Christians Should Get LOST

The TV series, that is.

I admit that the Calvinist in me is always intrigued by stories in which the characters struggle to find meaning and purpose behind seemingly random coincidences. It has been my experience that when you really start to pay attention in life, you soon realize that random coincidences simply don't exist. Nothing happens by chance in a universe under the care of a sovereign Creator.

Of course, it goes beyond that. Once you begin to filter through all the garbage that's out there, you find that there are actually a few shows that have redeeming qualities. LOST is one such show.

James DeMar, writing for American Vision, explains why the series has been such a hit and why Christians should pay attention:

LOST has and will affect tens of millions of people in numerous ways during the next few years before the show finally comes to an end. The writers engage the viewer through the use of inordinately involved story telling and multiple tie-ins through various media avenues. ...

... No other show in history has pulled so much from the past and present culture into a weekly TV production. Christians should take note. God calls us to be the "light of the world." If Christians want to be taken seriously and not be thrown into the dustbin of history, we need to start creating meaningful "stuff" through all the different avenues available that captures the unbeliever's attention along with fellow Christians. So often, movies are made or books are written with just Christians in mind. Jesus' message was for the lost of this world along with the believer.

Relate the Bible and God's Word to everyone. I don't believe the creators of LOST expect to save anyone's soul or even care, but it may actually stimulate more people into reading scripture and plant that needed seed more so than Bible thumping, yelling and screaming that we so often see on college campuses. At least LOST doesn't portray Christians as wackos. LOST is a show that engages and intrigues. Why can't Christians do the same?

While I certainly wouldn't call LOST a Christian show, it definitely touches on biblical themes. It is a show to which Christians can relate and one that perhaps could be used with non-believers to begin a discussion about God, faith, relationships, and life in general.

So, if you haven't done so already, get LOST. You'll be glad you did.

Yes, Another Blog

Humorous, random, less focused, disjointed, rambling, muddled...In other words, this new blog will be more like how my mind actually functions:

Lemon Harangue Pie

Check it out!

Is Jesus Lord?

You'd think that question would be a no-brainer for believers. But consider the "no-lordship" position on salvation that is held by some professing Christians. Nathan Busenitz, posting at Pulpit Magazine, calls attention to a particular quote from Zane Hodges, a leading opponent of lordship salvation. Here is a brief excerpt:

Oh how disgraceful for a man to have known the truth and proclaimed the truth and then to deny the truth! He has put the Son of God to an open shame! Well you say, "I guess he's headed for hell, right? I guess he's headed for eternal damnation. He's renounced his Christian faith." Wait a minute. I didn't say that, and neither does the writer of Hebrews. Let me remind you that Jesus said, "I am the bread of life. He that cometh to Me shall never hunger and he that believeth on Me shall never thirst." And He also said, "He that cometh to Me I shall in no wise cast out." ... God's will is that He lose no one (John 6:37-40). He has never lost anyone and He never will! And I grieve because my friend and brother has lost his faith but Christ has not lost him. He has lost his faith, but Christ has not lost him! Do you believe in the grace of God?

Yes, Mr. Hodges, I believe in the grace of God. It is because of that grace that I do not fall away and turn my back on the truth.

Sure, I sin. All Christians do, and we will continue to sin until we are ultimately freed from our sinful nature. But the beauty of God's grace is that He continues to forgive our sin. In fact, Christ's blood covered it once and for all on the cross. That does not mean, however, that we are free to do as we please. We believers who struggle with sin do not accept it as a natural extension of our relationship with Christ. We are pained by the persistence of sin in our lives. We continue to repent of our sin. We strive to live Godly lives - and we do so knowing that it is only by the grace of God that we have not fallen away.

If I were to venture a guess, Mr. Hodges, I would say that your friend was never a true believer in the first place. As you correctly noted, those who come to Christ will never be cast out. But as a Calvinist I believe in the perseverance of the saints. By that I mean that once God has saved a sinner by grace, through faith, that sinner will continue to be saved and show the fruit of his salvation.

This perseverance - or, more appropriately, preservation - is taught clearly in scripture. Ephesians 2:10 says, "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." Romans 8:29 says, "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers." We read in Phillippians 1:6, "And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ." And Galatians 5:22-23 says that "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control ..." Are those things evident in the life of one who rejects the lordship of Jesus Christ and speaks out against his followers?

