Vodpod videos no longer available.
A Sissified Needy Jesus?, posted with vodpod
Author Archives: Dan C.
The Believer’s Eternal Relationship With Christ
The closest relation on earth—the marriage bond—has an end. Marriage is only “until death us do part.” But the relation between Christ and the sinner who trusts in him, never ends. It lives when the body dies. It lives when flesh and heart fail. Once begun, it never withers. It is only made brighter and stronger by the grave. “I am persuaded,” says Paul, “that neither life, nor death, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature—shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord!” (Romans 8:38, 39).
~ J.C. Ryle
Tract: Be Content
If We Don’t Believe – Harvest
The Little Drummer Boy
Must We Believe in the Virgin Birth?
by Al Mohler, 2006
In one of his columns for The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof once pointed to belief in the Virgin Birth as evidence that conservative Christians are “less intellectual.” Are we saddled with an untenable doctrine? Is belief in the Virgin Birth really necessary?
Kristof is absolutely aghast that so many Americans believe in the Virgin Birth. “The faith in the Virgin Birth reflects the way American Christianity is becoming less intellectual and more mystical over time,” he explains, and the percentage of Americans who believe in the Virgin Birth “actually rose five points in the latest poll.” Yikes! Is this evidence of secular backsliding?
“The Virgin Mary is an interesting prism through which to examine America’s emphasis on faith,” Kristof argues, “because most Biblical scholars regard the evidence for the Virgin Birth … as so shaky that it pretty much has to be a leap of faith.” Here’s a little hint: Anytime you hear a claim about what “most Biblical scholars” believe, check on just who these illustrious scholars really are. In Kristof’s case, he is only concerned about liberal scholars like Hans Kung, whose credentials as a Catholic theologian were revoked by the Vatican.
The list of what Hans Kung does not believe would fill a book [just look at his books!], and citing him as an authority in this area betrays Kristof’s determination to stack the evidence, or his utter ignorance that many theologians and biblical scholars vehemently disagree with Kung. Kung is the anti-Catholic’s favorite Catholic, and that is the real reason he is so loved by the liberal media.
Kristof also cites “the great Yale historian and theologian” Jaroslav Pelikan as an authority against the Virgin Birth, but this is both unfair and untenable. In Mary Through the Centuries, Pelikan does not reject the Virgin Birth, but does trace the development of the doctrine.
What are we to do with the Virgin Birth? The doctrine was among the first to be questioned and then rejected after the rise of historical criticism and the undermining of biblical authority that inevitably followed. Critics claimed that since the doctrine is taught in “only” two of the four Gospels, it must be elective. The Apostle Paul, they argued, did not mention it in his sermons in Acts, so he must not have believed it. Besides, the liberal critics argued, the doctrine is just so supernatural. Modern heretics like retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong argue that the doctrine was just evidence of the early church’s over-claiming of Christ’s deity. It is, Spong tells us, the “entrance myth” to go with the resurrection, the “exit myth.” If only Spong were a myth.
Now, even some revisionist evangelicals claim that belief in the Virgin Birth is unnecessary. The meaning of the miracle is enduring, they argue, but the historical truth of the doctrine is not really important.
Must one believe in the Virgin Birth to be a Christian? This is not a hard question to answer. It is conceivable that someone might come to Christ and trust Christ as Savior without yet learning that the Bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin. A new believer is not yet aware of the full structure of Christian truth. The real question is this: Can a Christian, once aware of the Bible’s teaching, reject the Virgin Birth? The answer must be no.
Nicholas Kristof pointed to his grandfather as a “devout” Presbyterian elder who believed that the Virgin Birth is a “pious legend.” Follow his example, Kristof encourages, and join the modern age. But we must face the hard fact that Kristof’s grandfather denied the faith. This is a very strange and perverse definition of “devout.”
Matthew tells us that before Mary and Joseph “came together,” Mary “was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.” [Matthew 1:18] This, Matthew explains, fulfilled what Isaiah promised: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name ‘Immanuel,’ which translated means ‘God with Us’.” [Matthew 1:23, Isaiah 7:14]
Luke provides even greater detail, revealing that Mary was visited by an angel who explained that she, though a virgin, would bear the divine child: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy child shall be called the Son of God.” [Luke 1:35]
Even if the Virgin Birth was taught by only one biblical passage, that would be sufficient to obligate all Christians to the belief. We have no right to weigh the relative truthfulness of biblical teachings by their repetition in Scripture. We cannot claim to believe that the Bible is the Word of God and then turn around and cast suspicion on its teaching.
