Notes on ‘Neezer

Many of this blog’s entries are serious. This post is less formal, less structured and a little more light-hearted.

There are no longer evening services at my church, so I go to Ebenezer Christian Reformed Church for evening worship.

Last Sunday’s service was the monthly Young Adults service. That meant contemporary worship songs led by a band and a team of singers and a message geared to young adults. It reminded me of Campus Crusade and the Christian university subculture I was immersed in at Carleton, and to a lesser degree at Queen’s.

As much as I try to remain focused on worshipping God when I’m at church, I get distracted.

Here are my observations and reflections.

I regretted I had not invited two friends or my brother to join me. But then I recalled, I drove for the first time in a long time, and so thought to myself perhaps it was safer they had not come. Still, it would have been a good service for my brother to go to.

The pastor spoke about his tight-knit youth group growing up in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I was surprised his group only had 10 people – considering GR is the hub for the CRC in North America. He mentioned how disheartening it was to hear how many have since backslidden.

I chuckled when he said, “Maybe your parents are failures” before he added “in your eyes.”

The sermon was interesting (perhaps a bit too breezy though) and his advice was sound.

I sang extra loud during the two songs that were divided into male/female parts because all of the singers were female. And that got me thinking about traditional gender roles in the church (guys on the guitar and drums, a woman on the piano) and, as mentioned before, the exclusively female singers. Speaking of gender roles, later in the service, I was surprised to see a woman (we know each other because she’s a regular customer at the store I work in) help to gather the collection.

I was later taken aback by my surprise because I thought nothing of it, when women collected the tithes and offerings at Celebration Church. I guess I was comparing it to the church I go to in the mornings where women do not take up the collection because they are not allowed to be ushers.

Speaking of ushers, I was the usher at the morning service at the Baptist church and was asked to give the offertory prayer. I took the left side of the church, where most of the congregants were sitting. Only four people chose to sit on the right side, prompting one of the elders to joke that the church might tip over.

The collection at the Christian Reformed Church was donated to the Salvation Army. The offerings at the evening service are always donated to a charity – a practice I hugely admire.

I spent the collection pause looking discreetly at the other people (a challenging task when one is sitting near the front) and was intrigued at how deeply tanned most of the young people were. And that got me wondering how they spent the summer (which wasn’t entirely inappropriate because the pastor discussed reflecting on summer memories and looking ahead to new ones). That in turn, promoted me to wonder why I had never seen most of the young people at previous services and wondered what they did the other Sunday evenings. As I was rubber necking, I also attempted to determine if I had served any of the young adults at the store.

I thought I recognized one young woman as a former co-worker, but couldn’t decide if she was the person I was thinking of, and probably stared at her too long.

I left the service attempting to blend in with the outgoing herd, but my dark hair outs me from the mostly blonde congregation as a visitor. I shook hands with an older gentleman in the exact same hallway corner as the week before. I made a beeline to a man I’ve spoken with every time I go to the evening service.

Before I reached him, an elderly Dutch-accented saint asked me if I was a member of a church. I explained I was a member of a Baptist church and I attend the evening service because my church does not have evening services. She told me that she thinks the Baptists are good, to which I ridiculously responded that I also like Baptists.

The gentleman is a member of the evangelism team, so I told him about John Piper’s book Let the Nations Be Glad and offered to bring it next Sunday (that would be tonight) for him to borrow.

E-xperiment

I conducted an experiment this summer.

Here is the data:

July 12, 2006: Distribution Day
August 22, 2006: E-xperiment Ends

76 E-mails were sent
43 E-mail responses received
56.5 % E-mail response rate

5 Other responses
2 In Person
2 Instant Messenger
1 Telephone

63.1 % Total response rate

Guidelines

I did not mass e-mail. Each person received a personalized message. All e-mails contained at least one question, so as to invite the recipient to respond. I did not log onto msn for several days after Distribution Day. Family members were excluded. There was a reasonable expectation that each recipient might respond.

Analysis

Respondents are ranked by their religious identification. This is to provide anonymity. And it’s interesting. I make no distinction between active and nominal. Since high school, when I classified fellow students in a chart according to their religious identification, a person’s religion is how I chiefly remember people by.