So, is Jesus Lord or isn't he? He is Lord in the lives of true Christians, i.e., those who submit to his lordship. Those who don't are proclaiming to the world that their unrepentant, unregenerate souls have no need for a savior. Oh, what a sad position to be in on Judgment Day.

A Healthy Tree Wears Good Fruit

Jesus told his followers, "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have it printed on a t-shirt." Or something like that. Seriously, who knows for sure what Jesus actually said? As long as we let the world know that he's kind of important to us, isn't that enough?

Not since the "My boss is a Jewish carpenter" bumper sticker have Christians been so effective at being salt and light in the world. Now, your t-shirt can be one of the most effective ways to reach the lost.

Just think: with the right kind of Christian apparel, you will be able to...


...spread the Good News...

"Son,
I need you to build a bridge.
Here are all the tools you will need.
See you soon-
Love, Dad"

...lampoon popular culture...


...condense the Gospel into easily recognizable catch phrases...


...and even turn your children into pint-sized evangelists.

"I can do all things"

You can find these and other valuable witnessing tools here.

Remember, what's in your heart isn't as important as what's worn over it. That's what people are going to see. Why take the time to read and understand scripture when someone has already printed the important verses on a t-shirt? Why work so hard to live what you believe when you can just wear it?

Anything Goes

In olden days a glimpse of stocking
Was looked on as something shocking,
But now God knows,
Anything goes!
Good authors too who once knew better words
Now only use four-letter words
Writing prose,
Anything goes!
If driving fast cars you like,
If low bars you like,
If old limbs you like,
If Mae West you like,
Or me undressed you like,
Why nobody will oppose.
When every night the set that's smart is
Intruding in nudist parties in studios,
Anything goes!

---From "Anything Goes"

According to the Times of London, a Church of England priest has continued to officiate as a cleric in spite of his conversion to Hinduism. The Rev. David Hart's diocese renewed his license even though he moved to India, changed his name to Ananda, and serves in a Hindu temple in Thiruvananthapuram, a village in southern India.


Hart, er Ananda, recently published a book entitled "Trading Faith: Global
Religion in an Age of Rapid Change," where he discussed his conversion to
Hinduism. It should also come as no surprise that Hart was a Fellow of the
Jesus Seminar and secretary for the World Congress of Faiths.

In an interview, Mr. Hart said, "I have neither explicitly nor implicitly
renounced my Christian faith or priesthood." However, in his capacity as
Hindu priest, Hart daily blesses a congregation of about 60 with fire that
has previously been offered to Nagar, the snake god.

Hart believes his move will "be read in the spirit of open exploration and
dialogue which is an essential feature of our shared spirituality." "My
philosophical position is that all religions are cultural constructs," he
said. "I am acting out God's story in local terms." Nothing like diving headlong into a stew of theological relativism.

I know that I should probably critique the unbiblical, heretical view
of God on display; that I should point out the flaws in his soteriology, parse his
syncretism, and harp on his gross violations of God's holy and perfect law. Clearly his epistemological foundations are in need of challenge. But I'm going to resist those urges and in the spirit of Elijah (see I Kings 18), will resort to a bit of sarcasm instead.

When I read this news item, all I could think of was "The Simpson's"
episode entitled "Homer the Heretic," where Homer rejects Christianity. At
one point, he is discoursing with Apu at the local Quickie Mart. Seeing a
statue of Ganesha in the "employee lounge," Homer chides Apu:

Homer:
"Hey, Ganesha. Wanna peanut?"

Apu:
"Please do not offer my god a peanut."

Homer:
"No offense Apu, but when they were handing out religions, you musta been
out taking a whizz"

So true. But even worse are the "Christians" who allow such idolatry from their own clergy.

Joel Osteen: The Pandering Prophet

Joel Osteen was in the People's Republic of Massachusetts last week hawking his book "Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential."

You can almost picture the scene, can't you? Here is a blurb from the Boston Herald:

In Boston yesterday, more than 400 fans - most of them fawning females - lined up to meet Osteen at a book signing at the Prudential Center’s Barnes & Noble. Only a visit by former President Bill Clinton drew a bigger crowd, book store employees said.

Osteen and his pretty, blonde wife, Victoria, sold out the TD Banknorth Garden last night with their two-hour worship service, which fetched $10 a ticket. The couple’s visit came a month after controversial faith healer Benny Hinn came to the Hub.

