Baptismally Speaking

/3 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Just this morning, I opened up my Bible to continue with my through the Bible in a year reading. I just happened to open to the last page of my Bible and there is was. When I saw it, I felt a smile creep onto my face and joy filled my heart. There on the last page of my Bible was a picture that prompted my reaction. It is the picture of my baptism! My parents had baptized me as a child into the Catholic Church (and subsequently admitted to communion and confirmation). But as early as I could remember, I rejected it. I had spent virtually my entire life away from God. But as I gazed at that baptismal picture, I found myself transported back to that moment. The photo is from right before I was baptized at 21 years of age. I am standing thigh deep in the Ashland Creek. The pastor is standing behind me with his head obscured. My eyes are shut and there is a peaceful and slight smile on my face. I remember thinking at that moment, “Goodbye old life. Hello resurrected life!” What a glorious thought!

This photo has me thinking about baptism. Baptism is one of the two ordinances that Jesus gave to his people, the other being the Lord’s Supper. Just like Lord’s Supper, baptism is symbolic of the finished work of Jesus. Listen to Paul in Romans 6. “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were eburied with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:1-4). In the act of baptism, as we initially go down into the water, it is as if we are united with Christ going into the tomb. There is the death of the old man and the old life. As we come out of the water, it is as if we are being united with Jesus in His resurrection. We all know and realize that this is truly done, not by baptism, but by the Spirit who revives our dead hearts through regeneration. This is how we know that baptism is not necessary for salvation. Instead it is an issue of obedience. Jesus Himself was baptized. But baptism is a way that we celebrate what God has done in our lives. It is a glorious declaration and an amazing living epistle that we are Jesus’ and that He is ours.

As I think back to that day when I was baptized, when I came up from the baptismal waters, drenched from head to toe with water (in my mind overflowing with the Spirit), I knew that my life was God’s. I had known it before. My life was already His. But the very act of baptism somehow, at least in my heart, put an exclamation point on it. As I made it to the banks of the river, people hugged me and prayed for me. From that day, my life in Christ has taken many twists and turns. There has been up days and down days. I have been victorious and suffered heartache. But in it all, I can truly say, God has been in it. That humbles me. “Goodbye old life. Hello resurrected life!”

Soteriology in the Middle (Part III)

/9 Comments/in , , , , , , , , /by

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” John 3:16

 

In this post, my third and final post on soteriology, I wanted to think about the atonement.  Along with the resurgence of Calvinism and the dawning of what some call Neo-Calvinism in recent years, there has been an accompanying resurgence of a debate that has been going on amongst Christians for hundreds of years- the extent of the atonement.

Wayne Grudem defines the atonement this way:

“The atonement is the work Christ did in his life and death to earn our salvation.  This definition indicates that we are using the word atonement in a broader sense than it is sometimes used.  Sometimes it is used to refer only to Jesus’ dying and paying for our sins on the cross.  But…since saving benefits come to us from Christ’s life, we have included that in our definition as well.”[1]

Norman Geisler defines the atonement as “the substitutionary death of Jesus on behalf of our sins, whereby the just died for the unjust in order that God’s justice may be satisfied and His mercy justify the unjust.”[2]

 The idea of the atonement as articulated by the above theologians reflects the biblical teaching of the doctrine of atonement well.  The Bible tells us that God created human beings to know Him and to be known by Him in a relationship of peace, unity, and love.[3]  But our first human parents disobeyed the commands of God which were given to protect mankind and preserve the relationship with God they’d been graciously given.[4]  As a result all human beings are sinners from their core.  All humans break the law and heart of God in their actions, desires, and imagination on a daily basis.  This is the case because having a sin nature we are bound by natural inclination toward sin.  This is the result of inheriting a corrupt nature from Adam and Eve, sort of like human children that contract deadly diseases from parents who have engaged in sinful activities which have compromised their own health.[5]

Because of mankind’s sinful nature and sinful actions all humans deserve to experience the judgment of God.[6]  When someone breaks the law in human society it is common knowledge to us all that the guilty deserve to experience the consequences of breaking the law.  The Bible tells us that breaking God’s holy law carries with it the death penalty.[7]  This includes the experience of physical death upon which our soul separates from our bodies,[8] spiritual death in which our souls are separated from relational peace with God,[9] and the second death which is the experience of eternal conscious torment of body and soul in hell.[10]

 The good news for humanity in spite of our sinful condition and guilt before God is that the atonement is real, and its benefits are available to us through faith in Jesus.  Jesus lived a perfect life for us where we could not.  Though sinless,[11] He died in our place for our sins[12] on the cross experiencing and satisfying the penalty we deserved to undergo as spiritual criminals who have broken God’s holy law.[13]  In doing so He soaked up the wrath of God due us like a sponge absorbs water.[14]  He rose again from the dead conquering Satan, sin, demons, death, and hell on our behalf.[15]  Those who recognize their need for His penal substitutionary death accomplished in their place, and trust that it was sufficient to provide for their forgiveness and acceptance by God apart from any ritualistic, religious, or moral works performed by them are indeed forgiven, and experience the gift of new birth (regeneration).[16]

 

THE DEBATE

All Christians agree that the benefits experienced by those who have the atonement of Christ applied to them through trusting in Jesus are truly blessed with undeserved amazing grace.  They agree that only those who believe in the biblical gospel get to experience the merits of Christ’s atonement. The debate amongst Christians is in regard to the extent of Christ’s atonement.  Who does Jesus actually intend and desire to experience the merits of His atonement made on the cross?  When He voluntarily died on the cross did He intend to provide atonement for all individual sinners, or only the elect?

Some would affirm the doctrine of Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption which declares that Jesus died in a saving (atoning) way for the elect only.  Others would say that Jesus’ atonement is intended for and sufficient to save all individual sinners, but it is only efficient for those who respond to the gospel in faith.  This is what we would call the Universal Atonement view.  This latter view is not to be confused with Universalism which is a heretical view that has seen a recent rise in popularity in America due to the teaching of certain influential pastors.  Universalism basically teaches that since Jesus died for all people, all people will ultimately be saved and make it into heaven.  All biblical and gospel believing Christians reject such a view as heretical and demeaning to Jesus and the justice of God.  This being the case, Universalism will not be discussed in the rest of this post in detail.

