Tag: Christianity

United by the Gospel & Together for the Gospel

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

Over at Christian Book Notes, there is a contest currently running to win copies of the 2 book-compilations of messages from the previous 2 Together for the Gospel conferences (2006 & 2008). Both books are published by Crossway.

To enter the contest, you are to leave a comment, “regarding how the essential truths of the gospel unifies all (true) believers”. That got me thinking and I thought I’d share my thoughts here for my readers’ benefit. I also encourage you to go enter the contest yourself, it runs through Monday.

One more thing before I share my thoughts. You can download most of the 2010 T4G messages now, and the rest will be up shortly I assume.

The cross humbles us. It lays bare all our evil hearts. No one can raise his head when faced with how wicked his own sin is. Sin’s extent is displayed in the gravity of Calvary. There, the Creator God manifested in human flesh, died a tortured and bloody death to pay sin’s terrible price.

The cross then gives us all the same hope. The hope that our sins are dealt with and grace and mercy can come to us from Christ our crucified and risen Savior. The same hope of eternal glory and joy that never ends in Christ’s presence, acceptance with God, forgiveness of sins– this same hope is extended to all who believe in Christ as the sufficient sacrifice for their sins.

The cross, then, should also unify us around an appreciation of gospel truth and the spreading of it’s gospel glories. Smaller points of disagreement find their perspective when weighed in the light of the cross. If we share a joyous faith in a gospel of grace that flows to us from the cross of Jesus, then that is a big thing indeed. It is so big and so important, that differences over baptism, eschatology, church government, preferences of music or dress styles, and the like should pale in comparison.

When we magnify every relatively minor position on any given question, the gospel loses its status and becomes just one more point to agree or disagree on. This is the tragedy of sectarianism run wild. It makes mountains out of mole hills, and minimizes the importance of the truly central and cardinal truths related to the gospel.

Sorry I got a little carried away, but this is why I love the concept of T4G and The Gospel Coalition so much. There is great potential for unity when we see how glorious the Gospel really is.

“Your Church Is Too Small: Why Unity in Christ’s Mission Is Vital to the Future of the Church” by John H. Armstrong

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

Many today agree that the evangelical church in America has problems. It has a consumeristic mentality catering to the pervasive individualism of our society. Church programs are offered, and sermon series advertised in such a way as to get people hooked on the “brand”. Surveys and market research are conducted to find people’s felt needs and deliver. And with such a cheapening of church, it’s no wonder that counter movements abound in Christianity these days. Emergent, post-modern, missional — you name it, people realize the current super-sized church is high on calories and low on nutrition. Many are just abandoning the ship altogether.

One such counter movement is described by John H. Armstrong in his new book Your Church Is Too Small: Why Unity in Christ’s Mission is Vital to the Future of the Church (Zondervan, 2010). He contends that a twin focus on mission and unity will heal the Church’s woes.   He calls this missional-ecumenism.

Many of the problems Armstrong sees in today’s church are problems indeed. There is a high dose of sectarianism, and a low dose of biblical community. He reacts against the prevailing consumerism in churchianity. A return to the church’s “ancient/future faith” with a focus on the value of church history and an appreciation of the Apostle’s creed and other universally accepted creeds, he argues, will cure these ills.

Reacting to sectarianism in today’s church, Armstrong encourages a relational unity flowing from our brotherhood and shared faith in Jesus Christ. He wants us to see past our differences, but does hold that these differences matter. Denominations are not a bad thing in his view, but we should reach beyond them and see our shared unity as the “one church” following “one Lord” and sharing “one baptism” and “one faith” (Eph. 4).

