Skip to main content

Why Professing Christians Fall Away

Written by Rick Shrader

Why Professing Christians Fall Away

by Rick Shrader

%%tb-image-alt-text%%

             The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.                                                          Jeremiah 8:20

We have all seen it and been grieved by it. Someone makes a profession of being saved, stays around for a little while, and then is gone. Correctly, we turn immediately to our discipleship efforts and critique ourselves. Did we do all we could to strengthen them in their new faith? But the problem is often deeper than that and believers cannot always blame themselves for the decision others make regarding their walk with the Lord. It is an increasingly difficult day to be a Christian. The temptations and reasons to abandon the faith multiply as the age continues toward its end. If Peter had to warn the believers at Pentecost to “save yourselves from this ontoward generation” (Acts 2:40), how much more must we? Isaiah warned of “hasty fruit” (Isa. 28:4), and Daniel likened believers in the end time to “chaff of the summer threshingfloors” which “the wind carried away” (Dan. 2:35).

Jim Vogel recently wrote, “Long gone are the days when we could expect the lost in our communities to come to us. We are no longer living in a church-going culture. Interest in spiritual things is waning. People stay away in droves.”1 This seems to be the case not only with the unchurched (as we call them) but also with the “churched.” I have been in church-related ministry of one sort or another since 1972. The game I have hated the most is what I call “hide and seek.” That is when someone, an individual or an entire family, simply quits attending the church without any explanation and you have to go find them. You always try to be fair and give absentees the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they have been ill or on an extended vacation, or maybe they just needed time away for some reason. You always hate to assume the worse: that they are upset about something, or that they have been offended by someone. Surely they would have told you if that were the case. Maybe they have fallen into some sin and are embarrassed to come to you for help. The sad thing is that in over forty years of ministry I cannot recall a single time when they came to the church rather than the church having to take the initiative to go find them. And that is all right, it is the church’s job to find the one sheep that has gone astray! But doesn’t that also say something about profession of the Christian faith in our generation?

When I have pondered the reasons for this phenomenon, I come to only two conclusions. Either the person is unsaved and therefore has gone back to his old life, or as Peter described it, “The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire” (2 Pet. 2:22), or the person is truly saved but is, or has remained, in a carnal position and has lost interest in spiritual things. This is a man “overtaken in a fault” (Gal. 6:1); one who is saved “yet so as by fire” (1 Cor. 3:15); or as some who have “cast off their first faith” who are “already turned aside after Satan” (1 Tim. 5:12, 15). One of the sad results of these two conclusions is that we cannot always tell them apart, and their departure from the brethren leaves loved ones with doubt as to which is the real case. That is unless, of course, your final conversation with them uncovers the specific reason for their leaving. These two reasons may be caused by a number of underlying issues.

Reason 1: They are not truly saved

John said, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us” (1 John 2:19). The verse that follows proclaims that “you” who have stayed among the brethren have the Holy Spirit, in contrast to the ones that have left. Jonathan Edwards said, “Sinners in Zion are all hypocrites. They make a profession of the true religion. . . But all is hypocrisy.”2 A.T. Robertson said, “Outward ceremonial ritualism may only cover a brood of scorpions in the heart.”3 Hypocrisy, at the bottom line, is unbelief. It is to profess to be saved but to possess no saving faith, and no Holy Spirit. What happened to create such a false decision?

Pressure by a soul winner. I believe in soul winning. “He that winneth souls is wise” (Prov. 11:30). But we have also seen a lot of people make false professions of faith due to pressure applied by a Christian for whatever reason. I must confess that I have had my share of my own converts who evidently were not the Lord’s converts! Tozer said, “Some of the unsaved with whom we deal on the ‘quick and easy’ basis have such little preparation and are so ignorant of the plan of salvation that they would be willing to bow their heads and ‘accept’ Buddha or Zoroaster if they thought they could get rid of us in that way.”4 How true that has often been.

Pressure by a church invitation. I believe in invitations also and give one after every sermon. But just as the soul winner can get carried away pressing for a decision, so can the preacher. I can remember invitations in which the speaker would not quit until everyone in the auditorium had indicated that they had made some kind of commitment. Grandma Jones finally got hungry enough for lunch that she made a commitment to love her mother! Perhaps the evangelist needed the 100% report for his next prayer letter. I have seen people singled out and pulled down the aisle (almost literally) to get saved.

These kind of converts create seed that is sown by the wayside. The wicked one comes quickly and takes away the seed sown in the heart (Matt. 13:4, 19).   To be fair, let me say that this happens as well in proper invitations due to lack of understanding.

Pressure by follow-up programs. That may sound odd, but I am only saying that a lost person cannot last long around the teaching of the Word. Either he has to get saved or get out. No doubt multitudes have begun church discipleship programs who have never finished them. I don’t think the teacher should feel bad about this, it is inevitable. The verb tenses of Gal. 6:6 indicate that, “Let him that is [being] taught in the word communicate unto him that [is teaching] in all good things.” When there is no reciprocal communication by the student, the teacher can go no further.

Pressure by the situation. Sometimes people make a profession of faith because they are put in a situation where it is expected of them. I have begun premarital counseling with couples where one person is obviously not saved. The born again person is anxious for the other to get saved (for the wrong reasons of course) because he/she knows the marriage won’t take place unless both are believers. The unbeliever is usually primed for this situation and is ready to “make a profession of faith” for sake of the marriage.

On a similar note, sometimes a married spouse will get saved and very badly wants his/her spouse to be saved. The same pressure is then brought upon the counselor to “lead the person to the Lord.” After all, that is what the minister is there for, right? This is like the seed that fell in stony places that, although is was met with immediate joy, it only endures for a short while (Matt. 13:5-6, 20-21). I think Judas himself must have been put into a similar situation to make a profession of faith and be baptized by John because all the family was doing it.

Pressure by success and culture. The prosperity gospel has appealed to the lost world on the basis of success. If you will just receive Christ, all of your personal problems will be solved and you will begin to be successful in life. If that is really the case, why not try it? In many businesses it is a badge of integrity to be a Christian who applies biblical principles to business. There are many people looking for such businesses and being able to advertise that way is a great plus. Simon the sorcerer in Acts 8 was convinced that professing to be a Christian would bring him further success in his business. The sticky part is that business about getting saved and baptized and maybe joining an upscale church. But surely there is one out there that will accommodate me.

But the unbeliever cannot last long among spiritual things. The seed that fell among thorns first sprung up, but the cares of this world quickly choked it out (Matt. 13:7, 22). The flesh will always have a greater desire to please the cares of this world than the cares of lowly Christians. The bottom line is, if a person is truly not saved, no attempts to tie him to the church is going to (or should) work. Oil and water will not mix.

Reason 2: They are carnal Christians.

Carnality is a reality in the Christian life. The pull of the world can still be strong upon the immature believer and desire for the things of God usually grows slowly over a period of time. However, salvation cannot be made into a prolonged education process just because there are real hypocrites. No one can guarantee the sincerity of the convert other than God and the convert himself. But salvation comes as an instantaneous act of God by faith through grace. Spurgeon described his own conversion like this, “As, the moment before, there was none more wretched than I was, so, within that second, there was none more joyous. It did not take any longer than a flash of lightning. It was done, and never has it been undone.”5 Matthew Henry once advised those who doubt their salvation to remedy it in the following manner, “Are you in doubt about your spiritual state? Put the matter out of doubt by a present consent—if I never did, I do it now.”6 That being said, there are still reasons why true believers fall away due to carnality.

Lack of follow-up. A new convert is a babe in Christ and babies need to grow. But babies can’t do it all by themselves, they need adults to help them. This takes both the personal touch of a father or mother in the faith, and also a corporate touch of a family. The first steps need to be taken which are baptism and church life. There are dangers for little ones that can only be avoided by patient instruction. As a pastor I see the need for the safety of the church family in the life of a new believer. Church should not be something that the new convert someday grows into, it is a must, just like the traditional family is a must for all children at the earliest age.

Lack of expectations. Sadly, there may not be much expectation for godliness and growth in Christ in many churches today. If we are willing to admit that the spiritual level of the average church is alarmingly low, so will the role model be for the new believer. What expectation could there be for a new convert in the church of Laodicea? They thought they were mature and had “need of nothing” but in fact were “wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked” (Rev. 3:14-22).

Lack of encouragement. New believers begin their spiritual journey with their sins confessed and forgiven, and filled with the Holy Spirit. Their past is wiped clean by the blood of Christ and they have a new life spread out before them. Ironically, one of the dangers the new convert faces is rubbing shoulders with older believers. He is immediately pulled downward, not upward. His joyful expectations of his new life in Christ are sadly cooled by older believers who have settled into a more comfortable existence and don’t want a new zealot upsetting things. Even the penitent man in Corinth, after he had repented of sin and made things right with God, was in danger of being “swallowed up with overmuch sorrow” (2 Cor. 2:7) without the encouragement of the congregation.

Lack of teachers. The danger here is not so much a lack of people teaching good doctrine as the danger of falling among the many false teachers in the world today. This was a constant threat even in the first century even with the presence of apostles (see Acts 20:29-30; 2 Cor. 11:2-4; Gal. 1:6-9; Phil. 3:18-19; 1 Tim. 4:1-3; 1 John 4:1-6). Paul warned Timothy of Hymenaeus and Philetus whose false teaching was like gangrene and had already overthrown the faith of many (2 Tim. 2:16-18).

In this information age the threat is multiplied. The new convert does not know where to turn and who to trust. By the click of a mouse he may be infected already by false teaching that will spread in his soul like cancer. We have all seen such duped individuals fall away from the faith. A shepherd must constantly be on the alert.

Lack of example. A new convert knows almost no one in the church. Most likely, he/she will not take the initiative to make new Christian friends. This must be done by mature believers who see and understand this real need. Some years ago I wrote about what I called “hypocrite finders.” Even spiritual water seeks its own level. Hypocrites will find other hypocrites in the church. Spiritual immaturity will make friendship with spiritual immaturity, and this will happen quickly if other believers don’t step in first and befriend the helpless convert.

Teens and other younger ones are especially susceptible to this. I pastored a church with a balcony in which few ever sat because it was not needed to seat the Sunday crowd. I have watched young people who normally sat near the front on the main floor, bring a friend and sit with him on the back row of the balcony! I guess the church member didn’t want the visitor to think he was too spiritual. This is not new. Even Barnabas himself was “carried away” with Peter’s “dissimulation” (Gal. 2:13), the opposite of the needed “assimilation.”

Lack of strength. The bottom line for a new convert is that the world’s allurements are still strong, and without positive growth, saved flesh can become affected and act the same as unsaved flesh. This is a real danger that causes many believers to fall away from the Lord. When Demas forsook Paul in prison (2 Tim. 4:10), he left us wondering if he had fallen into carnality or was really unsaved. He had before been commended by Paul for his faithful work (Col. 4:14; Phile. 24).   It is only out of sympathy that we still count him as a brother even though he fell away.

And so . . . .

There is a conundrum here that confronts us all. How can some fall away from the faith so easily? How is it that such ones can walk away from a faith so precious to the vast majority of believers? How can some be content to be saved by the skin of their teeth? How can some who profess to know Christ have little or no concern for the final destination of their souls?

Carl Trueman said the following concerning these things,

“Only those who have an overwhelming grasp of the transcendent holiness of God will ever struggle with lack of assurance. For those who think of God as, well, pretty much like themselves, or like some other common or garden god, or simply as a projection of their own sentimentality, there is no problem with assurance. If God is not that holy, then sin isn’t that awful, and I’m just not that bad. Thus, if your view of God’s holiness is shaped by the standards of your own mediocrity, then you are unlikely to worry too much about whether you’re going to be acceptable to Him. . . God will look after my reputation if needs be; He has given me other work to do.”7

Notes:

1. Jim Vogel, “Guiding The Local Outreach Program,” The Pastor: A Guide for God’s Faithful Servant (Schaumburg: RBP, 2012) 161.