If you've been paying attention for the last several years, you may be aware that the homosexualist assault on marriage is quite advanced in Massachusetts. Hence, a visit from the "most popular preacher in the country" was bound to elicit some discussion of the Christian position on "gay marriage."

When asked about gay marriage, Osteen said "I don’t think it’s God’s best. I never feel like homosexuality is God’s best."

That antiseptic response was apparently not enough to mollify the hard-edged reporters on the scene who persisted with the hard line of inquiry. Osteen finally responded, "I don’t feel like that’s my thrust . . . you know, some of the issues that divide us, and I’m here to let people know that God is for them and he’s on their side."

God is on whose side exactly? The Old Testament condemns homosexuality in no uncertain terms. Buggery is termed an "abomination," and Leviticus 20:13 established the death penalty for homosexual acts.

In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul provides a revealing description of homosexuality: "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion" (Rom. 1:27).

The word "inflamed" here literally means "to burn out." Homosexuality involves the burning out of a man. The structure of the passage in Romans 1 indicates that homosexuality as a practice represents the height of apostasy and hostility toward God.

In a week when a British evangelical was arrested for merely passing out leaflets at a homosexual rally, Osteen's tepidness is really little more than cowardice. "But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death" (Rev. 21:8).

Writing about Osteen's comments, Dr. Mohler hits the nail squarely:

Mr. Osteen can be assured that his weak and evasive non-answer to this reporter's question will put him at very little risk for arrest. But then, pandering prophets are rarely at much of a risk from the public anyway.

There was no conviction in his answer; no clear declaration of biblical truth; no Gospel, no judgment, and no promise. Just a non-answer with a smile. Pathetic . . . simply pathetic.

Pastor John Returns

Our pastor, John Piper, has returned from his five-month sabbatical. And it seems he was quite busy:

I was able to finish writing the main body of two books. One is called What Jesus Demands from the World, which will be published by Crossway Books in late September (Lord willing). It is a 365-page book on the commands of Jesus, in an attempt to obey Matthew 28:19, "Teach them to observe everything I commanded you." Not just to know everything, but to observe (obey!) everything. How do you handle the Gospels in such a way that the teaching results in obedience? That was my goal. The other book is a response to N. T. Wright on the doctrine of justification. I have no immediate plan to publish it until I get the feedback from critical readers. My motivation in writing it is that I think his understanding of Paul is wrong and his view of justification is harmful to the church and to the human soul. Few things are more precious than the truth of justification by faith alone because of Christ alone. As a shepherd of a flock of God’s blood-bought church, I feel responsible to lead the sheep to life-giving pastures. That is not what the sheep find in Wright's view of Paul on justification. He is an eloquent and influential writer and is, I believe, misleading many people on the doctrine of justification. I will keep you posted on what becomes of this manuscript.

Definitely something to look forward to. You can read his entire report here.

For more on the doctrine of justification, check out Phil Johnson's excellent series on 2 Corinthians 5:21 over at PyroManiacs.

Worship Service or Pep Rally?

Maybe we've been going about things the wrong way. Maybe what we need isn't more Christ-centered worship or expositional preaching or even sound, biblical doctrine. Maybe what our churches need are more mascots. From the satirical LarkNews.com:

MONTEREY, Calif. — First Nazarene Church used to start Sunday services with announcements and a generic welcome from the associate pastor. Now service starts with whirling spotlights, stadium music and a cougar mascot bounding down the center aisle slapping high fives and making "raise the roof" gestures.

"Adding Christian Cougar was a great move for us," says the pastor. "No one calls our church boring anymore."

Churches across the country are adopting mascots to pump up Sunday mornings and rally people in worship.

"Our new mascot energizes things," says pastor Del Richards of Valley Baptist Church in Little Rock, Ark., which just introduced Lift-Him-Up Lion.

On Sunday morning during worship time, the Lion rushes on stage and does the running man dance to "Blessed Be Your Name." He then makes "I can't hear you" motions and broad clapping gestures, then kneels with his hands raised when the songs turn slower. Worship team members play along with his antics. During the offertory he pulls out an oversized wallet and dumps wads of fake cash into the offering plate. During the sermon he stands to the side and makes rah-rah gestures and encourages people to applaud.

"I tell him to go with the Spirit and raise some heaven," says the pastor. "By the time I get in the pulpit, the people are so amped up they can hardly contain themselves." ...