 

Calvinism on the Atonement

On the Limited Atonement side of this debate are theologians such as John Owen.  He expressed the common reasoning behind Calvinist thinking on the atonement this way:

“The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either: (1) All the sins of all men, (2) all the sins of some men, or (3) some of the sins of all men. In which case it may be said: That if the last be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so, none are saved.  That if the second be true, then Christ, in their stead suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the whole world, and this is the truth.  But if the first be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins?  You answer, “Because of unbelief.”  I ask, Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!”[17]

 Similarly, John Piper articulates his belief in Limited Atonement this way:

“Christ died for all the sins of some men.  That is, he died for the unbelief of the elect so that God’s punitive wrath is appeased toward them and His grace is free to draw them irresistibly out of darkness into His marvelous light.”[18]

 

Neo-Calvinism on the Atonement

 Though by his own admission he doesn’t appreciate the title, Mark Driscoll is held up by many as the poster-child for what is being called New Calvinism or Neo-Calvinism, and his view on the atonement which he terms Unlimited-Limited Atonement is increasingly becoming a predominant view of the atonement held by young Reformed Christians.  In explaining Unlimited-Limited Atonement Driscoll writes:

“At first glance, Unlimited and Limited Atonement are in opposition. But, that dilemma is resolved by noting two things. First, the two categories are not mutually exclusive; since Jesus died for the sins of everyone that means that He also died for the sins of the elect. Second, Jesus’ death for all people does not accomplish the same thing as His death for the elect. This point is complicated, but is in fact taught in Scripture (1 Tim. 4:10; 2 Peter 2:1).

Simply, by dying for everyone, Jesus purchased everyone as His possession and He then applies His forgiveness to the elect by grace and applies His wrath to the non-elect. Objectively, Jesus’ death was sufficient to save anyone, and, subjectively, only efficient to save those who repent of their sin and trust in Him. This position is called Unlimited Limited Atonement or Modified Calvinism.

Therefore, Modified Calvinists like the Mars Hill elders do not believe anything different than Arminians; we simply believe what they believe and more. Lastly, perhaps the Old Testament sacrificial system provides the best illustration of this both/and position. The High Priest would offer a sacrifice for the sins of the whole nation on the Day of Atonement; this is, in effect, unlimited atonement. Then, each worshipper would repent of their own sins as demonstrated by the giving of their own sacrifices for their sins; this is, in effect, limited atonement.”[19]

 

The Bible on the Atonement

Personally, I think the Unlimited-Limited Atonement position has far more to commend it biblically than the traditional view of Limited Atonement.  My differences with Driscoll’s view aren’t in regard to the extent of the atonement but are over the means of the application of the atonement.  While Driscoll affirms a version of Universal Atonement he also affirms the classic Reformed understanding of Irresistible Grace which, in my opinion, wrongly teaches that regeneration precedes faith (see Part II of this series of posts on www.crossconnection.net for discussion of this).  I would part ways with him on that point.  But in regard to the biblical witness on the extent of the atonement I believe Driscoll is right on, and that his Calvinist comrades have real challenges in squaring the intricate details of their Limited Atonement view with some clear statements of scripture on the issue.

 

Compelling Verses

As a formerly committed Five Point Calvinist let me give you some of the verses I found compelling (or troubling) as I began to shift to a universal understanding of the intent of the atonement.

1 John 2:2- “My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.  And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.”

 John is addressing believers in these verses.  This is clear from the phrase “my little children” as well as the context of the entire book of First John.  Here he clearly says that Jesus’ death was not just for those who were believers already, but for those of “the whole world” also.  The common explanation of John’s meaning offered by those who believe in Limited Atonement is that he didn’t mean every individual person when he used the term “world.”  Instead they say he meant the believers to whom he was writing and all the other believers in Christ living in different parts of the world.  One of the glaring problems with this interpretation is that in the context of his book John tells us that the “world” does not represent God’s people, but in fact represents the realm, influences, and practitioners of evil throughout the globe.  Later in this same chapter John tells exactly what the “world” is to him:

“Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  For all that [is] in the world–the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life–is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever. Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.”[20]

 According to John the “world” for whom Christ died is the entire world of evil influence, antichrists (non Christians), and the sinful impulses common to every member of the human race.  It is strange that some would try to designate the concept of the “world” in verse two as other believers living in places different from the audience to whom John was writing when John describes the world in such depraved, sinful, and unregenerate terms.

 

2 Peter 2:1- “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, [and] bring on themselves swift destruction.”  

 Here the apostle Peter is beginning a long section of Scripture detailing the marks, work, and fate of false teachers.  He will go on to explain that because they’ve led many astray from the truth of God that they will ultimately “utterly perish in their own corruption.”[21]  The thing we need to notice here is that these false teachers who are destined to utterly perish according to Peter were apparently “denying the Lord who bought them” by teaching a false gospel and denying Christ.  When Peter uses the term bought he is employing the language of redemption in reference to false teachers he believed would ultimately experience the eternal judgment of God!

If everyone for whom Christ died will ultimately be saved, how is it that these false teachers will utterly perish even though they were purchased by Christ?  Clearly this is a challenge for advocates of Limited Atonement which is sometimes called Effectual Atonement because this system conveys the idea that all for whom Christ died will effectually be drawn to Him for salvation.  Apparently that was not the case for these false teachers who were bought by Christ.

In response some Calvinists say that the false teachers weren’t really bought by Christ on the cross.  Instead, in an effort to find a way to cling to their doctrinal system in the face of such clear teaching, they insist that what Peter meant is that they were identified with those bought by Christ merely because they associated themselves with God’s people.  The problem with that idea is that it is not what the verse says.  Scripture says the Lord “bought them.”  It doesn’t say they were merely associated with those who were actually bought.

 

John 3:16- “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

This is a favorite verse of advocates of Universal Atonement.  To them it affirms undeniably that Jesus was given to the death of the cross for the sins of all individuals in the world.  It affirms that Jesus’ death was atoning and intended for the entire human race, but that only those who believe out of the human race actually receive the benefits of the atonement applied to them for salvation.  In response, adherents of Limited Atonement say that what John meant was that God gave His Son for the elect scattered throughout the entire world, and not every individual sinner in the world.   

J.C Ryle ably refutes the interpretation of this verse offered by advocates of Limited Atonement in his commentary on John.  Since Ryle makes the case for the universal meaning of John 3:16 so clearly, allow me to quote him extensively on this point.

