The Troubles We See

Psalm 49 (NLT)

Listen to this, all you people!
Pay attention, everyone in the world!

High and low,
rich and poor--listen!

For my words are wise,
and my thoughts are filled with insight.

I listen carefully to many proverbs
and solve riddles with inspiration from a harp.

There is no need to fear when times of trouble come,
when enemies are surrounding me.

they trust in their wealth
and boast of great riches.

Yet they cannot redeem themselves from death
by paying a ransom to God.

redemption does not come so easily,
for no one can ever pay enough
to live forever
and never see the grave.

...

but as for me, God will redeem my life,
He will snatch me from the power of death.

#4 - Love The World, You're Not A Christian - 1st John

The fourth characteristic of a non- Christian is loving the world. (See previous post.)

#4 - "If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world--the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does--comes not from the Father but from the world." 1 John 2:13,14

In his book, "Manifesto For A Revolution, The Kingdom of God On Earth" Alex Robertson explains what the Bible means when it uses the word "world".

"The devil is never to be underestimated. He is the master of fraud and subversion. All earthly fraud and subversion pays homage to him. As the devil is 'the prince of this world', his false kingdom is also of this world. It involves wealth, power, status and glory in this world--all that the devil has to offer. The true kingdom, as Jesus said, is 'not of this world'.

But is Jesus' kingdom not coming to earth? Yes! He didn't say it wasn't coming to this earth, he said it was 'not of this world.' The earth and the world are very different in the Bible. The earth means the physical creation; the world refers to a spiritual system. God is the king of the earth, but the 'prince of this world' is the devil. The earth is the Lord's, but Satan is 'the God of this world.' (John 12:31, 1 Corinthians 10:26; 2 Corinthians 4:4)"

The things of this world include our culture, the wisdom of mankind, and other religions. Many people claim to be Christians, yet they place culture in authority over God's word. An example of love for the world is point number two of the eight points of Progressive Christianity:

"Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us."

This expresses the "truth" of our culture. It is called post modernism and involves the belief that each person can have their own beliefs and that all beliefs are equally true. You can have your truth and I can have my own, different truth--and both "truths" are equally true. According to 1st John those who believe this are most likely not Christian.

On the other hand God says there is one truth:

"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." - Acts 4:12

---

Why Talk About Progressive Christianity

For the past two weeks I've been talking about my experiences with progressive Christianity in Massachusetts. This web site and blog are written for Christians. AS Christians we ted to live in an insulated world with little exposure to non-Christian thinking. I wrote about progressive Christianity because it provides an excellent example of how the meaning of the Bible can be twisted to serve man's desires instead of being the Word of God.

One of the things I found interesting are progressive Christian's attitudes toward learning something new about scripture. For example, the pastor I met said, "I understand you and I have very different views. Don't expect that you are going to change my views."

In other words, she was telling me that no matter what I said or showed her, she was closed to any possibilities other than what she already believed. I've encountered this attitude on a regular basis when talking with liberal (progressive) "Christians".

What type of attitude do I typically see in a Christian?

A Christian might say, "I have solid beliefs and I don't expect they will change. However, if it can be shown from scripture where I am wrong, I will change what I believe." In other words, a Christian puts God's word above their own ability to understand scripture, instead of putting their beliefs above God's word. We are imperfect and only God and God's word is perfect.

This does not mean we change direction every time we learn something new about the Bible. Sometimes it is easy to see an error in how we were thinking. Sometimes a new understanding of a passage of scripture must be carefully considered, prayed about and studied before we change what we believe. Often times the new view of scripture that was presented to us is invalid.

I've even heard well-known theologians say this. In spite of a lifetime of studying, teaching and learning about the Bible, they still put themselves under the authority of scripture. They are willing to change their beliefs if they are shown from scripture they are wrong.

My point is that scripture is always in authority over us.

---

Worshipping The god of Inclusiveness

This is the the third part of a three part post. I've been talking about how the United Methodist Church not believing in the inerrant and infallibility of the Bible has let to a practice of using changing human culture as the basis to interpret scripture, and this has led to the separation of love from obedience (toof God).

This brings us to the final point, the heresy that is driving United Methodists away from God. The worshipping of the god of inclusiveness. Everything I've observed in the United Methodist Church, and in the articles in the Progressive Christian Magazine, and in talking with practicing United Methodists... their beliefs and how they live out their faith is based not on the Bible, but on inclusiveness.

Love is defined not as obedience to God, but as inclusiveness.

Inclusiveness is the god of the United Methodist Church (or at least the god of many of the churches within the UMC).