Millard Erickson states this well: “If we do not hold to the virgin birth despite the fact that the Bible asserts it, then we have compromised the authority of the Bible and there is in principle no reason why we should hold to its other teachings. Thus, rejecting the virgin birth has implications reaching far beyond the doctrine itself.”
Implications, indeed. If Jesus was not born of a virgin, who was His father? There is no answer that will leave the Gospel intact. The Virgin Birth explains how Christ could be both God and man, how He was without sin, and that the entire work of salvation is God’s gracious act. If Jesus was not born of a virgin, He had a human father. If Jesus was not born of a virgin, the Bible teaches a lie.
Carl F. H. Henry, the dean of evangelical theologians, argued that the Virgin Birth is the “essential, historical indication of the Incarnation, bearing not only an analogy to the divine and human natures of the Incarnate, but also bringing out the nature, purpose, and bearing of this work of God to salvation.” Well said, and well believed.
Nicholas Kristof and his secularist friends may find belief in the Virgin Birth to be evidence of intellectual backwardness among American Christians. But this is the faith of the Church, established in God’s perfect Word, and cherished by the true Church throughout the ages. Kristof’s grandfather, we are told, believed that the Virgin Birth is a “pious legend.” The fact that he could hold such beliefs and serve as an elder in his church is evidence of that church’s doctrinal and spiritual laxity — or worse. Those who deny the Virgin Birth affirm other doctrines only by force of whim, for they have already surrendered the authority of Scripture. They have undermined Christ’s nature and nullified the incarnation.
This much we know: All those who find salvation will be saved by the atoning work of Jesus the Christ — the virgin-born Savior. Anything less than this is just not Christianity, whatever it may call itself. A true Christian will not deny the Virgin Birth.
Christ Will Build His Church
“Forever let us thank God that the building of the one true Church is laid on the shoulders of One who is mighty. Let us bless God that it does not rest upon man. Let us bless God that it does not depend on missionaries, ministers, or committees. Christ is the almighty Builder. He will carry on His work, though nations and visible Churches do not know their duty. Christ will never fail. That which He has undertaken He will certainly accomplish!”
~ J.C. Ryle
Tract: The True Church
Eisegesis Unplugged – Joshua 24:15
Eisegesis is the process of misinterpreting a text in such a way that it introduces one’s own ideas, reading into the text. Eisegesis isn’t always a bad, because one’s own ideas might be a reasonable interpretation, or logical and otherwise biblically sound inference.
The Passage
“. . . choose this day whom you will serve. . .”– Joshua 24:15
Faced with all of the ‘things’ in our lives we can give greater importance to than humbly serving God, Joshua’s command to the Israelites certainly has relevance for us today! The list of ‘things’ is rather long and includes everything from great salaries and careers, to sports and entertainment, to cars, boats and other expensive ‘toys’. Even our most valued relationships can appear on that list.
We ask those to whom we share the gospel to choose between serving God and man with that passage in mind. ‘Choose this day whom you will serve’ is often used to prove inherent ;free will;, since we assume that the command itself necessitates the natural ability to choose between wholeheartedly serving God and all the other things we ‘serve’. After all, wasn’t that what Joshua was telling the Israelites to do, choose between the one true God and other false gods?
What’s the rest of the story?
Joshua 24 begins with his summoning the tribes of Israel to Shechem, along with the elders, the heads, the judges, and the officers of Israel, to present themselves before God (v.1). When they had all gathered together, Joshua presents a ‘Thus saith the Lord” history lesson in which God speaks to the people in the first person, reminding them of all he had done for them, from calling and blessing Abraham to crossing the Jordan and inheriting the land (vv.2-13).
Joshua then speaks directly to the people and says:
“Now therefore fear the LORD and serve him in sincerity and in faithfulness. Put away the gods that your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD.” (v.14)
Joshua did in fact challenge the gathered Israelites to serve the Lord, telling them to put away the false gods of their fathers. Then notice our passage in its natural context:
“And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” (v.15)
Since throughout their wanderings, the Israelites are on record as having frequently returning to the false gods of their fathers, Joshua tells them to choose between a previous set of false gods and the gods of the peoples with whom they now dwelt,
The people responded:
“Far be it from us that we should forsake the LORD to serve other gods, for it is the LORD our God who brought us and our fathers up from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery, and who did those great signs in our sight and preserved us in all the way that we went, and among all the peoples through whom we passed. And the LORD drove out before us all the peoples, the Amorites who lived in the land. Therefore we also will serve the LORD, for he is our God.” (vv.16-18)
Then we have in vv. 19-23 an interesting conclusion:
“But Joshua said to the people, “You are not able to serve the LORD, for he is a holy God. He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions or your sins. If you forsake the LORD and serve foreign gods, then he will turn and do you harm and consume you, after having done you good.” (vv.19-20)
Joshua, in what sounds like a chiding manner, tells them ‘You can’t do it!’, pointing out their inability and insufficiency of themselves to perform service acceptable to God.
