Earlier, I had posted on what it means to love Jesus. Today, I'm pondering the other side of that coin.
Thanks to a strange but brave man (or is it a group that's doing it these days?) carrying a simple sign quoting John 3:16 to football games and public events of all kinds, it is widely known that God loves us. And recently, I've had...a discussion with someone who fell back on that as justification for professing some fairly worldly views.
While it is true that the Lord loves us, it is equally true that He loves ALL of us. He loves Osama bin Laden just as much as He loves me. But that doesn't mean Osama is in His kingdom, or is living a godly life. And the Bible warns against anyone falling away from the truth, because falling away from the truth is departing from God and His salvation. It is true that the Lord will never leave us or forsake us. But He also gives us the freedom to walk away from Him, His protection and promises. We can be sure of our salvation as long as WE don't elect to walk away from it.
And those who follow the ways of the world clearly are walking away from Him (James 4:4).
Friday, January 19, 2007
Friday, January 05, 2007
The Richland Hills Church of Christ has recently decided to add a single service that utilizes musical instruments in worship, and the range of opinions I've heard on this matter has sent me reeling. Most of the arguments against it have been vocalized many a time before. But recently I heard one that really made me scratch my head.
Some friends made the point that it was important to preserve our heritage of a cappella worship, and said that changing that was not something the founding fathers of the church would have wanted. My question, though, is this: who are the founding fathers of the church? Stone and Campbell? The church didn't begin in the 18th or 19th century - it began at Pentecost (and, I would argue, at the start of Jesus' ministry on earth). So the "founding fathers", at most, should refer to Peter, John, James, Paul, etc.......the inspired authors of New Testament epistles. So why would my friends desire to return to the wishes/intent of men who lived in the past couple of centuries? I guess the heart behind it is similar to those others I've had debates with in the past who turned to commentaries for supporting statements rather than turn back to the Word. They want to understand and do things a certain way, and will find a way to justify themselves. Truth is secondary.
Well, here's one more case where the Word proves itself:
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
If we don't take everything back to the Bible, seeking the heart of God and His intents for things, then what are we even doing here?
Some friends made the point that it was important to preserve our heritage of a cappella worship, and said that changing that was not something the founding fathers of the church would have wanted. My question, though, is this: who are the founding fathers of the church? Stone and Campbell? The church didn't begin in the 18th or 19th century - it began at Pentecost (and, I would argue, at the start of Jesus' ministry on earth). So the "founding fathers", at most, should refer to Peter, John, James, Paul, etc.......the inspired authors of New Testament epistles. So why would my friends desire to return to the wishes/intent of men who lived in the past couple of centuries? I guess the heart behind it is similar to those others I've had debates with in the past who turned to commentaries for supporting statements rather than turn back to the Word. They want to understand and do things a certain way, and will find a way to justify themselves. Truth is secondary.
Well, here's one more case where the Word proves itself:
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
If we don't take everything back to the Bible, seeking the heart of God and His intents for things, then what are we even doing here?
Faith and politics
It's becoming increasingly hard for me to understand how a Christian could align himself/herself with the Democratic party. Actually, it's impossible for me to understand, and getting more and more frustrating to me. The Democratic party supports so many things that are in opposition to God's will that it seems it would be unconscionable to anyone who purports to follow Christ. Can someone tell me how they can reasonably be known as a Democrat and a Christian?
Friday, December 08, 2006
Systematic salvation...
While I still mean to do research on my own to determine when the origin of "the sinner's prayer" was, it seems there's already a synopsis circulating. Versions of it may be found at either of the following locations:
http://www.myconvictions.com/sinnersprayer.html
http://www.s8int.com/sinnersprayer.html
http://www.myconvictions.com/sinnersprayer.html
http://www.s8int.com/sinnersprayer.html
Monday, November 27, 2006
If you love Jesus...
There's a curious trend I'm seeing in Christianity right now. I hear the phrase "...if you love Jesus..." more and more from people when they attempt to defend their faith or explain their motives. A young lady my wife and I spoke with last night said that she got into a lot of trouble in the last few years, but that all of that had changed because she "loved Jesus" again. But what does that really mean? She seemed to indicate that to "love Jesus" meant to have a strong emotional experience with Him that overrides all of your sinful, selfish human desires. it's not based in knowledge or wisdom, but in a person's emotions. But emotions proceed from the heart, and we all know that "the heart is deceitful above all things; who can comprehend it?" [Jer 17:9]
So if a strong emotional experience isn't the answer, then what is? The Word tells us "this is love for God: to obey His commands." [1 Jn 5:3] And we know His commands by knowing His word, by knowing His son, by knowing Him. That only comes through study of the Word, through prayer and meditation on the Word.
