Childlike Faith

When I was about 15 years old my dad was teaching me to ride motocross. Specifically I was learning how to jump aggressively once reaching the top of a steep sand quarry wall in order to launch myself and the motorcycle very high into the air, land and carry on as quickly as possible. Going high into the air slows you down, but I was primarily learning how to control the bike in any give situation.  I was learning how to ride just like my dad - and I couldn't have been happier! 

My dad had bought me my second motorcycle, a Yamaha BW200.  I loved the thing! It was nearly unstoppable. Because of the large wheels I could easily navigate mud, sand, logs... just about anything! But on the day in question I was about to come up against something I was not prepared for. 

Time and again I would rush up the wall and slip into the air, land and go around again. Faster, quicker, more aggressive... more this more that... my dad kept wanting more out of me. Finally I decided to give it all I dared to! Rushing up the wall adrenaline was pumping through my system and I was feeling that the situation was getting out of control. This time I didn't just slip into the air, I launched! It felt like I was on a rocket! I freaked out. It was too much. When I landed I tried to turn too soon.. .didn't give enough gas and the bike took me to the ground and pinned me there. 

I'm adopted but you would never know it based on how my dad and I look and act. I've so looked up to him that I talk like he talks, walk like he walks and even use his judgment - even today after having been married for some 19 years. My dad was my hero. 

I wanted to be rescued by my dad, my hero. 

I called out to him, but he just stood there looking at me. 

I called out again and again. 

Finally he told me he wasn't coming, that I had to pick the bike up off of myself and get back on it. "Now." He said, not harshly but with no hint that I could argue with him any further. 

I picked the bike up. Threw my leg over it. Started it up. Looked at him, disbelieving. Finally I road over to him - and he explained what had just happened to me. Then sent me down to bottom of the quarry to do it again, just as fast. 

You know what my dad explained to me that day? That I had to learn to pick myself up. It was time for me to start being the man I needed to become. I needed to know that I could rely on myself. I needed to know that when the situation is out of control I can control what I'm able to, and roll with the rest. I needed to be able to face the impossible, and get through it. He wanted me to be a strong man. 

I had wanted to be rescued by my dad, my hero. My dad wanted me to be the man I saw him as. 

Jesus' Disciples were in a boat in terrible weather. They saw a Man walking on the water and considered perhaps He was a ghost! He told them to not be afraid because "I AM." Peter recognized that it was the Lord, and said that if it was Him that he wanted to be called out to join Him on the water! WOW. Can you imagine asking such a question - and being sincere? Peter wanted to do something amazing like what the Lord was doing - just like I wanted to ride motorcycle the way my dad could. 

Peter got out on to the waves and started walking on water - yes a plain old fashioned fallible man like you or I.  Peter did great and the Lord must have been pleased! That is until Peter saw how the wind was affecting the water and became afraid. At that moment Peter began to sink. 

He cried out to Jesus "Lord save me!" and IMMEDIATELY the Lord stretched out His arm and saved him. 

Peter wanted to be rescued by the Lord, and the Lord did so IMMEDIATELY. 

So what's the lesson here? Well tomorrow morning I'm leading the Breaking of the Bread service and I'm going to speak on this lesson. While my dad's goal was to bring up a strong, self-reliant, resilient man the Lord crafts His children entirely differently. My dad had an honorable purpose, and he did the right thing so far as learning to be a man is concerned from his point of view. 

The Lord wants dependant children, and fully dependant at that. We are supposed to be so dependant on Him that we do not fear the waves, we simply call on Him in every situation at all times. We don't need to learn to be stronger than the waves, or to persevere through them, or to overcome them - we need to be ever reliant on the rescue of the Lord - in every situation. 

The Lord rebuked Peter that day, saying he had "little faith" but who among the Brethren reading this blog has faith like Peter did to get out of a boat and walk on water? 

Let us remember that the Lord didn't want Peter to perform that day, He wanted him to trust Him - no matter what. It was this amazing faith that Peter had, momentarily, that allowed him to do the amazing thing. The amazing thing was possible because of his trust, not as proof of it, not as part of it. Peter obviously had faith in the Lord even after he sank, but it was little faith - yet still enough for the Lord to save him. 