Results

Respondents were quick to reply. Of those who responded via e-mail 66 % did so in the first three days. Most (41.8 %) responded the day after Distribution Day, although a surprisingly high 16.3 % sent e-mails back on Distribution Day. With the exception of Day 8, at least one respondent sent a reply on or before Day 10. Day 1 signifies Distribution Day.

First Ten E-mail Respondents

Baptist
Free Methodist
Alliance
Baptist
Latter-day Saint
Baptist
Pentecostal
Unknown
Non-denominational
Free Methodist

Classification of e-mail Respondents

Affiliation (Number of e-mail Respondents)

Secular (9)
Baptist (8)
Pentecostal (6)
Christian Reformed (3)
United (3)
Unknown (2)
Non-denominational (2)
Anglican (2)
Alliance (2)
Free Methodist (2)
Latter-day Saint (1)
Muslim (1)
Wesleyan (1)
Associated Gospel (1)

Classification of other Respondents

Affiliation (Number of other Respondents)

Baptist (2)
Anglican (1)
United (1)
Secular (1)

Classification of Non-Respondents

Affiliation (Number of non-Respondents)

Secular (7)
Baptist (5)
Roman Catholic (4)
Non-Denominational (3)
Anglican (2)
Pentecostal (2)
Lutheran (1)
Brethren (1)
Mennonite (1)
Muslim (1)

Total Response Rate

Denomination (Total Response Rate (%))

Christian Reformed (100)
Free Methodist (100)
Associated Gospel (100)
Wesleyan (100)
Latter-day Saint (100)
Alliance (100)
Unknown (100)
Pentecostal (75)
United (75)
Secular (55.5)
Baptist (53.3)
Muslim (50)
Non-denominational (40)
Anglican (40)
Lutheran (0)
Brethren (0)
Mennonite (0)
Roman Catholic (0)

Oneness Pentecostalism

Calvary Temple (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada)

First Pentecostal Church
(United Pentecostal Church International)

We were in the Western outskirts of Belleville today at a vehicle dealership. I took a stroll into town and passed a United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI). The church is nearly next-door to the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC) affiliated Calvary Temple. To add to the confusion, the UPCI congregation is called First Pentecostal Church, although it was constructed in the late 1990s, much later than Calvary Temple.

While both are 'Pentecostal' the theology taught at the churches is different.

The PAOC is a mainstream evangelical Christian denomination. The UPIC is a Oneness Pentecostal denomination, which sets them apart from most of Christendom.

The most prominent Oneness Pentecostals are the trio that compose the contemporary Christian group Phillips, Craig and Dean. All three are pastors of Oneness Pentecostal churches, although they downplay their affiliation.

I was introduced to the Oneness movement when I was in high school and volunteering with Quite Youth for Christ. A friend and I met with the director to discuss potential outreach to area churches to raise the profile of Youth for Christ. When I suggested we involve First Pentecostal Church the director became visibly agitated and told us that they were different than us. And so they were not included. I wondered what made them different but did not investigate further.

Several years later when I was in university I went to an evening revival service with a friend at a Pentecostal Church after seeing an ad in the newspaper.

The service was almost entirely singing. The songs were traditional hymns sung with a distinctly Pentecostal gusto. I was impressed most of the congregation knew the hymns by memory. The congregation was multi-ethnic (although all of the leaders on the podium were white) and all were well dressed.

I had been to charismatic services before but it was the first time I had seen people collapse onto the floor shaking. One young man spent at least ten minutes shaking and rolling about on the carpet.

That certainly doesn't happen in my church tradition, but that’s not what sets Oneness Pentecostals apart. So what does?

They don’t believe in the Trinity. More specifically Oneness Pentecostals maintain that God is not three separate and distinct Persons (Trinity), but is exclusively one God without any internal distinctions of persons.

The church’s website explains, “In distinction to the doctrine of the Trinity, the UPCI holds to a oneness view of God. It views the Trinitarian concept of God, that of God eternally existing as three distinctive persons, as inadequate and a departure from the consistent and emphatic biblical revelation of God being one.”[i]

As such, people are baptized in the name of Jesus only (as opposed to the traditional ‘in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit’)

Oneness Pentecostals also believe water baptism and receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the immediate and outward evidence of speaking in tongues is essential to their salvation. Oneness Pentecostals do not believe that the gift of tongues in itself will save people. However, they believe all who have received the Holy Spirit will be saved, and thus will also receive and exhibit the gift of tongues.

