church invite

Trevin Wax pointed out this great video by Grace Community Church of San Antonio. It's a "before we tell you who we are, we want to tell you who we were." It's excellent. And it's timely.

I've recently engaged in conversation with those who do not believe homosexuality is sin. What became evident in the conversations is that most of those on "the other side" really wrestled with the entire concept of sin and redemption and how once redeemed, we interact with those in need of redemption. They continued to defend their position that homosexuality is not sin based on a "I am what I am" or "it's hateful to call X sin" or etc... They simply could not accept that it was appropriate to confront sin, to not identify a person with the sin/temptation they wrestled with, etc...

Anyway, enjoy this wonderful depiction of God's amazing grace.

rights or sin

In the discussion regarding whether or not homosexuality is sin and whether or not it is ok for a Christian address sin as sin, David Hayward finally states in his defense of thinking, "What it comes down to is rights." I think this is a good summary, for Hayward and others, this is the crux of it. For me, it's what has God told us and how is He glorified.

The gap is larger than an interpretation of a single issue.

humility

Some great quotes this morning from on-line friends Barry Simmons and Robert Spencer:

The measure of our new self in Christ—the renewed mind—is the degree to which we look away from ourselves to Christ as our treasure. If Christ is more to you, you are more. If Christ is less to you, you are less. Your measure rises and falls with your measure of him. Your valuing him is the value that you have. Your esteeming him is the esteem that you have. Your treasuring him is the treasure that you are. ~ John Piper "Assessing Ourselves with Our God-Assigned Measure of Faith, Part 2"

In reality there is, perhaps, no one of our natural passions so hard to subdue as pride. Disguise it, struggle with it, beat it down, stifle it, mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive, and will every now and then peep out and show itself; you will see it, perhaps, often in this history. For, even if I could conceive that I had completely overcome it, I should probably be proud of my humility. ~ Ben Franklin

Inflated views of ourselves are very dangerous to our soul. In America we believe the opposite, especially advertising agencies. Exalting the self is not perilous; it is profitable. On the billboard behind our church on 6th Street you can read a McDonalds ad: “Me, myself and my salad.” Advertisers, educators, counselors, human resource managers, coaches, politicians, and pastors will give an account some day for how they exploited the suicidal tendency of the human mind toward pride.

Paul does the opposite. He does what love demands. He warns against it in verse 3: “I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think.” In other words, Paul makes the first task of the renewed Christian mind the obliteration of pride and the cultivation of humility. What’s new about the renewed mind? Pride is put to death; humility begins to grow. ~ John Piper "Assessing Ourselves with Our God-Assigned Measure of Faith, Part 2"

the low view

Pastors and other leaders within the AVC have always been charged with hosting those who advocate sin within their churches. To some degree that may have always been true but I perceive it to be more so today. And I I think it goes further. Some AVC pastors promote these sins themselves. Under the guise of grace or enlightenment, these leaders have adopted a low view of Scripture.

I recently wrote to my pastor expressing my concern on this topic. In that, I referenced Phyllis Tickle, who while not in the AVC, has been embraced by some within the denomination and whose words, while illogical, ring true in observation.

Phyllis Tickle, like most emerg* (and potentially one I'd list as heretic), has a poor grasp of truth yet she bears listening to for the purpose of triggering some introspection. In the Great Emergence (2008), she wrote that the erosion of the authority of sola scriptura will have been in 4 stages: the end of slavery as a biblically justified practice, the acknowledgement of the reality of divorce and that those who suffer it might find total restitution in the eyes of God, the ascendancy of woman to ministry, and finally (and as yet incomplete), an acceptance of homosexuals into the Church. Added to this she includes the Pentecostal and Charismatic renewals (the Vineyard movement getting special mention) in which the Holy Spirit played an increased role in questions of Authority.

Today I read a former Vineyard pastor who typifies those who have adopted this false notion of love and truth. David Hayward wrote a post regarding Al Mohler's response to the recent Piers Morgan CNN interview with Joel and Victoria Osteen on the topic of homosexuality. In his post, Hayward noted Mohler's praise of Osteen's tenacious stand for the Scriptural truth that homosexuality is a sin. Mohler wrote:

To his credit, Osteen did answer his question, and by staking his position on the Bible’s teaching that homosexual acts are sinful, he took the only road available to anyone with any substantial commitment to the truthfulness of the Bible.

Hayward then cites N.T. Wright's position regarding the sinful nature of homosexuality:

Interviewer: So a Christian morality faithful to scripture cannot approve of homosexual conduct?
Wright: Correct. That is consonant with what I’ve said and written elsewhere.

Hayward adds, "It is obvious by now that endless exegetical analysis of the scriptures will only take us so far." I agree because endless exegetical analysis is not what we are called to. We called to subsequently live the life we find in Truth. Sadly, that's not what Hayward means by these true words. He really means that at some point our reason must override what we find in Scripture. Hayward continues:

So many things besides what the text itself is saying, such as the culture, time, the ad hoc nature of the documents, the human aspect of the texts, etc., must be taken into account. We now realize that the biggest problem is our hermeneutic… our own biases, blind-spots, prejudices and ignorance as we approach the texts.