... Mascots are also an affordable option compared to larger projects.

"We couldn't afford a new youth center, but we can afford a wolverine costume," says a Michigan pastor whose attendance has risen considerably since they added Worship Wolverine, who does trampoline flips, handstands and runs across the platform with a banner that says, "Praise!" ...

... Some churches experimented with live characters like Samson or the Apostle Paul, but people "thought they were weirdos or homeless people." Most stick with animals. (Full story)

Now, if people dressed up as animals can be used to get the congregation fired up for the Lord, just think of how much more excited people would be about going to church if we added cheerleaders!

Oh, that would be too much? I suppose. After all, we wouldn't want anything to take our focus off of Christ, now, would we? Unfortunately, looking at everything churches do to get people through the doors, we can't be too far away.

Should Christians Be Optimistic, Part III

I’m finally returning to the question of how Christians should view history, particularly the future.

I want to turn very briefly to the humiliation and sacrifice of our Lord and ponder just how it should change or shape our outlook of the future. Jesus suffered greatly, both as man and God, for the sins of His people.

First, he laid down His divine prerogatives to take the form of a humble servant. Paul writes that Jesus "made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross" (Phil. 2:7-8)

Second, not only did Jesus die for us, He lived a perfect life for us, too, in the face of great temptation. As the Second Adam, Jesus had to face and overcome the temptations and machinations of Satan (Matt. 4:1-11; Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13). The author of Hebrews says that, "we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15). Jesus had to face and conquer temptation on behalf of His people as a man, to win victory where Adam had fallen.

Third, in His physical being, Jesus had real, human, physical limitations. He hungered (Matt. 4:2), thirsted (John 19:28), and became physically tired (Mark 4:38). Additionally, Jesus had real human emotions. At various points, Jesus is described as troubled (John 12:27), sorrowful (Matt. 26:38), and compassionate (Mark 1:41).

Fourth, before going to the Cross, Jesus suffered slapping and scourging by His Roman tormentors and was mocked and cursed by His own kinsmen of the flesh. He endured harsh physical and emotional pain on our behalf.

Fifth, on the Cross, He became Sin for us. The Bible says that he became "a curse." "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.'" As God, Jesus was without sin, and yet He willingly became sin to save His people from the coming wrath and judgment of God. "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (II Cor. 5:21).

Finally, Scripture says that the only begotten Son of God, who shared perfect fellowship as the second member of the Godhead, was forsaken by the Father. “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34).

Christ's suffering begs the question, was it all in vain? Did Jesus do all of this so that only a small percentage of men would be saved? Did he suffer so that the world would fall increasingly under the reign of Satan? Moreover, is Jesus’ victory at the cross and His ultimate exaltation primarily, if not exclusively in the spiritual realm?

It seems reasonable to assume that because His suffering, humiliation, death, burial, and ultimate triumph occur in rather than outside histor--and as a real, physical man--that His ultimate victory likewise will be visible and on earth, in history, not as the result of a post-historical discontinuity.

W. G. T. Shedd puts it this way:

It is utterly improbable that such a stupendous miracle as the incarnation, humiliation, passion, and crucifixion of one of the Person of the Godhead, should yield a small and insignificant result. On a priori grounds, therefore, we have reason to conclude that the Gospel of the Cross will be successful, and the Christian religion a triumph on the earth and among the race of creatures for whom it was intended. But this can hardly be the case, if only a small fraction of the human family are saved. The presumption, consequently, is that the great majority of mankind not the small minority of it, will be the subjects of redeeming grace.

What Is Most Damaging to the Body of Christ?

Marc Heinrich poses an interesting question on his site, Purgatorio: Which of the following is most damaging to the Body of Christ?:

1. The Anglican's naming a woman Presiding Bishop who supports ordination of practicing gay clergy:


Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori became the first woman elected to lead a church in the global Anglican Communion when she was picked Sunday to be the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church. ... In 2003, the Americans shocked the Anglican world by electing the first openly gay bishop—V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. Placing a female bishop at the head of the denomination may further anger conservatives overseas and within the U.S. church. And Jefferts Schori voted to confirm Robinson.

2. The PCUSA's allowing the renaming of the Trinity to "compassionate mother, beloved child, and life-giving womb" instead of "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit":


At the recent 217th General Assembly meeting, PC(USA) commissioners voted to allow the denomination's churches to use the phrase "compassionate mother, beloved child, and life-giving womb" instead of "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" when referring to the Trinity. This was just one of the 12 phrases approved by the Assembly as permissible substitutions for the traditional names of the Godhead, another being "rock, cornerstone, and temple."

