Millennials and Mainlines: When ‘Relevant’ Christianity is Irrelevant

Posted by Dan C. on

John Stonestreet, BreakPoint

 

Recently, the Presbyterian Church (USA) dropped the hugely popular hymn, “In Christ Alone,” from its hymnal after its authors, Keith Getty and Stuart Townend, refused to omit a reference to Jesus satisfying the wrath of God.

In a powerful response over at First Things, which we’ll link to at BreakPoint.org, Colson Center chairman Timothy George quotes Richard Niebuhr who, back in the 1930s, described this kind of revisionist Protestantism as a religion in which “a God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.”

The response from the PCUSA, that their problem was not with God’s wrath but with the idea that Christ’s death satisfied God’s wrath, doesn’t change the fundamental problem of what George calls “squishy” theology. Theology is supposed to be true, not palatable.

Along these lines, maybe you’ve seen the recent viral opinion piece on CNN by my friend, Christian blogger and author Rachel Held Evans. In it, Evans offers her answers to the truly important question "Why are millennials leaving the church?"

To counter the exodus of young people from American churches, Evans says it’s time to own up to our shortcomings and give millennials what they really want — not a change in style but a change in substance. The answer to attracting millennials, she writes, is NOT “hipper worship bands” or handing out “lattés,” but actually helping them find Jesus.

Amen. I couldn’t agree more.

Then she goes on: “[The church is] too political, old-fashioned, unconcerned with social justice and hostile to [LGBT] people.” Well, okay — anytime political programs co-opt our faith, or we ignore the needy and fail to love those with whom we disagree, we do the Gospel of Christ great harm.

But when she writes that attracting millennials to Jesus involves “an end to the culture wars,” “a truce between science and faith,” being less “exclusive” with less emphasis on sex, without “predetermined answers” to life’s questions, now I want to ask — are we still talking about the Jesus of biblical Christianity?

The attempt to re-make Jesus to be more palatable to modern scientific and especially sexual sensibilities has been tried before. In fact, it’s the reason Niebuhr said that brilliant line that I quoted earlier.

He watched as the redefining “Jesus Project” gave us mainline Protestantism, which promotes virtually everything on Evans’ list for millennials. The acceptance of homosexuality, a passion for the environment, prioritizing so-called “social justice” over transformational truth are all embodied in denominations like the United Methodist Church, the Episcopal Church and the Presbyterian Church (USA).

But religious millennials aren’t flocking to mainline Protestant congregations. Mainline churches as a whole have suffered withering declines in the last few decades — especially among the young. What gives?

Well, in an another essay which appeared in First Things over 20 years ago, a trio of Christian researchers offered their theory on what’s behind the long, slow hemorrhage of mainline Protestant churches:

“In our study,” they wrote, “the single best predictor of church participation turned out to be belief — orthodox Christian belief, and especially the teaching that a person can be saved only through Jesus Christ.” This, said the researchers, was not (and I add, is still not) a teaching of mainline Protestantism. As a dwindling denomination rejects a hymn which proclaims salvation “in Christ alone,” this research sounds prophetic.

Evans is right that evangelical Christianity is responsible in many ways for the exodus of millennials. But ditching the Church’s unpalatable “old-fashioned” beliefs to become more “relevant” to the young won’t bring them back.

BreakPoint is a Christian worldview ministry that seeks to build and resource a movement of Christians committed to living and defending Christian worldview in all areas of life. Begun by Chuck Colson in 1991 as a daily radio broadcast, BreakPoint provides a Christian perspective on today’s news and trends via radio, interactive media, and print. Today BreakPoint commentaries, co-hosted by Eric Metaxas and John Stonestreet, air daily on more than 1,200 outlets with an estimated weekly listening audience of eight million people. Feel free to contact us at BreakPoint.org where you can read and search answers to common questions.

John Stonestreet, the host of The Point, a daily national radio program, provides thought-provoking commentaries on current events and life issues from a biblical worldview. John holds degrees from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (IL) and Bryan College (TN), and is the co-author of Making Sense of Your World: A Biblical Worldview.

Publication date: August 8, 2013

Five Ways God Points Sinners to Christ

Posted by Dan C. on

I’ve been listening to John MacArthur’s sermon series on the book of Acts as my homework for leading a Sunday morning Bible study through the same book. Listening to all of the sermons and taking notes better prepares me for the task and provides me with some helpful ‘additions’ to the broader study material, also John MacArthur’s.

