If now some know-it-alls object and say, “Well, even if somebody is not baptized with outward water, he can still believe, change and improve his life, and live according to the Rule of Christ. Therefore, baptism is not necessary.” Answer: You highly learned people should have made this objection not to me but to Christ himself, and that before he instituted baptism, so that he could have refrained from it. But at that time you were not his counselors. I realize it was a great oversight.

On the Christian Baptism of Believers by Balthasar Hubmaier

I’ve been reading Leonard Verduin’s book, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren for my Baptist Heritage class at Southwestern this semester. In it, I came across a very startling and sobering reminder.

The author writes of Constantine, and his “vision” of a cross in the clouds along with the words “in hoc signo vinces” (in this sign conquer), which led him to declare Christianity as the official religion of Rome, paint crosses on his soldiers’ shields, and attempt to return Rome to her former glory. Verduin writes,

This was to read a new and totally strange meaning into the “Cross.” Is the Cross of Christ then a thing whereby emperors’ ambitions are realized? A device that sees the political aspirations of a power-hungry ruler through to victory? Surely Constantine had grasped little or nothing of the ideas set forth in the Cross of Christ!

And yet Constantine’s misapplication of the cross is ours as well. How many have gone to Christ in effort to receive their selfish desires, their narcissistic ambitions, their grabs for power?

How many times have I?

How much ink has been spilled and sermons written that teach that Jesus is “for us,” that his desire is to “increase us,” and “make much of us?” Isn’t this the message that we long to hear?

We are all children of Constantine.

So many are willing to take only as much Jesus and Christianity as needed to gain what they truly desire – which usually includes some sort of financial blessings, physical blessings, and selfish gain.

But at the cross, we’re called to give all of that up for the sake of Christ.

The Cross is not the guarantee of our pursuits, but the declaration that Christ has conquered sin, shame, hell, and death. We don’t conquer by this sign. We surrender to the reality that by that sign, we have been conquered. We cease our attempts to make much of ourselves and fall on our faces and worship, and bring glory to the One who so rightly deserves it.

How to Share Your Faith

January 25, 2012 — 0 Comments

What do you think? Does that communicate it?

HT: Z

Matt Chandler explains the difference between a moralistic interpretation and a gospel-centered interpretation of the story of David and Goliath.

HT: Trevin Wax

For more on The Gospel Project, click here.

If only he would keep his mouth shut

Every time Joel Osteen opens his mouth, I cringe. Though he pastors the largest church in the United States, his theological ignorance is more incredible than the fact that the church fills what used to be Houston’s Compac Center.

He’s obviously a nice guy. You can’t get away from that reality. Despite his smile and slick hair, I don’t think he’s malicious in any way.

I think he’s just that simple.

And it’s not okay.

Joel Osteen has, by his own admission, been thrust into the pulpit by his late father’s pleading, and ultimately his father’s death. He has no theological training or background. He’s a soundboard operator and camera-man. He’s never attended a day of seminary or pastoral development.

And so week after week, from Lakewood Church and stadiums across the country, he gives his motivational speeches cloaked as legitimate sermons. He scratches itching ears with “helpful sermons” that are, simply, unbiblical.

Let’s be honest, when Oprah endorses your church, you’ve failed to present the Gospel.

And so when the news hit this morning that Joel Osteen, in his simpleton drawl, argues that Mitt Romney – an avowed Temple Mormon – is actually a Christian, I was shocked at the fact that I was shocked.

What I see about Gov. Romney is that he says ‘I believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He’s raised from the dead and he’s my savior.’ I see him as being a believer in Christ like me… That’s enough for me… There’s differences in all religion. I realize that Mormonism is different from Christianity, but you know what he’s a man of faith and values. And to me that’s strong.

So, Joel Osteen, the pastor of the largest church in America, sees no difference in a Mormon belief in Jesus and a Christian belief in Jesus.

Houston, we have a problem.

This is where education and training would be helpful. This is where every pastor and Christian who open their mouth need to be aware of the realities before them regarding not only their own religious tradition and Scriptures (Joel Osteen, this is where you would want to study first), but also that of other faiths and religious traditions that they may speak toward.

When a Mormon says something like, “I believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He raised from the dead and he’s my savior,” what they mean is,

I believe that Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers and children of God. The Holy Spirit had pre-marital sex with a young, virginal Mary, and she gave birth to an earthly Jesus. As he grew, he was a good Mormon who obeyed his parents, held strong moral values, and eventually died on a cross, to open the door of salvation to those who would do good works, go on mission, and believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet. In fact, Jesus’s deity is itself attainable for any good Mormon who lives a good enough life, and – should one qualify – they can eventually be god of their own universe and make their own little spirit babies.