2. Quoted by Randall Pederson, Day by Day With Jonathan Edwards (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005) 46.

3. A.T. Robertson, Paul and the Intellectuals (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1959) 96.

4. A.W. Tozer, Mornings With Tozer (Camp Hill, PA: Wing Spread Publishers, 2008) May 3.

5. Charles Spurgeon, My Conversion (New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House, 1996) 42.

6. Allan Harman, Matthew Henry (Scotland: Christian Focus, 2012) 145.

7. Carl Trueman, Fools Rush In Where Monkeys Fear To Tread (P&R Publishing, 2012) 63.

 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

The God Who Speaks

Written by Rick Shrader

The God Who Speaks

by Rick Shrader

%%tb-image-alt-text%%

             “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds” Hebrews 1:1-2

America is quickly leaving a word-based society and becoming an image-based society and so is the church of Jesus Christ. Christians have always been readers and listeners. The invention of radio was a simple diversion where simply sitting and listening began to overtake the struggle of reading. The advent of printed images in magazines increased the ease of perusing through a magazine where one could look at the pictures rather than read the articles. With moving pictures came the theater and the modern wonder of bringing images to life, which was eventually brought into the living room with the television. Few living Americans today have ever experienced a time when these things were not commonplace.

But movies and television are ancient history to today’s young people. They have not known a time without computers and the internet. Many young Christians have never experienced a church service with simple singing, praying, and preaching. Their world is a world wallpapered with images and sounds at home, in the car, at school, in the mall or restaurant, and also at church.

The epitome of image is the commercial—a professional moment created by people who want to make money that invades the world of people who live by the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. If one wants to get a true picture of the moral level of a society, he only needs to go as far as the radio, television, or online commercial. Consider the commercial where a product is being sold that supposedly will help you lose weight or increase bodily function of some sort. The pictures shown portray a happy, loving, successful person who is experiencing a perfectly happy moment. But while the pictures are being shown, by law the commercial must audibly say that taking the product may harm you in a number of different ways, actually causing a reaction opposite of what was intended, and in some cases may even cause death. But these ubiquitous commercials obviously work evidently because people watch but do not listen. Of course, the next commercial break will feature a law firm telling you that if you’ve taken the same drug, call because you will be able to sue them for damages and false advertising.

Some feel that our image-based world began in the 1930s in Nuremburg when Adolf Hitler held the first multi-media rallies. Thousands of people crowded shoulder to shoulder watching huge pictures with lights and music. Hitler was spewing the worst audio message imaginable but people were persuaded to follow because of the visual effects. Hitler knew this better than anyone and specifically describes his goal of brainwashing by this image-based methodology, calling it “the magic of influence of what we designate as mass suggestion.”1

Some feel that this all started in 1960 with the first televised presidential debate between Richard Nixon and John Kennedy. Nixon had been in the hospital and came to the debate physically weakened and looking emaciated. Kennedy, on the other hand, was young, tanned, and good looking. Those who watched the debate on television thought that Kennedy won, but those who listened on radio thought that Nixon won. Image wins in a debate every time. That is why today’s presidential debates are everything to do with image and almost nothing to do with substance.

While attending a pastor’s conference in Denver some years ago I listened to a young pastor explain why we must now fill our preaching and teaching times with multiple visual aids, because today’s youth are now learning from multiple sources that feed all the senses of sight, sound, feel, and even smell. This is how they learn today in school and the church cannot afford to be behind in its pedagogy. Another pastor then asked why the American student ranks almost last in most of the important educational categories world-wide. The leader had no answer.

Ironically we call the historic period of image-based worship the dark ages. Carl Trueman has written, “As regards the cultural trend away from words to images, one could make a case for seeing this as, theologically, an undoing or a reversal of the Reformation and a reversion to aesthetic and sacrament-centered church life of a kind that defined much of medieval Catholicism.”2 He refers to a time when the images filled the beautiful cathedrals and sight and sound became the essence of worship, not the preaching of the Word. God brought Christianity out of this first with a Renaissance of learning, then the invention of the printing press, and finally (and most importantly) a return to the Book in the Reformation. The Reformers believed that God speaks through His Word and therefore the Word must be central in any worship service—sola scriptura!

Much has been written and spoken about the effects of postmodernism on our image-based culture. Authur W. Hunt, III, wrote, “Much of what is going on in our church sanctuaries falls under my definition of postmodernism—that is, a turning from rationality and an embracing of spectacle.”3 Trueman points out that postmodernism has left us with two dangerous results: the death of the author and the medium as the message.4 Postmodernism posits that language changes so quickly that we cannot know the original intent of the author. The author, for all practical purposes, is dead.   Therefore, we have to read all writing, especially old writing, without trying to discover the author’s meaning but rather ask what it means to us right now. In postmodernism this is the only possible knowledge we can gain from writing. No wonder Americans today do not believe we can even discover what the writers of our constitution meant. This is why so many argue for a fluid meaning rather than a historical meaning. Applied to the Bible, however, this means that for all practical purposes God is dead and the only question we can ask is what the Bible means to me, not what the original writers meant. This also means that exposition of a text is largely a waste of time. Emotion and inward searching of the soul become a better hermeneutic.

On the heels of this, the medium virtually becomes the message. How the message is conveyed basically determines what the message is going to be. In this way the hearers (or experiencers) become the final authority. If the author of the text is dead, the hearer becomes his own god by determining what message can fit the medium. Is this a return to medieval Christianity? Have screens and speakers taken the place of icons, altars, incense, and stained glass? Albert Mohler wrote, “Though most evangelicals mention the preaching of the Word as a necessary or customary part of worship, the prevailing model of worship in evangelical churches is increasingly defined by music, along with innovations such as drama and video presentations. Preaching has in large part retreated, and a host of entertaining innovations have taken its place.”5

If God has spoken and speaks today through His Word, the Christian has an imperative that cannot be compromised. The preaching of the Word is God’s ordained means of communication and the exposition of that Word is the most important job of the teacher or preacher. And, we might add, filling of the Spirit Who inspired the sacred text, becomes the most essential methodology in worship. Hebrews 1:1-3 and 2:1-5 make important statements about the God Who speaks.

God spoke in time past

God spoke at sundry (various, NKJV) times and in divers manners. Beginning in Genesis chapter one, we find, “And God said, let there be light” (1:3); “And God called the light Day” (1:5). This pattern continues throughout the six days of creation. In addition, and wonderfully, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit speak among themselves (one in essence, manifested in three persons) “Let us make man in our image” (1:26); “Behold, the man is become as one of us” (3:22); and later, “Let us go down and confound their language” (11:7). From the beginning God has been a God who speaks. God spoke unto the fathers by the prophets. From Abraham and the patriarchs to Moses and the prophets, God spoke in various languages, visions, dreams, handwriting, inspiration, and other miraculous means.

When liberalism tried to “demythologize” the Bible, it wasn’t to take myths out, it was to remove any mention of God speaking through these miraculous means. This has been Satan’s method from the beginning, “Yea, hath God said?” But when Eve “saw” the fruit she was more impressed by the visual than by the word. Why will the unbelieving world today not accept creation? Because it was a miracle, and they have long ago decided that the miraculous never happened and that God has not spoken.

God spoke through His Son

Hebrews also makes plain that God spoke in the most unique way, through the incarnation of the Son both personally and prophetically. God spoke through Christ personally because Jesus Christ was God in the flesh and in Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col. 1:19, 2:9). He is called the Word, or Logos (John 1:1) because He conveyed the true message from God’s mind to us.

But God also spoke through His Son prophetically i.e., through the very words that Jesus said. “For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him” (John 3:34. See also John 6:63; 6:68; 8:26; 12:48-50). This was an historic occurrence that cannot be erased. Our very calendar forever will testify to the fact that God spoke historically through the Son. The gospel is the historical fact of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This can never be undone. The preaching of it can fail, the belief of it can wane, but the fact of God speaking through His Son will judge men in the end.

God speaks to us today

Such a statement as this is much used and abused. I hold to cessationism, i.e., that the miraculous sign and revelatory gifts ceased with the apostles and are not operative for today. However, God also did something in the first century through the apostles which was for us today—He gave us His inspired Word, “once for all delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). Through the Bible God is still speaking with the same authority with which Jesus spoke. Hebrews 2:1-5 tells us that Jesus spoke to those that heard Him (the apostles) and the apostles’ words were confirmed by their own miracles. Mohler said, “If you do not believe that God now speaks from His Word—the Bible—then what are you doing every Sunday morning? If you are not confident that God speaks as you rightly read and explain the Word of God, then you should quit.”6

There have been two errors made historically about God giving us His Word. The first is that God never started. These are those who, through their liberal presuppositions, could never accept that God inspired a Bible. To them the Bible is as any other book, a product of good and enlightened men, but not a divine product of the Holy Spirit. The second error is that God never stopped. These are the cults who believe that God is still giving the gift of inspiration to add to the Word of God—Mohammad, Joseph Smith, etc.   But God spoke once through inspiration (of course, 66 times over 1500 years, but “once for all delivered unto the saints”). But every time we read the Word of God, God is speaking through it directly to us. That is why exposition of the Word is vital to worship.

And so . . . .

By leaving a word-based culture and turning to an image-based culture we are forfeiting the very power of God in our worship. It is not that we cannot use pictures, screens, power point and so forth, but these must always be secondary and illustrious to the main thing, the written and spoken Word of God. After all, God gave us two illustrations to use in our preaching: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. But the difference in these illustrations and all others is that the very Word which they illustrate commands their use and explanation. An image-based worship is a return to a more ignorant time, not a progression forward. Arthur Hunt wrote, “Paganism never really died in modern western culture; it was only restrained. American Protestantism effectively suppressed many pagan forms up until the twentieth century; but the advent of the image-based media has brought forth a revitalization of the pagan gods in popular culture.”7 One would be hard-pressed to deny that the common scene at a rock concert is a return to paganism. In fact, it is the world’s idolatry. The church should be very careful in copying it.

Carl Trueman also wrote, “What we need to be concerned about is the replacement of preaching and doctrine in many generic evangelical churches with drama, with so-called liturgical dance, with feelings, emotions and mystical experiences, and, sometimes, with elaborate sacramental ceremonies which make the Catholic Church look positively Puritan by comparison. These all speak of the transformation of Protestantism from a word-based movement into something more concerned with aesthetics of one form or another.”8

If these warnings are not sufficient to make us pause, consider the warning in Revelation 13, a scenario which could realistically happen a short three and a half years from now if the Lord were to come today. Here the “beast” or antichrist is “worshiped” by the whole world, empowered directly by Satan. The whole worship scene is enhanced by “another beast” or the false prophet. This beast constructs the final multi-media, image- based worship service before Armageddon happens. He does it with “great wonders” and “miracles” (both from semeia, image, sign). The whole world will be tattooed with a “mark” upon the skin that shows solidarity with the movement. Is the world not conditioning itself for this type of worship?

Perhaps this article ought to be closed with Paul’s admonition to Timothy,

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;   Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.   For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;   And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.        (2 Timothy 4:1-5)

 

Notes:

1. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (New York: Houghton & Mifflin, 1971) 479. Interestingly, this comes from a section titled “The Significance of the Spoken Word.”

2. Carl Trueman, The Wages of Spin (Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications, 2004) Kindle, 793.

3. Authur W. Hunt, III, The Vanishing Word (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2003) 202.

4. Trueman, part 2, “”Short, Sharp Shocks.”

5. Albert Mohler, Jr., He Is Not Silent (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2008) Kindle, 260.

6. Mohler, 764.

7. Hunt, 25

8. Trueman, 359

 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Mary Slobodian: 1931 – 2014

Written by Admin

Mary Slobodian: 1931 – 2014

by Admin

%%tb-image-alt-text%%

maryOn July 22, Mary Slobodian, wife of BIEM and Baptist Global Mission founder, Peter Slobodian, passed into eternity. She went to join her husband, Peter, with the Lord, peacefully at her home in Gladstone, Missouri. She was 83 and is survived by 3 children, 11 grandchildren, and 14 great-grandchildren. 