One of the sermons provided a short list of ways God points sinners to Christ that I found helpful. Listed below are the points presented in the sermon, for your thoughtful consideration, followed by some personal thoughts concerning their application in our evangelistic efforts.

1. Knowledge

The miracles, signs and wonders at the hands of Jesus and the Apostles were signs that they were from God. The Jews knew that they were seeing with their own eyes that which only God could do. Some did the math and believed, but many did not.

One man, who was blind from birth, even reminded the Jewish leaders that only God could have healed him and even asked those rulers if they too wanted to become a disciples of Jesus. Sadly, I think they thought he was just being sarcastic. (See John 9)

Today we don’t have Christ among us, but we are given the same knowledge through the written New Testament.

2. Guilt

In the days following the birth of the Church at Pentecost, Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, preached to the Jews gathered in Jerusalem, accusing them of being guilty of their own Messiah’s death. 3,000 hearers responded with "what shall we do?" to Pater’s first sermon.

3. Sorrow

"Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death." – 2 Cor 7:10

The repentance of Peter for having denied Christ brought repentance and was ‘Godly’ sorrow. Judas’ sorrow for his betrayal was worldly sorrow that led to his suicide/hanging.

4. The goodness of God

"Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?" – Rom 2:4

5. Judgment

"The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." – Acts 17:30-31

As I consider these points, several things come to mind concerning their use in evangelism:

First of all, only one of them, knowledge, seems to not be connected with the issue of our ‘sin’ problem. The miracles and signs performed by Jesus and the Apostles were signs that the both of their ministries were of God. Only God could heal the sick and raise the dead. In the same manner, we can ‘make known’ the God of the Bible and the mighty deeds of Jesus and the Apostles in the early church. The Bible is our ‘source’ of information.

The remaining four; guilt, sorrow, the goodness of God and judgment speak of repentance, or turning. There are, I think, two aspects of repentance in view here – turning from sin and turning toward God. While both ‘turnings’ should need no explanation, turning toward God might have had special significance to the religious leaders of Jesus’ day and the days of the early church. Those same religious leaders thought themselves already toward God, while Jesus told them they knew not the true God. Go back and review some of the hard things Jesus had to say to them concerning whom they really served.

That four out of five ways God points to Christ deal with man’s issue with sin should be hugely significant. As we share Christ with a lost world, if we don’t take the conversation to man’s biggest problem, we are failing in our mission. That doesn’t mean we ‘pound people over the head’ with it, but we have as a goal to ‘get to the bottom line’, as it were. We walk gently down that path, with great concern and much care. We can even encourage those to whom we share Christ to actually identify the problem themselves, with ‘creative’ dialogue and conversation!

We need to remember that salvation is a work of God, and we are only messengers. We also don’t know which of our five points God will use in any individual to bring him/her to Christ. We leave the ‘convicting’ of sin, righteousness and judgment to the Holy Spirit. However, we just need to be like the Apostle Paul, and ‘unashamed’ of the entirety of the gospel message we present.

Lastly (for now) we must always bathe our evangelistic efforts with prayer. We should pray daily that God will open hearts to receive the gospel message and seize the divine appointments God arranges for us. We should be praying as we share the gospel message, both for guidance in that sharing and for God’s revelation to the hearer. We should be continuously praying for those to whom we share the gospel as they grow in Christ whether or not we are part of that growth, since we know the enemy will try and destroy seed that was sown.

So much for my thoughts. I have a couple of questions. Of the five points we just discussed, which ones seem to be most prevalent in most of today’s evangelistic culture? Which ones, if any, are missing? What are we to do about it?

Brazilian ‘Evangelical’ Model Under Fire for Deciding to Appear on Playboy Cover

Posted by Dan C. on

By Jessica Martinez, Christian Post

The Brazilian edition of Playboy magazine recently announced that a model who claims to be evangelical will be on the cover of its September issue.

Aline Franzoi, who belongs to National Mission Evangelical Church in Brazil, was already under fire for being a ring girl for Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) competitions, which some consider to be a violent sport.  But now news of her upcoming Playboy cover adds additional oil to the heat she has received over her career choices.

