Most recently we have heard quite a bit of criticism suggesting that citizens of America must be citizens of their country first and religious (Christian, Muslim, etc.) second. This is unacceptable for me. I am a Christian first and foremost. I am a citizen of this great nation second and that priority cannot change. The reason this is not an issue is because Christ never suggested for even a moment that violence would be necessary to be a good Christian. In fact, I can be a fanatical, religious right kind of a guy and this is no threat to the society at all. Moreover, the more I am bananas for Jesus the better for the nation because Christ has called me to be a model citizen.
I am to pray for my President, vote, obey those appointed over and pay my taxes and all of this does not conflict with my service to my King! My fellow Christians do not allow anyone to suggest to you that you can be religious as long as you keep it separate from your politics. I don’t separate it; I can’t separate it; the Bible does not allow for it to be separate. The idea of creating a duplicite life where I am separate in my thinking between God and the Nation is unacceptable. Stay focused; remember you will only be a citizen of America for a few years, but you will be a citizen of the Kingdom of God for all eternity—keep your priorities where they need to be.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Is Bible Burning Really Peacemaking?
An amazing thing actually happened last night, October 31st, in Canton, NC. On Saturday, I was driving back from our Fall Festival and the local radio station reported this event as national news. A Baptist church full of Christians intentionally destroyed the Word of God. Copies of the Word of God were destroyed by cutting them to shreds. (The intent was to burn them but they got rained out). Christians destroying the Bible—how is that God-honoring or God-glorifying? Bibles which contained the gospel and the message of God’s redemption were destroyed. Bibles which told of God’s love for man and the story of salvation were destroyed. This event was billed as that which is pleasing to God—was it?
When has the destruction of His Word, or books that contain His Word, ever been pleasing to God?
The defense from Amazing Grace Baptist Church is that these Bibles only contain a perverted version of the Word of God because they are NOT the Word of God. In their opinion, only KJV Bibles are the Word of God. All other English Bibles translated into language that is less archaic are not acceptable. The old English must be preserved; anything less is not God-glorifying.
But why is this? Why did God choose to do something for English speaking people that He didn’t do for Hebrews, or Greeks, or those who speak Latin? Why did He do it only for English speaking people?
Why didn’t He do it for the Germans or the French?
Where is the prophetic promise to English speaking people that God would inspire an English translation that would be superior to all other translations?
God’s promises of the preservation of His Word are not unique only to a particular culture or language. Has not God preserved His Word in German? Has not God preserved His Word in Korean? The answer is YES—unequivocally YES!
But there is NO indication that God has chosen to stop permitting the translation of His Word.
Some ridiculously suggest: Only one of these renditions is the Word of God and it is the rendition that preserves the whosoever not whoever or the one that preserves the “th” in believeth instead of believes.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
Is there a difference between eternal and everlasting? Or do both communicate the same truth? If both are acceptable words indicating life without end, then are both the Word of God when describing the life we receive from God to those who believe upon the name of Christ Jesus?
Now this does NOT mean “any old (or new) Bible will do,” but that certainly doesn’t mean I must burn anything that doesn’t meet my standard.
If you prefer the KJV, praise the Lord—but is it really God’s will to see less than KJV Bibles burned?
Since Roger Williams founded the first Baptist Church in Province, Rhode Island, Baptists have consistently stood for religious freedom.
If another Christian, who is a priest unto themselves before God and man, chooses to read a book from Pastor Rick Warren or do their devotions with the New International Bible, what right do I have to condemn them—isn’t that the role of the Holy Spirit to guide them in all truth?
Likewise, if I choose to bring to someone’s attention the failure to properly translate a verse in the TNIV, what right does someone else have to condemn me, in the execution of my pastoral responsibilities, before the flock that is called Berean Baptist Church?
If a precedent is set for burning books we don’t agree with, as an act that is pleasing to God, where does it end and who will ultimately make the final decision on what books are permitted in America and which ones are not permitted? Will we have a book czar?