The funeral service was on Saturday, July 26, 2014.

Interment at Lincoln Memorial Gardens, Zionsville, IN.

 

A pictorial history of Dr. Peter and Mary Slobodian from BIEM Missions on Vimeo.

“I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day:and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing”  (2 Timothy 4:7-8).

 

 

giving-God-the-Glory-148x226This is Peter Slobodian’s biography, “Giving God the Glory.”  It can be purchased through Baptist International Evangelistic Ministries.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
About Us, Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

America in Christian Perspective

Written by Rick Shrader

America in Christian Perspective

by Rick Shrader

%%tb-image-alt-text%%

“Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people” Proverbs 16:34

America has been the greatest nation in the age of grace. We share our Christian values with our mother England, but she has fallen from her graceful place generations ago and her favorite son may not be far behind. As we approach our “Independence Day” celebrations, I doubt that many in our great land will think of the words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Almost all holidays, religious or national, have become mere opportunities to play and party. We don’t take time to reflect on what brought us this freedom or how we came to be so blessed.

The true believer in Jesus Christ lives in a nationalistic conundrum. Can we rejoice in present-day America with its rejection of God and its blatant sins? Or can we be thankful for what we have had in the past even though we are living off the spiritual capital of our forefathers? Or can we be positive about our future, hoping that there will be some reprieve or revival or relief? Or can we be assured that these are the last days and that Jesus Christ Himself will rescue His Church before the dark and terrible days of tribulation to come? John’s tribulation riddle was, “He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints” (Rev. 13:10).

I have been in several countries of the world and have mostly enjoyed every place I’ve gone. Of course, this is largely because I’ve gone there to fellowship with believers and share the things of God with like-minded brothers and sisters. I am always reminded that most believers in this world do not enjoy the privileges and blessings that we have in America. In many ways, non-American believers deserve more of God’s grace than we do, and most pay a much dearer price for their faith than we. Do we not bear a much greater responsibility for the stewardship of God’s blessings, and deserve greater judgment if we squander them?

Anthony Daniels, speaking at Hillsdale College last month said of his native England,

“Certainly the notions of dependence and independence have changed. I remember a population that was terrified of falling into dependence on the state, because such dependence, apart from being unpleasant in itself, signified personal failure and humiliation. But there has been an astonishing gestalt switch in my lifetime. Independence has now come to mean independence of the people to whom one is related and dependence on the state.”1

Likewise in America, rather than dependence upon our Creator for the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of (true) happiness, we have turned to our own ways and that usually means making government our god who will always supply our need. In fact, the “liberation” theology of preachers such as Jeremiah Wright and others is actually a “dependence” theology making citizens dependents of the state which is, in this interpretation, the only god there is.

What is a Christian to do? As I have thought on these things as a patriotic American Christian, I believe there are Biblical truths that we must honor and follow regardless of what happens in our country. At the same time, we must ask that “for a little space grace might be shown from the Lord our God . . . to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage” (Ezra 9:8).

Principles of a Christian Nation

God instituted human government after the flood of Noah. From that time to this it has been God’s will that men collectively govern themselves for good while punishing the evil. Romans 13 makes it clear that such power is seen as the minister of God for good. Here are some things that we must be aware of in America.

First, Satan hates Israel and America is Israel’s only friend in the world. Any nation should fear to read that God has said He would bless them that bless Israel and curse him that curses Israel (Gen. 12:3). Satan knows what the future has in store and still believes that he must destroy Israel if his plan to control the world can succeed. To do this he must first destroy the biggest obstacle to that objective, and that is the United States. Anyone who knows Biblical prophecy knows how the scenario works out. In history, Germany, the land of Reformation, could not stand when it became anti-semitic. Russia fell when it persecuted its Jewish citizens. For the first time in our nation’s history we have a cold relationship to Israel and in the grand scheme of things, that is a precarious place to be.

Second, America is founded on God’s providence. Yes, every nation is to some extent, but in God’s providential working America has been especially blessed. “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance” (Psa. 33:12). This verse speaks specifically of Israel, but the next verse reads, “The Lord looketh from heaven; he beholdeth all the sons of men. From the place of his habitation he looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth” (vss. 13-14). To whom much is given much is required, and God has certainly given America much of which we are His stewards. To this point we have used our wealth to bless other nations and promote Biblical faith. That’s why we have been “blessed.”

Third, America was founded upon a Protestant ethic.2 It is only in a euphemistic sense that we say “Judeo-Christian” ethic. Our forefathers fled the Church of England in the way that England and all of Europe fled Roman Catholicism even though our tent is large and excludes no “Christian” interpretation. Henry Morris wrote,

“It is significant that all [of the signers of the Declaration] were at least nominal believers in the God of the Bible and in His supernatural creation of all things in the beginning, and in Jesus Christ as the chief Founder of our nation’s religion. None were atheists or Muslims or Buddhists or from any other non-Christian religion, and the same was true of the body of distinguished men who several years later formulation our national Constitution. It is understandable why God has signally blessed our nation. Indeed, ‘happy are the people whose God is the LORD.’”3

Fourth, there have always been just wars and America has always been on the right side. When immigrants to this land were truly seeking freedom to worship the true God according to their conscience and the Word of God, we fought for the dissolution of our ties with a tyrannical England. When slavery had engulfed us, we sacrificed a half-million citizens to right that wrong. When Germany would have destroyed the free countries of Europe we came to their rescue in WWI. When Hitler would have conquered the world we led the bloody charge clear to Berlin in WWII. In all the messy wars since then we were the protectors and the liberators. Gog and Magog is on the horizon, but America’s future moral compass will only be measured by her Biblical faith.

Fifth, America is not in Biblical prophecy, except, of course, in the most general sense as all nations of the earth that will exist at that time. What that means is that she may or may not be around when the Tribulation begins, depending on how far away that inevitable event is. Our most frequent prayer ought to be that America will still be promoting the preaching of the gospel until Jesus comes.

Sixth, Democracy is the best form of government for the age of grace. God dictated Israel’s law, and Jesus will rule the kingdom of God with a rod of iron, but in this interim the American experiment has proved to be the best sinful men can achieve. A monarchy rests on the good nature of one man and there is no such man until Jesus comes. An oligarchy rests on the goodness of a few but the chances of those few being in the best interest of the people are slim. A democracy depends on the goodness of the majority and their representatives. The chances of that happening have lasted longer than the other forms.   But it is only a matter of time until the first believing generations fail to pass on the faith to the next generations. Then the majority will rule according to their own lusts.

What has been called “American Exceptionalism” really rests on America’s lapsarian understanding of man’s sins. We are a rule of law precisely because “the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners” (1 Tim. 1:9), and Christians understand that “all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). The casting off of the rule of law is to promote sinful man above the law and to lose our humility before a righteous God.

Principles for Christians in a Christian Nation

First, Christian people who are blessed enough to live in America ought to live godly lives as members of a local church. We understand that this is the age of the local church. That is the entity God has chosen to work through to carry out His plans. It is “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). A baptized believer without a local church family walks alone in the world and is being unbiblical. If God’s people would do what God has commissioned Christians to do through the church, the nation of their residence would be greatly blessed and strengthened. Our troubles have not come because Christians have not been involved enough in politics, but because they have not been involved enough in their own local churches, and those churches have not been involved enough in doing what the church is supposed to do.

Second, Christians in America should be model citizens. Paul taught us to pray “for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior” (1 Tim. 2:2-3). “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men” (Rom. 12:18). If we practice the fruit of the Spirit rather than the lusts of the flesh, “against such,” we find, “there is no law” (Gal. 5:23).

Third, Christians in America should be productive citizens. “And that ye study to be quiet, and to do your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you” (1 Thes. 4:11). God made us to work and work is fulfilling and blesses our family and others. It was God who “gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness” (Acts 14:17), not the government’s welfare programs.

Fourth, Christians in America should defend their own country in law enforcement and military service. Since God has established government as His ordained means to control sinful men, it is not wrong for a Christian to make that his/her profession. After all, they are “ministers of God for good” (Rom. 13:4) also. No doubt, corruption in high places will frustrate the Christian civil servant, but as long as the agreed upon law of the land is still good in principle, the Christian may enforce it with all good conscience. From time to time, believers have had a tendency to almost worship patriotism because of a country’s blessing to them, but that has generally been better in history than having to flee for one’s life because of the evil nature of one’s country, as in communist or radical countries.

Fifth, Christians in America and everywhere else should remember that God is in control of it all. “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: he turneth it withersoever he will” (Prov. 21:1). “Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: and he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom to the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding” (Dan. 2:20-21). We don’t know the mind of the Lord, nor why we live in this land and not another, nor why we were born at this time and not another. Mordecai calmed the nervous Esther by reminding her, “and who knoweth whether thou are come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14). After all, “our citizenship is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 4:20). We are stewards of the time and place in which we live.

And So . . .

It may seem right now that we have two Americas existing within the same geographical boundary. We have never been so split over values, morals, religion, and politics. There is no more land to begin a new nation. We will live through the present crisis and serve God either way. History does not teach us that men get better but worse. Prophecy teaches us that the darkest days are still ahead but there is a blessed hope for the church of Jesus Christ. As with the death of the body, we don’t know how or when, we just know it will happen, so also with the nations that exist before the Day of Jesus Christ.

As a citizen of this great country, my emotions can swing from joy to sadness. As a pastor of a local congregation, I have a responsibility to prepare God’s people, especially the next generation, for whatever is coming. In most things in life we prepare for the worst case scenario and then thank God when it turns out better. A blithely positive attitude is great if that negative scenario doesn’t come. But if it does come, will God’s people stand in the evil day, and having done all, stand? Some generation will see the dark days and be translated out, will it be us?

In the meantime, let us take William Carey’s admonition, “Expect great things from God, attempt great things for God.” A wise man said if he knew the Lord was coming tomorrow, he would still plant a tree today. This indeed should be the Christian’s finest hour. “To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints” (1 Thes. 3:13).

Am I A Soldier of the Cross?
A fol-l’wer of the lamb?
And shall I fear to own His cause,
Or blush to speak His name?
Must I be carried to the skies
On flow-’ry beds of ease,
While oth-ers fought to win the prize,
And sailed through bloody seas?
Are there no foes for me to face?
Must I not stem the flood?
Is this vile world a friend to grace,
To help me on to God?
Sure I must fight if I would reign-
Increase my cour-age Lord!
I’ll bear the toil, en-dure the pain,
Sup-port-ed by Thy Word.
Isaac Watts

 

Notes:

1. Anthony Daniels, “The Worldview that Makes the Underclass,” Imprimis, May/June 2014.

2. See D.G. Hart, That Old Time Religion in Modern America, chapter 3, “Evangelicals and the Politics of Morality. Also see, John M. Barry, Roger Williams and the Creation of the American Soul, part VI, “Soul Liberty.”

3. Dr. Henry M. Morris, “The Pursuit of Happiness,” originally written in 2005 and adapted for Acts & Facts, July 2014.

 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

God’s Strength In Our Weakness

Written by Rick Shrader

God’s Strength In Our Weakness

by Rick Shrader

%%tb-image-alt-text%%

“And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.”   (2 Cor. 12:9-10)

The last four chapters of 2 Corinthians is a roller-coaster ride of emotions from the apostle Paul. In chapter 10 he is proving his apostleship to the doubters in Corinth; in chapter 11 he is contrasting his own testimony with the false apostles (who really were ministers of Satan) by listing his own perils suffered for Christ’s sake; in chapter 12 he takes the reader to the heavenlies where he was raptured to see the glory of God, and then explains that God also gave him a thorn in the flesh so that he wouldn’t glory in himself; then in chapter 13 he concludes that just as Christ was crucified in weakness but raised in power, so we, though weak in our sufferings, can live by the power of God.