How's your faith today? Are you trusting Him with everything? Are you?

On My Run

I've gotten serious about running again.

I was last truly serious about running early in 2005 when I ran in the Halifax Bluenose Half Marathon, which I completed in 2:12 in near hurricane conditions. I was pleased with the result considering the crazy winds, and impressed I lived through the experience. It was a terribly hard run, but also one of the greatest experiences of my life.

Since then I have been an on again, off again, kind of runner.  Having just crossed over into adulthood at the ripe old age of 40, I've decided it's time to get serious again. My loving wife has been running all along and she is very fast. So she's been training me since October and for Christmas she got me the Adidas miCoach.  We first saw it at one of her 10K races last year. I wanted it badly but didn't want to spend the money on myself. I generally only ever splurge on myself with computer or music gear.

I started training with the miCoach on January 4th. I set it up to train me with the goal of completing a 10K race in May in 60mins or less. The training program seemed too easy at first, but tonight I ran my 100th KM since the program started  - and it's getting pretty challenging. I've also gotten much faster! On  New Year's Eve I ran 5K in 28:16 - which isn't quick for a 40 y/o male.  I'm now able to do that same run in 25 mins. That's a huge improvement for such a short time!

If you are a runner who wants to get better, or someone who wants to learn how to run I can truly recommend this inexpensive bit of gear.

Quick Update

I'm working on Personnel Evaluations at work and so my writing here will be slow for the next little while. I had intended on having the review of Slave posted before this... however, it's a good thing that I've waited! Kindle doesn't give page numbers that relate to the actual print copy of the book, but that is being fixed. There's a preview of the next Kindle update which will include proper page numbers out now. As soon as this is released I'll be able to accurately quote MacArthur in such a way that people can easily find the quotes in the actual book. This is going to make writing the review much easier, and hopefully make the review more helpful in the end.

One note about the review - it's going to be short and I can sum it up for you right here. The book is not influential. I can't imagine anyone changing their mind to believe in MacArthur's Lordship Salvation theology after reading it, if they disagreed in the past. It is also not going to drive away anyone who currently even loosely holds to this theological position. It makes no real statement, comes to almost no conclusions, and so in the end I expect it will be an entertaining read for those who hold the position and a disappointing read for everyone else.

On a side note; I've ordered the book Free Grace Soteriology by Dr. David R. Anderson since it has been recommended to me by Dr. Robb Lawson.

Applying Acts 21?

If you were the Apostle Paul how would you have reacted to what the Church at Jerusalem was practicing? Read what he was told on his arrival in Acts 21:17-25 

¹⁷ And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.¹⁸ On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. ¹⁹ When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. ²⁰ And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; ²¹ but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. ²² What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. ²³ Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. ²⁴ Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. ²⁵ But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

Paul was returning to Jerusalem after having preached that if you strive to obey the Law that Christ profits you nothing, and that you are indebted to obey the whole Law. Gal 5:2-3 (for example). What's more he talks about those who compel men become circumcised do so to avoid their own persecution of the Cross of Jesus Christ, that they only want to boast in the fleshly works of men. Gal 6:12-13 He also states that he would rather they cut their own selves off - if you know what he means. Gal 5:12 Yes that is graphic and harsh.

How does Paul react to the news of Jewish Believers being "zealous for the Law"? Well some people have said that Paul made the ultimate compromise... some say he made the biggest mistake of his ministry... some say that Paul recognized that Jewish Believers are not the same as Gentile Believers in that Jewish Believers are still under the Law while the Gentiles never were and are still are not now.

The rest of Acts 21 tells us how he reacted and what ensued. Acts 21:26

²⁶ Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them

Paul capitulated, and obeyed ceremony and entered the Temple in accordance with the Law. Was Paul recognizing that he was under the Law? No. Was he compromising? Perhaps... but I don't think so. Can there be middle ground between under the Law and not under the Law? Some teachers in the Church divide the Law between ceremony and morality and claim that Christians are under the "moral law" however, here we have Paul obeying ceremonial law. Scripture does not divide the Law any more than Paul did in his actions at Jerusalem.  I don't think it was compromise.