I can agree to an extent with all of this. I too see John 17 and Jesus’ prayer for unity as being too easily dismissed in evangelicalism today. I think we need more charity, more grace, and a greater realization of how big our agreement is if we share in the core truths of the gospel. I agree that working together with other Christians and not viewing them as the enemy positively impacts our evangelism. I even share some of Armstrong’s specific criticisms of the modern church:

[There is] a small view of the church and a big view of our own importance. We have exalted our interpretations of the Scripture by boldly proclaiming: “My authority comes only from the Bible.” (pg. 131)

Some popular evangelical writers dehistoricize the church and make a case for revolution not reformation. They throw out the past. (pg. 107)

…Scripture is clearly not so much a treatise on systematic theology as the unfolding story of a people– the people of God…. A humble and faithful Christian life is marked by “fear and trembling” (Philipppians 2:12) and a willingness to allow for mystery. (pg. 96)

The culture with its decadence, relativism, consumerism, and wanton rebellion against the revealed will have God is actually the symptom of our problem. The root cause is a deeply divided, morally compromised, theologically indifferent, biblically ignorant, and culturally conformed church. The gospel has been reduced to a minimal set of consumer-related facts. The “sinner’s prayer” has replaced the kind of radical conversion that results in life-changing grace. In the process, the larger narrative of creation, fall, redemption, and re-creation has been lost. With this loss there is no coherent understanding of the kingdom of God. The church has now become a religious society of the comfortable. Serious Christians should cry out to God for his mercy and grace to be poured out on the church. (pg. 194)

Where Armstrong goes wrong, in my opinion, is jumping from the “one church” ideal in the NT, to affirming that the Catholic and Orthodox churches are part of that “one church” because they affirm the Apostle’s Creed. In vain did I look for any discussion of the Reformation and why Rome really isn’t advocating a false gospel when they do not preach justification by faith. Instead I found statements like this:

My understanding of biblical oneness combines two commitments that are often considered separately. the first is a commitment to work in every conceivable way to demonstrate the God-given spiritual oneness I share with other believers through our union with Christ….

But my second commitment goes even further. Many Protestant evangelicals are satisfied with informal person-to-person expressions of oneness. Because they tend to view the church as a voluntary association, they see no need to seek unity with other churches….

This two-commitment approach… has practical consequences for those who consider themselves evangelicals. It means I can no longer be… anti-Catholic…. With deep conviction, I am compelled to regard both Catholics and the Catholic church with love and esteem. (pg. 60-61)

…the Western church was torn apart by the Protestant Reformation. This movement challenged the Catholic Church to renew itself but resulted in in a massive schism leading to errors on every side. Eventually, these schisms resulted in the birth of several major divisions within historic Protestantism, leading to an endless variety of new churches built around human personalities and doctrinal differences. (pg. 89)

I appreciate the exhortation to unity and the admission that people who don’t think like us may well be honestly following Christ. But I think Armstrong is advocating a dangerous course when he encourages us to just view all Catholics or Orthodox adherents as genuine Christians. At this point, I need to let Armstrong explain in his own words at some length.

…We have heard a lot about culture wars in the United States for thirty years. I am far more concerned about the truth wars waged by polemicists inside the church. This is the bitter fruit of sectarianism. It lacks charity and leads to mean-spiritedness.

Privately, I hear people ask, “Who is a real Christian?” with regard to their own family members or members of their congregations (including pastors). If a Catholic becomes an evangelical, then those who remain Catholic are viewed by the “convert” as non-Christians….

I am wearied by this attempt to say who is and is not a real Christian… I find it destructive of everything true to Christ’s teaching. During my journey to catholicity, I made a conscious choice to give up this approach. After all, if a Christian is someone who has “the Spirit of Christ,” then I do not know who truly has “the Spirit of Christ.” Scripture further declares, “The Lord knows those who are his” (2 Timothy 2:19)…. Real conversion and true faith are God’s work. And since all three of the great traditions of Christianity teach that those who share in proclamation and participation must also have explicit living faith, I began to openly encourage explicit faith rather than wage attacks on others.

Once I took this step, I became more concerned about my own faith and attitudes. I no longer had to answer many of the questions people asked me about other people–questions that only fed my pride. I ask, “Why should you care about what I think since I don’t know the real answer?” I then ask, “Have you confessed faith in Christ? Are you his baptized follower?” If the answer is affirmative, then I proclaim the gospel and let the Spirit work as he wills. God will judge the heart… (pg. 150-151)

I can’t accept Armstrong’s explanation here. Certainly a glib, non-chalant condemnation of others is wrong. I also believe there are many true believers that aren’t Protestant. But I believe Scripture requires us to be more discerning and careful in this matter. I don’t want to publicly affirm Catholicism’s dangerous teachings about the gospel and the relative emphasis on Mary, works, confession, saints and things like that. Paul’s concern for unity didn’t prevent him from making strong condemnations of false doctrine, just see Galatians 1.