Though we may not suffer as many have throughout our history, every believer suffers in some fashion under the mighty hand of God. If we be without this chastisement of God we are illegitimate and not real sons. We learn nothing without effort and struggle and so it is with our knowledge of the love and grace of God. It is part of our nature to resist, to take the easier path of avoiding hardship, but softness comes by inactivity as well as lethargy and laziness.

John Bunyan was a man acquainted with suffering, spending twelve years in prison simply for preaching the gospel. He said,

“I count therefore, that such things are necessary for the health of our souls, as bodily pains and labour are for [the health of] the body. People that live high, and in idleness, bring diseases upon the body: and they that live in all fullness of Gospel-ordinances, and are not exercised with trials, grow gross, are diseased and full of bad humours in their souls.”1

Most of us would admit that our suffering for Christ has been of the more inward type, that is, we may have been wounded in spirit, gossiped about, slandered, or simply have been forced to go through a time of heart ache for someone else. I am not necessarily talking about those things we suffer because we live in a sinful world such as accidents, disease, or simply the pains of growing older. Those things are brought upon us by the introduction of our own sin into God’s originally perfect creation, and are allowed by God that we might see ourselves as we really are. No doubt, God will faithfully help us through these also. But there are sufferings that are specifically for Christ’s sake, as Peter wrote, “if ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye” (1 Peter 4:14). And why should we be happy about this? “for the Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you.” Or, as Paul wrote, “when I am weak, then am I strong.”

Perhaps if we suffered for Christ more in our very flesh we could see the work of God in us more directly. Yet when we suffer in our spirit, which is by far the more common form of suffering for the average Christian, the work of His grace in us is more difficult to grasp and therefore the more difficult to grow thereby. If we could really see how much we can learn from such circumstances, we would desire the fellowship of His sufferings even more. Not for revenge, nor for self-reward, but because, though some unknowing person did us harm, we know it was more Satan who desired the ruin of our spirit than the human instrument of his use, and also because we will grow by it if we learn to let Him increase as we decrease.

The abuse of prejudice

Those who fight against Christianity don’t always do it by brute physical aggression. Paul himself suffered from the prejudice about his physical appearance. “For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible” (2 Cor. 10:10). To be prejudiced is to make a judgment about someone based on one’s previous ideas before obtaining any first-hand knowledge of the person. Samuel had this prejudice when he went to the house of Jesse expecting to find a king for Israel. When he saw Eliab he thought, “Surely the LORD’s anointed is before him. But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart” (1 Sam. 16:6-7).

Many men and women in God’s service have not measured up to the physical standards of what society thinks or wants in a leader. Fanny Crosby said of herself, “I’m four feet three inches tall. I was four feet five, but I’ve shrunk up some. I weigh eighty-four and a half pounds. My grandmother used to call me ‘Fanny Flewit,’ because I flew around the house so.”2 But her physical size and appearance did not stop God from using her in a marvelous way. George Whitefield was evidently a very short man and probably cross-eyed, and perhaps even spoke with an impediment, but neither England nor America has produced a more powerful preacher of the gospel.3

The list of God’s servants with physical “shortcomings” could go on and on. My professor, Dr. Harju, in Life of Paul class, used to call the apostle Paul “a hook-nosed, runny-eyed, little Jew.” And maybe he was. Paul said he prayed three times for God to change him but God does not deal in divine eugenics. He had a greater blessing for Paul. “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.” And so Paul answered, “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Cor. 12:9).

By Paul’s testimony, therefore, we ought rather to thank those who persecute us because they have brought an opportunity for us to learn the greater blessing of God’s grace. We are the winner and they are the loser. Even though any person, Christian or not, will answer to God for slander and railing, the Christian will be greatly rewarded if he does not fall into retaliation himself.

God is not a respecter of persons (Rom. 2:11) and neither should the Christian be (Jas. 2:1). How can we bless God with our tongue, and then with the same tongue curse another human being made in God’s image (Jas. 2:9)? But we have seen it often. A pastoral candidate may not look like the perfect pastor; a youth pastor may not be “cool;” a singer may not be the prettiest girl in the church; or worse yet, a visitor may not measure up to the cultural expectations of the neighborhood (Jas. 2:2-3). To display this kind of persecution toward a brother or sister is a sin and displays a woeful lack of spiritual perception. But to receive this kind of persecution, or any other kind, is a hidden blessing.

The abuse of unforgiveness

People without Christ really don’t know how to forgive. Forgiveness to them usually means overlooking transgressions. Politicians, athletes, actors, performers and even ministers can commit the most immoral things and are excused with the false piety of “I just forgive.” Of course, this only happens if the person in question is politically correct. Then all can be forgiven. Sometimes such misplaced forgiveness comes by comparing this sin with another’s. “Well, many people throughout history have done the same thing.”

The fact is, until a person has been forgiven much by God, he/she cannot know to forgive even a little with another person. In the parable of the two debtors, the master said, “O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellow servant, even as I had pity on thee?” (Matt. 18:23-35).

The few times as a pastor that I have had to deal with public discipline, I always begin my remarks by saying, “There are a few things we believe. Sin is real, repentance is real, and forgiveness is real.” If the first two have truly taken place, then the third should also. Paul had to scold the Corinthian church in his first epistle for not even dealing with the sin. But in his second epistle, when they had dealt with it in a proper way and had forgiven the man, he urged them, “So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow” (2 Cor. 2:7). In a similar way Paul admonished the believers in Galatia, “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:1-2).

In a recent message, Dr. Kevin Bauder listed the sins of many prominent Christian leaders and rightly pointed out the usual lack of accountability. Then he said, “But we also need to establish real protections against slander and destructive accusations—for they, too, are a form of abuse, and those who engage in such activities are themselves abusers.”4 If you have ever seen a person either repent or apologize (whichever is appropriate for the offense) and then are taken back by brothers or sisters who refuse to restore such a one, or want a pound of flesh (so to speak), it is a discouraging and distasteful display of (the lack of) Christian love. It is disobeying the law of Christ, rather than fulfilling it. These forms of persecution come from the flesh, whether saved flesh or lost flesh, and they are destructive to individuals who are then overcome with much sorrow, and also to churches in sowing seeds of discord which God hates (Prov. 6:16-19).

But at this point let me also repeat that trials are growing times for the Christian. The truth about all our sin is that we deserve much more than the pain our sin brings; yes, we deserve hell itself for eternity! It is by the grace of our Lord that He paid that debt for us and forgave us. We are left on this earth, in this faulty flesh, for a variety of reasons, one of which is that we may continue to grow and be more like Christ, and solid growth comes of pain. Do not be bitter toward those whom Satan has duped into using. Bless God for His mercy and grace in that hour and use it to your eternal benefit.

The abuse of self-revelation

It is a dangerous thing to claim to receive a message from God. There is a fine line between saying that God has “led” me to do something, and saying that He “told” me specifically what to do. One is to say that the Holy Spirit works in me and leads me according to His will, while the other is to say that God has revealed something to me clearly and plainly. Current religious culture has created a panoply of confusing propositions with the words dream, vision, whisper, voices, revelation, prophecy, and so on. Bible believing people are properly cautious, not wanting to say in any way that God has not made Himself known to us, but also not wanting to wish “God speed” to someone who is changing the Word of God.

Albert Mohler rightfully insists that, “If you do not believe that God now speaks from His Word—the Bible—then what are you doing every Sunday morning? If you are not confident that God speaks as you rightly read and explain the Word of God, then you should quit.”5 But Mohler is not saying that every Christian will hear his/her own special revelation from God. Rather he is saying that God now speaks through His Word because it IS His Word. If you hear the Bible being read, you are hearing God speak—today! But if you seek other verbal communication from God, you are not hearing God’s Word but some human wisdom about God.

The examples of this are myriad. In Ann Arbor, Michigan, a Vineyard minister, Rev. Ken Wilson, claimed he received a “strong nudge from Jesus” to change his view on homosexuality and to support homosexuals in the church.6 Did he really? Of course not! But when someone claims that his view came directly from God, it becomes difficult to refute without a semester course on theology. Eliphaz the Temanite used this trick to lecture Job, “Now a thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof. In thoughts from the visions of the night, when deep sleep falleth on men, fear came upon me, and trembling, which made all my bones to shake. Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair on my flesh stood up” (Job 4:12-15).

Recently, congregations have been pressured into drastic changes by pastors who have had such “visions” from God. What can be said in opposition to that? Can you fight against God? But, again, the fine line is, talking as though “vision” only means a leading of the Lord, and yet practicing as though “vision” means a revelation. Too many times their orthodoxy may explain it one way but their orthopraxy results in a stronger way. The fact is that God has spoken the same thing to all churches and it is our job to apply that revelation in the best way we can. But let us not pressure people into something by claiming divine revelation about it.

This has been a fact of our generation. Men want so much to be seen as great leaders, and this is a way to accomplish that. But God has not asked that of us. He has asked us to preach and practice His Word. If we do other, verily we have our reward! But, again, how should we respond in such an environment? Be faithful to God’s Word. Don’t strive to be a Warren or an Osteen or a Hybels or a Hinn, who would want to be? God has not asked us to work for the applause of men or churches. God, who sees in secret, will reward us openly at His Bema Seat. And that is enough.

 

And So . . . .

I could go on. There is an abuse of silence. This is when you find you have offended someone but they never let you know. If it really didn’t matter, that would be one thing. But you find that they have been hurt by it and have even left the church, or some such thing. To find that a brother or sister has done this without coming to you is disheartening. I call this hide-and-seek Christianity. All you can do at that point is take the initiative yourself (there is wisdom in the Lord’s directive) and pick up what pieces you can.

There is the abuse of gossip which is much more well known. The terrible thing about gossip is that someone is harmed by it, and harmed in a way that can never be undone or recovered in this life. We can make it right by repenting and going to the offended person, but the words are like fire that continue to burn around the world. Surely this kind of persecution against the spirit will be severely judged by God.

I could add the abuse of hypocrisy, whereby a false believer takes advantage of an unknowing brother or sister and then goes out from us because they are not of us. Many times destruction and hurt are left in the wake.

James’ cure is the best: “But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace” (James 3:17-18).

 

Notes:

1. John Bunyan, Advice To Sufferers (Louisville: Vintage Puritan Series, nd) Kindle, 91.

2. “Recollections of Fanny Crosby.” The Christian Herald, March 17, 1915.

3. Harry Stout, The Divine Dramatist (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994) 41.

4. “A Story Worth Repeating,” preached at Trinity Baptist Church, March 28, 2014.

5. Albert Mohler, He Is Not Silent (Chicago: Moody, 2008) Kindle, 764.

6. “Minister claims he received ‘strong nudge from Jesus to announce support for homosexuality,” The Beacon, May, 2014, p. 2.

 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Marijuana and the Christian

Written by Rick Shrader

Marijuana and the Christian

by Rick Shrader

%%tb-image-alt-text%%

RickShraderThe culture in America is changing quickly, and not necessarily for the good. Christians generally agree that issues such as abortion, pornography, or same-sex marriages are immoral, unbiblical, and harmful to society at large. Not all agree about substance abuse in areas such as alcohol, tobacco, and drugs like marijuana. Churches have long had to develop convictions as well as policies concerning these substances in defining their membership and spiritual leadership roles. The rapid legalization of marijuana is quickly forcing the church to include it on its list of substances for qualification.

In 1969 only 12% of Americans supported the legalization of marijuana. Today it is 58%. 50% of Catholics favor legalizing the drug as do 58% of Protestants in America. 21 states have legalized the medicinal use of marijuana with similar bills pending in 16 other states. 2 States, Colorado and Washington, have legalized recreational use of marijuana with 13 other states pushing for the same and these numbers change almost daily. This has caused the Department of Justice to announce it will not enforce federal laws (because possession of marijuana is still a federal crime) and create conflict in those states. It does not look like this will be abated soon.

The Marijuana Plant

Marijuana is one of the varieties of the Hemp plant or Cannabis Sativa L. The Hemp plant has been around for thousands of years because it is the best source for many products including rope, textiles, foods, paper, body care products, detergents, plastics, and various building materials. The industrial Hemp is grown for its stalk which can grow to 15 feet tall. It contains only about .01% of THC (Tetrahydrocannabinoids), the addictive ingredient that makes a person high.