Oneness Pentecostals are also very concerned about personal holiness. Apparently liencesed UPCI ministers are not allowed to own a television set.

Second and third year students at a UPCI affilated Bible College in Fredericton, New Brunswick, must obtain permission to get engaged or married (first year students are denied the option).

According to the school’s website, “Male students are expected to wear ties and dress shirts to all classes, outreach and church activities. Suit coats or jackets are required for church services. For outside ministry, men must wear white shirts and ties. Men are also required to keep their hair trimmed off the ears and above the collars and without long sideburns. Women students are expected to wear their dresses at a modest length, sufficient to cover there (sic) knees when standing or sitting. Elbow length sleeves are requested. Women must not cut their hair and they are asked to avoid extreme hairstyles”[ii]

Most members do not watch movies and television. Many avoid mixed swimming and do not wear shorts, makeup and (for women) pants. Of course, a dress and appearance code is not unique to Oneness Pentecostals.

Although the movement is less than a century old, orthodox Christian theologians believe Oneness theology can be traced to the ancient heresy of modalism.[iii] This was the belief that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit were modes or manifestations of God in various activities. The teaching was also known as Sabellianism because Sabellius taught a form of this doctrine in Rome in the third century.

The early church condemended Sabellianism and the movement eventually faded – but its doctrine has clearly remerged as a challenge to the traditional understanding of God’s nature. The UPCI, which is just one of the many Oneness Pentecostal denominations, claims a membership of over 4 million. Most live outside of North America. The largest non-Catholic church in Columbia, for example, is the United Pentecostal Church International.

Oneness Pentecostalism “occupies a kind of cloudy no man's land between orthodox Christianity and the various groups that, because of their beliefs and practices, are decidedly not orthodox.”[iv]

The Oneness Pentecostalism movement is one more reminder that God’s church must guard against deficient doctrine.

[i] United Pentecostal Church International, Accessed 22 August 2006. Available:
http://www.upci.org/about.asp
[ii] Northeast Christian College, Accessed 22 August 2006. Available:
http://www.northeastchristiancollege.com/campus.html
[iii] Stephen Lang, ‘Jesus Only Isn’t Enough,’ Christianity Today, 1 April 2002, Accessed 22 August 2006, Available:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/004/22.60.html
[iv] Ibid.

Dreary Distractions

My brother works at a summer camp and they went to a zoo one day. He said that by the time they had arrived it was noon and the kids wanted to eat. Lunch took almost an hour because the children chased chipmunks and squirrels.

Neighbourhood critters distracted them from polar bears, camels and elephants. In other words, the dreary and routine distracted them from the thrilling and unusual.

It reminds of me of Steven Curtis Chapman’s song ‘See the Glory’:

'I’m playing Gameboy standing in the middle of the Grand Canyon
I’m eating candy sittin’ at a gourmet feast
I’m wading in a puddle when I could be swimming in the ocean
Tell me what’s the deal with me
(I know the time has come for me to)
Wake up and see the glory'

CS Lewis said that we are often like children who think they are having fun stomping around in a mud puddle in the backyard, when all the while what is really being offered to us is an adventure at the seashore.

In A Hunger for God John Piper wrote, “It is not the banquet of the wicked that dulls our appetite for heaven, but endless nibbling at the table of the world.”[i] He added that simple pleasures of earth often replace an appetite for God.

Jonathan Edwards preached in April 1739, “They choose not to be diverted from amusing themselves with toys and vanities. Thus, well might the wise man say, Ecclesiastics 9:3, ‘The heart of the sons of men is full of evil. Madness is in their heart while they live; and after that they go to the dead.’”[ii]

May God’s people be alert to the dangers of the dull and trivial!

As Edwards said, “How much wiser are those few, who make it their main business to lay a foundation for eternity, to secure their salvation!”[iii]


[i] John Piper, A Hunger for God, Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1997, p. 14
[ii] Jonathan Edwards, The Eternity of Hell’s Torments, Sermon Notes, 1739. Accessed 20 August 2006. Available:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/hell2.html
[iii] Ibid.