“Some think…that the word ‘world’ here means God’s elect out of every nation, whether Jews or Gentiles, and that the ‘love’ which God is said to love them is that eternal love with which the elect were loved before creation began, and by which their calling, justification, preservation and final salvation are completely secured.  –This view, though supported by many great divines, does not appear to me to be our Lord’s meaning.  For one thing, it seems to me a violent straining of language to confine the word ‘world’ to the elect. ‘The world’ is undoubtedly a name sometimes given to the ‘wicked’ exclusively.  But I cannot see that it is a name ever given to the saints.—For another thing, to interpret the word ‘world’ of the elect only is to ignore the distinction which, to my eyes, is plainly drawn in the text between the whole of mankind and those out of mankind who ‘believe.’  If the ‘world’ means only the believing portion of mankind, it would have been quite enough to say, ‘God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that the world should not perish.’  But our Lord does not say so.  He says, ‘that whosoever believeth, i.e., that whosoever out of the world believeth.’ –Lastly, to confine God’s love to the elect, is taking a harsh and narrow view of God’s character, and fairly lays Christianity open to the modern charges brought against it as cruel and unjust to the ungodly.  If God takes no thought for any but His elect, and cares for none besides, how shall God judge the world?”[22]

 

1 Timothy 4:10- “…the living God…is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe.”

Paul teaches the same thing here that John does in John 3:16.  Though God is especially the Savior of believers (the elect) because the merits of the atonement are actually applied to them through faith, He is also the Savior of all individuals because His atonement was sufficient for their salvation as well.  The difference between those Jesus is “especially” the Savior of and those He’s not especially the Savior of isn’t about who His atonement was intended for; it’s about who believes the gospel so that the atonement may be applied to them.

 

What About Verses that Teach Jesus’ Death was Specifically for Christians?

Some claim there is biblical support for Limited Atonement in verses that specifically describe Jesus’ atonement as being accomplished for His people without reference to unbelievers.  An example of such a verse would be Acts 20:28: “…shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.”

Advocates of Limited Atonement point out that this verse says Jesus (God) purchased “the church” with His own blood, and not all individuals.  While it is true that it says Jesus purchased His church with His blood, it is also true that it doesn’t say that Jesus didn’t purchase those who don’t come to faith in Him.  In light of the universal language of other clear passages of Scripture it would be perfectly reasonable to affirm that Paul has in mind those who actually benefit from Christ’s redeeming work on the cross through faith, while not denying that He also died for those who don’t come to faith as well (such as the false teachers in 2 Peter 2:1).  It is an inference to say that since Paul affirms that Jesus died for His church that he is also saying Jesus didn’t die for anyone else.  We use language like this every day in communicating with one another.  For instance, when I say “I love my wife and work to provide a livelihood for her.” it doesn’t follow that I don’t love my daughter and also provide a livelihood for her through my work.

 

Answering the Big Question

When you get into a discussion on the extent of the atonement the proponents of Limited Atonement almost always fall back on the same question.  This question was popularized by Calvinist theologian John Owen and was noted earlier in this post.  To quote Owen again, he asked, “…why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins?  You answer, ‘Because of unbelief.’  I ask, Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!”[23]

While at first glance this question might seem to pin the believer in Universal Atonement with a logical problem from which they cannot escape without becoming particular redemptionists, this is not the case.  Two things need to be pointed out in response to Owens’ famous logic problem.  First of all, whether or not the teaching of Scripture is easily graspable within the confines of what we consider human logic isn’t the issue.  The question of the truth of a doctrine isn’t resolved by whether or not it is logical to us, but whether or not it is actually taught in Scripture whether it makes sense to us or not.  The truth is that the Bible affirms that there are infinite spiritual realities that are true, and to which we are subject that we cannot understand in our finiteness.[24] For example, consider the reality of the Trinity.  The Bible affirms that the Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God, there’s only One God, and that the Father, Son, and Spirit are not each other.  Is that beyond human logic?  Absolutely!  Is it true and affirmed by all biblical Christians?  Yes!  Why should we not approach understanding and explaining the biblical data on the extent of the atonement with the same humility and trust in the Scriptures?

Secondly, the question is based on a faulty view of the application of redemption.  It muddies the water and places the provision and the application of redemption as occurring simultaneously at the cross.  If this is true, the elect were forgiven for their sins at the moment the atonement was made for them when Jesus died on the cross. On the contrary, the Bible seems to teach that though the provision was secured for our forgiveness through the atonement at the moment it was accomplished on the cross, the application of the provision isn’t granted until we believe the gospel during the course of our lives.[25]

As far as the sin of unbelief itself is concerned, to be sure, it is a sin for which we stand deserving of judgment like every other sin.  But “faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.”[26] And when faith is enabled through the power of God’s Word and a sinner repents of the sin of unbelief, the merits of the atonement are applied to them and they are forgiven for their prior unbelief as well as every other sin they’d committed to that point, or will commit in the future.  The promoters of Limited Atonement are the ones who want to make unbelief a special category of sin.  If we distinguish rightly between the time that the provision of atonement is made for all sins (the cross) and the time that the application of the provision is granted (faith and conversion) we come out biblical and without conflict and confusion.  But whether it feels logical to us or not the Bible is clear that those who experience God’s judgment do not do so because atonement was not made for them, but because they refuse to believe that it has.

“Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? Hebrews 10:29

[1] Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Page 568.

[2] Geisler, Norman. Systematic Theology: Vol. III Sin & Salvation. Page 254.

[3] Colossians 1:16

[4] Genesis 3

[5] Genesis 6:5; Romans 5:11-14

[6] Romans 3:19-20

[7] Romans 6:23

[8] Genesis 2:17

[9] Romans 5:1; 1 Corinthians 6:17

[10] Revelation 21:8

[11] Hebrews 4:15

[12] 1 Corinthians 15:3

[13] 1 Peter 3:18

[14] Romans 5:1; 9

[15] 1 Corinthians 15:4; John 16:7-11

[16] Ephesians 1:13; 1 Corinthians 15:1-2; Galatians 2:16; 3:13-14

[17] Owen, John. The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.

[18] Piper, John. What we Believe about the Five Points of Calvinism.

[19] Driscoll, Mark. http://cdn.marshill.com/files/2005/11/20/20051120_unlimited-limited-atonement_document_9143.pdf

[20] 1 John 2:15-18 NKJV (Emphasis added)

[21] 2 Peter 2:12c NKJV

[22] Ryle, J.C. Expository Thoughts on the Gospels. Vol. III. Page 154.

[23] Ibid

[24] Deuteronomy 29:29; Romans 11:33-36

[25] Ephesians 1:13; 2:8-9

[26] Romans 1-:17b NKJV

Word and Image

/11 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

I was speaking with a couple of friends and one mentioned a book he was reading that spoke of the Image centered church of the Middle Ages and the Word centered church emerging from the Reformation.  The church of the Middle Ages employed Image by reason of societal illiteracy and its own theological presuppositions and institutional needs.  The church of the Reformation changed its theological presuppositions and institutional philosophy and Image gave way to Word.  The prevailing of the Word over Image has done much to shape the western world, but today, a media saturated culture is promoting Image over Word.