According to her Facebook page, Franzoi responded in Portuguese yesterday to the recent backlash she has received over her decision to appear on Playboy.

"About the issue regarding my religion that came out in headlines saying I am ‘Evangelical,’ this will be the first and only time I will speak about it. I never wanted to link information about my religion and work since they are different areas," she wrote. "Journalists are the ones who link me with the title of ‘Evangelical, not Aline Franzoi’ but I’m sure everybody can differentiate it."

A Hispanic news site, Noticia Cristiana, reported that Franzoi told VIP, a Brazilian magazine, that she would not pose nude because she is evangelical. And prior to her most recent career controversy, Franzoi also told another Brazilian outlet, UOL, that she publicly displays her Christian faith in a bold manner.

"I’m evangelical and use my Facebook to tell how much God was and is powerful in my life. And, anyway, what’s wrong with being ring girl? It is very concerning to know what is right and wrong, but in my view, God looks at our heart and our intention."

But her recent Facebook statement makes it unclear whether she considers herself an evangelical or not, and whether her opinion of appearing nude has changed.

The founder of Actors, Models and Talent for Christ, a talent agency based in Georgia, finds Franzoi’s decision to appear in the men’s magazine disheartening.

"Because media covers our world, today’s Christian stars have an unprecedented opportunity to be positive role models. The Bible tells us to be imitators of Christ. We can’t be perfect, but if we’re truly following Jesus, He will perfect us," said Carey Lewis.

"I am saddened at the massive loss of innocence among our children, as well as the dramatic increase in human trafficking. Overt sexuality contributes to these tragedies. Actors, models and talent for Christ have a responsibility to set a better example," he added.

Although it is not clear whether Franzoi will pose nude or not for Playboy, her credibility as a Christian continues to be questioned.

"It’s difficult to be a model while practicing a legalistic religion like Evangelicals do. She should either leave her religion or leave her career," commented Artemio Degas, a reader on Noticia Cristiana.

"God does see your heart, he sees that it’s perverted," added another reader, Eliseo Flamenco.

____________________________________________

Sadly, I’ve run across professing Christians who would see nothing amiss here. Here’s a comment that reflects their mindset:

David danced before the Lord naked. Many prophets paraded around in loin clothes. We are all on our own personal journey to God. Who am I to question the mystery of God? Who knows but that her being in Playboy as a Christian witness will not reach a lost soul? No one can please everyone all of the time and the only one they need to focus on pleasing is God. She says she will not pose nude but even if she ends up being duped into it, I still believe that God can make all things work to the good for those who are called according to his purpose. My prayer is for Aline Franzoi to trust in the Lord with all her heart and to lean not upon her own understanding but in all her ways to acknowledge Him and He will direct her paths. In Jesus name, Amen.

The article itself is troubling enough, but above comment from someone named Karen, is too sad for words at the moment, although the young woman probably feels like she is somehow being ‘Christ like’ and loving. I cannot help but wonder from who/where she is receiving her teaching.

Atheist Weddings on the Rise

Posted by Dan C. on

Jim Denison, Denison Forum on Truth and Culture

Ireland is allowing atheist weddings for the first time. Until this year, those who did not want a religious ceremony could have only a legal function officiated by a magistrate, not a wedding celebration. But as secularism continues to escalate in a country once dominated by the Catholic Church, secular weddings are on the rise as well. The percentage of Irish weddings performed by the Catholic Church or the Church of Ireland has fallen from 90 percent in 1996 to 69 percent in 2010.

In response, humanist "solemnizers" are now able to perform weddings there. They have seen demand for their services skyrocket.  Many are booked into next year. Scotland legalized humanist weddings in 2005 and saw them jump from 100 that year to 2,846 in 2011. Secular weddings are allowed in Australia, Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and some U.S. states.

One person who performs such weddings says, "I prefer to view an ‘atheist ceremony’ as a ‘celebration of love.’ The experience of love transcends all the boundaries and differences, beliefs and conditions, and touches all who join the couple in their celebrations."

Does it really?

Aldous Huxley observed, "Of all the worn-out, dog-eared words in the English language, surely love is the worst." He’s right, of course. We "love" mustard on our hot dogs, some of us "love" the latest "Wolverine" movie enough to stand in line today for tickets (not me), and we "love" our spouses and family. Surely, not all in the same way.