I really don’t think anyone wants to go down that road, do we? I think the Book of Mormon is pure fiction having no value whatsoever—however, I am willing to fight for a Mormon’s right to have and read the Book of Mormon because I recognize that same right also preserves my right to have and to read the Bible (in any and all translations) as I am led by God the Spirit.
Baptists who burn Bibles and books, as a religious ceremony, are only one or two steps away from much more violent acts which surely could not be pleasing to our Lord who said, “Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.”
You can be sure of one thing; no one thinks of burning books as an act of making peace.
There are some still alive today who can remember the first news reports of Germans burning Bibles in the months before the invasion of Poland and the start of World War II—what, my friends, is the difference?
Why was it wrong for Nazis to burn books before World War II, but today it is an act of worship, pleasing to the Lord, begun with prayer, associated with the body of Christ, done in a church and accompanied by hymns of worship and much rejoicing—how is that?
See for yourself how the pastor is promoting this church service on his website and is quite frustrated with other Baptists who chose not participate in such an event.
http://www.amazinggracebaptistchurchkjv.com/Download99.html
He even laments, why is it that Baptists will unite against the liquor industry but will not unite against the perversions of the Word of God—how is that?
Am I to compare a bottle of Jack Daniels to the NIV and have just as much a passion to destroy both? Is that how I am to think? I think not.
If I could only see the same definitive prohibitions against the ESV as I see against drunkenness, I would consider taking such a stand.
Ask me to show you where drunkenness is prohibited in the Bible, and that is easy to do.
If you prefer to show me a passage where the ESV translation committee did not do justice to the text, I will gladly listen to such an opinion and evaluate your position—but burn the entire book—is that really the correct solution?
If there was just one Bible verse that says God loves the KJV better than other translations—if there was just one Bible verse that indicates He prefers Elizabethan English to contemporary English--but the opposite is found to be true with the reality that the New Testament was written in common Greek. Jesus spoke to the common people in a way that the common person could understand what He said.
The preacher who uses the KJV will, throughout His sermon, seek to help the congregation understand what the Bible is saying to the people and he, the preacher, speaks in the language of his people. He doesn’t seek to preserve the Elizabethan English with the way he speaks. And when there is a word like “concupiscence” in the text he is preaching from, notice how he stops and explains the word often using words found in other translations—indirectly, what is the difference?
Passages from the Psalms, originally written in Hebrew, are quoted to justify God’s love for Elizabethan English—how is that? I believe God is well pleased anytime a group of translators assembles with the primary purpose of giving a people the very Word of God in their own language beginning with the Septuagint and moving forward today.
If you prefer the Elizabethan English, Praise the Lord, I will fight for your right to love, cherish and use the KJV Bible with the exact same energy I will devote to preserving another brother in Christ’s right to use his ESV for which he has the same right to love, cherish and use.
That is precisely the religious freedom this great country we call America was founded upon, and we must fight to keep those precious rights with our very blood if that becomes necessary.
When has the destruction of His Word, or books that contain His Word, ever been pleasing to God?
The defense from Amazing Grace Baptist Church is that these Bibles only contain a perverted version of the Word of God because they are NOT the Word of God. In their opinion, only KJV Bibles are the Word of God. All other English Bibles translated into language that is less archaic are not acceptable. The old English must be preserved; anything less is not God-glorifying.
But why is this? Why did God choose to do something for English speaking people that He didn’t do for Hebrews, or Greeks, or those who speak Latin? Why did He do it only for English speaking people?
Why didn’t He do it for the Germans or the French?
Where is the prophetic promise to English speaking people that God would inspire an English translation that would be superior to all other translations?
God’s promises of the preservation of His Word are not unique only to a particular culture or language. Has not God preserved His Word in German? Has not God preserved His Word in Korean? The answer is YES—unequivocally YES!
But there is NO indication that God has chosen to stop permitting the translation of His Word.
Some ridiculously suggest: Only one of these renditions is the Word of God and it is the rendition that preserves the whosoever not whoever or the one that preserves the “th” in believeth instead of believes.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
Is there a difference between eternal and everlasting? Or do both communicate the same truth? If both are acceptable words indicating life without end, then are both the Word of God when describing the life we receive from God to those who believe upon the name of Christ Jesus?