In the course of this conversation I said that it will be interesting to see what wins out – Word or Image.  But I think that verdict is in – Image is eclipsing Word.  This same friend told me of a theological discussion he was having with his nephew.  My friend recommended a book to his nephew and his nephew wanted nothing to do with any printed media.  He wanted his uncle to direct him to Youtube or maybe something on Facebook.  He didn’t know how to relate to Word, Image dominated his learning processes.

Image is eclipsing Word.

Please note, this young man wasn’t disposed against truth, but inclined toward truth conveyed by Image.  This calls for a few comments and questions – and please add your own.

  • The church in utilizing Image, should not change its theological presuppositions and minimize Word.
  • To what extent should church employ Image in service of Truth?
  • Is the media redefining the essence of the church or just the methodology of the church?
  • When does Image become image – aesthetics devoid of content?  When does Image become image – Image for appearance’s sake?
  • Image is not to supplant Word, both should be employed in service of Truth.
  • Is Image the same as Word in a different form?  Do Image and Word convey the same content?
  • The church’s greatest mistake will be to understand that the emphasis on Image is to be translated mainly into media.
  • The church’s greatest opportunity in this milieu is not creating cool graphics and relevant film.  The church’s greatest opportunity and challenge is creating true Image – the Image of Christ.  We are being conformed to Image of Christ – Image is crucial!  As the saints are transformed into Image, Image joined with Word and alongside Word can be a formidable apologetic.
  • Community should be Image.

General & Specific Revelation

/3 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

I posted this blog before we actually launched this blog so I thought it would be worth a repost.

The arguments never seem to end.

There are those who argue that evangelism must come only through words. “The Gospel must be preached!” They yell.

Then there are those who argue that evangelism must come first through actions. “Preach the Gospel always and when necessary use words.” They parrot (supposedly attributed to Francis of Assisi).

Both sides are very adamant that they are right and yell at the other camp. Well more honestly, one side yells and the other side shakes their heads condescendingly but in the name of love will not address it publicly. 🙂
So Christians are again finding themselves fighting against other Christians instead of outshining the lost in the cause of Jesus.

Read more

For My Bi-vocational Homies

/7 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

“You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.” 2 Timothy 2:3

“For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain.” Philippians 1:21

 

The Clueless Pastor

I’ll never forget attending a conference in Washington two months into being a lead pastor.  It was the annual conference that Pastor Wayne Taylor and Calvary Fellowship put on, this time at Warm Beach in Washington state.  When me and my wife received the invitation for the conference I looked at Jen and said, “I need to get trained.  We’re going to this conference!”

Because one of the conference speakers had to cancel last minute there were a few hours that needed to be filled during the conference schedule.  Much to my dismay as an introvert, pastor Wayne decided that during the open times we would pass around a microphone and give each pastor the chance to stand up in front of the five or six-hundred people in attendance and request prayer for something specific in their lives or ministry.

I was really sweating it as the microphone was making its way to me.  I didn’t even feel qualified to be standing with the other pastors having only been “official” for a couple months.  Honestly, I even thought about trying to sit down and hope the mic would pass me without anyone noticing.  But rather than lie, I decided to stand and just be open when my turn to speak came.  So when I got the mic I simply said, “Hi. My name’s Kellen and I’m from Salmon, Idaho.  I’m twenty-five years old.  I’ve been a pastor for two months and I have absolutely no idea what I’m doing.”  To my surprise the whole place broke out in spontaneous applause and laughter!  After the laughter died down I added (while shaking mind you), “Please just pray for continued confidence in the Lord’s enablement.”  And that’s what pastor Wayne prayed for me along with the other people.

“Confidence in the Lord’s enablement.”  I now believe that prayer request was Spirit-born.  I thought I was just being nervous.  But looking back now I can see that is exactly what I should’ve been praying for then, and what I need to be continually relying upon and praying for now seven years into vocational ministry.

Real Ministry = Pressure

Ministry is intense.  To be sure some seasons are more like a pressure-cooker than others, but ministry always brings with it heat and trials.  One of the most challenging times of my life was when I was pastoring a Calvary Chapel in rural Idaho.  During one particular season I was taking 20 credit hours from Calvary Chapel Bible College by correspondence, preaching Sunday mornings in Acts, leading the midweek study on Wednesday evenings in Genesis, teaching the new believer study on Tuesday nights, leading the leadership training class on Saturday mornings, doing all the administrative and counseling work for the church during the week, planning/leading worship and running the team rehearsal on Wednesday afternoons, learning how to be a pastor and a new dad at the same time, and working to stay fruitful and invested as a husband.  Looking back at that time I know I should be dead.  The only explanation for why my wife and I are still in the game is the supernatural enabling grace of the Holy Spirit!

Turning up the Heat

If that season of ministry was tough, church-planting was brutal.  Working forty hours a week, commuting nearly an hour one way to start shifts which were at times as early as 4:30 am (harsh for a non  morning-person), leading a men’s study on Tuesdays, a house church gathering on Wednesdays, preaching on Sundays, continuing to learn how to be a dad and stay invested as a husband, hear from God about location, vision, new leaders, and overall church-plant strategy were some of the many things I had to chip away at during our first year planting Refuge Church.  I praise God for the original planting team of five other adults and our three kids that were there helping through this process in so many ways.  With their help planting was brutal. Without their help I dare say it would’ve been impossible.

This month marks one year that I’ve been supported full-time by Refuge Church.  I’m so thankful to be in this spot.  I certainly don’t feel like I have any more time than I did when I was bi-vocational.  But I can at least spread my time with greater flexibility so as to get things done.  As I write this today I’m incredibly thankful for the unexpected but fast growth of our church.  I’m thankful that we are planning our seventieth baptism since launching two years ago which will take place in March.  I’m thankful for so many blessings of God that we’ve seen.  But one of the things I’m most thankful for are the co-laborers God has raised up to assist me.  God has given me seven other good men that are carrying the load of oversight.  One of them has already been ordained as a pastor at Refuge Church.  The six others are in our elder/pastor assessment and training process sharing the load with us.