This book will stretch you and cause you to think. And much in the book is actually helpful and good. But I would encourage only a discerning use of the book by mature Christians.

This book is available for purchase at the following sites: Amazon.com and direct from Zondervan Academic

This book was provided by Zondervan Academic for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

10 Points to Consider Before You Contemplate Divorce

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

It boggles my mind that so many Christians today are convinced that divorce is a viable option for them. They agree that the Bible generally frowns on divorce, and that it isn’t best. But in their situation…. If we just knew how rough they had it, we’d understand!

To those in that place, let me offer some advice. Here are 10 points I pray you’d consider carefully before you ever contemplate divorce. [And I’m referring to divorce without any Biblical warrant such as adultery or abandonment.]

1) If you claim that Jesus is your Lord, ask yourself this: “Does my Lord and Master agree with me on this decision? Does Jesus really want me to divorce my spouse?”

2) If you think He does agree with you, then look a little more closely at the following Bible passage:

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”… And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery. (Matt. 19:3-6, 9)

Jesus, our Lord, makes it very clear that divorce for just any old reason is not permissible.

3) You might say, “that is just your interpretation of this passage.” To that, I would reply with a question. “How then, can you know anything about God, salvation, eternal life or anything?” If you can’t take God at His Word here, and you prefer to twist it to allow an exception for yourself, who’s to stop you from twisting any other passage? And who’s to say we’re not wrong about everything when it comes to Christianity?

4) Now let me try a different approach. Consider Jesus and His bride, the church. All believers are part of His church — we are His bride. Aren’t you glad Jesus hasn’t left you? Can you even contemplate the possibility that Jesus would leave you?

5) If we are thankful that Jesus loves us, and that He doesn’t leave us when the relationship doesn’t offer enough return on His investment, shouldn’t that influence how we treat our spouse? After all, Jesus’ forgiveness of our sin is the basis for our obligation to forgive others (Eph. 4:32). And even more soberly, if we don’t forgive others, we can not expect Jesus to forgive us (Matt. 6:14-15).

6) If you’re tracking with me even a little bit, I hope the following passage will perhaps connect with you more powerfully.

Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word…

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. (Eph. 5:24-26, 31-33)

No I’m not preaching at you here. No one lives up to the ideal presented in this teaching. Instead, look at the picture. Christ loves his church, and men ought to love their wives the same way. The church respects & submits to Christ, and wives ought so to respect their husbands. What will your divorce say about Christ and the church? How does what you’re about to do fit with this picture? As Christians we are to be “like Christ”. Divorce is entirely unlike Christ.

7) Here’s another angle, does a promise matter anymore? If you take back your promise to your spouse, do you think it’d be fine if Christ took back some of his promises to you? Isn’t this just a “lie” plain and simple? There may not be a more serious and damaging lie than the lie of divorce.

8) Another, and perhaps even more serious consideration focuses on the nature of sin. Sin is deceptive. It often feels right, but it isn’t. Sin can even give a temporary pleasure, but it won’t satisfy. The blatant sinner is one who convinces himself that there is very little sin in his actions. If you honestly think this divorce you are considering is not a terrible sin, you need to heed the warnings in the next 2 points.

9) Sin must be punished. Adultery (which is Jesus’ words for unwarranted divorce) is sin of the first degree. Adulterers don’t inherit the kingdom of God, unless they are washed and sanctified (1 Cor. 6:9-11). And people who claim to be washed and sanctified cannot lightly commit adultery, without risking serious injury to their soul.

10) You say, but this is all just so hard! You don’t know how hard this whole trial of a marriage has been. I do know. It’s not easy. Neither is fighting the sin of pornography, or any number of other sins which our sinful society so strongly encourages. It’s not easy to choose the narrow way that leads to life, and we aren’t promised a life full of roses with no thorns. The words of the author of Hebrews seem especially appropriate here.