And when you know the Father, you'll know why He wants to work powerfully in this world, and you'll eagerly, anxiously follow along in the things He's doing.
And that is the real definition of loving Jesus.
So if a strong emotional experience isn't the answer, then what is? The Word tells us "this is love for God: to obey His commands." [1 Jn 5:3] And we know His commands by knowing His word, by knowing His son, by knowing Him. That only comes through study of the Word, through prayer and meditation on the Word.
And when you know the Father, you'll know why He wants to work powerfully in this world, and you'll eagerly, anxiously follow along in the things He's doing.
And that is the real definition of loving Jesus.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Wandering away from the truth
Y'know, it's funny but people can talk themselves into believing just about anything.
One of the most frustrating debates (arguments, really) in modern Christianity is that of whether baptism is necessary for salvation. The Bible clearly states that it is, but most of modern Christianity doesn't believe in it anymore, instead choosing to believe that one can be saved simply by saying a simple prayer....and possibly put it off until the 11th hour. Most just accept it without question, without searching the Scriptures, and never realize that it was a convention that came into practice during tent revivals in the last 200 years (as I'll demonstrate in subsequent blogs).
The debate about baptism usually includes some reference to it being an "action" and the claim that salvation comes through faith alone, apart from any deeds we perform. Well, this is partially true. If you don't have faith, then no amount of bathing is going to get you into the Kingdom of Heaven. But the deeds that don't result in our salvation aren't acts of obedience, but so-called "good deeds" that many people believe rack up points for us to earn a ticket to Heaven.
Jesus Himself said outright that we must be baptized in order to be saved (Mark 16:16), but this is just the most blatant reference among many. So, it is an action that must be followed, but it's not what saves you. The debate goes on whether baptism is necessary for salvation, or whether the Sinner's Prayer suffices. Until now, I had thought that it was at a standoff. But I recently read a wikipedia article that indicates that some are now trying to presume that not even this simple prayer is necessary for salvation, but that, somehow, one just lapses into salvation as a result of faith without even this prayer. Wiki article
What is the future of this debate headed to now? Will those who currently maintain that only faith (apart from a prayer, apart from baptism) is necessary for salvation completely abandon the need for repentance and a resulting change in one's life after salvation? Will those who follow that line of thinking eventually come to believe that faith....in a Higher Power (and not in Christ) is enough to gain access to Heaven? Since there are billions of people who already believe that, I can only assume it will.
True disciples of Christ will seek to do things the way He did them and told us to do them. They'll trust the Word of God alone, and not just listen to a fallible preacher on Sunday mornings. They'll know what it says and trust that it's true, and their lives will be transformed by it. Ultimately, this is what determines who's really saved.
One of the most frustrating debates (arguments, really) in modern Christianity is that of whether baptism is necessary for salvation. The Bible clearly states that it is, but most of modern Christianity doesn't believe in it anymore, instead choosing to believe that one can be saved simply by saying a simple prayer....and possibly put it off until the 11th hour. Most just accept it without question, without searching the Scriptures, and never realize that it was a convention that came into practice during tent revivals in the last 200 years (as I'll demonstrate in subsequent blogs).
The debate about baptism usually includes some reference to it being an "action" and the claim that salvation comes through faith alone, apart from any deeds we perform. Well, this is partially true. If you don't have faith, then no amount of bathing is going to get you into the Kingdom of Heaven. But the deeds that don't result in our salvation aren't acts of obedience, but so-called "good deeds" that many people believe rack up points for us to earn a ticket to Heaven.
Jesus Himself said outright that we must be baptized in order to be saved (Mark 16:16), but this is just the most blatant reference among many. So, it is an action that must be followed, but it's not what saves you. The debate goes on whether baptism is necessary for salvation, or whether the Sinner's Prayer suffices. Until now, I had thought that it was at a standoff. But I recently read a wikipedia article that indicates that some are now trying to presume that not even this simple prayer is necessary for salvation, but that, somehow, one just lapses into salvation as a result of faith without even this prayer. Wiki article
What is the future of this debate headed to now? Will those who currently maintain that only faith (apart from a prayer, apart from baptism) is necessary for salvation completely abandon the need for repentance and a resulting change in one's life after salvation? Will those who follow that line of thinking eventually come to believe that faith....in a Higher Power (and not in Christ) is enough to gain access to Heaven? Since there are billions of people who already believe that, I can only assume it will.
True disciples of Christ will seek to do things the way He did them and told us to do them. They'll trust the Word of God alone, and not just listen to a fallible preacher on Sunday mornings. They'll know what it says and trust that it's true, and their lives will be transformed by it. Ultimately, this is what determines who's really saved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)