Interestingly, a current Vineyard pastor, Frank Emanuel, weighs in here (as he does elsewhere), expressing his opinion based on a low view of Scripture, that homosexuality is not sin, "we need to rethink homosexuality, because what we have today is not at all represented in any Biblical texts."

That's code for, "where one agrees with the text, it is truth and where one does not, we need to employ our faulty reason."

Hayward then employs a common scare tactic citing the death of a gay activist in Uganda and says, "American evangelicals visiting Uganda insist that a strictly biblical attitude be taken towards homosexuals. This is the result. How strictly biblical do we want to be?"

First, Hayward who would rightly confront others using scare tactics somehow links calling homosexuality sin to causing murder. He later (in the comments) tries to cover his blunder by saying he was only asking the question. Regardless, he makes an irresponsible and unsubstantiated link. And worse, he clouds the truth.

My answer to his question - I was to be strictly fully biblical! The clarification is fully. Hayward would have us call Scripture and those who stand by it into question by appealing to who images of those who have failed to live the whole of Scripture. He doesn't consider the redemption found in the whole. He instead finds fault in the part and then calls the whole into question. His is the path of destruction. He dresses his position as loving but it is nothing of the sort. True love exposes sin but then offers redemption, mercy, and grace. I thank God that we can be strictly and fully biblical and we don't have to settle for less.

Finally, what about Piers Morgan and that interview? Morgan notes several times that people would be angry at Osteen while implying that Osteen is that one that is angry. Morgan implies that Osteen should not set himself up as judge. His basis for accusing Osteen of this is (1) Osteen saying something is wrong and (2) the influence Osteen has over a large audience. Interestingly Morgan is accusing Osteen on his international talk show ...

Additionally, Morgan tells us he doesn't see God as a God of redemption. He implies that people get well through their shear effort and that homosexuality isn't as "easy" as other addictions - huh? He even suggests that people other than homosexuals choose their addictions - wow! And it goes on and on ... yet few seem to notice the failed logic and the utter depravity of fallen mind. Morgan is applauded because he reflects the worldview of our fallen creation.

I understand why (and expect) the world doesn't question him and mindlessly accepts his reasoning against Osteen. My frustration however is with those claiming to represent Christ buying into the same lies. Renew your minds.

Technorati Tags: homosexuality, Scripture

how to get friends to church

Pew Haul - missioning made easy ...

Technorati Tags: evangelism, humor

seed planting

John Wimber once said, "Proclamation of a faulty gospel will produce faulty at best, weak Christians. All too often, instead of a call to the Lordship of Christ and His Kingdom, people hear a Gospel that emphasizes more about self: Come to Jesus & get this or that. This is not the costly Kingdom that Jesus proclaims, "If you want to save your life, you first must lose it."

My friend Barry Middleton added to that with the following words of wisdom.

You can plant a seed to grow a tree, once the tree grows, you can cut off its limbs, its branches, and it will still be a strong tree.

If you plant a seed that has been broken, cracked, or is deformed in any way, the tree that comes forth with be a complete deformity and will not have a strong root system..

Most of the so called gospel that is being preached (sewn) today, is deformed ... thus the problems in the church.

revelation in one sentence

From Josh Harris:

In his free online commentary on Revelation Vern Poythress writes, "You can summarize its message in one sentence: God rules history and will bring it to its consummation in Christ."

object of faith

"If the object of your faith is a particular outcome for your situation, your faith will be as weak as your wisdom. But if the source and object of your faith is Almighty God, even if it is the weak mustard-seed variety, your faith will be enough for whatever God allows into your life." - Nancy Guthrie

HT:JH

obama corrupts language

From Peter Wehner, On Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Obama Corrupts Political Language.

On the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s pro-choice decision in Roe v. Wade, President Obama said in a statement that Roe “affirms a fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters.”

To which one might ask: since when is lethal violence used on the defenseless and the most vulnerable members of our society considered an intrusion on “private family matters”?

This line of argument is absurd. Would the president argue that our laws should be silent on matters of spousal and child abuse? After all, based on the Obama Criterion, those, too, might qualify as “private family matters.”

The president’s statement that abortion on demand affirms a “fundamental principle” is evidence of a man who is willing to corrupt the English language in order to advance an ideological agenda — and in this instance, a particularly vicious and brutal agenda.

In his 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell wrote, “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible.” He spoke about “the decadence of our language” and how “language can also corrupt thought.” And he alerted his readers to the fact that “Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Pure wind is not solid — and taking the life of the innocent unborn is neither a “fundamental principle” nor a “private family matter.”

Technorati Tags: abortion

meekness

The New Bible Dictionary on Mt 5.5 ...