Slave to Superstition

As I was shuffling piles of old Sunday school material at church, I found a New World Translation of the Bible – the version of the Bible the Jehovah’s Witnesses use. My initial thought, shamefully, was that the presence of this book in the church has contributed to the ‘bad luck’ that has befallen the congregation in the last few years.

That’s foolishness, of course.

But it reminded me that while I am redeemed, all of my thoughts and actions apart from saving grace are morally ruined.

As an unregenerate I was a slave to superstitions. I ate the same cereal for breakfast every morning for years, concerned that had the routine been altered, bad luck would befall me. That I didn’t even like the cereal made no difference.

I did other strange things. I had a model Ferris wheel I would reposition. I made sure to put the plug in the bathtub the exact same way each time. Why? For good luck.

Even the copy of the New Testament, the means the Lord eventually used to save me, was part of a ritual. I would place my thumb on the circle on the front cover most days before I left for school.

The Lord drew me out of bondage to these (and other) ridiculous rituals.

John Calvin, never one to be nuanced in his writings, said this about superstition.

“It is easy to see how superstition, with its false glosses, mocks God, while it tries to please Him. Usually fastening merely on things on which He has declared He sets no value, it either contemptuously overlooks, or even undisguisedly rejects, the things which He expressly enjoins, or in which we are assured that He takes pleasure. Those, therefore, who set up a fictitious worship, merely worship and adore their own delirious fancies; indeed, they would never dare so to trifle with God, had they not previously fashioned him after their own childish conceits.”[i]

Luck saturates our culture and runs the gamut from the oft-used phrase ‘good luck’ to newspaper reporters who credit luck when a person walks away unscathed from a potentially fatal car accident.

Charles Spurgeon said,

"The heathen often attributed their prosperity, to “fortune”; some of them talked of “chance;” others discoursed of “fate.” Anything is to man’s taste rather than blessing the great Father, and adoring the one God. If they prospered, they were “lucky”; this was instead of gratitude to God.”[ii]

He continued, “But may I not be addressing some who, at this moment, do not bow before God, and bless him for their prosperity? They attribute it to their industry, and to their good luck. Oh, sirs, you come under the head of those who know God, and yet do not glorify him as God; neither are you thankful.”[iii]

1 Corinthians 10:31 reminds us, “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”

May the Lord help the superstitious “to confess this sin, and may His grace wash them clean of it, for indeed it is a great and heinous sin in the judgment of the Most High. Justice makes a black mark against those who do not ascribe their good things to God, from whom they flow with such sweet constancy of kindness.”[iv]

[i] John Calvin, The Institutes of Christian Religion (Chapter 4) Accessed 12 August 2006. Available:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.iv.i.v.html
[ii] Charles Spurgeon, “Knowledge, Gratitude, Worship,” Spurgeon’s Sermons, Vol. 30, 1884. Accessed 18 August 2006. Available:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/spurgeon/sermons30.i.html?
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid.

Feed the Sheep

In the movie Luther, a Catholic leader was horrified that Martin Luther translated the Bible into German. He said that the Bible was too complicated for common people to understand.

On one recent episode of the White Horse Inn a reporter asked Protestant pastors attending an evangelical pastor convention if they taught the doctrine of imputation. Several responded by saying that they avoid such heady doctrine because it would confuse church attendees.

Both illustrate an assumption that common Christians cannot comprehend the complexity of Christianity.

But church leaders are called by God to lead and teach His people on all things pertaining to God, including the challenging parts.

John Owen wrote:
“The first and principal duty of a pastor is to feed the flock by diligent preaching of the word. It is a promise relating to the New Testament, that God would give unto his church ‘pastors according to his own heart, which should feed them with knowledge and understanding’ (Jeremiah 3:15). This is by teaching or preaching the word, and no otherwise. This feeding is of the essence of the office of a pastor, as unto the exercise of it; so that he who doth not, or can not, or will not feed the flock is no pastor, whatever outward call or work he may have in the church. Their work is "to labour in the word and doctrine (I Timothy 5:17); and thereby to ‘feed the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers’ (Acts 20:28): and it is that which is everywhere given them in charge.”[i]

[i] John Owen, The Duty of Pastors and People Distinguished, 1643, Accessed 17 August 2006. Available:
http://www.cprf.co.uk/quotes/dutypastors.htm

Revelation 3:20

I wanted to use the bathroom when I arrived yesterday morning at the grocery store I work at. I followed my usual routine of knocking on the door (no answer) and gently turning the handle (it was not locked).