The Hemp plant, or Cannabis, can also produce the marijuana variety grown specifically for its flower, not its stalk. This variety grows only about 5 feet tall but produces 10-15% THC (although the marijuana of the ‘60s had only about 1 to 2%). The marijuana plant has 60+ cannabinoids, the active ingredients (of which THC is one) that make the plant marijuana. These ingredients can be made into liquids called tinctures which can be taken internally, mixed with foods, and used medicinally. There are also synthetic liquids that are legal in Canada and the UK. These liquid forms have been available for a number of years in prescription form to be used for pain relief though users usually prefer the smoking variety.

Growing Issues

The legalization of marijuana has growing momentum and probably will not stop until it is available in all 50 states. An internet search will show a great diversity of opinion as to the positive and negative effects of marijuana on the human mind and body. Whereas pro-drug websites boldly state that marijuana is not harmful and in fact may be good for you, medical opinion is beginning to come in that shows the opposite, or at least is not nearly so optimistic.

“We don’t have as good data as we have for alcohol, but the evidence is already clear,” said Susan Weiss, policy chief for the National Institute on Drug Abuse. “Marijuana is not good for you.” Frequent, prolonged marijuana use has been linked to depression, psychosis, anxiety, and other mental disorders, especially among teenagers. A decades-long study in New Zealand found that adolescents who used pot at least four times a week lost an average of 8 IQ points between the ages of 13 and 38. Studies suggest that about 9 percent of all users become dependent on marijuana, and that pot smokers have far higher rates of workplace injuries and school absences than non-users. One study of 46,000 Swedish soldiers found that even infrequent pot smokers were more than twice as likely to develop schizophrenia as non-smokers; regular users were six times as likely.1

Just this month (April, 2014) Northwestern University released a study on the negative effects of marijuana. This study was a collaboration between Northwestern Medicine® and Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School. On their website, Northwestern reported, “This is the first study to show casual use of marijuana is related to major brain changes. It showed the degree of brain abnormalities in these regions is directly related to the number of joints a person smoked per week. The more joints a person smoked, the more abnormal the shape, volume and density of the brain regions.”2

In addition to the medical issues related to marijuana, there are legal issues where federal and state laws conflict. There are issues related to prison terms such as a man in Missouri who has already served 20 years of a life sentence for possession of marijuana, an action that wouldn’t even get him arrested today. There is the issue of whether prohibition actually works or is just fueling the fire of possession. There is the issue of pain relief for some who claim they have found no other way of relief. And then there is the issue of whether marijuana should be any more illegal than alcohol or cigarettes. These issues and more are also causing differences of opinion among Christians as to the proper attitude to take toward marijuana.

Common Reasons Given in Favor

In reading various websites, even some Christians give arguments in support of marijuana use. “It is no worse than alcohol.” Of course, no one knows yet what the effects of marijuana will be on society. This answer is a wish, not a conclusion. The fact is, if marijuana is only half as bad as alcohol it is far too bad. Alcohol has been one of the most harmful substances that sinful man has used and abused. God warned of its use (Prov. 20:1) and so have many medical and law enforcement officials. To say that something is no worse than alcohol is like saying that your upcoming surgery is no worse than a root canal, so don’t worry about it.

“God gave us all herbs to enjoy.” God did give us His creation to use but not abuse. This is usually spoken in regard to the Hemp plant which has varieties that can be used in good or bad ways. Most things that mankind makes are this way because this is a broken, or fallen, world. God may have given us the raw materials but the artwork is ours (Mic. 5:13; Acts 17:29). Because God gave us sound doesn’t mean that all music is good; because God gave us color doesn’t mean that all pictures are good; because God gave us trees doesn’t mean that all boats made from them are good boats. God gave us the ingredients for various poisons too, but I don’t think a wise person will take   them in their final form as gifts from God. Almost all of the earth’s raw materials can be used in a positive or negative way.

“Almost everything is bad for you. Because car exhaust is bad, am I going to stop driving?” No, you are not going to stop driving, but you won’t put your mouth over the exhaust pipe while the car is running either. We live in a sinful world with many harmful things and it is our stewardship to navigate this world to the glory of God with the best of our ability. We can succeed or fail at that (1 Cor. 9:27).

“The jails are full and yet the drugs are still available. The ban on some drugs like marijuana is too costly and doesn’t work.” Again, this is a wish not a fact. No one knows what the legalization of marijuana is going to do to our neighborhoods, schools, gang problems, and a host of other issues. Solving the problem by abandoning all restraints is kind of like jumping over a cliff and then deciding half way down that it wasn’t such a good idea. America is about to jump over this cliff and we have no idea what it will be like. When men take their own path with little regard to God’s direction, it ends in harm and regret (James 4:15-17).

Lastly, “Smoking marijuana has given me the only relief I can find for my constant pain.” Actually, I have the most sympathy for this person. Pain is personal and we all deal with it differently. I have heard parents make this argument for children who went this route. First, I have a hard time thinking that with all of our medical technology there really isn’t better pain relief than marijuana. Second, there are other variations of the same drug available in prescription form that are more controllable.   But third, I would hope that in such a circumstance I would still refuse, or at least greatly resist, the use of a substance that harms me in other ways as much as it helps me in one way (Col. 3:17, 23).

Biblical Reasons Against

Our Body. First and foremost is the Biblical reason that many Christians have grown tired of—our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and what is purposely used though it harms our body is not good, and, in fact is sinful. Paul says that the believer’s body is a “member of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15) and therefore he should not give it to a harlot and become one in body though he can never become one in spirit (vs. 17) with her. Then he applies that well known statement that our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and we have been bought with a price, which is the very death of Christ (vss. 19-20). We are not to be drunk with wine wherein (“in which is”) is excess but be filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18). We are to be vessels “unto honor, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work” (2 Tim. 2:21). Just as God raised up the body of Christ, He will raise our bodies to be in His presence because they are important to Him (1 Cor. 6:14).

To simply say that we cannot attain complete purity of our bodies in this life and therefore it is futile to try, is to give up proper spiritual effort. We know the difference between positional and progressive sanctification. To rest in one’s position in Christ with no concern for ongoing sanctification is to be disqualified for the race (1 Cor. 9:27). Even the apostle Paul, late in his life, said he would press toward the finish line of life’s race (Phil. 3:14) “but I press on, that I may also lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me” (vs. 12, NKJV).

Our Witness. It is disconcerting that we have largely abandoned the method of using our abstinence (of worldly things) as a means of witness for Christ. Whereas we used to believe that abstinence brought conviction to the lost person by explaining why we do not do the activity, now we seem to believe that participating with the lost person and somehow befriending him in that way better draws him to Christ. I think we have turned from relying on the Holy Spirit for conviction to relying on our own means of drawing them. And besides, we really don’t like the tension the first method creates.

This doesn’t mean, as some will surely try to point out, that we become unfriendly and caustic in our abstaining witness. In fact, this is where the witness is greatly enhanced, when we can speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). But we can’t have a powerful witness with just the love. There must be the truth also. Paul’s use of the great separation passage (“come out from among them and be ye separate” from Isa. 52:11) in 2 Cor. 6, follows a scolding of the Corinthian church for not understanding that trying to make righteousness have fellowship with unrighteousness, or light to have communion with darkness, is to be unequally yoked with unbelief (2 Cor. 6:14-18). That is not to be light in the world but darkness. Surely Paul understood the proper balance of love and truth.

Our Family. The family is God’s creation for nurturing children from infancy to adulthood. Parents are supposed to protect, educate, discipline, and train the children to become productive servants in God’s vineyard (Eph. 6:4). Also the children that are under a parent’s care are to obey them that “it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest life long on the earth” (Eph. 6:3). Pastors and their wives are to offer their children as examples to the whole church of good order and godliness (1 Tim. 3:4-5; Titus 1:6). Christian families ought to be the first in society to take the “high road” when it comes to issues of morality, service, friendliness, hospitality, godliness, and even safety. The reason we can’t imagine a parent wanting a child to smoke marijuana or use any other illicit substance is because we understand that a parent’s heart has a God-given sense of protection toward its children (Prov. 4:1-6).

Our Church. The local church has the right and the obligation to set boundaries for itself (meaning its members) concerning things which it believes is harmful, sinful, or disruptive to the Biblical function of its ministry. This may be in the form of a church covenant to which members agree upon joining the church or the constitution (By-Laws) which the church adopts by vote and agreement. No one is forced to join any local church and no one is forced to stay. It is a voluntary society which believing families join if they think it will be the best place to worship and raise their children.

Churches have always had to deal with issues such as alcohol, tobacco, pornography, and various drugs. This is becoming more important in our generation, not less. It is not good to see many churches have little concern about the use of addictive substances within their membership. Most conservative churches have valid concerns for how these things affect them. The coming ubiquity of legal marijuana will force churches to include it among their constitutional agreements.

The church in Jerusalem gave specific advice to the churches in Galatia regarding idols, fornication, and dietary rules about meat (Acts 15:20) and the Galatian churches gladly adopted those for their situation (Acts 16:4-5). Paul (as the apostle) directed the Corinthian church to settle upon matters of law courts, fornication, abuse of the Lord’s Supper, spiritual gifts, and even false teachers. The churches established and overseen by Timothy and Titus were given many directives for healthy and godly living (1 Tim. 2:8-9; 2 Tim. 2:14-26; Titus 1:10-16). The world they lived in dictated swift and specific action be taken regarding these harmful things.

And So . . . .

I doubt that the practices of Christians and substances will change much with the addition of legalized marijuana. Those that have already allowed moderate drinking will probably allow moderate use of marijuana. It is interesting that most church covenants don’t mention tobacco in any form but there is usually a conviction about it that is well known in the church. Families will probably allow marijuana or not according to how they presently deal with these other substances. This will, no doubt, be a growing concern for youth leaders as the pressure on Christian kids mounts over the next few years.

I would hope that conservative churches and families will become more convicted about abstinence toward these harmful substances and will seek fellowship with others of like mind. Issues like marijuana will create even broader differences in our culture but Christians, of all people, must be willing to stand for moral and decent principles. This stand will not hurt us but will help us and give us another platform from which to share our faith in Christ as we speak the truth about this in love.

 

Notes:

1. http://theweek.com/article/index/236671/is-marijuana-bad-for-you?

2. http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2014/04/casual-marijuana-use-linked-to-brain-abnormalities-in-students.html.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

The Small Church in Today’s Culture

Written by Rick Shrader

The Small Church in Today’s Culture

by Rick Shrader

This isn’t an easy time for small churches.  In today’s culture, small often means inadequate, unsuccessful, non-visionary, and unexciting.  By today’s cultural standards those descriptions may be right.  Our culture sees bigness and excitement as marks of success.  By God’s standards, however, any size church may be successful or unsuccessful and may seem boring or exciting.

I grew up in the large fundamental Baptist churches of the 50s and 60s.  My home church had around 8,000 in attendance with 100 buses running every Sunday.  I liked the church and was drawn into it in my teenage years by a loving youth group (they didn’t even have a youth pastor in the early days) and by an abundance of activities.  I later served as youth pastor there in the mid 70s.  By then the attendance was half of what it had been in the 60s and churches of other stripes were becoming large with newer and more innovative methods than we were using.  When I visited the church again in the mid 80s it was just an average church struggling to keep around a thousand people in attendance.

The church I attended during my Bible College days (1968-1972) had an attendance of 2000 and more with a live, weekly television broadcast.  It was not until I went to seminary that I experienced small church life.  During those three years of schooling in Minneapolis I served in a church of about 50 people on the west side of St. Paul.  It was a new experience for me but I was in ministry and enjoyed it.