Did he make a mistake? Perhaps an intentional mistake. I think he intentionally became a hypocrite in order to win the hypocrites. I believe Paul became all things to all men that he might win some.  1Cor 9:19-23 And even more so, Paul was acting exactly according to his words and so NOT being a hypocrite. In Rom 9:1-5 Paul says that he could wish that he was himself accursed of Christ, if by such he could win the Jews to Christ.

Was Paul, a Jew still under Law? NO! He explains his, and all Jewish Believers relationship with to the Law when he rebukes Peter, who had been living like a Gentile until some Jewish Believers showed up in Antioch. Gal 2:11-21

¹¹ Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; ¹² for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. ¹³ And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. 

¹⁴ But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? ¹⁵ We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, ¹⁶ knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified. 

¹⁷ “But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! ¹⁸ For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. ¹⁹ For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. ²⁰ I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. ²¹ I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”

Jews become like Gentiles when they believe because they have died in Christ, and are dead to the Law.

So was Paul mistaken to go into the Temple the way he did, under Law? No I don't think so. I think he set aside the freedom he had in order that he could win those in bondage. Read the wonderful sermon he was able to preach to the huge crowd that sought to kill him. Acts 22:1-21 I think Paul knew what would go down and used that opportunity to tell them about Christ the Just One, and the true washing away of sins - not just being purified for a moment so that one can enter the Temple.

So what's my point here? 

Well, I want everyone reading to be thinking about how we can do this with our Lordship Salvation Brothers; if they have in fact received the Gospel of Christ 1Cor 15:1-11 before they were swept aside by the wind of this false doctrine.

See while successful Discipleship is not a condition for, or of true Salvation in Christ, it is the very focus of the Epistles of the New Testament. It's interesting that today in church we were studying 1Thess and I think it's the only letter from Paul that doesn't include the correction of grave disorder. The only correction Paul gives is about the reality of our hope in Christ's return being a good thing. So I can say wholly confidently that Discipleship is a HUGE topic in the Bible. We really are supposed to submit to Christ and live holy, and do good works - we really are!

Those in the the bondage of Lordship Salvation see this as a condition for and/or an unavoidable result of salvation because it is so prevalent in the New Testament. So how can we do a better job of giving ourselves the opportunity to preach the washing of sins by the death burial and resurrection of the Jesus Christ the Just?

How can we surrender freedom to win the opportunity to preach freedom? How SHOULD we do this? Can we do this without blaspheming God?

Just finished reading Slave

I've just finished reading John MacArthur's Slave this moment. My first impressions still stand - though some will require some tweeking when I publish my review of the book.

In short, I feel like I've just watched a movie that was promoted to be a summer blockbuster which would win all the awards.. and it turned out to be Transformers 2.

This book is WAY over hyped...

First Impressions of MacArthur's Slave

Update: Find my final thoughts on Slave here. 

So I've read the Preface and Chapter One of MacArthur's new book Slave. I will of course continue reading the book but I think my first impressions are worthy of being captured here before they are lost in a whatever new thoughts come from exposure to the rest of the work.

MacArthur's pride is NOT my issue with his theology. That being said, one initial reaction to the promotion of the book (See this promo video for example) has been consistent and this sentiment as written by Bruce Bauer in his review at Amazon.com is a great example:

The back paper jacket to the book caught my attention: “A COVER-UP OF BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS: Centuries ago, English translators perpetrated a fraud in the New Testament, and it’s been purposely hidden and covered up ever since. Your own Bible is probably included in the cover-up!” 

WHAT? Are we to understand that Bible translators for centuries, hundreds if not thousands of highly-trained knowledgeable men of God, have kept a well-guarded secret about the true meaning of the Bible that only NOW Dr. MacArthur will be the one scholar who will bring us the real scoop? 