Now this does NOT mean “any old (or new) Bible will do,” but that certainly doesn’t mean I must burn anything that doesn’t meet my standard.
If you prefer the KJV, praise the Lord—but is it really God’s will to see less than KJV Bibles burned?
Since Roger Williams founded the first Baptist Church in Province, Rhode Island, Baptists have consistently stood for religious freedom.
If another Christian, who is a priest unto themselves before God and man, chooses to read a book from Pastor Rick Warren or do their devotions with the New International Bible, what right do I have to condemn them—isn’t that the role of the Holy Spirit to guide them in all truth?
Likewise, if I choose to bring to someone’s attention the failure to properly translate a verse in the TNIV, what right does someone else have to condemn me, in the execution of my pastoral responsibilities, before the flock that is called Berean Baptist Church?
If a precedent is set for burning books we don’t agree with, as an act that is pleasing to God, where does it end and who will ultimately make the final decision on what books are permitted in America and which ones are not permitted? Will we have a book czar?
I really don’t think anyone wants to go down that road, do we? I think the Book of Mormon is pure fiction having no value whatsoever—however, I am willing to fight for a Mormon’s right to have and read the Book of Mormon because I recognize that same right also preserves my right to have and to read the Bible (in any and all translations) as I am led by God the Spirit.
Baptists who burn Bibles and books, as a religious ceremony, are only one or two steps away from much more violent acts which surely could not be pleasing to our Lord who said, “Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.”
You can be sure of one thing; no one thinks of burning books as an act of making peace.
There are some still alive today who can remember the first news reports of Germans burning Bibles in the months before the invasion of Poland and the start of World War II—what, my friends, is the difference?
Why was it wrong for Nazis to burn books before World War II, but today it is an act of worship, pleasing to the Lord, begun with prayer, associated with the body of Christ, done in a church and accompanied by hymns of worship and much rejoicing—how is that?
See for yourself how the pastor is promoting this church service on his website and is quite frustrated with other Baptists who chose not participate in such an event.
http://www.amazinggracebaptistchurchkjv.com/Download99.html
He even laments, why is it that Baptists will unite against the liquor industry but will not unite against the perversions of the Word of God—how is that?
Am I to compare a bottle of Jack Daniels to the NIV and have just as much a passion to destroy both? Is that how I am to think? I think not.
If I could only see the same definitive prohibitions against the ESV as I see against drunkenness, I would consider taking such a stand.
Ask me to show you where drunkenness is prohibited in the Bible, and that is easy to do.
If you prefer to show me a passage where the ESV translation committee did not do justice to the text, I will gladly listen to such an opinion and evaluate your position—but burn the entire book—is that really the correct solution?
If there was just one Bible verse that says God loves the KJV better than other translations—if there was just one Bible verse that indicates He prefers Elizabethan English to contemporary English--but the opposite is found to be true with the reality that the New Testament was written in common Greek. Jesus spoke to the common people in a way that the common person could understand what He said.
The preacher who uses the KJV will, throughout His sermon, seek to help the congregation understand what the Bible is saying to the people and he, the preacher, speaks in the language of his people. He doesn’t seek to preserve the Elizabethan English with the way he speaks. And when there is a word like “concupiscence” in the text he is preaching from, notice how he stops and explains the word often using words found in other translations—indirectly, what is the difference?
Passages from the Psalms, originally written in Hebrew, are quoted to justify God’s love for Elizabethan English—how is that? I believe God is well pleased anytime a group of translators assembles with the primary purpose of giving a people the very Word of God in their own language beginning with the Septuagint and moving forward today.
If you prefer the Elizabethan English, Praise the Lord, I will fight for your right to love, cherish and use the KJV Bible with the exact same energy I will devote to preserving another brother in Christ’s right to use his ESV for which he has the same right to love, cherish and use.