3. The SBC's resolution on alcohol:


RESOLVED, That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Southern Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages.

RESOLVED, That we urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our communities and nation ...

While I believe all three positions are unbiblical, it is my contention that #3 (i.e., the issue of liberty vs. legalism) is the most damaging to the Body of Christ. Why do I say that? Because those churches who agree with #1 or #2 have already demonstrated that they are not part of the Body of Christ.

Is Old Testament Law Applicable Today?

Something that has been on my heart lately is the relevance of Old Testament Law: Does it still apply to us today? I hope to write more on this subject in the near future, but in the meantime, let me share some of my initial thoughts on the subject.

Whevever I hear someone talk about "God's Law"—in particular, calling for "God's Law" to be enforced in civil government—I find myself a bit confused. What exactly does that entail? What do they mean by "God's Law"? My concern is that what they are really pushing is an American theocracy.

Recently, I read an article that called for the state-sanctioned killing of homosexuals. "The word of God commands that sodomites are to be executed," the author writes, "and God gives our civil officials the sword to do the job. Until our civil officials turn from their wicked way by administering Justice, we can only be judged with the most depraved pagan nations in history." Welcome to life under theocratic rule.

One of the things that jumps out at me whenever I see a plea for a return to "God's Law" is the lack of clarification in defining the law. If honoring the law means adherence to the Old Testament, then what other laws should we enforce? Should a man who lies with a woman during her menstrual cycle be banished (Lev. 20:18)? Should women who aren't virgins be stoned to death (Deut. 22:20-21)? Should all adulterers be executed (Deut. 22:22)? Should we stone rebellious children (Deut. 21:20-21)? What's to be done with those who mar the edges of their beards (Lev. 19:27)? Should women who have just given birth be kept from attending church services for 33 days—66 if they give birth to a girl (Lev. 12:4-5)? And how should we lawfully and biblically deal with those who have bodily discharge (Lev. 15)?

How are we to determine which laws are to be enforced? Didn't James say that if we fail to keep the law in one point, we are guilty of breaking all of it (James 2:10)? I'm not saying that the Old Testament is irrelavant, but we must look at it in light of the New Testament.

For example, in the New Testament we learn that Christ, through his life, death, and resurrection, fulfilled the law (Matt. 5:17, Luke 24:44, John 15:25). We as Christians fulfill the law through love (Rom. 13:10). And Paul reminds us that "the whole law is fulfilled in one word: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'" (Gal. 5:14).

That, of course, isn't to say that we should be silent when it comes to the law. As we take Christ to the world, we preach the law so that people are convicted of their sin. But we also reach out to the lost in love by preaching the gospel. That's how individual lives, families, communities, nations, and the world are changed. No amount of legislating will do that.

A New Law
- from Mockingbird by Derek Webb



Don't teach me about politics and government
Just tell me who to vote for

Don't teach me about truth and beauty
Just label my music

Don't teach me how to live like a free man
Just give me a new law

I don't wanna know if the answers aren't easy
So just bring it down from the mountain to me

I want a new law
I want a new law
Gimme that new law

Don't teach me about moderation and liberty
I prefer a shot of grape juice

Don't teach me about loving my enemies

Don't teach me how to listen to the Spirit
Just give me a new law

I don't wanna know if the answers aren't easy
So just bring it down from the mountain to me

I want a new law
I want a new law
Gimme that new law

What's the use in trading a law you can never keep
for one you can that cannot get you anything
Do not be afraid
Do not be afraid
Do not be afraid

Should Christians Be Optimistic? Part II

In my previous post, I considered certain attributes of God's character and
His purposes that should incline Christians toward historical optimism.

Likewise, consider Jesus and His ministry. Christ came to earth to
accomplish the purpose of His Father in establishing the kingdom of God.

Before departing to the right hand of the Father, Jesus promised to empower
His disciples, and He gave them their marching orders. "All authority in
heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples
of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and
of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.
And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age" (Matt. 18:18-20).