In an article ("Blaming Our Ugliness on God") in the current issue of Progressive Christian Magazine, the Rev. Scott Campbell states: "The religious right has been on a campaign to belittle and ridicule the notion of inclusiveness, insisting that inclusion is not a doctrine, as if somehow that makes it less worthy or less linked to Christ."

Let's see if I understand the last part of what he is saying... if inclusion is not a doctrine taught by the Bible, we should still link the doctrine of inclusion to Christ. He is saying that our own human ideas are in authority over God. If we think it is a good idea, then we can make it a part of Christ. We decide what Christ's message is, instead of believing the Bible. This is what is called making god in your own image.

Looking over my past six posts we can see that the foundational doctrine that is driving un-Biblical practices in the United Methodist Church is the doctrine of inclusiveness. Everything is filtered through the doctrine of inclusiveness. Inclusiveness trumps everything else, including the Bible, the church's own Book of Discipline, the teaching of Martin Luther and John Wesley... everything.

What does the Bible say about inclusiveness? To start I researched (in the KJV) the words: include, inclusive and inclusiveness. None of those words are ever used in the Bible... anywhere. The Bible never talks about inclusiveness. It's a big book, with lots of words. But these words are never used.

Of course, that doesn't mean the principle of inclusiveness isn't taught in the Bible. So let's find out. Does the Bible teach the principle of inclusiveness?

Acts 4:12 says: "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

So salvation is very exclusive. It is through Jesus Christ alone.

In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus says:

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. " (Matthew 7:21)

The kingdom of heaven is very exclusive. Only those who obey God will enter the kingdom.

We saw in a previous post that the Lord's Supper is very exclusive. It is for believers only, and only those believers who are coming to the table in a worthy manner. (1 Corinthians 11:26-29)

Sin cuts us off from God. Isaiah 59:2 tells us: "Your iniquities have separated you from your God." Our sin divides humanity into two groups, those who are separated from God and believers who are no longer condemned by their sin (Romans 8:1) and thus have Jesus Christ living in them (Galatians 2:20). Each group is exclusive of the other. You can not be in both groups, and you must be in one or the other. They are exclusive.

God excludes some people from certain activities. Women may not teach men (1 Timothy 2:12). Only believers may be in ministry (1 Timothy 3:1-13, Titus 1:6-9). Those who embrace sin are not believers (Acts 3:19, 26:20, Luke 13:3).

Christianity is not inclusive. God has set boundaries and limits.

There is one aspect of Christianity that is inclusive. Salvation through God's grace is available to all. It does not matter where you live, what culture you are in, who you are, or how much you have opposed God (sinned) in the past. Everyone who repents (turns away from sinning) and trust Jesus Christ as their Savior is saved.

What principle about inclusiveness do we get from the Bible? Salvation is open to all (the opportunity is inclusive), but only those who repent and trust Christ are saved (salvation is very exclusive). That's it.

If there is a doctrine of inclusiveness, that doctrine is that we (believers) should be sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-3) with everyone... no exceptions. Are you doing that? Or are you instead worshipping the false "god" of inclusiveness and spending your time making sinners feel good about their sin? That's all that worldly inclusiveness accomplishes. It is a very unloving attitude to have.

If you truly love your neighbor, show that love by warning them about sin and eternal hell.

The Prince of Preachers, Charles Spurgeon said: "Have you no wish for other to be saved? Then you are not saved yourself. Be sure of that."

Jonathan Edwards said: "The only way we can know whether we are sinning is by knowing His Moral Law."

George Whitefield said: - "First, then, before you can speak peace to your hearts, you must be made to see, made to feel, made to weep over, made to bewail, your actual transgressions against the Law of God."

The Bible says: "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murders, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

"How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? " - Romans 15:14

Christians need to go out and tell people, tell all the nations of the world, the good news about sin and Jesus Christ. That is practicing inclusiveness!

Blaming Our Ugliness on God?

"Ignorance of the nature and design of the Law is at the bottom of most religious mistakes." - John Newton (who wrote the song "Amazing Grace")

Today I'll continue looking at the Progressive Christianity Magazine article (current issue) titled "Blaming Our Ugliness on God" by The Rev. Scott Campbell. My purpose is to shine a light on the most significant problem the United Methodist Church faces. The Rev. Campbell's article gives us the perfect example of that problem.

In yesterday's post we saw that Rev. Campbell believes we should be "personally accountable for our decisions and actions" instead of basing them on "Scripture, canon law and books of church order." So if we are not to base our decisions and actions on Scripture, what should we base them on? The answer, according to Rev. Campbell, is that the power of culture guides us. Speaking of the Bible's moral law concerning women and homosexuals in ministry he writes:

"Some will no doubt claim that Scripture is the source of the prejudices in question. It is curious however, how quickly such ironclad injunctions seem to lose their power when culture leaves religious law behind."

