What People Believe

It’s been said that, in general, people believe what they want to believe. Conversely, they don’t believe what they don’t want to believe. If you can change what people want to believe, you’ve got them in the palm of your hand. Just ask the salesman who is an effective ‘closer’. His success as a ‘closer’ relies on overcoming the resistance of the person buying a car/boat/house/time-share/you name it. In spiritual matters it is not much different.

“For Christ did not send me to baptize, but–to proclaim good news; not in wisdom of discourse, that the cross of the Christ may not be made of none effect; for the word of the cross to those indeed perishing is foolishness, and to us–those being saved–it is the power of God.” 1 Cor 1:17-18

Now however, instead of the salesman, we are dealing with God. By nature, coming from the womb, we are spiritually dead, unable and unwilling to seek God on our own (See Psalm 14, Romans 3, and Ephesians 2). We don’t want to believe God, are living in rebellion against him objects of his wrath. That’s the bad news. Then, as Paul tells us, along comes the good news, the gospel of Christ and his death for our sins. But wait, a dead man can’t believe much of anything. What does God do?

God wakes the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit, who changes what a person wants to believe, and guess what? The word of the gospel is brought to that one who now wants to believe it, he/she believes, and another adopted son or daughter joins the family of God!

What a mighty God we serve!

What’s the real issue here?

‘Here is a recent question asked of readers, posted on a blog I found while browsing the Internet recently recently:

“If you attend a church which suits your music style, teaching style, lifestyle and theology beliefs…. is that submission?” 

My first reaction to the question was “…submission to what?”, although I didn’t ask it in the comments to the blog. What I did do is read the few (thus far)comments, to see how responders interpreted the question.

Since the comments all revolved around being in submission to the pastor/leadership/teachings/theology/doctrine of the church in question, that was most likely the intent of the question. I am glad I did not comment at the blog. If I had asked my question in response to the original question, I would have been seen as confrontational, accusatory, not nice, whatever. It has happened before. Any assumptions of my motives would have been confirmed if I had taken my comments where I wanted to go in the conversation. The question again: 

“If you attend a church which suits your music style, teaching style, lifestyle and theology beliefs…. is that submission?” 

There seems to be an underlying assumption that we attend a particular church based on our preferences/likes/dislikes, etc., which I think is an accurate assumption of how we who calla ourselves Christian/Christ followers. We choose a church to attend like we shop for shoes, clothes, cars, houses, whatever.

So with that thought in mind, that we more often than not, choose a church to attend based on personal reasons, whatever they might be, is that an indicator of ‘submission’ of some sort? Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t.

Asked another way, what should be the driving force/need/requirement for selecting a local church to attend in the first place?

So. . .a couple of questions based on a question asked by someone else, somewhere else. It was a good question, if it causes us to think.

Saved From Unhappy Circumstances or Saved from God’s Wrath?

by Bob DeWaay, Twin City Fellowship, Minneapolis, MN

A regrettable development in current evangelicalism is that the term “gospel” is often used in a way that lacks the content of the gospel as preached by Christ and His apostles. Today we hear, “come to Jesus and have a better marriage,” or “come to Jesus and find purpose in life,” or “come to Jesus and He will solve your economic or emotional problems.” None of these statements is the gospel. First of all, do the hearers of this weak message know who Jesus is? Perhaps some are Mormons who claim to believe in Jesus, but have a different Jesus. Secondly, do those who hear this message know what Jesus did for them? Maybe they hear that Christ died on the cross; but why? If Jesus came to solve their marriage problems, give them a better job, or get them off of drugs, why did He need to die on the cross for these matters? This confuses people because it is confusing. Jesus could help people solve problems without dying on the cross. God has the power to give people better marriages and find them better jobs without having His only begotten Son killed by murderous rebels.

Paul told the Philippians of Christ’s pre-existence with God and as God (Philippians 2:6), His death on the cross (Philippians 2:8), and His subsequent exaltation (Philippians 2:9). This is the essence of the person and work of Christ. This work of Christ was not to help people have less stress in the workplace, but to deliver them from the wrath of God against sin!

The true gospel is about God reconciling sinners (enemies) to Himself through the blood atonement:

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. (Romans 5:8-10)

The false “gospel” being preached today says that Jesus came to save people from a lack of purpose, lack of happiness, or from living a stress filled and problem filled existence. The true gospel delivers sinners who are God’s enemies (whether they know it or not) from God’s wrath through the blood atonement. This is the gospel Paul preached and this is the “faith of the gospel” around which Paul told the Philippians they should strive to unify. Any church that does not clearly and publicly preach this message from the pulpit, yet talks about “unity,” is promoting a false and man-made unity that is unbiblical.

