe will honor God and benefit humanity. In every case, however, the practical working out of "benefiting humanity" has compromised biblical faith and dishonored God. Why is that? God's Word gives no commission to the church to fix the problems of the world. Those who attempt to do so (Rick Warren et all) are starting out under a false premise, "...a way which seemeth right unto a man," not God's way. So where can it go from there? "the end thereof are the ways of death," i.e.., destruction (Proverbs 14:12). Furthermore, the problems of the world are all symptoms. The root cause is sin." (Rick Warren et all) added in parenthesis by KMS.
We cannot tell what is true or false about any organization or its methodologies used to incorporate and promote the gospel by man's methods. All efforts must be viewed through the grid of scripture and proper exegesis, especially in these tumultuous times when few if any Christian "Rightly Divides the Word of Truth correctly." All truth is not God's Truth, and every method void of the Holy Spirit of God will fail regardless of the zealous attempts of the individual, no matter how the gospel is repackaged.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
KMS, www.livingtruthministry.com
Friday, September 12, 2008
Countdown to the Rapture
The seven year period that precedes the second coming of Christ to planet earth is known as the Tribulation, the last 3 & 1/2 years of this period is known as the Great Tribulation. It is also the 70th. week of Daniel chapter 9 It marks the beginning of “ the Day of the Lord”.
What will it be like?
There are many questions that arise which have to do with the timing of the second coming of Christ. Early on in my Christian life I believed the Rapture and the Second Coming were one in the same. Where the confusion came had to do with the interpretation of isolated passages of scripture taken out of context. For instance if you were to read about the Rapture of the church as a post tribulationalists you would expect John 14:3 to be Jesus explaining where the Believers living at the time of His return would be taken: “I go to prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am there ye may be also.”
Would I have to wait until His second coming to earth to be taken to my home in Heaven? What about the verse in Matthew 24:40-42 about two in the field working, one taken, the other left behind, or the two women grinding at the mill, one taken and the other left. Does that speak of the rapture or the second coming?
In order to clear up the confusion that many of these verses taken out of context can result, it is important to do here as well as in any area of study to understand the times in which prophecy was given...to whom...and was the prophecy fulfilled in light of past predictions, or was it a yet future event?
In a few words the Rapture, Tribulation, Second Coming, and the millennial reign of Christ to the Disciples and the Apostles except for Paul was a mystery. But like any mystery...there must be an explanation. Maybe it isn’t possible for the human mind to comprehend all that God has planned and purposed for mankind...maybe some of us care more than others about such things as destiny...and the afterlife. Maybe it’s not fashionable to be puzzled about events that happen as the world turns, seemingly unconnected events yet timed somehow to fulfill the will of God.
What is the safety net God has made available to his Bride, the Church? Is it all wrapped up in a promise only to be deciphered by those who continue to look for His soon return with hope, and not for those who doubt? Does God treat doubt like sin? Or is the study of prophecy a particular exercise that is only meant for a few...who have the time?
I admit there are many questions seemingly unanswered. Also to complicate this, many who have knowledge of the future through a proper study of the rightly divided Word are often ridiculed for thinking they “know it all” when they are asked about areas in which they have expertise. I’m beginning to think that persons who are deceived don’t want to know the truth. That the truth to a deceived person is devastating unless there is a safety net for them to fall into until they get the correct picture in view. I believe Dispensationalism has been given a bad rap by the subjective crowd who continue on their merry way from one “feeling” to the next.
The Charismatic Renewal movement is shredding the truth in evangelical churches at this very moment. The false signs and wonders occurring during this age will intensify and be even more convincing when the Tribulation actually begins. We must concentrate on what the Word of God says about the times in which we are living.
The many questions being raised today have the same root cause as those of the early Church. Look at the problem as it occurred. The Thessalonians were anticipating the Lord’s soon return. They had a general knowledge about His coming, the end of the world, or worlds system, and the consummation of history. They hadn’t been conditioned by the prevailing thoughts of our time like evolution, re-incarnation, and the like. They knew that the world would not go on forever, that it had not always been here or that it would never end as so many actually believe today.
They knew of our Lord’s response to the question asked by the disciples one day, “Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the age?” (Matt. 24:4). With this question, the disciples revealed that they wisely did not believe in false doctrines about the perpetuity of all things and various views of the uniformity and eternity of nature, which were prevalent in their day and certainly pervasive in our day. You could say that they had honest doubt about the future, and I maintain that the Lord honored their concerns and in a manner of speaking He was thankful for their honesty.
How different it is today, it seems just the opposite: everyone has their own opinion and there are as many theories about creation and life and death overall as there are rivers in America. I maintain that it’s the dispensationalist that rightly divides the word of truth that has his or her feet firmly planted on the sure foundation of time past, time present, and time future, through a proper understanding of God’s plan of the ages.
What do you think?
Your questions are also encouraged. www.livingtruthministry.com
KMS
What will it be like?
There are many questions that arise which have to do with the timing of the second coming of Christ. Early on in my Christian life I believed the Rapture and the Second Coming were one in the same. Where the confusion came had to do with the interpretation of isolated passages of scripture taken out of context. For instance if you were to read about the Rapture of the church as a post tribulationalists you would expect John 14:3 to be Jesus explaining where the Believers living at the time of His return would be taken: “I go to prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am there ye may be also.”