In the NT meekness (prautēs and adjective praus) refers to an inward attitude, whereas *gentleness is expressed rather in outward action. It is part of the fruit of Christlike character produced only by the Spirit (Gal. 5:23, av). The meek do not resent adversity because they accept everything as being the effect of God’s wise and loving purpose for them, so that they accept injuries from men also (as Moses above), knowing that these are permitted by God for their ultimate good (cf. 2 Sa. 16:11). The meekness and gentleness of Christ was the source of Paul’s own plea to the disloyal Corinthians (2 Cor. 10:1). He enjoined meekness as the spirit in which to rebuke an erring brother (2 Tim. 2:25, av), and when bearing with one another (Eph. 4:2). Similarly, Peter exhorted that the inquiring or arguing heathen should be answered in meekness (1 Pet. 3:15, av). Supremely meekness is revealed in the character of Jesus (Mt. 11:29, av; 21:5, av), demonstrated in superlative degree when he stood before his unjust accusers without a word of retort or self-justification.

starbucks trenta

The Starbucks Trenta - excessive?

the cross is humbling

“Every time we look a the cross Christ seems to say to us, ‘I am here because of you. It is your sin I am bearing, your curse I am suffering, your debt I am paying, your death I am dying.’ Nothing in history or in the universe cuts us down to size like the cross. All of us have inflated views of ourselves, especially in self-righteousness, until we have visited a place called Calvary. It is there, at the foot of the cross, that we shrink to our true size.” — John Stott, The Message of Galatians
HT:OFI

hey jude

Hey Jude by The Beatles in flowchart form ...

confrontation

Not every word uttered in agony or despair requires reproof (Job 6.26).

ordo salutis

From Credo House's Theological Word of the Day, Ordo Salutus:

(Latin, “order of salvation”)

Refers to the successive order of events in the process or event of salvation. This order includes necessities such as predestination, regeneration, faith, justification, repentance, atonement, and glorification. Depending on one”s particular stance on theological issues having to do with salvation, he or she would place these events in a different sequence. For example, the Calvinist would normally place regeneration before faith in their ordo, while the Arminian would see regeneration as a result of faith. The Roman Catholic would see justification as an event and a process that takes place throughout the Christian”s life, while Protestants would see justification as a definite event resulting from faith. Therefore, the Roman Catholic and Protestant ordo would differ from one another.

i belong to him

"I belong to Him simply because He deliberately chose to create me as the object of His own affection." ~ Phillip Keller, A Shepherd Looks at Psalm 23

god works to show his glory in us

God, the one who helps us, never sleeps (Psa 121.2-3). In fact, He goes "to and fro" to show his might on behalf of those of us that trust Him (2 Chron 16.9).

pregnancycare of cincinnati

I love the purpose of PregnancyCare of Cincinnati.

• to share god's truth about the sanctity of human life
• to show parents the value of choosing life for their unborn child
• to demonstrate Christ's love and mercy in hopes of guiding people to his saving grace
• to support and encourage couples who are trying to follow God's plan for sexuality, marriage, and parenting

While intending to save babies, they have managed to not become "cause-centered" but to remain Gospel and Christ-centered.

Technorati Tags: abortion

spurgeon on calvinism and the gospel

"I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor." ~ Charles Spurgeon, A Defense of Calvinism

HT:LS

Technorati Tags: Calvinism

are you a calvinist?

Here's John Piper's advice on how to respond when asked, “Are you a Calvinist?” say, “You decide. Here is what I believe . . .”

I believe I am so spiritually corrupt and prideful and rebellious that I would never have come to faith in Jesus without God’s merciful, sovereign victory over the last vestiges of my rebellion. (1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 3:1–4; Romans 8:7).

I believe that God chose me to be his child before the foundation of the world, on the basis of nothing in me, foreknown or otherwise. (Ephesians 1:4–6; Acts 13:48; Romans 8:29–30; 11:5–7)

I believe Christ died as a substitute for sinners to provide a bona fide offer of salvation to all people, and that he had an invincible design in his death to obtain his chosen bride, namely, the assembly of all believers, whose names were eternally written in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain. (John 3:16; John 10:15; Ephesians 5:25; Revelation 13:8)

When I was dead in my trespasses, and blind to the beauty of Christ, God made me alive, opened the eyes of my heart, granted me to believe, and united me to Jesus, with all the benefits of forgiveness and justification and eternal life. (Ephesians 2:4–5; 2 Corinthians 4:6; Philippians 2:29; Ephesians 2:8–9; Acts 16:14; Ephesians 1:7; Philippians 3:9)

I am eternally secure not mainly because of anything I did in the past, but decisively because God is faithful to complete the work he began—to sustain my faith, and to keep me from apostasy, and to hold me back from sin that leads to death. (1 Corinthians 1:8–9; 1 Thessalonians 5:23–24; Philippians 1:6; 1 Peter 1:5; Jude 1:25; John 10:28–29; 1 John 5:16)

Technorati Tags: Calvinism