After this, Jesus ascends to heaven and is enthroned at the right hand of
God. I've often wondered why I've never heard a single sermon on the
ascension and its significance. Not once in my entire life do I recall
having been taught about this doctrine. The reason, I've concluded, is
that it conflicts with the predominant eschatological framework of the
modern evangelical church. The idea that Jesus is king NOW and has been
given all authority in heaven and ON EARTH does not neatly comport with the
notion that the church will fail, and that Satan's authority and power will
increase over time.

Jesus has been exalted at the right hand of God and the promised Holy
Spirit was poured out on the church to empower it with gifts (Acts
2:30-36). Scripture affirms that Jesus will, indeed must, reign until he
has put ALL his enemies under his feet (I Cor. 15:25). But does this
victory occur through a catastrophic return, or is the process slow and
gradual with Jesus working out His will through His People?

Paul says that the Father "seated him [Jesus] at his right hand in the
heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion,
and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the
one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over
all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills
all in all" (Eph. 1:19-23).

Jesus said to Peter, "I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will
not overcome it." Our Lord paints a picture of a militant and empowered
body of believers, with Jesus in the lead working through the Holy Spirit,
taking the Gospel into the world and scattering the darkness. It is the
forces of evil manning the barricades against the Church, not visa versa.

Thus, if Jesus has been given all authority, and has been made head of the
church, then He is responsible to bring the world into submission. Is it
possible that He will fail? And why would such a victory only come about
AFTER the church, the Body of Christ, has been raptured out of the world?

Having said that, let me offer a qualification. The kingdom of God has not
reached its ultimate fulfillment. There is indeed an "already, not yet"
dichotomy at work. However, is it not reasonable to expect that during the
period between inauguration and consummation there will be growth in the
kingdom of God?

When Jesus describes the Kingdom in His parables, he paints a picture of a
mustard seed sown in a field. "It is the smallest of all seeds, but when
it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree,"
says Jesus (Matt. 13:31-33). Likewise the kingdom is like leaven that over
time permeates the entire loaf of bread. So the development is progressive
and slow, not catastrophic or in some sense post-historical.

This is not altogether different from a traditional understanding of
sanctification. There is a moment of definitive sanctification in the life
of the believer. However, the process of growing into Christ-likeness
takes place in history, on earth, practically in the life of the believer.
And though sin is not completely eradicated, it should wield less influence
over the believer. Why shouldn't this principle apply to the broader
context of God's kingdom?

Next time, I will briefly consider Christ's humiliation.

Should Christians Be Optimistic? Part I

As a Calvinistic Southern Baptist, it dawned on me recently how crabbed we sound when synthesizing our understanding of God's sovereignty, or decretive will, with historical pessimism.

Over the course of several brief posts, I would like to consider how our understanding of God's sovereignty, Christology, and Pneumatology should provide a framework for historical optimism.

First, let us consider some basic purposes of the Father. God has promised to bless the nations and all families of the earth. "Now the LORD said to Abram, 'Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed'" (Gen. 12:1-3)

Second, the Father has promised to establish His Son's Kingdom over the whole earth (see Ps. 110). In Daniel 2, we read, "God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever."

Through Christ, the Kingdom of God comes to fruition. According to Isaiah there will be no end to the increase of His government, and from His throne justice and righteousness will be established and upheld.

We also know some other things about God’s attributes. In His dealings with man, God is gracious and merciful. "The LORD is gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love" (Ps. 145:8). Similarly, God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live" (Ezek. 18:32; see also Ezek. 18:23).

On the other hand, we also know that God decrees EVERYTHING that comes to pass for His glory and pleasure (see Eph. 1:3-14). According to the London Baptist Confession (1689), "God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass."

Does God’s decretive will, expressed above, come into conflict with his graciousness toward men? The primary eschatological approaches of the day, which tend toward historical pessimism, typically posit that the vast majority of mankind will be lost. But if God does not take pleasure in the deaths of men, why would he foreordain to punish the majority of them?

More to come...

Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia

In case you forgot, tomorrow is June 6, 2006, or... (cue the theme music from The Omen) ...666!

Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia (Does it really need to be explained?) is the fear of the number 666, and it has led to some silly reactions. You may recall that U.S. Route 666 was renamed to U.S. Route 491 back in 2003. And I know of one house not too far from my own home that had its address changed from 666 to 668.

Unfortunately, this irrational fear seems to be popping up in evangelical circles. Ambassadors Ministries, for example, is calling for a "violent day of worship" to combat the forces of evil:

"We believe that the plans the enemy has for this date (June 6, 2006) will be destroyed through violent worship and praise. We are inviting the entire world to be part of this huge unity project."