Would I have to wait until His second coming to earth to be taken to my home in Heaven? What about the verse in Matthew 24:40-42 about two in the field working, one taken, the other left behind, or the two women grinding at the mill, one taken and the other left. Does that speak of the rapture or the second coming?
In order to clear up the confusion that many of these verses taken out of context can result, it is important to do here as well as in any area of study to understand the times in which prophecy was given...to whom...and was the prophecy fulfilled in light of past predictions, or was it a yet future event?
In a few words the Rapture, Tribulation, Second Coming, and the millennial reign of Christ to the Disciples and the Apostles except for Paul was a mystery. But like any mystery...there must be an explanation. Maybe it isn’t possible for the human mind to comprehend all that God has planned and purposed for mankind...maybe some of us care more than others about such things as destiny...and the afterlife. Maybe it’s not fashionable to be puzzled about events that happen as the world turns, seemingly unconnected events yet timed somehow to fulfill the will of God.
What is the safety net God has made available to his Bride, the Church? Is it all wrapped up in a promise only to be deciphered by those who continue to look for His soon return with hope, and not for those who doubt? Does God treat doubt like sin? Or is the study of prophecy a particular exercise that is only meant for a few...who have the time?
I admit there are many questions seemingly unanswered. Also to complicate this, many who have knowledge of the future through a proper study of the rightly divided Word are often ridiculed for thinking they “know it all” when they are asked about areas in which they have expertise. I’m beginning to think that persons who are deceived don’t want to know the truth. That the truth to a deceived person is devastating unless there is a safety net for them to fall into until they get the correct picture in view. I believe Dispensationalism has been given a bad rap by the subjective crowd who continue on their merry way from one “feeling” to the next.
The Charismatic Renewal movement is shredding the truth in evangelical churches at this very moment. The false signs and wonders occurring during this age will intensify and be even more convincing when the Tribulation actually begins. We must concentrate on what the Word of God says about the times in which we are living.
The many questions being raised today have the same root cause as those of the early Church. Look at the problem as it occurred. The Thessalonians were anticipating the Lord’s soon return. They had a general knowledge about His coming, the end of the world, or worlds system, and the consummation of history. They hadn’t been conditioned by the prevailing thoughts of our time like evolution, re-incarnation, and the like. They knew that the world would not go on forever, that it had not always been here or that it would never end as so many actually believe today.
They knew of our Lord’s response to the question asked by the disciples one day, “Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the age?” (Matt. 24:4). With this question, the disciples revealed that they wisely did not believe in false doctrines about the perpetuity of all things and various views of the uniformity and eternity of nature, which were prevalent in their day and certainly pervasive in our day. You could say that they had honest doubt about the future, and I maintain that the Lord honored their concerns and in a manner of speaking He was thankful for their honesty.
How different it is today, it seems just the opposite: everyone has their own opinion and there are as many theories about creation and life and death overall as there are rivers in America. I maintain that it’s the dispensationalist that rightly divides the word of truth that has his or her feet firmly planted on the sure foundation of time past, time present, and time future, through a proper understanding of God’s plan of the ages.
What do you think?
Your questions are also encouraged. www.livingtruthministry.com
KMS
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Need a Spiritual Revival?
Every person on earth begins their life with a sin problem (guilty, condemned, alienated from God). If a person wants to have their life cleaned up spiritually, he can see that accomplished according to God's Word. "How can a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed according to Your word" (Psalm 119:9). Anyone who will pay close attention to the message of the Scriptures will find therein God's provision of forgiveness and salvation. "Let Your mercies come also to me, O LORD — Your salvation according to Your word" (Psalm 119:41).
God's merciful salvation (from sin and unto godliness) is enjoyed by those who call upon Him wholeheartedly. "I entreated Your favor with my whole heart; Be merciful to me according to Your word" (Psalm 119:58).
Every person who has found new life through the Lord's merciful salvation eventually encounters times when a reviving is needed. The difficulties of life seem to choke all spiritual vitality out of us. It is time to call upon the Lord and turn to His word. "I am afflicted very much; Revive me, O LORD, according to Your word" (Psalm 119:107).
Every person who has found new life through the Lord's merciful salvation eventually encounters times when a reviving is needed. The difficulties of life seem to choke all spiritual vitality out of us. It is time to call upon the Lord and turn to His word. "I am afflicted very much; Revive me, O LORD, according to Your word" (Psalm 119:107).
Sometimes, the battle is so intense that our inner man seems to be smashed face down in the dirt. Again, it is time to seek the Lord in His word. "My soul clings to the dust; Revive me according to Your word" (Psalm 119:25). Yes, in God's word, we find direction for our lives and replenishing of our lives.
Dear Lord of the Scriptures, I praise You for giving me new life according to Your word. Now, in the afflictions and battles that I face, I ask You to revive me according to Your word.
"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and Worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and Godly lives in this present age, while we wait for The Blessed Hope--the glorious appearing of our great God
and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good." (Titus 2:11-14) www.livingtruthministry.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