As I opened the door, an older gentleman relieving himself called out ‘Come in!’ It was awkward.

The incident reminded me of a commonly cited Scripture.

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me” (Revelation 3:20).

Matthew Henry wrote concerning this verse,

“Christ is graciously pleased by his word and Spirit to come to the door of the heart of sinners; he draws near to them in a way of mercy, ready to make them a kind visit. [2.] He finds this door shut against him; the heart of man is by nature shut up against Christ by ignorance, unbelief, sinful prejudices. [3.] When he finds the heart shut, he does not immediately withdraw, but he waits to be gracious, even till his head be filled with the dew. [4.] He uses all proper means to awaken sinners, and to cause them to open to him: he calls by his word, he knocks by the impulses of his Spirit upon their conscience. [5.] Those who open to him shall enjoy his presence, to their great comfort and advantage. He will sup with them; he will accept of what is good in them; he will eat his pleasant fruit; and he will bring the best part of the entertainment with him. If what he finds would make but a poor feast, what he brings will make up the deficiency: he will give fresh supplies of graces and comforts, and thereby stir up fresh actings of faith, and love, and delight; and in all this Christ and his repenting people will enjoy pleasant communion with each other. Alas! What do careless obstinate sinners lose by refusing to open the door of the heart to Christ!” [i]

[i] Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, Vol. VI Accessed 16 August 2006. Available: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.xxvii.iv.html

Reviewing Themes

A recent article published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram succinctly summarizes several themes I have raised in this blog.

‘“True biblical faith is the kind of faith that is willing to say: 'I don't care what it costs me. I am willing to do whatever [Jesus wants] me to do,'"said Jon Speed, a 34-year-old street preacher from Justin. ‘That's the Gospel.’”[i]

No. That is not the gospel but how Mr. Speed responds to the gospel. As I wrote last month the New Testament defines the gospel as, simply, Christ. More specifically, the “gospel of the glory of Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:4).

The article then addressed the public image of Christians.

“Experts say that evangelical Christians who take to the streets seem to be trying to rehabilitate the image of the street preacher, a figure of disrepute in the popular imagination.”

Next the issue of the Great Commission (it was quoted at the end of the article) arose.

“David Personius, a 15-year-old from Keller, was handing out pamphlets with other Great News Network members. "It might not be the funnest thing to do, but I know I should be doing it," he said. "If I'm a Christian, I should do things Christ said to do."

It sounds like he was ‘doing evangelism’ out of duty because that is what Christians do, rather than a desire to see God’s glory made known.

[i] Jeff Carlton, “Evangelists take to the streets, but aren’t always welcome.” The Fort Worth Star-Telegram. 14 August 2006. Accessed 15 August 2006.
Available:
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/nation/15271253.htm

Sweet Union

I recently dipped an Oreo cookie into a glass of milk hoping that my taste buds had changed. They hadn’t. The cookie was soggy. As a boy I could never understand why people in Oreo commercials habitually dunked the cookies into milk.

I recently had a hunch it had something to do with marketing the snack food so I decided to investigate.

My hunch was correct.

Apparently Oreo cookies were initially targeted at the tea-drinking British market. But in the late 20th century, Oreos became synonymous with milk.

A 2004 press release illustrates this union.

“Oreo cookies and milk go hand-in-hand – literally,” said Jeff Manning, executive director of the California Milk Processor Board (CMPB). “Nothing beats an ice cold glass of milk and an Oreo…It’s a classic combination.”[i]

The partnership continues. A glass of milk is featured prominently on the main page of the Oreo cookie website. In fact people can write and videotape songs as a part of the ‘Oreo and Milk Jingle’ competition.

It’s a smart public relations campaign. And that got me thinking.