Is this reaction to the promotional material justified by what is contained in the book? Well this is a tough one to answer - properly. The short answer is yes, but here's the long answer. MacArthur cites two other people who have written on the subject. In 1966 Edwin Yamauchi wrote an article in his own publication the Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society entitled "Slaves of God." MacArthur's inspiration for Slave is the second. Murray J. Harris 1999 book "Slave of Christ" was his reading material on a long flight, and it gave him the idea of the big "cover-up."   So MacArthur doesn't set himself up as the "one scholar" who will save us from the "cover-up."  HOWEVER,  MacArthur sets himself above the Reformers, and all those who have followed in their tradition. He gives them praise and then writes in the Preface:

"Though all those noble theologians in the rich Reformation tradition of gospel truth touched on this matter - no one had pulled the hidden jewel all the way into the sunlight." 

So yes, MacArthur is portraying himself as this one great scholar who is doing for us what the Reformers and their followers never did. Those are big shoes to walk over... but well just because the guy has a big head doesn't mean I can discount his work. That would be the same time of behaviour that he and other Lordship Salvation preachers engage in, and I'll have nothing of it.

So with the sensational stuff out of the way let's get to the real issues!

This early in the book I have come across three practices in his teaching which give me concern.

1. Double speak. Was there an intentional "cover-up" of the meaning of doulos or not? Is MacArthur the saviour of doctrine or just following a long tradition?

In the preface he writes that Harris' Slave of Christ made him:

"realize there had been a centuries-long cover-up by English New Testament translators that had obscured a precious, powerful, and clarifying revelation by the Holy Spirit. Undoubtably, the cover-up was not intentional--at least not initially."

So it wasn't intentional at first but now it is? Then in Chapter One:

"this cover up.....almost seems like a conspiracy"

If it's intentional then then it must be a conspiracy? This double speak on this topic is classic MacArthur. Whether he's talking about how he's going to expose a long hidden truth, which has been spoken about in every generation since the Apostles.... or an intentional world wide cover-up that isn't a conspiracy.... or whatever controversial doctrine he is teaching on - it's all of grace but if you're not working as a slave of Christ you're not really saved.... MacArthur is highly adept at presenting his doctrine in such a way as to give those who follow him quotes which seem orthodox outside of the context of his teaching.

2. Using MacArthur's interpretation to define other's words. This one is a bit hard to explain. In The Gospel According (TGATJ) to Jesus MacArthur would make a claim, offer his reasoning which was never fully convincing and then a few pages later say "Since we know.... then the Apostle Paul meant..." It was down right offensive to me as I read the book. In Slave MacArthur offers stories of the torture and deaths of some martyrs. He notes how the people he talks about would only answer their questioners with "I am a Christian." Over a few pages MacArthur declares that "christian" = "slave of Christ" and then goes on to state that this is what these martyrs were stating.  MacArthur makes it seem as though one person did actually say the words "I am a slave of Christ" but doesn't actually quote the man, nor the question being asked of him, or give any other context.

One interesting example may be hard for some to catch. MacArthur writes:

"In fact, whereas the outside world called them Christians the earliest believers repeated referred to themselves in the New Testament as the Lord's slaves."  

While it is true that several of the writers of the NT used the word "doulos" to describe themselves and their service to Christ - they were not using it as MacArthur describes. These were a few specific people describing their own relationship to the Lord, explaining their purpose and lives. This is not how Christians talked about themselves, it is how Apostles and other men with offices in the Church spoke of themselves - and rightfully so.

3. Using extra-bibilcal reasoning to define what the Bible says. I'm all about the Grammatical Historical Hermeneutic. That being so, MacArthur throws out the context of word usage in the Scriptures and inserts the Greco-Roman view of slavery in it's place.

My first impressions are not all that surprising.

NOTE: I cannot figure out how to give page references because I'm using an eBook version of Slave and reading it on my laptop & iPod.

Update: Find my final thoughts on Slave here. 

Purchased 'Slave' on Kindle

So I've purchased John MacArthur's new book Slave on my Kindle account.

I'm going to be taking my time reading it but I'm sure I'll be posting about it soon. Here's a screenshot of the first page after the cover however:

If there is anything good, at all, about this book being published it must simply be that followers can no longer deny that MacArthur preaches a works based salvation.  In the very first paragraph of writing in the book RC Sproul praises the work and states:

"Those who would be His children, must paradoxically be willing to be His slaves." 