…let us lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us…

Consider [Jesus] who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood…

For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. Therefore, lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees, and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed. Strive… for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.

See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and casues trouble, and by it many become defiled; that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. For you know that afterward, when he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he sought it with tears. (Heb. 12:1b, 3-4, 11-17)

I want what’s best for you, really. I don’t want you to miss out on “the peaceful fruit of righteousness”, and the joy of seeing the Lord, because you didn’t like God’s painful discipline and couldn’t fight for “the holiness without which no one will see the Lord”. I fear you are ready to sell your birthright “for a single meal” and miss out on so much. And like Esau, you may find yourself crossing a line to the point of no return — a place where, when you come to your senses and even seek for a chance to repent, you won’t be able to. That is what I fear the most.

Friend, I hope these points will help you. And for those like me who know people considering divorce, may you find this article helpful. May God be pleased to intervene and gloriously change hearts and heal relationships.

Home Depot Theology: “You Can Do It. We Can Help.”

~ Bob Hayton ~ 8 Comments

I was struck by one line of a very good article in The Christian Science Monitor this weekend. The story highlights the “new Calvinism” which is on the rise today, and focuses on Mark Dever’s church, Capitol Hill Baptist in Washington, D.C. The contrast between a biblical, Calvinistic ministry and the prevailing “Home Depot theology” of evangelicalism today could not be painted more starkly. I encourage you to read the article as it will be a blessing and encouragement to you.

Here are a few snippets:

Today, [Calvin’s] theology is making a surprising comeback, challenging the me-centered prosperity gospel of much of modern evangelicalism with a God-first immersion in Scripture. In an age of materialism and made-to-order religion, Calvinism’s unmalleable doctrines and view of God as an all-powerful potentate who decides everything is winning over many Christians — especially the young…

…

Much of modern Christianity preaches a comforting Home Depot theology: You can do it. We can help. Epitomized by popular titles like Joel Osteen’s “Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential,” this message of self-fulfillment through Christian commitment attracts followers in huge numbers, turning big churches into megachurches…

…

More broadly, the Calvinist revival reflects an effort to recast the foundation of faith itself. From conservative evangelical churches to liberal new-age groups, the message of much modern teaching is man’s need for betterment. Not New Calvinism; its star is God’s need for glory. And the gravity of His will is great: It can be denied, but not defied.

Many conservative Christians who dislike some of the doctrinal emphases of Calvinism have to at least be happy that a more biblically-based ministry model is catching on today. Give the article a read and let me know what you think. Feel free to comment on the “Home Depot theology” descriptor too. Doesn’t that just describe exactly what is wrong with the seeker-sensitive, market-driven Christianity that evangelicalism is promoting?

My Explanation of “The Five Points of Calvinism”

~ Bob Hayton ~ 19 Comments

For a while now, I’ve wanted to do a series on the five points of Calvinism, or at least, in my own words, answer the question: “What is Calvinism?” The wait is over, and my brief (for me) explanation of Calvinism is ready. You can check it out at my Calvinism page, but I want to share it here for your benefit as well.

———————–

This is my own work on the five points here. I recommend John Piper’s clear and concise booklet as the best explanation of Calvinism to those who are ignorant of what Calvinism is and what it teaches. His treatment is respectful and very Biblical, it is available online here.

When it comes to Calvinism I think of it as a description of what happens “behind the scenes” with respect to our salvation. We are confronted with the gospel and asked to believe, we feel conviction and then relief when we trust Christ. Biblically, however, what happened in our heart was more than us independently deciding what we would do with the gospel. I have found that the more we know of what Scripture teaches about the inner workings of salvation, the greater will be our respect and regard for the One who saved us. All of this should tend toward a greater degree of personal worship, a sincere humility, and more glory to God, not a higher degree of pride or party spirit.