The true Biblical understanding of the gospel is shown by Paul’s address to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:17-35). Paul reminded them of his previous preaching to them: “how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house, solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:20, 21). The gospel says, “repent and believe.” If repentance is not preached, then the apostolic pattern is not being followed and the Great Commission is not being obeyed (see Luke 24:47). After God established a church in Ephesus through the gospel, Paul nurtured them. Here is his account of how he did so: “Therefore I testify to you this day, that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God” (Acts 20:27). Whatever of God’s purpose is revealed is to be declared publicly. The implication is that the preacher who knows the whole counsel of God but fails to preach it is guilty before God.

________________________________________

This is an excerpt from a larger article concerning true and false Christian unity, published by Critical Issues Commentary, that can be read here.

The Coming Final Persecution – Steve Lawson

Click to listen, or go here to listen, view, or download.

This might be one of the best and most memorable expositions I have heard based on Mark 13:9-13:

“But be on your guard. For they will deliver you over to councils, and you will be beaten in synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them. And the gospel must first be proclaimed to all nations. And when they bring you to trial and deliver you over, do not be anxious beforehand what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. And brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death. And you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.”

Dr. Lawson considers six points in his exposition:

1. The need for believers to be alert, on guard.

2. The animosity of the world toward disciples of Christ.

3. The necessity of the preaching of the gospel.

4. The Activity of the Holy Spirit.

5. The betrayal of family members by family members.

6. the allegiance to Christ of true believers.

Please listen to this powerful sermon and feel free to comment.

Are Prophets and Apostles for today’s church?

Ephesians 4:11, “It was he who gave some to be (1) apostles, some to be (2) prophets, some to be (3) evangelists, and some to be (4) pastors and (5) teachers.”

We know that today we have evangelists, pastors and teachers. the New Testament is full of instruction and encouragement for all three ministries, especially from the Apostle Paul. What does the NT say specifically about prophets and apostles?

If the NT speaks, it should settle the matter.

Go for it. 🙂

The Reformation Then and Now

Is the Reformation over? Does it matter today? Michael Reeves unpacks the story and theology of the Reformation and exhorts Christians to study the Reformation for the sake of the gospel. There is an excellent interview with the above title, between Mark Dever and 9Marks ministries and theologian/teacher/author Michael Reeves, here. It’s a great listen that addresses a seriously relevant question.

And she named the child Ichabod. . .

In the book of 1 Samuel we find this account of messenger bringing news of a battle between the army of the Israelites and the Philistines:

“Israel has fled before the Philistines, and there has also been a great defeat among the people. Your two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead, and the ark of God has been captured.”

As soon as he mentioned the ark of God, Eli fell over backward from his seat by the side of the gate, and his neck was broken and he died, for the man was old and heavy. He had judged Israel forty years.

Now his daughter-in-law, the wife of Phinehas, was pregnant, about to give birth. And when she heard the news that the ark of God was captured, and that her father-in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed and gave birth, for her pains came upon her. And about the time of her death the women attending her said to her, “Do not be afraid, for you have borne a son.”

But she did not answer or pay attention. And she named the child Ichabod, saying, “The glory has departed from Israel!” because the ark of God had been captured and because of her father-in-law and her husband. And she said, “The glory has departed from Israel, for the ark of God has been captured.” 1 Samuel 4:17-22

That was Israel then. What about today’s evangelical church? Would this grieving wife cry “Ichabod” over her? Has the glory of the Lord left the church, or certain churches where. . .

  • the gospel has been replaced with ‘moralistic therapeutic deism’?
  • sin and the need for true repentance is not preached?
  • people are told that their ‘decision’ causes their salvation?
  • the sovereignty of God has been replaced with the sovereignty of man?
  • transformed lives are the result human effort and not the power of the Holy Spirit?
  • sound doctrine has been replaced with good advice?
  • preachers of the whole counsel of God have been replaced with ‘life coaches’?

. . .and the list goes on and on and on.  At least ask the question.

On My Mind: The Skinny God – By David Wells

Many years ago, J. B. Phillips wrote a book called Your God is Too Small. It was quite popular at the time, in 1952, although it now seems rather quaint. The juvenile understanding of God Phillips was attacking then is, by contemporary standards, rather innocent. This, however, is a book which I believe should be written afresh every decade. For is it not the case that our internal bias (cf. Rom. 1:21-5) constantly tilts us away from God’s centrality and toward our own? And does this not lead us to focus more on ourselves and less on him? Even worse, don’t we then substitute our importance for his greatness?