First review of MacArthur's new book 'Slave'

UPDATE: Here are my own thoughts about Slave (and here are my first impressions).

In the coming days I intend on discussing how we can, and if we should, follow Paul's example in Acts 21 with our dealings with Brethren who preach the Lordship Salvation message.  Here's the first review I've read of MacArthur's new book 'Slave.'

John MacAthur's New Apostate Book - at the Notes From A Retired Preacher blog. (a repost of Bruce Bauer's review at Amazon.com)  I am also going to repost it here. 

Please Note: This review by Bruce Bauer is from: Slave: The Hidden Truth About Your Identity in Christ (Hardcover), by John MacArthur

The back paper jacket to the book caught my attention: “A COVER-UP OF BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS: Centuries ago, English translators perpetrated a fraud in the New Testament, and it’s been purposely hidden and covered up ever since. Your own Bible is probably included in the cover-up!” 

WHAT? Are we to understand that Bible translators for centuries, hundreds if not thousands of highly-trained knowledgeable men of God, have kept a well-guarded secret about the true meaning of the Bible that only NOW Dr. MacArthur will be the one scholar who will bring us the real scoop? 

Yes, this is exactly what the book would have us to believe, that the common Greek term “doulos” has been mistranslated in every major version of the Bible since the earliest of printed Bible translations. According to MacArthur, “doulos” should be translated primarily if not exclusively as “slave.” Most modern translators (NASB, NIV, KJV, NKJV, ESV) as well as common Greek-English lexicons interpret the term in a variety of ways as, “servant,” “slave,” “bond servant,” “bondman,” or “attendant.” MacArthur also states on pp. 29-30 that the proper meaning of the Old Testament’s nearest equivalent term, “‘ebed” has also been hidden by modern translators: 

“The King James Version, for example, never translates ‘ebed as ‘slave’—opting for ‘servant’ or ‘manservant’ the vast majority of the time. But contrast that with the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament from before the time of Christ. It translates ‘ebed with forms of ‘doulos,’ or ‘slave’ more than 400 times!” 

WHAT?? The LXX translated the Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek, NOT to English! So MacArthur is leaping to an inappropriate conclusion about the meaning of the Hebrew in this case.  

My greatest problem with the book was that the author, MacArthur, took the ancient images of slavery and superimposed them onto modern Christianity with the intent to create the notion that our normative relationship with God and our service to God should be that of a slave to a master, instead of that of a child of God responding out of love and gratitude to an omnibenevolent (all loving) Father God. Romans 8:15 says, “For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba,” Father.” 

With this slave-to-master representation set into place, the author proceeded to promote his standard Lordship Salvation doctrine dressed in new clothes, slave garb. He even used much of the same argumentation that he used in “The Gospel According to Jesus.” And, once again, he freely denigrated and characterized Free Grace theology, especially in chapter five.

Recommended reading: “The Grace Awakening,” by Charles Swindoll

With some science on the side

Happy New Year everyone!

Here's three notable science stories from recent days which I hope will work together to make a cool point or two.

Is this evidence that we can see the future? - NewScientist.com

Experiments with 1,000 volunteer students determined that people can recall words they've been shown in a list of words 53.1% of the time when they will be asked to type the same words in the future. That is to say they are asked to type randomly selected words from the original list they were shown only after they have already demonstrated recall of some of the words from the original list. One might expect a 50/50 result based on pure randomness. The 53.1% rate is interpreted as significant proof of pre-cognition, or seeing the future in some way imperceptible way.

Question: Would a rate of 50% (or 46.9% for that matter) have been interpreted as significant proof that people do not naturally have pre-cognition?

Why the human body temperature is 98.6 degrees F. - GIZMODO.com

Turns out our body temperature is "perfectly balanced." If it were lower we'd get fungal infections, if it were higher we'd have to constantly eat to maintain the energy requirements.

Question 1: Have we been designed with the perfect temperature or did we only happen to survive because we evolved to have this body temperature?

Question 2: If we evolved to have this temperature, then how? Did we, or rather our ancestor just get it right the first time? See if the temperature wasn't perfectly balanced then the organism COULD NOT have survived. This is sort of like irreducible complexity in that you can't gradually come to the correct temperature. It's right or you're dead.