C.S. Lewis notes that the word "gentleman" originally meant "one who had a coat of arms and some landed property." As a result, "when you called someone a ‘gentleman’ you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact." Then "gentleman" came to mean someone whose behavior you happen to like. Today it’s a name on a restroom door.

Has the same thing happened to the kind of "love" that God intends for marriage? The Bible uses three words for "love": eros, sexual love (we get "erotic" from this word); phileos, friendship love ("Philadelphia" means "city of brotherly love"); and agape, unconditional love. Marriages today are often based on the first two, but the third is the strongest, most enduring foundation for any home.

An atheist wedding can celebrate eros or phileos, but agape comes only from God as a "fruit of the Spirit" (Galatians 5:22). You and I can’t do much about the rise of humanist weddings. But we can make sure that our marriages and homes don’t become more secular over time.

Is God the source of your love for your family today?

Jim Denison, Ph.D., is a subject matter expert on cultural and contemporary issues. He founded the Denison Forum on Truth and Culture, a nonsectarian "think tank" designed to engage contemporary issues with biblical truth in 2009 and is the author of seven books, including Radical Islam: What You Need to Know. For more information on the Denison Forum, visit www.denisonforum.org.

Publication date: July 26, 2013

The Thought Lives of Believers and the Building up of The Body

Posted by Dan C. on

In his final remarks to the church in Philippi, the Apostle Paul said this:

“Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” – Phil 4:8

Perhaps more than any other passage in scripture, this verse has meant more to me personally in guiding my thought life. It tells me what the overall ‘character’ of my thought life should be, regardless of the situation I am in, as well as how I should ‘direct’ my thought life when my fleshly mind wants to do otherwise.

I’ve found it quite easy at times to dwell on perceived and actual wrongs that have come our way to the extent that I’ve become personally discouraged and bitter; become angry toward the ‘perpetrator’ and asked God to let me be the instrument of His vengeance.

The above passage tells me to think about, focus on good things. This does not mean that I should just let wrongs go and not seek ‘justice’ for those wronged. There is a system of Biblical church discipline for such matters as well as a civil court system, both ordained of God for the purpose of ‘righting wrongs’.

I believe there is great danger, both personally and for the body of Christ, when we begin to focus on the wrong and not on what good for the Glory of God can be accomplished in hard situations. As believers, we are to be about the building up of the body of Christ. We have given gifts just for that purpose – to build up the body of Christ.

“So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up.” – Ephesians 4:11-12

We are instructed concerning ‘gifts of the Spirit’ in 1 Corinthians 12; that they are for the ‘common good’ :

4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

Whatever we think about offices in the church and spiritual gifts, Paul makes it very clear in both passages that they are given and empowered by the Holy Spirit to equally important members of the church who occupy different offices and perform different functions in the body, a;working together to build up the body.

What has this t do with our thought lives? I’m so glad you asked!

I’ve never become bitter about a wrong done (to myself or others) without my thinking being the first step toward wanting to be an instrument of God’s vengeance upon persons guilty of wrong. All I have to do is focus on the evil wrongdoing and the want to have that wrong righted. And I must say that it’s not too difficult to find passages of scripture to support my desire, although I need to take them out of the context of God’s redemptive plan and/or read into them (eisegete) God’s permission for my sinful emotions and even a ‘holy crusade’ for justice.

On the other hand, while there might have been great wrong done, if I focus, as Paul teaches us, on whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, and whatever is worthy of praise I can avoid falling off of a path leading to restoration and redemption, which is God’s ideal; and leave the ‘justice’ element to appropriately applied church discipline and whatever God ordained civil court system is in place, and ultimately to God himself.

In short, regarding the church, the very Bride of Christ, I can either be a ‘body builder’ or a ‘wrecking ball’. Which one am I? When there are wrongs done or ‘sin in the camp’, how do I respond? I could ignore it and keep my head stuck in the sand, pretending it isn’t happening. I could decide to hunt down the criminals, expose them to the world as both judge and jury, or I could pray that God take care of the justice and be an agent or reconciliation and redemption.

The question is, am I a ‘body builder’ or ‘wrecking ball’? Dear Christian, which one are you?

Food for thought early on a Sunday morning.