This gets right to the problem. He is stating that culture is in authority over God. That God's word must be interpreted, not through Scripture, but through our culture.

Who creates culture? People do. Do people have authority over God? No!

The Rev. Campbell is falling into the same trap Satan used to tempt Eve into sin in the Garden of Eden. Satan planted doubt that God's word was true (don't trust Scripture). He led Eve to change God's word (modify God's word based on your circumstances). And then led her to believe she could be equal to God and become a god herself (have authority to determine what is right and wrong). Might Satan be at work here? Martin Luther said:

"Satan, the god of all dissension stirs up daily new sects. And last of all which of all others I should never have foreseen or once suspected, he has raised up a sect such as teach that men should not be terrified by the law, but gently exhorted by the preaching of the grace [mercy] of Christ."

In his article the Rev. Campbell further clarifies his thoughts by writing: "I believe it is offensive to God to offload our own fears and prejudices onto God. In so doing we misrepresent God to the world. Instead of proclaiming a message that conveys the wideness of God's mercy, we tell a tale of a God who is frightened and limited..."

It sounds like the Rev. Campbell is preaching the message Martin Luther says comes from Satan.

One problem the United Methodist Church faces is that they do not believe in the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible. The Book of Discipline (UMC Book of doctrine and rules) states that the Bible is sufficient for our salvation and that the moral law in the Bible should be obeyed. But, how do you know what the moral is, if you do not have the infallible and inerrant word of God to reveal the moral law? Do we use culture, which changes over time and is different around the world, to reveal moral law? Under no circumstances! That makes no sense. You would then be basing God's moral law on a foundation of sand.

The other "pillar" progressives use to support using culture to interpret Scripture is that by doing so we are, in the Rev. Campbell's words, following God's "mandate of living out Christ's inclusive love." The two key words are "love" and "inclusive".

What is Christian love? John Wesley said: "Before I can preach love, mercy and grace I must preach sin, law and judgment."

The Rev. Campbell is trying to separate love from God's law. But according to John Wesley God's law comes before love. You can not love without the law. Why? Because God's law describes God. It describes His character. It describes who He is. If you take away God's law, you no longer have God and you are worshipping a pagan idol you have created to serve you.

As much as the Rev. Campbell hates to turn to Scripture for guidance, let's see what Scripture says about the relationship between the law and love. This is 1 Peter 1:22

"Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply."

Peter is saying that obeying God (the truth) creates sincere love.

Keep in mind that love is not a feeling, it is an action. If we live in obedience to God, our actions toward others will be loving actions.

John, who is known for writing about love, says in 1 John 2:3-6

"We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, I know him, but does not do what He commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him. Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did."

Here again we see that it is obedience to God's word that defines a Christian. Remember, who Jesus was. He was without sin. He always obeyed the Father.

I've heard United Methodists say that because the great commandment (Mark 12:29-31) says to love God and love your neighbor, that this is how we obey God... by loving others. My question is, how do you do that? What exactly does loving God and loving others look like? 2 John 6 tells us:

"I ask that we love one another. And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands."

Biblical love is not a feeling. The Greek word used in the New Testament for "love" is agape. It literally means to love with your actions. What are the actions? Obedience to God's word.

You can't know about love unless you are obeying God. You can't obey God unless you are loving. They are intertwined so tightly they can not be separated. The problem is that some United Methodist Churches force them apart, throw away God's word (law), and try to retain what they define as God's love. That doesn't work.

My next post will talk about inclusiveness.

Jonathan Edwards - "The only way we can know whether we are sinning is by knowing His Moral Law."

United Methodist Church Preaching Another Gospel

Yesterday I mentioned having attended two services at a "progressive" United Methodist Church. This is more than a random church I was visiting, this is the church I grew up in.

After attending Sunday school and church services at this church for 18 years, I did not know the meaning of the words "born again" (John 3:3). I did not know that I was a sinner in need of a savior (Romans 3:23). I did not know that salvation was only through Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12). In other words I had never heard the gospel.

This past Sunday during the service the pastor briefly said something along the lines of, "This is what the gospel is..." I remember that at the time it struck me as not being the gospel presented in the Bible, but later that day I could not remember what she said. So I called her and asked her to tell me what the gospel is.

She was concerned that the answer to this question was too complicated to discuss on the phone. But she gave it a try. Her answer was that the gospel was very involved and included a wide breath of theology. That in addition to the individual gospel there is a corporate gospel. The gospel is not "all about us individually". The gospel also tells us that we need to do good works. We have to make the world a better place. The gospel is a social gospel.