I could easily make a list of good things and not so good things about that little church.  I could also make a long list of good things and not so good things about the larger churches I had known.  I have found that most fundamental Baptist churches will be somewhere in between those extremes in attendance.  I have also found that small churches will be limited in some areas where larger churches are not, and that large churches will be limited in some areas where smaller churches are not.  Most of us, however, will live and serve the Lord in smaller churches.  These churches receive many criticisms that I have found to be somewhat unfair, and also, the many good things about small churches are often overlooked.

Criticisms of the small church

I have heard dozens of criticisms of small churches in the last thirty to forty years.  I must admit I have heard many criticisms of the larger churches also.  Having experienced (and worked in) both, however, my heart is with the smaller churches.  Though some of the criticisms of large churches are unfair also, I want to use this space responding to the criticisms of the small churches.

The small church can’t offer enough.

I think this is perhaps the most valid complaint about small churches.  This is just the way it is.  If the small church is a new church and just getting started, it may be in a rented facility with limited space, limited manpower and limited funds.    A large family with small children has a need for nursery, classes, a youth group, or junior church.  A small church, especially a new church, may not be able to provide all of those.

However, when we think this way we are thinking as moderns, not necessarily as New Testament believers. Charles Ryrie wrote, “Indeed, one receives the impression from the New Testament that the Lord preferred to have many smaller congregations rather than one large group in any given place.  And there seemed to be no lack of power that stemmed from lack of bigness.”1  Our desire to have more things offered for our family stems more from our convenience-based society than from what we read in the New Testament.    After all, there are those who argue for doing away with children’s ministries all together but I think that is an over-reaction.  We ought rather to be willing to put up with these inconveniences and make up the difference in our own family time if our convictions tell us we need to be in such a church.  When people are looking for a school for their kids, they are happy that the ratio of teacher to student is small and that their child will receive more one-on-one attention from the teacher.

The small church is boring.

This argument may hold weight with our entertainment-based culture today but I doubt that it holds much weight with God.  By today’s standards reading is boring, conversation is boring, listening is boring, and certainly preaching is boring.  But this is mostly the fault of the one who is bored, not the one who seems boring.  C.S. Lewis, as a young atheist, described his attitude toward church as, “Oriental imagery and style largely repelled me; and for the rest, Christianity was mainly associated for me with ugly architecture, ugly music, and bad poetry.”2  But after his conversion Lewis described Christianity as “delightfully humdrum.”3

Being bored is not a sin.  Eutychus (Acts 20:9) was certainly bored enough to fall asleep in church but I doubt it was the preaching of the apostle Paul that was at fault.  This is not to say that we should purposely be boring or not strive to interest our hearers.  But most things that are worth learning start out to be boring and gain in interest as one gets more familiar and skilled.  G.K. Chesterton once quipped that Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried.4  Where the Spirit and the Word are central, the believer should not be bored.

The small church is afraid of change.

This charge has been a charge against traditional churches and a defense of contemporary Christianity all my life.  It usually means that Christians who resist the newer fads are fearful of losing power, or influence, or some such thing.  But small churches may have decided not to change things out of conviction, while larger churches may have changed something out of mere pragmatism.  To say that those who have not changed a particular thing were afraid to, however, is judging beyond what one really knows.  Change for change’s sake is not a virtue either.

The greatest change a person makes is to leave the world and come to Christ.  When that happens old things are truly passed away and all things become new (2 Cor. 5:17).  I have found that older people are saying that they went through this change long ago when they were converted.  They do not understand why a younger generation does not change in the same way.  To them (the older saints), it is the younger generation that is afraid to change, afraid to leave the old life behind and be changed into the image of Christ.  Profession of faith without a changed life is at epidemic proportions today.

The small church doesn’t care for the lost.

The argument from this perspective is that if the small church really cared about people getting saved it would change its methods in order to attract more people to hear the gospel.  This goes hand-in-hand with the belief that methodology is always morally neutral and can, rather should, be changed if a better method comes along.  Small churches are more often conservative churches that usually retain things on purpose:  hymn singing, choirs, song books, expository messages, invitations, and so on.  I would argue that it is not our methods that draw people but the Spirit of God Who is pleased or displeased with our methods.

To be “relevant” is to be what God would want us to be in our place and time in history.  That is, our relevancy is to God, not to the world.  That is why McCune says, “Ultimately the Gospel is relevant to the true needs of men and for us to try to debase the good coinage of the Gospel by vitiating it so that we can make it more attractive to men is to lose the Gospel and make it irrelevant.”5  Myron Houghton says, “Traditional Bible-believing fundamentalists believe that what a church ought to be and how it should function must not be determined by unchurched people or by the prevailing culture.”6  Therefore, the church that really cares about the lost will be careful to please the Spirit of God in all things in order to be as effective as possible in preaching the gospel.

Advantages of the small church

Having experienced both the small and the large churches, I believe there are many great advantages that the small church has because of its smallness.  This is not to say that larger churches cannot have the same, but that it is easier and more natural for the small churches to offer these things.

The small church is vitally connected with our Baptist history.

It has not been the norm for Baptists, who usually have been of the separatist persuasion, to be the large church in town.  It would be hard to argue that the churches of the New Testament were very large (especially by today’s standards), the early Jerusalem church notwithstanding.  Of course, Baptists have produced some of the most dynamic preachers in history and those men attracted large crowds, but they seem to be the exception not the rule.

When we travel to England we visit Spurgeon’s Tabernacle but we soon realize that most other Baptist churches in English history were quite smaller.  In the museums of John Bunyan (in Bedford) and William Carey (in Moulton) one may look at the rolls of the business meetings and see twenty or thirty names.  Yet what greater things could be accomplished for Christ than what these two men alone did?  It is not the size of the church which makes a man but the depth of his conviction.

The small church creates a good reality.

Not that reality amounts to largeness or smallness, but I mean this in the sense that our current culture is filled with artificial reality.  The television program, the video game, the commercial, the online “socializing,” all do more to separate us from reality than to create it.  Carl Trueman, in describing his search for reality, said he “saw the old opium of the people, religion, appropriating the new opium of the people, bland commercialized pop culture.”7  Arthur Hunt, describing how our culture is turning from a word-based society to an image-based society wrote, “Postmodernism is a turning from rationality, and at the same time an embracing of spectacle.”8

Having been in both, I believe the large church lends itself more toward the spectacle than the small church, sometimes very overtly.  The small congregation is forced to present a more “real” atmosphere simply because it cannot put on the spectacle.  The congregants must be the special music, live with the lack of professionalism, use their imagination, make more effort to speak to people.  In other words, they are forced to be what they ought to be.

The small church is family oriented.

This has been an age-old observation of families looking for churches. They want to be involved with other people and have their children involved, and, as with their search for a school, they want more one-on-one attention paid to their children.  The large church may have the advantage of providing more activities and programs, but the small church has the advantage of providing personal contact, concern, and participation.

In addition the small church offers the opportunity for children to learn what body life is all about.  Tozer wrote, “The church is called the household of God, and it is the ideal place to rear young Christians.”9  I have watched my two-year-old grandson stand among adults in the church lobby and wave good-by to the older folks as they leave.  He seems to think that is what you are supposed to do in church.  There is no better place on earth for children than in a church where everyone is in close contact and Christian fellowship.

The small church provides personal pastoral care.

When I was a youth pastor in a large church with well over one hundred in the youth group, those teens seldom had interaction with their pastor.  For all practical purposes I was their pastor but that is not how it should be.  To grow, however, this arrangement was important.  This problem of the “CEO” pastor vs. the “Shepherding” pastor has come to the fore in recent years.  For a generation now we have been told that the reason the small church doesn’t grow is because of its inherently poor administrative model.10  But though a more business-like model may cause growth, the question remains, which is the New Testament model?

If the pastor is instructed in the Scripture to personally care for the people of the flock as God’s undershepherd, then he must do that regardless of its positive or negative effects on growth.  This is not a head-in-the-sand mentality.  This is a personal stewardship issue.  As a pastor I must pastor the flock, which means caring for those who have placed their membership here.  A “hub and spoke” model may not be the best for growth but it is the best for the people who have placed their accountability under my accountability (Heb. 13:17).

The small church honors senior saints.

Honoring our elders is a Biblical imperative that easily becomes forgotten in our youth-oriented age.  Whether we desire it or not, our seniors tend to get lost in the large church or relegated to the senior saints group, or even to an early service where few others will attend.  But “honoring” elders is not just something on a to-do list, it means letting them give direction, have an important voice, be prominent, give advice.  This may be one of the greatest challenges to our age.  Samuel Rima wrote, “These older parishioners frequently become nothing more than irritating roadblocks to the great church we want to build, and subconsciously we may label them ‘traditionalists’ or ‘complainers,’ who threaten to block our dream.”11

But Zacharias is right when he says, “The older you get, the more it takes to fill your heart with wonder, and only God is big enough to do that.”12  In the small church one is almost forced to rub shoulders with these older saints, hear their prayers, shake their hands, be patient with their physical challenges, and appreciate their wisdom.  Paul knew that though the outward person is perishing, the inward person is being renewed daily (2 Cor. 4:16).  The closer one gets to this inward man, the closer one gets to Christian character first hand.

 

The small church is well-suited to reaching the average person.

The average man on the street and the average family living the average life have much in common with the life of the small church.  I think people can have unjust complaints about the large as well as the small church when it comes to friendliness or boldness in witnessing, but I think there can be no doubt that the plain atmosphere of the small church is more like the atmosphere of the normal family and that form is the form we really look for in this world of extravagant imitation and conformity.

We should remember also that the world is full of average people who need Christ.  We sometimes become myopic about the fashionable, avant-garde, culturally astute persons and direct our entire efforts at reaching them while ignoring the very ones who may be closest to accepting the message and life of the church.  The local fellowship of believers is divinely designed to do just that.

Conclusion

The Puritan John Flavel said, “Carnal men rejoice carnally, and spiritual men should rejoice spiritually.”13.  All churches, large and small, should be striving to worship God in Spirit and in truth.  I believe that the small church today is much like the average church of the New Testament and well equipped to do just that.  We should not be discouraged at our small size but rather encouraged at our fitness to be the pillar and ground of the truth.

 

Notes:

1. Charles Ryrie, Balancing the Christian Life (Chicago:  Moody Press, 1994), p. 20.

2. C.S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy (New York:  HBJ, 1955), p. 172.

3. C.S. Lewis, Christian Reflections (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1994), p. 20.

4. G.K. Chesterton, What’s Wrong With  the World (San Francisco:  Ignatius Press, 1994), p. 37.

5. Rolland McCune, Promise Unfulfilled (Greenville: Ambassador International, 2004), p. 310.

6. Ernest Pickering and Myron Houghton, Biblical Separation (Schaumburg: RBP, 2008), p. 177.

7. Carl Trueman, Reformation:  Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow, Kindle version, 1528.

8. Arthur W. Hunt, III, The Vanishing Word (Wheaton:  Crossway Books, 2003), p. 188.

9. A.W. Tozer, Born After Midnight ( 113.

10. In 1993 Leith Anderson wrote the first four entries in Vital Church Issues, (one of Kregel’s Vital Issues Series, 1998, by editor Roy Zuck), in which he criticized the “hub and spoke” model of small churches as opposed to the “delegation” model (p. 36) of the larger churches.

11. Samuel Rima, Rethinking The Successful Church (Grand Rapids:  Baker Books, 2002), p. 16.

12. Ravi Zacharias, Can Man Live Without God? (Dallas:  Word Publishers, 1994), p. 89.

13. John Flavel, in Mayo Hazeltine, Ed., Orations from Homer to McKinley, vol. IV  (New York:  P.F. Collier & Son, 1902), p. 1599.