Now, I could be wrong, but hasn't this particular date already come and gone 20 times over the last 2000 years?

Why Does Evil Exist?

Human beings are curious by nature, so it is understandable when people wonder why bad things happen. If there is a God, and if God is good, then why does evil exist? Surely there must be a reason.

To answer this question, we must first begin to understand the concept of God's sovereignty and holiness. I realize that's a bit like saying, "In order to put gas in your car, you must first learn how to build an internal combustion engine while blindfolded," but let's just touch on some of the basics.

What is the very first thing we learn in scripture? "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen. 1:1). That's pretty straightforward. The Bible opens by saying that everything exists because of God. Naturally, there is the assumption that the Creator is in control of his creation. In other words, he has complete sovereignty.

Scripture teaches us that while God does not condone evil (Isaiah 13:11), he did ordain that evil exist. This has everything to do with his sovereignty. In fact, as we see in the book of Job, not even Satan can make a move without God's say-so.

God himself is not the sinner, nor does he act as an agent of sin. But he can and does intend sin for good. One example of this can be found in Genesis 50:20, where Joseph confronts his brothers who sold him into slavery: "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today."

Note that Joseph didn't say that God used evil for good. He meant for evil to happen so that a greater good would come from it.

Perhaps the ultimate example of God ordaining evil for good is the sacrifice of his only son for our sins. The crucifixion of Jesus Christ was clearly an evil act committed by evil men—there is no other way to describe the execution of the most innocent person who ever lived—but Christ's death was predestined even before the world began (Acts 4:27-28, Eph. 1:5-7, 1 Pet. 1:18-20). And it is that sacrifice that has purchased eternal life for those who believe.

The blessed truth to be found here is that God is in control of all things (Deut. 32:39, Job 1:21-22, Isaiah 45:7, Amos 3:6, James 4:14-15). Everything that happens is in accordance with God's will. In Ephesians 1:11, the Apostle Paul writes, "In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will."

The sovereignty of God is absolutely fundamental. As Charles Spurgeon preached:

There is no half way between a mighty God that worketh all things by the sovereign counsel of his will and no God at all. A God that cannot do as he pleases—a God whose will is frustrated—is not a God, and cannot be a God. I could not believe in such a God as that.

God is nothing if not sovereign.

God is also holy. He is perfectly good and just in every way. While it may at first seem like a contradiction for a holy God to even allow evil to exist, much less ordain it, the existence of evil helps us understand who God is. Let me explain.

As human beings, you and I long for that which is good. We want to do what is right. We strive constantly for something that is higher than we are. And there is nothing higher, more right, or more good than God. He is the epitome of purity and perfection. As such, he cannot help but bring glory to himself. To do anything less would be a sin—and God does not sin.

In short, the existence of evil allows God's glory to shine. The great American theologian Jonathan Edwards gives us a much more detailed explanation:

It is a proper and excellent thing for infinite glory to shine forth. And for the same reason, it is proper that the shining forth of God's glory should be complete. That is, that all parts of his glory should shine forth, that every beauty should be proportionately radiant, that the beholder may have a proper notion of God. It is not proper that one glory should be exceedingly manifested and another not at all. Thus, it is necessary that God's awful majesty, his authority and dreadful greatness, justice, and holiness should be manifested. But this could not be unless sin and punishment had been decreed so that the shining forth of God's glory would be very imperfect, both because these parts of divine glory would not shine foth as the others do, and also the glory of his goodness and love and holiness would be faint without them. Nay, they could scarcely shine forth at all. If it were not right that God should decree and permit and punish sin, there could be no manifestation of God's holiness in hatred of sin or in showing any preference in his providence of godliness before it. There would be no manifestation of God's grace or true goodness if there was no sin to be pardoned, no misery to be saved from. How much happiness soever he bestowed he would not be so much prized and admired, and the sense of it would not be so great. So evil is necessary in order to the highest happiness of the creature and the completeness of that communication of God for which he made the world because the creature's happiness consists in the knowledge of God and the sense of his love. And if the knowledge of him be imperfect, the happiness of the creature must be proportionately imperfect.

So, why does evil exist? If I had to answer in a single sentence, I would say this: Evil exists because its inevitable defeat ultimately glorifies God.