Why published research findings are often false. - SlashDot.com

Uh oh.  The New Yorker is reporting that many well-established, multiply confirmed findings are looking increasingly uncertain. Why is this happening? Apparently John Loannidis (author of Why Most Published Research Findings Are False) says that it is because of "significance chasing" or finding ways to interpret data so that it passes the test of statistical significance. That is the 95% boundary proposed by Ronald Fisher.  "The scientists are so eager to pass this magical test that they start playing around with the numbers trying to find anything that seems worthy." 

Question: Why do we, the very assembly of the Firstborn, allow the unmitigated and implicit trust of scientists to propagate through our society as though it were helpful in any way? The very Scientific Method is based on mistrust of findings! See the graphic above. I wholeheartedly believe in the use of the Scientific Method - I do not believe this even allows for the creation of a new High Priesthood of Scientists.

Happy New Year! How's your Worldview doing?

MERRY CHRISTMAS ONE AND ALL!!

Peace is declared to you! Justice has been satisfied! Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall have peace with God!

Merry Christmas One and All!!

Faith Worth Experiencing

1Peter 1:3-9

³ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, ⁴ to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, ⁵who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 

⁶ In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, ⁷ that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, ⁸ whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, ⁹ receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.

This "Faith Worth..." series started with a quiet discussion titled Faith Worth Sharing. One long time reader, Look Up, commented that sharing one's faith with someone else has very little value because the object we should be sharing is Christ Himself, not "our" faith.  His point is well taken, but I must point out that I would never want to duplicate MY faith in anyone else. My faith is in Christ the Lord, and my faith is my experience of THE FAITH. Look Up wasn't wrong, but he did read an argument into my articles that was not there.

This happens with the text of 1Peter 1:7 as well. I might argue in exactly the same way. The wording could be made to sound like a personal faith, but it is actually about "The Faith." If you read only verse 6 it is easy to misinterpret the passage, especially if you have a system of theology that tells people to examine the quality of their faith. However, if you read verse 6 you must find that Peter says "In THIS you greatly rejoice..."

The good student of the Bible must ask "In what?" and find the answer in the preceding verses 1Peter 1:3-5. We rejoice in the promise, protection, provision, and preservation of God. The genuineness of "your faith" is not how well you trust, obey, act on.... these things of God, it is how well God follows through with them. Our faith is genuine, and not in vain, if God is truly the God He says He is. If Christ did in fact die for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, be buried and raise again the third day according to the Scriptures. 1Cor 15:12-19

So how does this all fit in with sharing your, or the, faith? It's as I often tell people. When you step out in faith like Peter did when he stepped out of a boat on to raging water to walk with the Lord he quickly experienced the genuineness of the faith. When his personal faith started to fail, the faith was still valid because the Lord is faithful. 2Tim 2:13 "The faith" works exactly the same way with personal witnessing. You step out and God is with you.

If you have been working on the things that we discussed before, under the article Faith Worth Building then you are no doubt getting a desire to tell others about what you've learned. It's a natural progression. I'm sure everyone can remember that burning desire to tell everyone about Jesus Christ when they were first saved. It's not a requirement for Salvation.. nor is it a positive indicator of one becoming saved (or not) but it is the normal experience of a Believer.

I've learned myself, and seen it demonstrated over and over again that one of the greatest personal faith building experiences is getting out there and sharing Christ with people. On the street... at work... in church.. at home anywhere and everywhere. God will be with you and you'll experience His faithfulness which is the genuineness of the faith!

Folks it's Christmas time. This is the one time of year when people EXPECT you to talk about Jesus. So open your mouth, be loving, be truthful and tell the whole story. The bad news - sin, death, hell, and the Good News 1Cor 15:1-11.

Merry Christmas! 

RECALL NOTICE

Important Recall Notice

The Maker of all human beings is recalling all units manufactured, regardless of make or year, due to the serious defect in the primary and central component of the heart. This is due to a malfunction in the original prototype units (code named Adam and Eve), resulting in the reproduction of the same defect in all subsequent units.