 

 

 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Questions of the Modern Mind

Written by Matt Shrader

Questions of the Modern Mind

by Matt Shrader

It has been a long while since young-earth creationists have made such an international appearance. On February 4, 2014 Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis debated with Bill Nye from Bill Nye the Science Guy. Many in the scientific community tuned in to see how the debate would go. Countless churches and schools organized viewings of the debate. This author turned on the online stream which allowed me to conveniently pause and restart as needed. Many billed this as the second Scopes Monkey Trial. Interestingly, several prominent scientists excoriated Bill Nye for even debating. Many of the world’s leading atheists, including Richard Dawkins, objected to even giving creationists (let alone young-earth creationists) a podium from which to speak. For such scientists there is nothing to debate because creationism (and theism for some) has lost its day. This suggests that there is something bigger at play here, and it stretches back past the Scopes Monkey Trial of the 1920’s, past the publications of Darwin of the late 1800’s, and more precisely to the central questions which have come from the “modern” critiques of Christianity. Such questions predate that time period, but they were never presented with such tenacity, penetration, and widespread acceptance than they did at that time.

The central question of the Ham-Nye debate was this: “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?” That is a great question, and I am glad that it gained some international news attention. I agree with those who have pointed out that the central question must inevitably turn not just to scientific data, but also to issues of how we can know anything (epistemology), what is our ultimate authority, what does it mean to exist, what do you do with the questions your viewpoint will inevitably create, and is there a Creator God that we can know on a meaningful level? Those questions reveal where the real differences reside.

The debate was not really about evidences. If the debate was all about which model presents the best explanation of the evidence then their could have been a more focused debate over the evidences. Instead both debaters referred the listeners to various resources to check their statements. And truly, the debate over the evidence is nothing new and there are myriads of explanations for either viewpoint answering the other viewpoint. It is well worth the time and effort to evaluate those evidences. These issues had to come out to answer the central question of the debate but they could never fully satisfy that question because the question points to those bigger issues I mentioned.

If you watched the debate, and it is surely still able to be accessed online, then you may have gotten the same feeling that I did: these guys live in very different worlds from one another. Furthermore, Bill Nye and those who agree with his point of view had to look at Ken Ham with an air of complete consternation. Ken Ham kept pointing to the Bible as his authority, an authority which Bill Nye repeatedly referred to as an old book come to us through countless modifications resulting in its utter unreliability. Bill Nye even pointed to certain ideas which he saw as morally reprehensible in biblical theology (theodicy questions) as well as rejecting any kind of non-natural explanation for human consciousness (psychology). Those questions all point to the central idea.

Bill Nye, who also happens to be a former student of Carl Sagan, could not understand why someone would reject not just the critiques of modern science on the Bible but also the critiques offered in the areas of psychology and moral theory and biblical higher criticism. I half expected Bill Nye to stop and respond to the major question by saying: “Viable??? Mr. Ham, don’t you know that the Enlightenment and modern critiques of religion have happened…and you lost?” In essence, how can anyone accept biblical explanations of anything (such as science) when they consider the huge body of modern religious critique?

I would like to take this article and explain a little bit of where such a question comes from by giving a historical survey of the modern critiques. I think we must also make the point that these questions are extremely significant to many. And I want to talk to how the current conservative Christian who accepts biblical authority and inerrancy can start to respond to such questions. But to answer a question we must first understand the question.

The Modern Challenges to Religion:

The critiques of the modern mind began in the time period called the Enlightenment, a period which stretched from the post-Reformation religious wars (ca. 1648) until  the French Revolution (1789). “It is the age which brought together the humanistic spirit of the Renaissance and the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century and thereby ushered in what we call the ‘modern world.’”1 This time period brought about revolutions in science, philosophy, anthropology, and also religion. Instead of an understood reliance on theological authority from the Bible or the Church, the modern man looked elsewhere for a foundation. Autonomous humanity was the central cry. Reason as the authority dominated especially the 1700’s. There was a trust in the ability of humanity to understand nature and inevitably progress, an understanding which produced much optimism. Other Enlightenment ideas such as toleration and the scientific method were also presented as a result of this newfound foundation. For Christianity, the options were whether they should accommodate to these changes; how they should adjust to these changes; or how they could resist these changes.

David Hume (1711-1776) was one of the first (and perhaps the best) of the modern critics of religion. He essentially destroyed any attempt to build a religion on pure reason alone. This was a blow to that Enlightenment idea but also a blow to those theologians who were attempting to build a natural religion which appealed to nature and reason apart from or in concert with special revelation. Now theology could no longer make appeals to its old authorities and neither to pure reason. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) then put forth what he understood to be the new boundaries of religious discourse. This left religion reliant upon central moral laws inherent in humans (Kant’s categorical imperative). Because of these philosophical critiques Christianity was allowed to operate in fewer and fewer places with fewer and fewer potential foundations.

As the Western world came to grips with the philosophical programs of the Enlightenment certain solutions were offered by Christians (and they are quite diverse). Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) was the most important of the early liberal theologians. He sought to provide an exposition of Christianity that could fit within these bounds. The title of one of his most important books reveals exactly what the modern Christian felt they had to do: On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers.

The critiques, however, were not finished. David Friedrich Strauss (1808-1874) began the study of the life of Christ and attempted to determine what could be actual history and what was mythical or religious. Essentially, Strauss started the historical critical movement which subjected the Bible to the foundations of the modern mind and did not accept miracles or supernaturalism. Among subsequent modern theologians, simply accepting the trustworthiness of the Bible in matters of history, science, and other areas has not been entertained as a serious option since Strauss inspired biblical higher criticism.

In an entirely different vein Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-1872) began to envision what the true nature of Christianity must be and concluded that God is simply the projection of our own failures in life (and so God is the perfect we always fail to be). Christianity (and any religion) was simply a tool of the past that can and should be discarded because of the discoveries of the modern mind. This idea influenced significant modern thinkers such as Karl Marx, Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Sigmund Freud, and Friedrich Nietzsche. It was Nietzsche (1844-1900) who then critiqued Christianity’s morality because it hindered humanity from embracing the truths of the modern world. Nietzsche’s parables about the “death of God” began to question why culture had not moved on past religion. With Feuerbach, Freud, and Nietzsche Christianity was questioned as to the viability of its anthropology, psychology, and morality.

Daunting as these critiques were, perhaps the scientific work of Charles Darwin (1809-1882) challenged the Bible’s trustworthiness even more fundamentally. The very origins and makeup of humanity and indeed the entire physical universe was radically rethought following his books. Any type of Christian theology that appealed to nature as clearly and undeniably pointing to God was now theoretically answered by the modern mind.

These are but a few of the critiques that have been and are being leveled at Christianity. When Bill Nye is asked to respond to whether a biblical creation account is viable or not he must be a bit puzzled at the supposed unlearnedness of those who do. As I noted above, Bill Nye questioned the Bible’s trustworthiness (as did Strauss), the Bible’s morality (as did Feuerbach and Nietzsche), the Bible’s explanation of consciousness (as did Feuerbach and Freud), and of course the Bible’s views of science, nature, and anthropology (as did Darwin). Bill Nye is committed to only natural evidence and human reason, as is any child of the Enlightenment.

All this begins to show the questions of the modern mind. And I am speaking of those beyond and behind the explanation of scientific data. I might summarize these as: “What is the truly religious person supposed to do with their religion considering the full barrage of challenges and problems that have been presented by the Enlightenment?” The postmodern also asks these questions. They may add other issues such as skepticism, relativism, and truth because they have not accepted the modern solutions to those questions. What we must see is that to the modern and postmodern the issue of existence becomes central. What am I? Am I alone without God? What can I know? What does it mean to be and exist?

I hope that you see the incredible weight that is on the person who truly asks these questions. They are basic and unsettling. And that is one point that should not be missed. For a Christian to simply cast off such questions as “impious” or “off base” can be harmful. When you discard such questions, the modern thinker (and even a postmodern is an heir of this Enlightenment) takes your brushing off as a disinterest in them as a person because they think you do not care about their existence.

So what does the Christian do? How can the Christian respond? I believe that there are answers and I believe that the old truth is powerful even in a new day. We answer these questions for the sake of the truth (aletheia) but also for the sake of the person who needs the truth.

Answering the Questions:

The answers provided by modern theology since these questions have been asked are incredibly diverse and certainly not equally valid. They range from a rejection of Christianity as a necessary form of religion to an intentional return to a pre-modern understanding of the questions and of Christianity. My response to these questions comes from a conservative cultural and theological stance. There is no way to give a comprehensive treatment to those questions in the remainder of this paper. Theologians have given their entire lives to writing about these answers and still wish they could explain and answer more. Part of what we do with the continual publication of a paper like this is to give various and multi-faceted answers to these and other important questions. And so as a start let me give six things to remember.

Stand for Truth. This is simply to say that “Truth” exists and it is important. It is not to say that we infallibly know truth, but we may know it well because of God’s divine accommodation in Scripture and through the works of the Holy Spirit in the individual Christian. This is truth not only as the Bible speaks but also as humans speak and interact. We believe that there are things that are true and thus things that are false. We desire to encourage true beliefs, true speech, and truth in all endeavors. And of course, it is the truth of the gospel that is at the center: a truth which has come to us through God’s revelation in the Scriptures. Today many do not even believe in the existence of God which leads them to deny or radically redefine the idea of “Truth.” We must be sharp in our apologetics, find the questions that are at the heart of each person, and never give away the idea of truth.

Expose the bankruptcy of skepticism and relativism. An incorrect response to the critiques of Christianity is to slide into skepticism or relativism. Skepticism refuses to allow that there is any way to know knowledge and relativism is the related denial that there are any universal truths. As Christians we cannot agree to those ideas but we surely admit we make mistakes and may need time to answer questions and so we should be understanding and humble. I think that diversity is a good thing but I do not agree that this means that every kind of diversity is good (then any idea is acceptable, even eugenics for example). We should recognize we are fallible and that we have questions that are hard to answer but we should still insist that there are answers and that certain answers are better than others based on their adherence to truth.

Love your neighbor. All Christians must recognize their responsibility to love their neighbor and to fulfill the Great Commission. We should be winsome and approachable and civil in our discussions. We should also speak the truth and seek to convince others of the truth. This point should not be confused with weakened convictions or timidity to approach hard subjects or a lack of militancy for truth. We care for those around us and so we are careful that we do not drive them away with something other than the truth. We see all peoples as worth reaching with the truth.

Preach the Gospel. It is the power of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God that is behind the preaching of the gospel. To change someone’s mind concerning ultimate matters often means a change of that person’s heart. This is, of course, the ultimate answer that many are seeking when they ask the questions of existence. This is what we want for them. I also believe the Bible teaches that the regenerate Christian is able to see truth for what it really is because they have experienced the change of the new birth. Romans chapter 1 reminds us that the unbeliever will suppress the truth in unrighteousness and so we must seek for them to be believers. Evangelism is a command and it is also the most powerful convincer of truth.

Know that you are a pilgrim and sojourner. We are not Christianizing the world, but we are being salt and light. We are not staking all things on forging a world that is free from sin and error, but we do accept our responsibility to speak prophetically against sin and error when we see it. We seek to better the world we are in and to do whatever we can with the stewardship that God has given us. This may mean that we find ourselves in the cloud of witness that have suffered for their faith, a position that is truly glorious for its association to Jesus (Acts 5:41). As pilgrims and strangers we realize our permanent residence is elsewhere and realize our stewardship responsibilities even now.

Trust God. We can never forget that deception can convince anybody. Sin causes us to suppress truth. We rest in the truth of Scripture and we rely on the regeneration, illumination, and filling of the Holy Spirit. We trust God’s word and love and find our ultimate delight in God.

Is creation science viable? To answer we must first answer the bigger questions about God, revelation, authority, human ability, and human existence. Is faith viable? Yes, it has been and it will be (and everyone exercises it).

Today, people want to know what they can trust about these ultimate questions. Christians point to God’s sovereignty over all the universe past, present, and future. Notice that when the apostle Peter responded to those who scoffed and doubted the coming of Christ and saw no indication to accept it, he said remember creation, the flood, the coming of Christ, and the absolute reliability of God’s promises. God has not forgotten and God has not failed to accomplish his purposes.

(2 Peter 3:1-15, ESV)

This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, 2 that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, 3 knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. 4 They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. 8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.  9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.  10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. 11 Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, 12 waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! 13 But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. 14 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation.