And the people said to Joshua, “No, but we will serve the LORD.” (v. 21)
Then Joshua said to the people, “You are witnesses against yourselves that you have chosen the LORD, to serve him.” (v.22)
And they (the people) said, “We are witnesses.” (v.23)
Joshua told them, in effect, ‘I think that’s gonna come back to bite ya, for sure’, yet they still promised.
If we have read the rest of the Old Testament, we know that the Israelites indeed failed to keep their promise, in spite of warnings from prophets, deliverance from enemies by judges and kings, and even in spite of hard bondage. In fact there was a period of several hundred years when there was no prophet in the land. God ceased speaking to his chosen people and left them to their own desires.
What’s the point?
If we use Joshua’s ‘choose this day whom you will serve’ command as a reminder to check for idols we have not abused the text. However, if we use Joshua’s command as proof of man’s natural ability to choose Christ, are we being faithful to the original context? And speaking of the original context, it is in that context, ‘the rest of the story’ as Paul Harvey would say that we find the bigger lesson.
The short episode in Joshua, chapter 24, near the end of Josha’s life, after deliverance from bondage in Egypt, desert wanderings, entering the promised land, miracles and fierce battles is part of a grand pageant that begins in Genesis and ends in Revelation! It’s the story of the creation, fall and redemption of the people of God – a people created for the glory of His Name who by way of the first Adam fell into such darkness and depravity that they became the objects of the creator’s wrath.
The Apostle Paul provides an excellent summary:
“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience–among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ–by grace you have been saved– and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” (Ephesians 2:1-8)
So here’s the point. While we certainly ought to take to heart lessons from scripture that apply to us today, we need to pay attention to ‘the rest of the story’!
Thoughts Concerning the Foreknowledge of God
“And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.“ – Romans 8:28-30
There is a group of people ‘foreknown’ by God the Father, chosen before the foundation of the world (Eph 2), who will be brought by God’s grace and power justification (salvation) and on to glorification. Jesus, God the Son knows these as the ones ‘given’ by the Father to the Son who will come to the Son whom will never be lost.
“All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” – John 6:37
Jesus also knows them as His sheep, those ones who know His voice, will follow Him and are given eternal life, never to perish.
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” – John 10:27-28
There is also a group of people who appear at the judgment claiming to have done much in Jesus’ name to whom He says:
“On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’” – Matt 7:22-23
The debate concerning predestination and election many times comes down to the ‘foreknowledge’ of God. Election and predestination cannot intelligently be denied. Some say that it means that God knew the decisions men would make concerning Christ and those whom He ‘foreknew’ would choose Christ became the elect remnant. I believed that for years. Is it true? Let’s take a look at the ‘foreknowledge’ or God.
The word ‘know’ in the Greek is:
γινώσκω
ginosko
1) to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel
1a) to become known
2) to know, understand, perceive, have knowledge of
2a) to understand
2b) to know
3) Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman
4) to become acquainted with, to know
Note the strength and intimate nature of the ‘knowing’. Also note that it concerns knowing to the extent of having an intimate relationship with the one ‘known’. To ‘foreknow’ is the same sort of ‘knowing’, only beforehand.
προγινώσκω
proginsko
1) to have knowledge before hand
2) to foreknow
2a) of those whom God elected to salvation
3) to predestinate
This foreknowledge of people whom God will bring to salvation, justification, sanctification and glorification is the same foreknowledge we find pertaining to Christ and the crucifixion.
“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know–this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.” – Acts 2:22-23
Although men crucified Christ, it was an event in history predetermined (predestined) by to occur. Why? the entire human race had been plunged into sin by the Sin of the first Adam and someone had to die; blood had to be shed to redeem those whom God ‘foreknew, called, predestined, justified and glorified’ (Rom 8:28-30).
Certainly God, in His omniscience, knows the future decisions of men; however His predetermination to have a remnant people, before the foundation of the world, was based solely on His choosing, ‘according to the purpose of His will, to the praise of His glorious grace’. – (Eph 1:5-6)
Food for thought. . .
The Army of The Lord – Harvest
Vodpod videos no longer available.
The Army of The Lord – Harvest, posted with vodpod
The Battle Cry 