That's not what I remember reading in the Bible. I thought the gospel is so simple that anyone can understand it. Here's what the Bible says. Paul defines the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8

"Now brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain."

"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also..."

Notice that Paul starts out by making it very clear that what he is about to write is THE GOSPEL. It is the gospel that saves. It is the foundation on which we stand. To believe anything else means we are believing in vain.

The Gospel is not complicated and difficult to explain. It is very simple. Christ died for our sins. He was buried and rose from the dead on the third day. He was then seen alive again by many people, demonstrating that there is life after death.

In Galatians Paul makes it very clear, that if anyone else preaches a different gospel, no matter who that person is, that person deserves to be eternally condemned.

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned." -- Galatians 1:8

Then in verse 9 Paul repeats what he just said again: "As we have already said, so now I say again, If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other that what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned."

This must be a very important point for Paul to have repeated it. He wants to make his point clear. The gospel he is preaching (1 Corinthians 15:1-8) is the ONLY gospel. How did he know the gospel he preached is correct and is the only gospel?

In verse 11 Paul goes on to explain: "I want you to know brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, rather I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."

The gospel Paul preached came directly from Jesus Christ.

Yes, as Christians we should be doing good works and be striving to create a better world (James chapter 2.). But our good works are a result of our faith, coming from our love that originates in God. Good works are not a part of the gospel message they are the result of the gospel and God's saving grace.

I urge this pastor to keep in mind Proverbs 30:5,6

"Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar."

Scripture Does Not Change

Is the meaning of scripture unchanging or does it need to be interpreted in the light of our current culture?

I recently attended a United Methodist Church (UMC). This lead to discussions with UMC church members about women pastors, homosexuality and other topics. I was told that reading the Bible for what it said was not correct. We need to read the Bible in the context of our culture. It was explained to me the Bible was written for a first century culture, but we live in a 21st century culture that is very different and the Bible needs to accommodate those differences.

So, does the Bible mean what it says or do we need to "adjust" what it says to reflect the "realities" of our culture?

In Romans 15:4 Paul writes: "For everything [all scripture] that was written in the past was written to teach us..."

The Old Testament was written over a 1,000 year period, from about 1,500 BC until about 500 BC. During that period the cultural context changed many times, but the word of God did not change. Paul is saying scripture was given by God to teach us. All of scripture was given to teach us, no matter how long ago it was written or what cultural context it was written in.

Read John 1:1 -- "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

Who is the Word? Jesus Christ. Why is Jesus Christ called the Word? Because the Bible is a description of the character of God. Does God change? No, He does not. So the description of His character, the Bible, does not change.

1 Peter 1:23 says "For you have been born again; not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God."

God's word is imperishable. Something that is imperishable means that it does not change. It goes on forever.

The word "living" does not mean changing. It means we have a God who is alive, not a god who is made of wood or stone and is dead.

1 Peter verse chapter 1, in verses 24 and 25 goes on to say: "All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field. The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord stands forever."

God is not only saying that His word endures forever, but things that come from mankind wither and die. Things that come from mankind are not living and enduring. So if men's wisdom (culture) is used to change what scripture says, we are using something that withers and dies, instead of living and enduring forever.

This exact same thing is stated in the Old Testament. Isaiah 40:8 says: "The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of God stands forever."

The Catholic church changes scripture by saying that traditions have authority to add to or change the meaning of scripture. The United Methodist Church is claiming that culture has the authority to add to and change the meaning of scripture. To claim culture can change scripture is making the same claim the Catholic church is making.

In addition, it is very arrogant and exclusive to claim culture changes scripture. In doing so we are claiming that the Bible should be changed based on American culture. We are claiming that it is American culture that is the most "advanced", right, good culture and it is the supreme culture. Who are we to tell the Chinese their culture is wrong? Who are we to tell the Sudanese their culture is wrong? If you claim the Bible must be interpreted by culture, you are claiming the evolutionary belief that the American culture has evolved to become the supreme over all other cultures. How arrogant!!

Who is supreme? God and only God.

Where does culture come from? It is created by man. Something created by man can never be in authority over God.

In understanding the Bible we can NEVER put ourselves in a higher position than God. The way to understand the Bible is to use the word of God (scripture) to interpret what the word of God means. We use scripture to interpret scripture. There is no higher authority. To do anything else is to make ourselves into gods, placing ourselves above and in authority over the one true God.

By the way I am not saying we do not need to understand the original context of the Bible. It helps us understand the meaning of the original Greek words, for example. The original context also helps us understand the principles that are being taught by Scripture. But the cultural context never can be used to change the meaning of scripture.