This inward bias is now being mightily encouraged by our experience of the modern world, the upshot of which is our fascination with our self. Those who are well fed seldom think about food but for the hungry this becomes a consuming preoccupation. And for modern people, the self has likewise become an obsession. We are the starved. How else can we explain the fact that America has half the world’s clinical psychologists and one third of the world’s psychiatrists? Over approximately the last thirty years, the number of clinical psychologists has increased 350%, clinical social workers 320%, and family counselors 680%, so that today we have two psychotherapists for every dentist and there are more counselors than librarians. The plagues of the modern self are providing sustenance for an extraordinary number of professionals, as well as driving a burgeoning publishing industry.

At the root of these statistics are two related developments. On the one hand, it is undeniable that life in our contemporary world is extraordinarily difficult, that the toll it extracts is high, and that the wounds it inflicts are deep. We, today, live with more stress, with higher levels of anxiety, than any prior generation. We have more people passing through our lives on a daily basis than ever before because of telephone, fax, e-mail, and even television and yet we are often lonely because so few ever matter to us personally. We often are not rooted in any place but wander around our society like perpetual migrants and we may not even have families to which we are connected in any meaningful way. The constant change, the terrible speed of it, the escalating number of choices we have to make, all extract their cost. And we must also live in a society that is fragmenting in fundamental ways. Between 1960 and 1993, violent crime increased 560%, single parent households 300%, births to unmarried mothers 400%, and teen suicide 200%. So, it is no wonder that we feel alarmed and insecure and that we also become preoccupied with the wounds and pains within.

On the other hand, many (even in the Christian world) have drunk deeply at the trough of popularized psychology and appear to accept its two basic assumptions. First, we believe that we can find release from these pains through the right technique. If we are anxious, guilty, insecure, lost, unmotivated, unappreciated, ineffective, or friendless, we need worry no more about it. There is an answer, though we will have to pay to get it. Second, we have come to believe that our top priority should be that we seek our own authenticity before all else and that others, such as spouses or friends, may have to be treated as a threat to our own growth. Hence, where these assumptions have intruded upon the Church, our spirituality has become extremely privatized, highly individualistic, inimical to commitments, and quite ethically indifferent. Because this is so, we lose our appetite for God, our taste for his Word, and our sense of dependence on Christ. Our God, too, has become too small and is now often lost amidst our inner preoccupations.

There are, of course, those who genuinely need professional psychological care but the overwhelming proportion of those who have cast their faith in psychological terms do not. Their appetite for the therapeutic has come about for other reasons. In part, it reflects their own inner emptiness and the pain which this creates; in part, it rests on our growing cultural sufficiency, that what God’s grace, power, and regeneration once did, we can now do for ourselves; in part, it reflects a greatly diminished sense of sin and our refusal, quite often, to bear the pain of any self-reproach at all; and in part, it seems to reflect our lost ability to see any purpose in life outside of the self, an inability that both fuels our self-indulgence and stokes our need for more distraction.

What seems so obvious to anxious, pained, bewildered moderns is what is so wrong. We are having to learn again, even in the Church, that Christ’s paradox is always true: “Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it” (Matt. 10:39). Losing one’s life flies in the face of all of the counsel we are receiving today that it is by finding the self, cultivating the self, expanding the self, and actualizing the self, that we will find life. Today, self-restraint and the self-abnegation‹which faith requires‹have become obscenities. And we miss the point entirely if we think that this is simply a quarrel between two competing views of therapy.

No, what is at stake is whether or not we will be able to see the greatness of God, and whether what we see will enter into the innermost fibers of our being, for this is where our true spiritual health resides. The greatness of his power, wisdom, and goodness, and his greatness in creating, sustaining, and ruling over all of life, are not simply doctrines to be talked about but truths to be appropriated. His greatness in giving and judging his Son in our place, as well as his greatness for what he has yet to do one day in putting truth forever on the throne and error forever on the scaffold, should be matters of great weight to us and great joy for us. The psalmist spoke of longing, of fainting for God, of being enraptured with his beauty (Ps. 84:1-2), of having a compelling thirst for him (Ps. 42:1). How out of place this would be in many of our churches today! The truth is that our diminished “god” simply lacks the power to summon up such longing, such hope, such pleasure, in those who have come to worship him. But if our God has become small and skinny, he has been diminished only in our understanding and experience. He has not really been diminished. So why can we not hope that the Church will yet be surprised to discover his greatness afresh? Why can we not hope that those who long for God, who are enraptured by his beauty, who thirst deeply for him, will become the norm rather than the exception? I know of no reason.