T – stands for Total Depravity. This means that every aspect of man is tainted by sin. No one is as evil as they can be, but evil affects every part of our being – mind, will, heart, etc. We do not seek after God, naturally. And apart from God’s initiative, we cannot please God. In fact, we are enslaved by the devil and are lost, blinded to the truth of the gospel and in need of God to mercifully reach down and intervene. (Rom. 3:10-18, 8:7-8; 1 Cor. 2:14; 2 Cor. 4:3-6; 2 Tim. 2:24-26)

U – stands for Unconditional Election. Since we are helpless and totally depraved, we need God to intervene. God doesn’t sit on the sidelines and see who is worthy of being chosen, God chooses. And because of His choice, the “elect” live lives worthy of their calling. Scripture is quite emphatic that neither our belief nor our works fit us for being elected but rather, flow from our election. (Acts 13:48; John 6:44, 6:64-65; 10:26; Eph. 1:3-6; 1 Thess. 1:4-5; 2 Thess. 2:13)

L – stands for Limited Atonement. The choice of “limited atonement” to fit with the TULIP acronym is unfortunate. Actually TULIP doesn’t date back before 1900, and “limited atonement” wasn’t widely used much before then. “Particular redemption” or “definite atonement” give the sense better. Jesus’ death is of infinite value and is sufficient for all but efficient for the elect only. Jesus didn’t just make salvation possible (if “activated” by one’s own contribution of faith). He actually redeemed and saved a people through His death. These are the sheep for whom He died and the church whom He purchased with His blood and the bride whom He died for. He died in some different sense for these than He did for those He knew would reject His atoning sacrifice. He actually bore their real punishment and substituted on their behalf in a real way — He made true propitiation for these. (John 10:11 compared to 10:26; Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25-27; Titus 2:14; 2 Tim. 1:9; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Jn. 4:9-11)

*It should also be noted that there have historically been varying positions regarding this point among Calvinists. All Calvinists hold that Christ died for everyone in a general sense and for the elect in a specific sense (1 Tim. 4:10). Some take this to mean the typical understanding of “L” must be flawed and so they call themselves 4 point Calvinists, others take this as a “multiple intentions” view that in the atonement, God had more than one purpose. The majority today hold that God’s purpose in the atonement was the saving of the elect, other benefits such as common grace extend to all as an extension of what Jesus did on the cross, but the cross-work was not performed on the behalf of all, but only for the elect. (This does not mean we should not preach to all, since we have no way of knowing who the elect are. Hyper-Calvinists are the ones who do not preach the gospel indiscriminately to all, and they do not speak for Calvinists in this extreme and errant practice.)

I – stands for Irresistible Grace. This point does not mean no one can resist God’s grace. People do resist. But for all who have been elected, God will overcome their resistance and graciously save them. This captures the idea of regeneration preceding faith. Calvinists believe faith flows from a heart that has been regenerated. A dead heart can’t believe. Faith is the sign of what happened behind the scenes in the internal workings of the heart. So while it may look like faith causes the new birth from our perspective, it actually is the new birth which evidences itself in faith. (John 1:13, 3:3-8; 1 Cor. 2:14; 1 John 4:7, 5:1 [note Greek tense on both of these = “has been born of God”]; Deut. 30:6; Ez. 36:25-27; Heb. 10:15-16; James 1:18; Phil. 2:13)

P – stands for Perseverance of the Saints. This means more than the common understanding of the eternal security of the believer. God preserves all the elect so that not one of them is finally lost, but He also so works in them that they persevere in their faith. When they fall, they aren’t utterly destroyed, they get back up. They bear fruit and have good works which testify to the genuineness of their professed faith. For those who fail to persevere, we are not the ultimate judge God is. But we should exhort one another daily to “fight the good fight of faith”. When understood properly, this point allows believers to take seriously the many warning passages and “if” statements in Scripture. It also gives us confidence to trust that “He who began a good work in [us], will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ”. (Phil. 1:6; 1 Cor. 15:2; John 10:28; 1 Pet. 1:3-5; Heb. 3:12-14, 6:11-12, 10:23-25, 12:14; Col. 1:21-23; Matt. 3:8-10, 7:15-23;)

——————-

I’m open to critique and feedback on this; so please use the comments to let me know what you think. We can have a charitable debate on the topic too, if you’d like.