A comment against Calvinism and intellectual TMD

Posted by Dan C. on

A must read for those interested in intellectual honesty.

SLIMJIM's avatarThe Domain for Truth

Rick Kelly

I enjoy reading this blog by a guy who goes by the handle “Wintery Knight.”  A few days ago WinteryKnight posted a lecture by Jerry Walls rejecting Calvinism. That post produced many comments.  In the past our blog experienced similar dialogues concerning Calvinism though at a smaller scale (see for instance the comment section of this post).  Overall the comments at Wintery Knight were cordial.  From a quick scan, I thought the most problematic comment was by an individual who went by the name “TMD” which I produce in full below :

Calvinists delude themselves into thinking that they have Scripturally-derived beliefs, when in fact, they are guilty of the exact same type of atomistic prooftexting that is often used to show Jews that Jesus is Messiah.

One can use this method to prove almost anything. Open theism can be proven no less effectively through this method:http://openviewtheology.com/95_verses.html

Calvinists might respond…

View original post 1,103 more words

The AMA Announces a Newly Discovered Disease!

Posted by Dan C. on

That’s right, there’s a new ‘disease’ on the street and it’s called ‘Anti-CalvinItis Disease”, or ‘ACID’, for short.

ACID first appeared on the AMA radar screen when several college students began twitching uncontrollably when, in a ‘Religious Studies’ class at their university (unnamed for security concerns), the course Professor inadvertently let the name “Calvin” slip out during a Christian History lecture. The professor has since lost his tenure at the university as well as his teaching credentials.

A policy had been put in place prohibiting the use of the name ‘Calvin” in front of ‘mixed’ audiences (Calvinists & Arminians), and other terms suggested as substitutes. Ignorance of the policy was no excuse. Good luck at Burger King, Professor.

‘Official’ disease status for ACID was granted after a severely distressed Arminian gunned down three men at a bus stop in Philadelphia who were discussing the Reformed Theology class they had just attended. Since we know that we are all born in a sinless pristine state, outside influences must have driven the poor Arminian to do what he did.

Now that ACID has made it to the AMA’s official disease list, the Defense Team for the jailed Arminian expects to be the first to use an ‘ACID Reflex’ defense in court.

The trial will be broadcast by CSPAN, FOX NEWS, TBN and GOD TV

AMA staff members and researchers are currently preparing comprehensive lists of ACID symptoms, effects, stages, and preventive measures, which will be incorporated into diagnosis, treatment and prevention information, both in printed form and to be disseminated via every media source available (your tax dollars at work).

The seriousness of the spread of this disease is unknown at this time, but the Mayo Clinic is on the case. While it is already certain that ACID can cause a degradation of rational thought processes it is hoped that recovery is possible. 12 Step Program Gurus are working on recovery programs as we speak.

We will keep you informed of developments as they occur.

"What does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage?"

Posted by Dan C. on

First of all, no matter what view one takes on the issue of divorce, it is important to remember Malachi 2:16: “I hate divorce, says the LORD God of Israel.” According to the Bible, marriage is a lifetime commitment. “So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate” (Matthew 19:6). God realizes, though, that since marriages involve two sinful human beings, divorces are going to occur. In the Old Testament, He laid down some laws in order to protect the rights of divorcees, especially women (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). Jesus pointed out that these laws were given because of the hardness of people’s hearts, not because they were God’s desire (Matthew 19:8).

The controversy over whether divorce and remarriage is allowed according to the Bible revolves primarily around Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. The phrase “except for marital unfaithfulness” is the only thing in Scripture that possibly gives God’s permission for divorce and remarriage. Many interpreters understand this “exception clause” as referring to “marital unfaithfulness” during the “betrothal” period. In Jewish custom, a man and a woman were considered married even while they were still engaged or “betrothed.” According to this view, immorality during this “betrothal” period would then be the only valid reason for a divorce.