Whatever this is, it is not Christianity

Mormons say Jesus, but they mean an entirely different Jesus than the Jesus of the Bible. They claim to believe the Bible, but theirs is an awfully rewritten version of the King James Bible, not to mention the addition of their own scriptures (which amazingly tell of Native American Indians speaking in King James English!) Frankly, their god is an entirely different God than the one God, Yahweh, revealed in the Bible.

So, do we give Joel a pass for this obviously ridiculous statement? After all, he didn’t go to seminary?

No! We demand that every pastor who dares open his mouth and proclaim God’s message to God’s people knows what he’s talking about! We demand that every pastor study the Bible, know his Bible, and preach the Bible.

If a preacher isn’t willing to do that, then he frankly has no business in the pastorate to begin with.

HT: Todd

Click for full-size image

HT: Challies

One day, at the end of a class session on Calvinism’s doctrine of God’s sovereignty, a student asked me a question I had put off considering. He asked: “If it was revealed to you in a way you couldn’t question or deny that the true God actually is as Calvinism says and rules as Calvinism affirms, would you still worship him?” I knew the only possible answer without a moment’s thought, even though I knew it would shock many people. I said no, that I would not because I could not. Such a God would be a moral monster.

Roger Olsen, Against Calvinism

This quote concerns me on so many levels.

Does Calvinism make God a moral monster?

What justification does Dr. Olsen have to define “morality” apart from God and then judge God by that definition?

And if God unmistakably revealed himself to Dr. Olsen as the Sovereign God of Calvinism, Dr. Olsen would reject him outright?

That seems to turn the argument that “Calvinists worship a theological system over the Bible” on its head, doesn’t it?

And is it surprising that this arrogance would develop out of an outright rejection of Biblical inerrancy?

For Calvinism

January 10, 2012 — 0 Comments

In For Calvinism, Michael Horton (Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics at Westminster Seminary California and cohost of the White Horse Inn) reveals the rich Biblical and historical roots that exist beneath the doctrines of grace that are most commonly referred to as Calvinism. Published by Zondervan alongside Roger Olsen’s Against Calvinism, these two books speak to one of the theological trends that (according to Time magazine) is “changing the world.”

Chapter Summaries

In chapter one, The Essence of Calvinism, the author seeks to dismantle stereotypes and caricatures, and in turn, show where Calvinism lands among various theological positions (Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism, and Socianism).

In chapter two, Of Regents and Rebels: The Human Condition, Horton aspires to display that genuine Reformed theology does not begin with Total Depravity, but with the Creator God and His prize creation, man. Man was created with freedom of will, and chose sin, evil, and death, thereby shackling all of creation in sin. The result is that all of humanity now chooses sin freely, and – controlled by sin – cannot choose otherwise.

Chapter three, Loved Before Time (Election), the author builds a Biblical case for the doctrine of election and distinguishes and clarifies that doctrine from that of reprobation. For an extended section of this chapter, click here.

In chapter four, Mission Accomplished (Atonement), he tackles what is, without a doubt, the most debated and discussed aspect of Calvinism’s five points. He describes “Limited Atonement,” as an “unfortunate label,” and prefers “alternative terms such as ‘definite atonement’ or ‘particular redemption,’” as they clarify the position better.

All orthodox Christians maintain that the atonement is limited either in its extent or in its nature. Calvinists believe that it is limited (or definite) in its extent, but unlimited in its nature or efficacy: Christ’s death actually saved the elect. Arminians believe that it is unlimited in its extent, but limited in its nature or efficacy: Christ’s death makes possible the salvation of everyone, but does not actually save any.

Chapter five, titled Called and Kept (Effectual Calling and Perseverance), differentiates between perseverance and security, as well as providing another (better?) term for definition – “effectual calling” rather than “irresistible grace.”

In chapter six, Calvinism and the Christian Life, the author spends extensive time dispelling the notion that Calvinism hinders piety. He maintains that this is a caricature, and that election is a crucial impetus for the pursuit of godliness.

Chapter seven, Calvinism and Christian Missions, was perhaps my favorite chapter. In it, Horton probed the rich heritage of Calvinist missions, taking the accusation that Calvinism leads to a lack of passion for missions head-on.

For example, Southern Baptist church historian William R. Estep, a noted authority on Anabaptism, asserts that “logically, Calvinism is anti-missionary.” If election is true, he argues, “evangelism and missionary effort are exercises in futility.” The premises in Estep’s article do indeed follow logically to his conclusion. If election eliminates personal responsibility for responding to the gospel and the gospel itself is not to be proclaimed indiscriminately to every person, of course the missionary enterprise would be a fool’s errand. However, none of the premises is actually held by Calvinists. But they are widely assumed by non-Calvinists. It is a caricature of Calvinism that leads to the conclusion that, on logical grounds, it is inimical to missions.