Let the Christian see our present battles and God’s waiting not as reason to doubt His faithfulness, but as reason to be diligent. And let the unbeliever see God’s waiting not as evidence God is not there or that He does not care, but as His patient longsuffering giving opportunity for salvation.

 

Notes:

1. James C. Livingston, Modern Christian Thought, Volume 1: The Enlightenment and the Nineteenth Century, Second Edition (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 5.

 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Worship and Culture

Written by Rick Shrader

Worship and Culture

by Rick Shrader

In the twenty years that I have been writing Aletheia articles, perhaps nothing has been written about more than worship and culture.  Worship has become the description of how we “do church,” and culture has become what we are, not what we should strive to become.  Ravi Zacharias wrote, “Culture has become like a dress code, varying with the time of the day and presence or absence of the elite.”1  Os Guinness wrote, “Compared with the past, faith today influences culture less.  Compared with the past, culture today influences faith more.”2 A sad commentary on today’s faith and church life.

To this modern milieu  of cultural expression in our churches, Harold M. Best has written,  “Hence, in this culture in which experiential narrative has preempted concept and proposition, in which language has become circularly relativized, and in which a musico-visual matrix turns out to be the communal glue, the last thing any worship model should do is to modify the centrality of the Word simply because culture does.”3  But it seems that this is exactly what contemporary worship models often do.  Yet let me quickly add that the avant-garde churches of any generation no doubt have done the same thing.  A 60s church built on gospel quartet concerts  and ice cream cones may have been no different than a 2014 church built on CCM concerts and lattes.

The operative word here may be “built.”  Jesus used the word, of course, when announcing that He would build His church (Matt. 16:18), and though we probably don’t have a better word for the business of evangelism and church planting, we have to be a lot more careful how we use it.  Professionals of any age have built churches and so can professionals today.  There are ways to get people in the doors and ways to keep them there.  There are ways to raise the funds needed and ways to advertise for more.  There are ways to get oneself known around the world and ways to get a place at the associational table.  If a church (or school, or organization) grows in size and influence, especially if it can show numerous “ministry” opportunities, then it has been “built.”

I will be 64 years old this year.  By now I have done more than I will do from here on.  I have made my decisions about what paths I will take in my ministry.  I have attended and worked in mega-churches and have attended and pastored in small churches.  I have been a youth pastor in a large church but now I pastor a small church which has a truly great group of senior saints.  Though I defended my youthful ways when I was young, now I understand the ways of senior saints.  I don’t believe senior saints in a smaller church want to “just sit and do nothing” any more than middle aged saints want to do that in a big church.  In fact, I find the seniors more involved, especially considering their physical limitations, and willing to work, than I see from many younger saints.

I do find that I have narrowed my focus of ministry as I grow older, not just because I am older, but because I think I see more clearly what is important.  At this point in my life I must worship.  I find that this is not optional.  I won’t short that for any other reason, nor do I need to.  First, I have become convinced that we do not come together to worship, we are worshipers who come together.  Jesus Christ is my High Priest Who ever lives to make intercession for me.  That worship service which He performs for me before the Father in that heavenly tabernacle never stops.  If it would, I would have no plea for my sins.  He is my Advocate, my Propitiation, my Shepherd.  I am not the active one in that worship, He is.  Therefore, I will live my life, private and public, with the full knowledge of what is going on.  I cannot acknowledge the culture when it contradicts that worship.

Second, I will come together with other believers to do what believers are supposed to be doing when they come together.  I have grown firm in the determination that I will be just as blessed with three, thirty, or three hundred other believers.  It makes no difference to me.  Jesus has promised to be in the midst of such gatherings by His Spirit regardless of size.  However, I must strive to do this without compulsion, show, hypocrisy, division, or worldliness.  That isn’t always accomplished, but it has to be the norm.

I cannot be a part of worship which copies the world.  It is false worship that speaks like the world so that the world hears (1 John 4:5).  That kind of worship does not draw people to the Savior though it may draw people into a room.  The Holy Spirit cannot be pleased with it since it is He Who wrote that to be a friend of the world is to be the enemy of God (James 4:4).  In the world the pop singer and the frowning athlete are the same—worldly.  And so is the Christian singer, minister, or performer who copies it trying to influence people.

I have been blessed in corporate worship in a congregation of 2000 voices singing the great hymns of the faith, and I have been blessed in the Wednesday prayer meeting of 10 people, hearing the weakened voice of a grandma blended with the untrained voice of a child.  “The cries of the lambs must mingle with the bleating of the sheep, or the flock will lack much of its natural music.”4

I want the documents of the church to define what the corporate worship ought to look like.  Sure, the New Testament defines it, but since different churches interpret it for themselves (a must in Baptist churches) it should be known to all what that interpretation is.  The narrower the better.  Why?  First of all, I have to live with myself.  That is the narrowest of all social circles.  Then I have to live with my family.  If I have been wise, I married a woman who wants to worship as I do, and we will try to raise our children to want the same.  But the next circle is the local church.  We want to join with other families who, as much as possible, want to worship the same way we want to worship.  The more alike that is, the better.  The documents of the church are the official declaration of what that worship will believe and how it will practice.  A mission church or a new church may take time to mold itself into that stature, but the growing period is always rewarded in adult life.

Brethren, we are the salt of the earth.  If we lose our saltiness we are good for nothing but to be thrown into the streets (Mark 9:50).  I fear we would rather become “old salts” who have learned to get along with the language of the world.  But salt is an irritant to its surroundings.  So is light.  Accept that or admit you are going a different way. If we are not willing to actually lose our lives, if we would rather keep our lives in this adulterous and sinful generation, then we will lose it in eternity (Mark 8:35).

 

What about evangelism?  Surely we all care about the lost soul and realize the danger of eternal fire.  I have always felt that those old evangelists whom I grew up hearing, who gave long invitations, who also reaped many tares among their wheat due to an easy believism, always loved the souls of men.  And I will accept the same about those who are performing more modern evangelistic gymnastics today.  But have we not also said that we are doxological before we are soteriological?  Have we not also committed ourselves to the holiness of God as an absolute which we must not offend even by our evangelistic techniques?   If we perform this bait-and-switch to draw the lost person, explaining later what Christianity really means—the loss of one’s life for the glory of God—are we not being dishonest?  The degree to which I bend this conviction is the degree of my non-commitment to the Word of God.

I am not a very good Calvinist.  I would rather be more than I am, I could easily let a lordship view of salvation explain away my poor evangelism, but I am not that either.  I believe in “means” for the gospel’s sake (as many of my more Calvinistic friends also do) mixed with a healthy dose of the free will of sinners to accept or reject.  But I do believe this, that the Holy Spirit has to draw and save every sinner who comes to Christ and, that though the gospel doesn’t make demands (as in works for salvation), grace does make demands for which a person has to count the cost.5 Will a person seek forgiveness without a burden of their own sin?  Will a person turn to God without turning from his idols (1 Thes. 1:9)?   Repentance is not a work for salvation, it is a sorrow and release from guilt when accepting joy and forgiveness in Christ.  My point is that evangelism is much more about me being in a place to be used of the Holy Spirit than it is about my headiness in the methodology of this world.  “The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord” (Matt. 10:24).

 

There are real consequences for thinking like this, but at this time in my life I am beyond caring too much.  I won’t have a big ministry that will be viewed with approval by, well, whomever.  I won’t be invited to speak at the national pastors’ meeting where all must be positive and uplifting.  I won’t be given a place at the table of the movers and shakers of my movement.  I may even be considered narrow, legalistic, pietistic, in the box, unloving, uncaring, et.al. by family, friends, and fellow ministers.

Now before you think I’m having a pity party and enjoying a martyr’s complex, let me say that this is actually a great relief in my life.  It’s too bad it has come so late.  Young ministers of my generation have grown up with a tremendous burden of being a success or failure in the ministry.  Our schools have been busy teaching us how to be great men and do great things.  It’s taken me until now to see that great men never wanted to be great, they just wanted to be men of God, and God used them in great ways.  But also, the ministry has always been filled with men whom no one ever knew, who never had a place at the so-called “table” and never missed it.  To all of them I say I’m sorry I didn’t realize who and what you were.  We’ll never know the front line men of Normandy, we just know they were great men.

This is the great thing about being old, at least by comparison.  I don’t care about my “brand” in a world of branding.  I care little what the young people think of me now as much as I care what they will think of me in their old age when the time of thanks is gone.  “Time like an ever rolling stream bears all its sons away, they fly forgotten as a dream dies at the op-’ning day.”  I have learned from those older than I that the nearness of seeing the Lord, by death if not rapture, is a great motivation in life.  But we learn it when life’s physical struggles really begin, and when the inner strength is all that we have, when the years draw nigh and you have little pleasure in them.  What an irony!  The outward man is perishing but the inward man is being renewed day by day!

What if!  What if a generation of young men and women would love God more than the world?  What if young ministers would lead a movement to honor God and His Word above the applause of men?  What if there were churches that would live out their convictions at the cost of popularity or success?  What if our Bible colleges and seminaries would ask for those who wanted that more than they wanted a fun time, or a comfortable room, or even an accredited degree?  What if there is still a young William Carey somewhere who would say, “I go to mine for souls, you hold the ropes?”  And what if there were young Andrew Fullers and John Sutcliffs who would do it?  For the rest of their lives! We can always hope.

I heard such a young man preach this passage last Sunday night:

5 I have considered the days of old, the years of ancient times.  6 I call to remembrance my song in the night: I commune with mine own heart: and my spirit made diligent search.  7 Will the Lord cast off for ever? and will he be favourable no more?  8 Is his mercy clean gone for ever? doth his promise fail for evermore?  9 Hath God forgotten to be gracious? hath he in anger shut up his tender mercies? Selah.  10 And I said, This is my infirmity: but I will remember the years of the right hand of the most High.  11 I will remember the works of the LORD: surely I will remember thy wonders of old.  12 I will meditate also of all thy work, and talk of thy doings.  13 Thy way, O God, is in the sanctuary: who is so great a God as our God?  14 Thou art the God that doest wonders: thou hast declared thy strength among the people.  15 Thou hast with thine arm redeemed thy people, the sons of Jacob and Joseph. Selah.

(Psalm 77:5-15)

 

Notes:
1. Ravi Zacharias, Deliver Us From Evil (Dallas:  Word Publishing, 1996) 5.
2. Os Guinness, Dining With The Devil (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993) 16.
3. Harold M. Best, “Traditional Hymn-Based Worship,” Paul Engle and Paul Basden, Editors, Exploring the worship Spectrum , 6 Views  (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004) 236.
4. C.H. Spurgeon, Spurgeon’s Prayers (Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 2002) 158.
5. See Myron Houghton, Law & Grace (Schaumburg: RBP, 2011) 120.
 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

ABM–20 Years of Leadership

Written by Rick Shrader

ABM–20 Years of Leadership

by Rick Shrader

In the December issue I gave some of the history of Aletheia Baptist Ministries but I did not tell it all.  From the beginning in 1997, when Dr. Peter Slobodian started the original mission board called Baptist Global Mission, this ministry has been blessed to have been led by godly and qualified men who have served on the board of directors.

Dr. Slobodian’s good friend Rev. Dick Steinhaus (and mine) served as the first chairman of the board for ten years.  He loved Dr. Slobodian’s desire to take the gospel to Russia and Ukraine.  During those years also we were privileged to have serve as the first board of directors, Dr. Lance Ketchum, Elbert Dean, Rev. Roy Chestnut, and myself.  In 2001, Rev. Don Cox joined the board and served until 2009.  He was a good friend and overseas traveling companion with Dr. Slobodian.  In 2004 Terry Conley joined the board and, upon Rev. Steinhaus’ resignation, became the second chairman of the board, which position he still faithfully holds today.  In 2010 Bill McPherson joined the board and remains on the board today also.  Others who have served from time to time are Rev. Bernie Augsburger, David Curry, and Rev. David Zempel.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
About Us, Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More