As we wrap this post up I want to give encouragement to these men and others who are in shoes similar to theirs, and similar to those I’ve been in.  I want to encourage the bi-vocational guys with a few things that the Spirit has spoken to me at different times to keep me going when the pressures of jobs, school, family, and ministry have seemed too much in different seasons.  When the flames of trial are licking our face, we remember…

 

1. God is Sovereign 

When you’re bi-vocational your tendency is to stress over the fact that you can’t get done what you want to get done because you don’t have enough time in the day.  The enemy uses this dynamic to get us focused on “going full-time” so we can have more time.  Satan uses this to get us frustrated and discontent.  God’s sovereignty is the antidote to this unhealthy place of heart.  Do what you do have time for to the best of your ability and entrust the rest to Jesus, the real pastor of the church.  It is His harvest and work.  He can give you more time, a different job, or turn the hearts of those you feel may be holding you back.  If He isn’t doing those things than your job is to do what you can do faithfully and then rest in God’s sovereignty.

I recently heard a pastor say that though many preachers deliver beautiful and powerful messages on the sovereignty of God with their mouths, they preach a message of open-theism with their lives.  They say God is sovereign but their stress and micro-management preach that they are sovereign.  They say God is sovereign but their anger toward those not giving them their God-promised opportunity preach that those over them are sovereign.  So, our wives and families hear us preach God’s sovereignty in the Bible study, but at home they know dad believes everything really depends on him.  Rest in God’s sovereignty men.

 2. God is Sanctifying You Today 

This one can hurt.  Instead of asking “When will this end?” every five seconds when our circumstances are hard we need to spend more time asking “What is this for?”  God is more concerned about what He is doing in you through the instruments of life’s trials than He is concerned about what’s getting done through you.  There is no such thing as wasted suffering and pain for God’s people.  As hard as things can seem at times, if God is letting us go through trials it is because He intends to do something in us through them that will be more beneficial to us than it would have been had He let us skip the trial altogether.

3. God is Preparing you for Tomorrow 

The lessons we learn through ministry pressure and suffering are not just about us, but they’re about those we will lead in the future.  If you know what it’s like to struggle to make ends meet as a poor and over-worked bi-vocational pastor, you will be a great comfort to those you counsel later in ministry who are struggling to make ends meet.  If you learn how to trust God through working a job you don’t enjoy with difficult co-workers, you will be a better counselor to others in similar situations.  When we suffer God is making us useable for future ministry opportunities.  As Dustin Kensrue wrote, “As long as we live every scar is a bridge to someone’s broken heart.”

4. God has given you a mission field

God could have you in any job.  He could have opened any opportunity He wanted for you.  But He gave you the job you have.  You are sent to your workplace every day as a missionary.  Until and unless God’s purpose for you being in the mission field of your job is complete, you will stay there.  How you stay there is up to you.  Will you be there grudgingly and complaining?  Or will you go to work every day with a sense of discovery praying toward fulfilling the purpose and touching the people Jesus has sent you to fulfill and bless?

5. Jesus is your Sabbath

The truth is that if you’re not satisfied in Jesus as a bi-vocational pastor then you won’t be satisfied in full-time ministry either.  I’ve chased the carrot of ministry opportunities only to discover that nothing I attain, and no opportunity of service I receive ever satisfies my heart if that’s what I’m expecting it to do.  I’ve had the chance to be involved with many types of ministry that most guys my age wait for years to enjoy.  But you know what my heart says every time I get to fulfill a ministry dream? “Well, it’s still not Jesus.”  Jesus is our Sabbath and our soul rest.  We tell people no job, experience, or relationship will satisfy them and that the hole in their heart must be filled with Jesus to be healed, and then we treat ministry as our idol expecting it to do what only Jesus can.  Let’s practice what we preach and be satisfied in Jesus alone.

Final Encouragement

To all my bi-vocational homies out there- Hang in there!  We love you, and so does your God!  God is stretching your capacity.  He is making you an instrument of grace for future use.  He is doing heart surgery in you so you can be spiritually healthy.  He is sovereign and also your sabbath rest.  Our goal isn’t to “go full-time.”  Our goal is to fulfill whatever role Jesus has for us to play in spreading His kingdom, die faithful, and enter into the joy of our Master with the title of “faithful servants.”  My prayer for you today is the prayer I requested for myself at that conference.  I’m praying for you that today and for the rest of your days you will enjoy continued confidence in the Lord’s enablement to fulfill your ministry, faithful to the end.

 


God’s Means of Grace for Ministry and Life

/3 Comments/in , , , , /by

Been thinking about last week’s post by Jeff Jackson (“The Pulpit AND the People Skills of the Pastor— http://www.crossconnection.net/2012/02/magnets-the-pulpit-people-skills-pastor).

For me, it’s a crucial topic. I have struggled with the people part of ministry, I do still struggle with it, and I will continue to struggle with it. It’s going to be with me … this struggle … until I fall asleep or the rapture comes. I’m resigned to that fact.

Because I don’t want to be one of those guys who lament, “Lord, the ministry would be wonderful, were it not for the people,” and because I do want to be one of those guys who act as Jesus’ assistant pastor … and therefore treat them as He does—I will work through these struggles.

I will utilize the means of grace the Lord has given us. I will rely upon:

1. My identity in Christ. No matter how well I do or how badly I do, I am not defined by people’s estimation of me. I’m defined by God’s view of me through His Son, which is the only wholly accurate measurement of my life. He loves me even though I may struggle with myself.

2. My calling to ministry. Paul told timid Timothy to wage the good warfare according to the prophecies that pointed to him (1 Timothy 1:18). I will remember that it was not my idea that I go into the ministry. Rather, it was a calling upon my life. I have very specific and supernatural events that I remember as part of that calling. I chew on these again and again, and am greatly encouraged.

3. The fact that I am fearfully and wonderfully made. It was David who wrote Psalm 139. Even though he was a man of great strength, he also had his weaknesses. I am probably more introvert than extrovert, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing, God made me that way. I can be comfortable in my own skin.

4. His strength being perfected in my weakness. Weaknesses are opportunities for grace. My confession of relational weakness results in sufficient grace being poured into my life. This grace enables me to overcome insufficiencies, to the glory of God (2 Corinthians 12:9). 

5. God’s anointing upon my life. When Jesus told the man with the withered hand to stretch out that hand, He was telling him to do something that he may have never done. Yet, Jesus’ command was His promise of Divine enablement, when obeyed by faith. As this man obeyed Jesus and relied upon His word/commandment, Jesus gave him the ability to do something he was incapable of doing in the natural. Jesus commands me to be a pulpit pastor and a people pastor. He will enable me.

Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, {6} who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant… (2 Corinthians 3:5-6)

6. His school of relationships. I have always thought that if I can do it at home, I can do it anywhere. The home is a classroom for all of life. The things I am learning in my marriage are totally transferable. If I trust the Lord to help me apply 1 Peter 3:7, I can trust Him to extend the application to the body of Christ.

7. The word of God, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and the power of prayer. These are the staples of our walks with Christ. The word teaches us, reproves us, corrects us, trains us in righteous living, matures us, and equips us for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17). The Holy Spirit empowers us for service and provides overcoming grace against the power of the flesh (Galatians 5:16). Prayer is the way we access the Bible’s  truth and the Spirit’s strength.

I’m stopping after number seven. It’s the number of completion, so I must be done.  Cool

Why I Don’t Fight the Translation Wars

/5 Comments/in , , , , /by

I called Calvary Costa Mesa in 1985 and told them that I would like to affiliate the church I pastored with Calvary Chapel.  They said, “Great, we’ll put you on the list.”  I’ve been a Calvary pastor ever since.  I know, times have changed.

I had used the New American Standard Bible since January of 1972.

By the way, NASB means ‘Now and Always, Slightly Better.’  Wink

It was required for exegesis, memory work, and homiletics at the Bible College I attended. I had grown quite familiar with its rhythms and patterns and accustomed to its cadence and pace.  But I thought, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.”  I knew that CC used the KJV.  I knew that I would not use the KJV, but I seriously thought about switching to the New King James Version.  But before I did…

I have discovered that the question to ask isn’t: “What is the best translation?”  That question can start fistfights in the lobby after service!  I didn’t ask myself whether the NKJV was a better translation than the NASB – or vice-versa.  I asked the question: “Which is the best Greek text underlying the various translations?”  The KJV is based upon the Greek manuscripts comprising the Textus Receptus, while the NASB is based upon the eclectic text – a compilation of Greek texts discovered subsequent to the translation of the KJV from the Textus Receptus.  After some study I came to the conclusion that the Textus Receptus is not superior to the eclectic text nor is the eclectic text superior to the Textus Receptus.  And somewhere in the middle of this I decided to retain my use of the NASB.

While reading the literature of the translation wars that accuse the NASB of downplaying the deity of Christ or the KJV of butchering the Greek at this place or scolding the NIV for obscuring the text at that other place, I wearied of it all.  It seemed to me that the accusations were overall petty and I could not, with intellectual integrity, follow to the conclusion of a completely flawed translation.  There are places in all of them that could stand some revision, but to throw them out wholesale as the devil’s work seemed foolish and agenda driven.  (“Well, what about ‘The Message’?”  That’s a paraphrase and not a translation and so it is outside the scope of this article.)

I think I am post-modern when it comes to translations – preference wins out.  I don’t think that one is better than the other.  That’s why I don’t fight the translation wars.  If, after hearing me preach from the Slightly Better version, someone comes and tells me that they use the NIV, NKJV, HCSB, EB, BEE, ESV, etc., I say, “Praise the Lord.”  If they tell me that they will continue to use their “New World Translation”, we’ll have a fistfight in the lobby!

Ministry Idolatry

/5 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Our hearts are idol factories. We all know this to be true. Ever since the fall of Adam and Eve, humanity has been doing its best to value itself outside of God and for its own purposes. Martin Luther was correct in his assessment that if a person gets the first commandment right (having no other gods before Him) then they would not ever transgress the rest of the commandments. All of our sins are rooted in our heart’s predisposition towards idolatry.

This can become increasingly a problem for people who have been called into ministry. Because the human heart is always looking for a way to justify itself outside of Jesus, it is very easy for us to try and find our standing before God in our service. Let me say from the outset, there is a fine line between walking out our callings and having ministry idolatry. Only God knows the intricacies of the human heart. So please do not think that I think that I know the motivations of another’s heart. I do not and realize (more and more each day) that before his own master a servant stands or falls. There are too many people writing in the comments sections of internet sites that think that they can speak about the motivations of another’s heart. I do not wish to add myself to that cacophonous chorus. But I do want to address a very present struggle that is at work within the heart’s of every minister.

For many of us, we struggle with finding our full identity in Christ alone. There is something glorious about being used by God to bless the world in the name of Jesus. But it is very easy to find our identity in our ministry rather than in Jesus alone. I believe that this is why so many cannot imagine their spiritual lives outside of the work that they do for Jesus. I often ask myself, “How would I do if God asked me to leave the pastoral ministry? Would I be bored? Would I like going to church? Would I feel a void?” By asking these questions, I have found that my heart finds its value in a million things other than Jesus. Looking back over my past as a Christian, I have found my heart exalting “being a Christian”, “being on the worship team”, “being an elder”, being an assistant pastor”, “being a church planter”, “being a part of a specific movement”, “being a conference speaker”, “being an author”, and on and on ad nauseum. Do you see how this goes?

Ministry idolatry is a way to allow our service of God to keep us from actually relating with God. We can be incredibly busy and effective but yet really not relate with God at all. We allow our service for Him to define us rather than allow Him to define us for us. Anything that we value ourselves by or whatever our allegiance is outside of the person and work of Jesus, that is idolatry. So let us ask the Spirit of God to expose our heart idolatry!

Soteriology in the Middle (Part II)

/7 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , /by

“…He saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”[1]

 

In my last post I said that in following posts we’d be taking a look at what I’d call a “moderate” and more biblical perspective on Soteriology in contrast to the classic Calvinistic and Arminian systems of Soteriology.  Specifically in this post we will be talking about regeneration- the new birth.  The Bible is very clear that the person who is truly a child of God,[2] accepted and forgiven for their sins in light of the atonement of the cross of Christ being applied to them through faith is born-again.  The Holy Spirit has come to indwell them[3] and sealed them for the day of redemption.[4] He has made them a new person spiritually speaking.[5]

But how does the new birth come about in a person’s life?  That is really the question that is before us.  Do people have enough good left in them in their fallen state to simply make a decision to trust in Christ when presented with the gospel message apart from any divine enablement to do so as Pelagians teach?  Is a person born-again in a moment in time because by exercise of their own free-will they put their faith in Jesus’ work performed in their behalf on the cross as Arminians would contend?  Does God sovereignly make people born-again before they exercise or express faith in Jesus as Calvinists would say?  Or is there another way in the midst of these approaches to answering this question that gives the best account for the most biblical passages that deal with the issue at hand?