That is precisely the religious freedom this great country we call America was founded upon, and we must fight to keep those precious rights with our very blood if that becomes necessary.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Dunk'in Booth at the Fall Festival
As I prepare for another hour at the dunking tank, at Fall Festival, I can’t help but to wonder if the desire to dunk someone is further proof of the need for redemption from a sin nature.
Why is it, that, someone would desire to throw a ball at a target, which causes a lever to drop someone into the water—in a way, that isn’t refreshing?
Yet amazingly people will spend money for such an event. They will line up. Why is that? Can anyone help explain this from a theological perspective? Or is this just fun? I guess it depends on whether you are on the seat or on the ground throwing and if the weather is warm and the water is warmer or not. Today it appears God has been gracious to me with the sun that is occasionally shining down on our parking lot and perhaps even into the water…And someone suggested that this is fun…
Why is it, that, someone would desire to throw a ball at a target, which causes a lever to drop someone into the water—in a way, that isn’t refreshing?
Yet amazingly people will spend money for such an event. They will line up. Why is that? Can anyone help explain this from a theological perspective? Or is this just fun? I guess it depends on whether you are on the seat or on the ground throwing and if the weather is warm and the water is warmer or not. Today it appears God has been gracious to me with the sun that is occasionally shining down on our parking lot and perhaps even into the water…And someone suggested that this is fun…
Friday, October 30, 2009
Ladies Retreat in May 2010
We did it. We locked in May 7-8, 2010 for our first ladies retreat at Camp Anchorage. I know this is going to be an awesome time for the ladies to get away and enjoy God, His Word, and each other.
Please mark your calendar and send me an email if you would like to help plan for this weekend retreat.
Please mark your calendar and send me an email if you would like to help plan for this weekend retreat.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Elijah Speaks in the 21st Century
In 1 Kings 18:21, Elijah asks a question that needs to be asked and answered by every "so-called Christian" in America today.
Here is his question: If the Lord be God [and He is], how long will you go on halting between two opinions?
You see the people were not sure if Jehovah was the only God or were there multiple gods that could be worshipped and be petitioned to obtain favor.
Baal, thought to be associated with fertility, was a god to worship for your crops to do well.
So Elijah asked a simple question: How long are you going to go through life limping between serving God and serving others gods (like yourself)?
You see if God is really who He says He is [and He is] then we had better get fully behind that truth, the truth (John 14:6), and begin to show it with our lives. Halting or limping between sometimes serving God and sometimes distracted and serving anything and everything else is not what Jesus had in mind when he said, “take up your cross and follow me!” (Mark 10:21).
“Follow God!” is exactly what Elijah said and it is still expected today. This prayer a prayer gospel and then go back to living like a child of the devil has never been acceptable in the Word of God.
It wasn’t acceptable when Elijah was alive and it wasn’t acceptable when Nicodemus met with Jesus at night for fear of having to choose between being a Pharisee in good standing or a disciple of Christ (John 3).
Nic left that night still halting between two opinions. How long will you halt between two opinions?
Elijah said: If the Lord is God, follow Him, but if Baal be god, follow him. Elijah the prophet said it right.
The call of salvation is not a call to get someone to raise a hand and pray a prayer; the call of salvation is one of a lifetime of following the one true God perfectly revealed to us in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
America is full of “so-called Christians” who need to stop hedging their bets and commit to following God with their heart, mind, soul and body!
Here is his question: If the Lord be God [and He is], how long will you go on halting between two opinions?
You see the people were not sure if Jehovah was the only God or were there multiple gods that could be worshipped and be petitioned to obtain favor.
Baal, thought to be associated with fertility, was a god to worship for your crops to do well.
So Elijah asked a simple question: How long are you going to go through life limping between serving God and serving others gods (like yourself)?
You see if God is really who He says He is [and He is] then we had better get fully behind that truth, the truth (John 14:6), and begin to show it with our lives. Halting or limping between sometimes serving God and sometimes distracted and serving anything and everything else is not what Jesus had in mind when he said, “take up your cross and follow me!” (Mark 10:21).