This article first appeared in the July/August 1997 issue of Modern Reformation.


Dr. David F. Wells is the Andrew Mutch Distinguished Professor of Theology at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts

PERMISSIONS: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided.

"Evangelical" Absurdity?

Kathleen Parker of The Washington Post recently wrote an article reacting to Franklin Graham stand for the exclusivity of Christ in the matter of salvation. You can read her article here, if you like.

This post is not specifically about the Franklin Graham and his being disinvited from the White House Observance of the National Day of Prayer. It concerns some statistics mentioned in Kathleen Parker’s article.

Concerning the opinions of Protestant pastors and Islam, mentioned a poll conducted by an evangelical polling firm:

A survey of 1,000 Protestant pastors found that 47 percent agree that Islam is “a very evil and a very wicked religion.” But such opinions may be confined mostly to an older generation. Evangelicals under 30 believe that there are many ways to God, not just through Jesus.

She also cited research by David Campbell of Notre Dame and Robert Putman of Harvard that indicated:

“nearly two-thirds of evangelicals under 35 believe non-Christians can go to heaven, vs. 39 percent of those over 65.”

The main thrust of Ms. Parker’s article seems to be that the last bastion of the exclusivity of Christ in Salvation, evangelical Christians as opposed to those who are more liberal and universalistic concerning salvation, is crumbling. As younger evangelicals drift farther and farther away from the exclusive claims of Christ, while the older generations that believe Jesus meant what he said in John 14:6, are dying off, the “all roads lead to God” mantra will get louder and louder within the church!

Having said that, and setting aside the troubling statistics themselves, the overarching question seems to be, “Why?” Why, when scripture is clear on the matter of Christ being the only way to God, are younger “evangelicals” rejecting the clarity of the very words of Jesus in John 3, not to mention the OT prophets and NT apostles?

There are probably several answers to the question, and I will not render an opinion. Feel free to discuss it. But think about it and consider the implications for what calls itself the “church”, as well as what it says about those who call themselves “evangelical”.

If your own ‘opinion’ tends to universalism, examine scripture on the matter. If you are in fact a genuine believer and truly “evangelical”, the Holy Spirit will set you straight.

The Power of God in the Life of the Believer

“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. – Philippians 2:13-14

In these two verses, what are the Paul’s instructions to the believer?

We are instructed by Paul to work ‘out’, not work ‘for’, our salvation. The believer already has both salvation and the assurance of it for all eternity, because he/she has believed and trusted in the Son for the forgiveness of sin.

What does it mean to ‘work out’ the salvation which we already posses?

It does not mean that we are to labor, solely by our own human efforts, to be pleasing to God, for scripture tells us that all of our righteousness is like a filthy rag, still tainted by sin (Isaiah 64, see also Psalm 14 & Romans 3).

It does mean that we are to yield to ‘God who works in us’ , and do so humbly (with fear and trembling); knowing that is is GOD at work by the power of His Spirit indwelling us.

How exactly does God work within us?

John Owen provides us an excellent answer to this question:

God works in converted men a will to that which is spiritually good; which is to be understood, not of the formation of the natural faculty of the will; or of the preservation of it, and its natural liberty; or of the general motion of it to natural objects; nor of his influence on it in a providential way; but of the making of it good, and causing a willingness in it to that which is spiritually good. Men have no will naturally to come to Christ, or to have him to reign over them; they have no desire, nor hungerings and thirstings after his righteousness and salvation; wherever there are any such inclinations and desires, they are wrought in men by God; who works upon the stubborn and inflexible will, and, without any force to it, makes the soul willing to be saved by Christ, and submit to his righteousness, and do his will; he sweetly and powerfully draws it with the cords of love to himself, and to his Son, and so influences it by his grace and spirit, and which he continues, that it freely wills everything spiritually good, and for the glory of God: and he works in them also to “do”; for there is sometimes in believers a will, when there wants a power of doing.”

God works within the believer to give him/her a desire, to do that which pleases God, and also provides the power to do that which pleases Him.

Why does God so work in the life of every believer?

For the same reason He determined to have a remnant out of lost and dying humanity as a people for Himself:

“He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.” – Ephesians 1:5-6

The ‘prime’ product of all that God does is ‘the praise of His glorious grace’. We believers are the eternally blessed ‘by-product’ of ‘the purpose of His will’.