 

Arminianism and Calvinism on Depravity

Pelagianism is generally rejected by orthodox Christians. So we won’t specifically deal with that system of thought in this post other than to say up front that what is often flippantly termed “Arminianism” today is truly Pelagianism when you consider primary manuscripts written by the architects and proponents of these systems.  So let’s shift our focus to the Arminian and Calvinistic answers to our question.  We will start by stating the Arminian and Calvinistic views of the depravity of mankind.  The Arminian position (or Remonstrance if you like) was originally articulated by Jacobus Arminius (16th-17th Century).  Arminius taught in regard to human depravity that “In this [fallen] state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace.”

To be fare, I did not represent the Calvinists as well as I could have in my descriptions of some of the five points in my last post.  Some dear and close Calvinist friends pointed these spots out to me in regard to my last post and I want to remedy those mistakes here lest I inadvertently create a straw man to argue against in dealing with these subjects.  So in putting forth the Calvinistic view of the depravity of man (a view not drastically different from Arminius’ own view described above) allow me to quote from a classic Calvinist confession on the subject- the London Baptist Confession of 1689:

“As the consequence of his fall into a state of sin, man has lost all ability to will the performance of any of those works, spiritually good, that accompany salvation.  As a natural (unspiritual) man he is dead in sin and altogether opposed to that which is good.  Hence he is not able, by any strength of his own, to turn himself to God, or even to prepare himself to turn to God.”[6]

What both of the above views have in common is that they agree on what we would theologically call Total Inability.  The idea is that due to the fall of mankind human beings cannot, will not, and do not desire to trust in Jesus for their salvation apart from God liberating them from their bondage to sin and enabling them to do so.

 

Scriptural Affirmations of Total Inability

Both classic Arminianism and Classic Calvinism affirm Total Inability because Scripture itself does so.  Consider the following verses:

John 6:44- “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

 Romans 8:7-9: “Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.”

 1 Corinthians 2:14: “But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.”

 

God Must do Something

Most orthodox believers agree in light of verses like those above that there is a spiritual blinding[7] and/or deadness[8] that must be illuminated[9] or reversed through spiritual resurrection which must take place to enable a sinner to trust in Christ.  Again, the question is what is that work that God does to bring about the ability of a person to trust in Jesus and believe the biblical gospel?  Arminians believe God has universally granted the ability of all individuals to choose Christ by restoring their originally God-given free will through Prevenient Grace.  The doctrine of Prevenient Grace is defined well by the Church of the Nazarene:

“…through the fall of Adam they (Humans) became depraved so that they cannot now turn and prepare themselves by their own natural strength and works to faith and calling upon God. But we also believe that the grace of God through Jesus Christ is freely bestowed upon all people, enabling all who will to turn from sin to righteousness, believe on Jesus Christ for pardon and cleansing from sin, and follow good works pleasing and acceptable in His sight.”[10]

Calvinists have a different explanation of the work that God does to enable faith in the life of the sinner.  They infer from verses that teach Total Inability that the work God does to produce the possibility of faith in the elect is the work of new birth (regeneration), though in truth verses describing Total Inability do not explicitly say this is so or demand such a conclusion.  They contend that regeneration precedes faith.  This is a logical inference they term as a logical necessity based on their view of Total Depravity.  As noted in my last post on Soteriology R.C. Sproul states the Calvinist view that regeneration precedes faith this way: “We do not believe in order to be born-again.  We are born-again in order to believe.”[11]

Let us be clear that if a person is born-again before they exercise or express faith in Jesus that they are saved before they exercise or express faith in Jesus.  In saying they are “saved” I do not mean that they have experienced every dynamic of biblical salvation at the moment of regeneration.  For example I understand that glorification is part of the wider biblical theology of salvation and that no Calvinist would claim a person is glorified at the moment of regeneration.  None-the-less, God Himself equates the work of regeneration with being a literal work of salvation in the person who experiences the new birth.  Consider the following statement of God in Holy Scripture:

“…He saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”[12]

Some Calvinists understanding of the weight of stating that a person is “saved” before they exercise or express faith in Jesus because of God’s secret work of regeneration in their hearts causes them to prefer that their position not be characterized this way.  But as shown from scripture above this would necessarily be the unavoidable reality if regeneration does indeed precede faith.  Even the great preacher and committed Calvinist C.H. Surgeon acknowledged that when people are regenerated they are saved.  In his sermon Warrant of Faith he conceded, “…man, being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate.”[13] But we are saved “thru regeneration” according to the Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Paul.  If advocates of the idea that regeneration precedes faith don’t like to be characterized as believing a person is saved before they exercise or express faith, it is their position that must be abandoned and not the characterization of their position by those who articulate it scripturally.

 

What Does God Do?

I am in the moderate middle on the exact work that God does to enable sinners to put their faith in Jesus for salvation.  I am not Pelagian because I believe in Total Inability.  I am not Classically Arminian because I do not believe that mankind is automatically and universally in a state of Prevenient Grace due to the merits of Christ on the cross and therefore able to make a free-will decision to trust in Jesus at any given time.  I am not a Five Point Calvinist because I don’t believe the work that must be done on behalf of sinners to enable them to come to faith is the work of regeneration.  I am somewhere in the midst of each of these views.

Stated positively, I believe that all people are totally depraved and as such are in a state of Total Inability when it comes to desiring or being able to actually choose to respond to the gospel message in faith.  I believe that God sovereignly works in the hearts of people to bring them to a place where they understand their need to trust in Christ and understand that Jesus is the solution to their sin.  I believe that upon bringing them to this place of understanding those who are “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father”[14] are effectively brought to faith in the gospel and repentance through the convicting and enabling work of the Holy Spirit.[15] When the sinner enabled by God heeds the command of the gospel in faith they are regenerated through faith as scripture declares, and born-again.[16]

Soteriological Moderates (which I consider myself) are able to affirm verses on Total Inability while not twisting sequential verses which describe the order of events at salvation and demonstrate that faith is the vehicle that brings regeneration into a sinner’s life, not the result of regeneration.  A handful of verses that clearly demonstrate that faith precedes regeneration would include:

Ephesians 1:13-14: “In Him you also [trusted], after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”

According to Paul the order of salvation goes like this: A person hears the gospel.  Next, they believe the gospel.  Lastly, having believed the gospel they heard they are sealed with the Holy Spirit.  They hear, they believe, they receive the sealing of the Spirit.  A Calvinist ordering of this might say they hear, they receive the Spirit, they believe.  That is not what the verse states.

Galatians 3:2; 14c: “This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?… we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Again, reception of the Spirit is through faith.  Faith is not the result of involuntarily being born-again through a secret work of God in the heart.