However, the Greek word translated “marital unfaithfulness” is a word which can mean any form of sexual immorality. It can mean fornication, prostitution, adultery, etc. Jesus is possibly saying that divorce is permissible if sexual immorality is committed. Sexual relations are an integral part of the marital bond: “the two will become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5; Ephesians 5:31). Therefore, any breaking of that bond by sexual relations outside of marriage might be a permissible reason for divorce. If so, Jesus also has remarriage in mind in this passage. The phrase “and marries another” (Matthew 19:9) indicates that divorce and remarriage are allowed in an instance of the exception clause, whatever it is interpreted to be. It is important to note that only the innocent party is allowed to remarry. Although it is not stated in the text, the allowance for remarriage after a divorce is God’s mercy for the one who was sinned against, not for the one who committed the sexual immorality. There may be instances where the “guilty party” is allowed to remarry, but it is not taught in this text.

Some understand 1 Corinthians 7:15 as another “exception,” allowing remarriage if an unbelieving spouse divorces a believer. However, the context does not mention remarriage, but only says a believer is not bound to continue a marriage if an unbelieving spouse wants to leave. Others claim that abuse (spousal or child) is a valid reason for divorce even though it is not listed as such in the Bible. While this may very well be the case, it is never wise to presume upon the Word of God.

Sometimes lost in the debate over the exception clause is the fact that whatever “marital unfaithfulness” means, it is an allowance for divorce, not a requirement for it. Even when adultery is committed, a couple can, through God’s grace, learn to forgive and begin rebuilding their marriage. God has forgiven us of so much more. Surely we can follow His example and even forgive the sin of adultery (Ephesians 4:32). However, in many instances, a spouse is unrepentant and continues in sexual immorality. That is where Matthew 19:9 can possibly be applied. Many also look to quickly remarry after a divorce when God might desire them to remain single. God sometimes calls people to be single so that their attention is not divided (1 Corinthians 7:32-35). Remarriage after a divorce may be an option in some circumstances, but that does not mean it is the only option.

It is distressing that the divorce rate among professing Christians is nearly as high as that of the unbelieving world. The Bible makes it abundantly clear that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) and that reconciliation and forgiveness should be the marks of a believer’s life (Luke 11:4; Ephesians 4:32). However, God recognizes that divorce will occur, even among His children. A divorced and/or remarried believer should not feel any less loved by God, even if the divorce and/or remarriage is not covered under the possible exception clause of Matthew 19:9. God often uses even the sinful disobedience of Christians to accomplish great good.

Recommended Resources: Logos Bible Software and Divorce and Remarriage: 4 Views edited By H. Wayne House.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/divorce-remarriage.html#ixzz2a0e3J6HN

A Relegated Gospel

Posted by Dan C. on

by Burk Parsons

Dear Wormtongue,

Before we get to the primary reason for our letter, we want to begin by commending you for the most excellent job you’ve done in your well orchestrated effort to convince your patient to keep his faith an entirely private matter, all the while thinking he’s doing a nobly sufficient job of showing forth his faith by displaying that old, faded Christian bumper sticker on his car.

What’s more, you’ve gone beyond the call of duty as you’ve managed to persuade him to keep his faith segmented to one realm of his life rather than allowing it to naturally shape every area of life. This our arch-enemy commanded His brainwashed followers when He delivered that ghastly Sermon on the Mount, which sermon could still prove to be devastating to our cause if we’re not careful to continue to draw our patients’ attentions elsewhere, particularly to those less clear passages in their increasingly dusty Bibles over which they seem to love to quibble. Brilliant work, our devious son.

Now to the chief reason for our letter, which has everything to do with what we’ve just mentioned. For all these matters are intertwined as they relate to our post-fall campaign to subvert the gospel by striving to deceive Christians to keep the gospel relegated to one area of their lives, particularly to that past moment when they first trusted the homeless, murdered Nazarene. Our success in this area will mean victory in every other detail of their lives. For we, indeed, are in the details.

If we are to overcome them, we must convince them that they can overcome anything in their own strength, apart from the gospel that is lived out in daily repentance and faith. Their independence from the gospel is our independence. Thus, it’s our daily aim to get them to believe, or at least to act as if the gospel is exclusively for other people who still need to be saved and that the gospel’s only legitimate use is in evangelism. Our faithfulness in this effort will prove successful as we strive to get Christians to give up on living by faith and begin to strive to live by good works for the express purpose of obtaining the enemy’s earned blessings and merited grace, so they think, and so they will live as they keep running on an endless performance treadmill. Having had some initial success among the Galatians, and continued success in Rome, we know that when we’re victorious in relegating the gospel, we are victorious — or so it seems for now.

Your Master,
Legion