He goes on to describe the rich history of Calvinist missions, from Calvin himself to William Carey to John Eliot to David Brainerd to David Livingstone to Karl F. A. Gutzlaff to Jonathan Goforth to Samuel Zwemer. Horton then goes beyond these men’s stories and gives a compelling Biblical argument for the logic of Calvinism in missions.

And in chapter eight, Calvinism Today: A SWOT Analysis, the author looks in-depth at the strengths and weaknesses of Calvinism, as well as it’s opportunities and threats. Listed among the strengths and weaknesses are: intellectual boldness and cold intellectualism, a love for truth and factionalism, respect for tradition and traditionalism.

Conclusion

In For Calvinism, Horton gives a strong, clear, Biblically-faithful witness that speaks to the tremendous strengths of the doctrines of grace. He encounters caricatures and stereotypes head-on – giving historical evidence through sermons, creeds, and catechisms – explaining that those who hold those certain positions stand on the fringes of Reformed theology, or are misunderstood assumptions by those outside of Calvinism about Calvinists.

The chapters on the rich heritage of Calvinism and Christian piety, and that of Calvinists and missions and evangelism are worth twice the price of the book in and of themselves. In my experience, these two issues are those most criticized by those outside of Calvinist circles. Concerns with Calvinism generally focus on a belief that election will hinder the believer’s efforts in sanctification, or that it would hinder the passionate resolve to share the gospel to all nations. These two chapters simply stop those arguments cold.

Sadly, For Calvinism will primarily be read by the already-convinced, or the will-not-be-convinced. This is not due to the author’s tone, as much as the topic. Few stumble upon books like For Calvinism without a predetermined position in mind. However, even those predisposed against Calvinism will find in Dr. Horton a gracious host, welcoming them to explore the vast richness of the Calvinist theology.

These doctrines of grace may be vilified or celebrated, but they are never boring or trivial. Throughout the history of the church their recovery has provoked debate, reformation, renewal, and mission.

For Calvinism by Dr. Michael Horton

Often, when the term “Calvinism” is mentioned, people think of an arbitrary God who drags some people into heaven kicking and screaming, while telling others who want to be saved that they’re simply not on the list. Sometimes this caricature is actually given life by hyper-Calvinists. However, it has never had any place in the Calvinist system.

In strong terms, the Canons of the Synod of Dort (1618-1619) declared, “Reformed Churches … detest with their whole soul” the view “that in the same manner in which the election is the fountain and cause of faith and good works, reprobation is the cause of unbelief and piety.” God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezek. 18:32) but delights in the salvation of the elect (Eph. 1:5-6). No one is saved by divine coercion and no one is rejected apart from his or her own will. (p. 57)

For Calvinism by Michael Horton

Consider the following scenario, offered by Dr. Thomas White

The doorbell rings. Mark, the relative that I have been praying for years gets up from his brown La-Z-Boy recliner and opens the door.

Two young men wearing white dress shirts stand at the door one slightly behind the other. The one in front politely says, “Hello, I’m from the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints, and we would like to share some information with you. Do you have a moment?”

Mark responds while still gripping the handle of his door, “You guys are the ones that believe we can become gods, used to believe in polygamy and a bunch of other stuff right? Aren’t you guys a cult?” He begins to close the door.

The young man in back named Joe responds, “No sir, we are not a cult, and we don’t have weird beliefs. In fact, Mitt Romney, the president of the United States, holds membership in our church.” As the door opens a little wider Joe continues. “In fact, the evangelical Christian vote put Romney in office. He carried the vote among Baptist, Methodists, Presbyterians, and Catholics. He is very popular among conservatives. So as you can see we do not have weird beliefs.”

Tilting his head and looking upward Mark thinks to himself as he opens the door, “Oh, these people are just another denomination. Lately, I have thought more about God so perhaps He sent them to my door.”

Mark says, “Well come on in. I do have some questions that I would like to know the answers to…”

This scenario may likely become reality in a couple of years.

I cannot vote for Mitt Romney because Mormonism is a false religion that deceives people about the truth and leads them to an eternity in hell. Some people have to worry more about this world than the next but my calling demands that I worry more about eternity and less about current economic conditions.

Click for the full article.

That’s a strong case. And I’m obliged to agree.

What do you think?

Should a Southern Baptist (or any Christian) Vote for Romney?

← Older