John 20:30-31: “And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.”

The Apostle John, a teacher of Total Inability in John 6:44, found room in his understanding of Total Inability to believe that faith still precedes new life (regeneration).  He compiled the massive account of Jesus’ life and miracles found in the Gospel of John so that his readers might believe that Jesus is the “Christ, the Son of God,” and that “believing” they may have life in His name.  Note that new life through Jesus comes to a person after or through believing according to John.  Again, a Calvinist rendering of this would say something like, “I write of these works of Jesus that God might give you spiritual life so that you can believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.”  Again, this is not what scripture says.

What I’ve chosen to call illumination (2 Cor. 4:6) must remove the hindrance of Total Inability so a person can put their faith in the gospel to be born-again.  Some kind of illumination must precede faith so that we can believe.  But these sequential verses demonstrate clearly, and I believe irrefutably, that faith precedes regeneration.  Such a picture is portrayed in Acts 16:14:

“Now a certain woman named Lydia heard [us]. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.”

At the moment of this woman’s conversion “the Lord opened her heart” to enable her to believe the gospel Paul was preaching.  Upon opening her heart she was able to “heed” or respond to the gospel Paul preached.

 

Nagging Questions

A defining moment in my position on the order of salvation came when I began to think about how Old Testament saints were saved, or counted righteous before God.  Most evangelicals believe that the gift of regeneration is a special work of God which He performs in His people during the New Testament age alone.  If the Calvinist is right and regeneration must occur in a person’s life before they can exercise saving faith in the gospel, how is it that Abraham “believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness” if he was never regenerated?[17]  To be clear, Scripture tells us that the thing Abraham “believed” (or put his faith in) so as to be accounted righteous before God is nothing less than the Gospel!

Galatians 3:8-9: And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, [saying], “In you all the nations shall be blessed. So then those who [are] of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.”

Indeed it is not only Abraham who was able to respond to God’s promises in faith apart from being regenerated, but Hebrews chapter eleven lists a mountain of Old Testament (and therefore unregenerate) saints who somehow were able to believe in the promises of God looking forward to the cross in a saving way.

So here’s the issue: I believe that Abraham was in a state of Total Inability.  I believe that I (in the New Testament age) am in a state of Total Inability.  God did something in Abraham that was effective and sufficient to enable him to have saving “faith” in the promises of God that was not regeneration!  And yet, though I am no more dead in my sin than Abraham, the Calvinist would tell me that I must be regenerated or I cannot exercise or express faith in the gospel.  Am I to conclude that Abraham was less bound by Total Inability than I am?  Or am I to conclude that I am dead spiritually to a more intense degree than Abraham?  This is inconsistent and contradictory and devastating to the idea that regeneration must precede faith.

When I’ve asked the question of how Old Testament saints were able to exercise faith apart from regeneration to advocates of the doctrine that regeneration precedes faith I have yet to see them answer how this can be.  They end up affirming the moderate position by saying things like, “Well clearly God had to do something even though it wasn’t regeneration.”  To which I say, ABSOLUTELY!  And I would contend that it is the same thing He does to enable people to come to saving faith today.  He works in us to enable the response of faith to the gospel.  Upon our response of faith to the gospel we are born-again.  Call that work of enablement what you will.  I’ve chosen to call it illumination.  What’s clear is that while a sovereign work of divine enablement must precede faith, faith most certainly precedes regeneration.  Until next time…

[1] Titus 3:5b NKJV

[2] Romans 8:14-17

[3] 1 Corinthians 6:19

[4] Ephesians 1:13

[5] 2 Corinthians 5:17

[6] A Faith to Confess: The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689

[7] 2 Corinthians 4:4-6

[8] Ephesians 2:1-3

[9] John 12:32; 16:7-11; Acts 16:14

[10] Nazarene Manual. 2005-2009

[11] Sproul, R.C. Chosen by God. Page 73.

[12] Titus 3:5b Emphasis Added

[13] Spurgeon, C.H. Warrant of Faith

[14] 1 Peter 1:2 NKJV

[15] John 16:7-11;

[16] Acts 16:14 NKJV

[17] Genesis 15 6 quoted in Galatians 3:6 NKJV


The Pain is Real …. and It’s Okay

/3 Comments/in , , , , , , , /by

I am amazed at what people heap upon the leadership of the church, especially the pastor. If someone leaves the church it is the pastor’s fault. If someone has an issue or a complaint it is automatically assumed the pastor did something wrong and it is his job to fix it. If someone betrays the pastor it is his job to go and reconcile and bring the “lost sheep” back into the fold. As a pastor I have grown to accept this.

What I have a hard time with is the insensitivity to my feelings. I refuse to let people try to minimize or rationalize how I am feeling inside. This isn’t one of those “I am a person and I have feelings too” kind of moments. This is one of moments that I am expected to soldier on even though inside I am grieving. What I have found that as the leader of the church people want me to be doing okay all the time.

For a long time I struggled with this and it only produced more feelings of frustration. Why weren’t people understanding that I might need a moment to deal or maybe that I am not in a good mood because I am dealing with something? As I grew through this I realized they weren’t even thinking about me, or what I am going through at all, they needed me to be okay so that I could deal with their problems.

So lately I have been focusing on how I can deal with all the stuff going on in me while at the same time be available to counsel others. There are a couple of things that I have discovered that are helping.

First, I take my feelings to God everyday: I know this sounds trite but I have found it to preciously true, especially when it comes to anger. Currently I am working through a messy situation with a former elder that had produced some intense feelings inside of me. If I don’t take this to the cross and ask Jesus to help me I am prone to allow this spiritual battle rage in my mind which leaves me in a terrible state of mind. I am then good to no one.

Second, I manage my schedule much better: I have only so many spots in my calendar each week for counseling. My first priority are the messages I teach, then my staff, then counseling. I am okay with saying no or delegating it to my associate pastor. It has taken a long time but I think I am there.

Finally, I don’t beat myself up: Most of what goes on in a pastor’s ministry happens in his mind. It is a true Iceberg analogy where people only see ten percent. Most pastor’s beat themselves up over the mistakes they have made. It can be debilitating. I have become content in being real. This shocks people sometimes, especially old school church people, but it is so freeing. I don’t go around raging but I am just honest with people. I also understand that when feelings of anger come up I am not a bad person. I don’t let it turn into sin but I deal with it.

The fact is that the pain is real in our lives and you know it’s okay. We don’t have to exert more energy than we have to put up a front. Be who you are and let your people see your flaws. It is amazing how much that can minister to people.