“Follow God!” is exactly what Elijah said and it is still expected today. This prayer a prayer gospel and then go back to living like a child of the devil has never been acceptable in the Word of God.
It wasn’t acceptable when Elijah was alive and it wasn’t acceptable when Nicodemus met with Jesus at night for fear of having to choose between being a Pharisee in good standing or a disciple of Christ (John 3).
Nic left that night still halting between two opinions. How long will you halt between two opinions?
Elijah said: If the Lord is God, follow Him, but if Baal be god, follow him. Elijah the prophet said it right.
The call of salvation is not a call to get someone to raise a hand and pray a prayer; the call of salvation is one of a lifetime of following the one true God perfectly revealed to us in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
America is full of “so-called Christians” who need to stop hedging their bets and commit to following God with their heart, mind, soul and body!
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Great Job Youth and Sponsors
Watch this youtube clip of our Berean Youth Group. This past Sunday they did an incredible job!
A Day at the House of God
Psalms 84:10
For a day in thy courts is better
than a thousand.
I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
For a day in your courts is better
than a thousand elsewhere.
I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God
than dwell in the tents of wickedness
What an amazingly awesome cry from the psalmist.
He would rather spend one day in the court of the Lord than a 1000 days on the lake or golf course or at a ballgame or in the woods hunting.
This man is in love with the Lord—he is bananas for God.
He would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of God than to dwell inside a tent with wickedness.
This man is in love with the Lord—he would rather suffer the cold or heat outside the tent of the Lord than to be inside out of the weather but in with the wicked.
This man or woman of God is in love with God.
He serves as an usher or greeter. She is in love with being a church and serves as the keeper of the door—ready to greet all who come to the House of God.
As men, woman, and children approach for worship he or she extends to them a greeting in the name of the Lord, to the glory of the Lord.
He or she is standing by ready to show them the location of the nursery, first class, crown room, chapel or restroom. This doorkeeper in the house of the Lord makes being at a new place much easier.
Being in the court of the Lord, at the house of God, is a JOY to this person.
Getting up for worship is what he was created for and it is his joy to extend to God songs of love and adoration.
Would to God that every member, of every Christ-exalting, gospel-centered, God-glorifying, and Bible-believing church, would exclaim, with all their heart, that a day with the body of Christ is better than 1000 days elsewhere!
Would to God that every Christian would find a church to be a doorkeeper at—this moving from place to place and half-hearted commitment to the local church is not what is pictured in this Psalm.
In this psalm, the psalmist knows where he is going to worship each Lord’s day—do you?
For a day in thy courts is better
than a thousand.
I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
For a day in your courts is better
than a thousand elsewhere.
I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God
than dwell in the tents of wickedness
What an amazingly awesome cry from the psalmist.
He would rather spend one day in the court of the Lord than a 1000 days on the lake or golf course or at a ballgame or in the woods hunting.
This man is in love with the Lord—he is bananas for God.
He would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of God than to dwell inside a tent with wickedness.
This man is in love with the Lord—he would rather suffer the cold or heat outside the tent of the Lord than to be inside out of the weather but in with the wicked.
This man or woman of God is in love with God.
He serves as an usher or greeter. She is in love with being a church and serves as the keeper of the door—ready to greet all who come to the House of God.
As men, woman, and children approach for worship he or she extends to them a greeting in the name of the Lord, to the glory of the Lord.
He or she is standing by ready to show them the location of the nursery, first class, crown room, chapel or restroom. This doorkeeper in the house of the Lord makes being at a new place much easier.
Being in the court of the Lord, at the house of God, is a JOY to this person.
Getting up for worship is what he was created for and it is his joy to extend to God songs of love and adoration.
Would to God that every member, of every Christ-exalting, gospel-centered, God-glorifying, and Bible-believing church, would exclaim, with all their heart, that a day with the body of Christ is better than 1000 days elsewhere!
Would to God that every Christian would find a church to be a doorkeeper at—this moving from place to place and half-hearted commitment to the local church is not what is pictured in this Psalm.
In this psalm, the psalmist knows where he is going to worship each Lord’s day—do you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