This defect has been technically termed "Sub-sequential Internal Non-Morality" or more commonly known as SIN, as it is primarily characterized by loss of moral judgment.

Other symptoms include (but are not limited to):

·       Loss of direction

·       Foul vocal emissions

·       Amnesia of origin

·       Lack of peace and joy

·       Selfish or violent behavior

·       Depression or confusion in mental component Fearful

The Manufacturer, who is neither liable or at fault for this defect, is providing factory authorized repair and service FREE of charge to correct the SIN defect.

The number to call in your area is F-A-I-T-H. Simply believe that Christ died for your sins, was buried and rose again, and your unit will be regenerated. No matter how big or small the SIN defect is, Christ will repair and replace it with:

·       Forgiveness

·       Love

·       Joy

·       Peace

·       Longsuffering

·       Gentleness

·       Goodness

·       Faith

·       Meekness

·       Temperance

Please see operating manual HOLY BIBLE for further details on the use of these fixes. [ See sections 1Cor. 15:1-4;  Eph. 1:7;  and Gal. 5:16-26 ].

WARNING: 

Continuing to operate any human unit without receiving this repair fully voids any and all Manufacturer's warranties (explicit and/or implied), exposing the owner to dangers and problems too numerous to list; including potential legal judgment for damage to other manufactured items including but not limited to other human units. Such continued operation shall result in the owner/operator being permanently impounded. [For free emergency service before it's too late: call upon the Lord Jesus Christ who loved us and gave Himself a ransom for our sins].

DANGER: 

Any and all human units not receiving this recall action shall be destroyed by fire. 

This action has been authorized by the Creator.

Systematic Theology

I've often complained about Systematic Theology, and perhaps I'm not alone in this.  This week, I've been checking out a new-to-me blog called The Naked Bible. This quote from the blog's author,  Dr. Michael Heiser, sums up my thoughts about Systematic Theology very well near perfectly. I will be adopting his words.

I don’t really care too much about systematic theology; it’s almost always English Bible-driven and “top down.” I care about biblical theology. - From a comment in THIS DISCUSSION.

"top down" means that the System drives the understanding of the Bible not the other way around.  I believe that such systems give poor theologians false confidence in their doctrine. I also believe they all to often keep good theologians from teaching good doctrine while they correct bad doctrine. Truly talented teachers are able to do both at the same time but in my experience these men are rare and far between.

When Brother Lou was reviewing my book he reacted with grace to my stance on Systematic Theology, even though he has been a teacher of the subject himself. I almost felt bad for having this view expressed in the book. It's funny to me that out of all the things I wrote about in Fail-Safe this is the one topic that comes up most often when people criticize me.

So what are your thoughts about Systematic Theology?

Resurrection Evidence: That Amazing Creed in 1 Corinthians 15

Bad Kool-Aid: The Gospel According to INSERT NAME

If you are not familiar with the Bad Kool-Aid series please read the introduction first.

Many Bibles have the first four evangelistic letters of the New Testament titled as "The Gospel According to" Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  This has led to people offering many "takes" on the Gospel of Jesus Christ and calling their take "The Gospel According to INSERT NAME." Many of the authors of such works use their various authorities to redefine the Gospel in such a way that agrees with their own views.

This practice is so prevalent that even secular media have taken the approach. A simple search at Amazon.ca returns 10,879 books that contain "The Gospel According to".... This practice seemingly gives biblical validation to the idea of relative truth; what is true for me might not be true for you.

There are many various implications of the Gospel, but that there is more than one valid "take" on the Gospel of Jesus Christ is Bad Kool-Aid. There is only one Gospel according to the Scriptures, which is the same Gospel and the same take on that Gospel as Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul and Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Stephen, Apollos... and every one else. There is ONE Gospel, and ONE take on it. 1Cor 15:1-11, Gal 1:6-9, Gal 1:11-12

LINK TO THIS ANSWER!

If you find someone spreading the Bad Kool-Aid of a Gospel According to INSERT NAME, please link them and their audience to this answer! Tell them that they are spreading Bad Kool-Aid and that there is only ONE Gospel of Jesus Christ. Here's a TinyURL to use: http://tinyurl.com/374clf9