What is the image of the church in North America?

Is it a gathering of believers obeying God and reaching out in love to others?

Probably not.

As one pastor noted, “The face of evangelicals is an angry face, protesting something, rather than people that are serving or helping or reaching out.”[ii]


May the Church of Christ renew its heart for God, service and humanity!

[i] After Dunking for Decades, Oreo and Milk Take the Plunge. Press Release. 9 September 2004. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available:
http://www.suntimes.com/special_sections/evangelical/cst-nws-evang11.html
[ii] Cathleen Falsani, “Church leaders work to alter public perception.” Chicago Sun-Times, 11 February 2005. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available:
http://www.gotmilk.com/news/news_034.html

Fruit (less) evangelism

I used to attend services at the Anglican Church in my hometown for several summers. I sometimes see the minister but he has never asked why I have not returned to the church. Nor did he invite me back.

In fact the only time the minister invited me to a church-related function it was a strawberry social!

How many 22-year old guys want to attend a strawberry social?

With this style of ‘evangelism’ perhaps it’s not surprising that when I went to that church, I was the only regular attendee in the age bracket of 15-40.

Rethinking the Great Commission

I’ve heard more sermons and lectures on the Great Commission than any other subject. While certainly some were inspiring, an angry speaker attempting to motivate the listeners by guilt delivered almost all of them.

After most of these ‘share the gospel without resolve or the blood of the unsaved will be on your hands because you have made such a pithy effort to save them” messages, I was always left feeling that something was amiss. I just couldn’t figure out what that was.

It was John Piper’s book Let the Nations Be Glad that helped me understand the folly of this mentality and redirected my understanding of the purpose and pursuit of evangelism.

Rt. Rev. Dr. David Zac Niringiye, an assistant bishop of Kampala in the Church of Uganda (which is a member of the Anglican communion) in an interview with Christianity Today provides a superb perspective as an observer outside our subculture.

Dr. Niringiye believes that one of the most serious threats to the North American church is the deception of power—the deception of being at the centre. He was asked how the Church in the West could better equip itself to be more countercultural.

This was his reply:

“We need to begin to read the Bible differently. Americans have been preoccupied with the end of the Gospel of Matthew, the Great Commission: ‘Go and make.’ I call them go-and-make missionaries. These are the go-and-fix-it people. The go-and-make people are those who act like it's all in our power, and all we have to do is "finish the task." They love that passage! But when read from the center of power, that passage simply reinforces the illusion that it's about us, that we are in charge.

I would like to suggest a new favorite passage, the Great Invitation. It's what we find if we read from the beginning of the Gospels rather than the end. Jesus says, "Come, follow me. I will make you fishers of men." Not "Go and make," but "I will make you." It's all about Jesus. And do you know the last words of Jesus to Peter, in John 21? "Follow me." The last words of Simon Peter's encounter are the same as the first words.”[i]

How refreshing to hear a God-centered message!

[i] “Experiencing Life at the Margins” Christianity Today. 14 July 2006. Accessed 14 July 2006. Available:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/007/31.32.html

Sin No More

Jesus told a man He healed, “See you are well! Sin no more.” (John 5:14).

To many contemporary people ‘sin no more’ means just that – sin no longer exists. The Church of England recently investigated the beliefs of “generation Y” (15-to-25-year-olds). Their study, which was published in a book, yielded fascinating results.

As a journalist in The Guardian quipped after reading the results, “Sin is as alien to the contemporary mind as fetching water from a well (and) darning your own socks.”[i]

The researchers found a sense of need for salvation from sin to be non-existent, while death was perceived as less problematic than aging!

The reporter attempted to put a positive spin on the findings.

“Call them empty gestures if you will, but young people today care a great deal about trade justice, making poverty history and saving the planet for future generations and cute little baby elephants. Sinners reject God, but not necessarily the good.”[ii]

Of course, rejecting God, but not the good is impossible.

Paul wrote, “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.” (Romans 3:10-12)

This is similar to Psalm 14:2-3: “The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.”

Both verses are about humanity’s natural fallen condition apart from God’s grace. This is given further credence in Romans 7:18. Paul said, “I know that no good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh.” “Flesh” refers to man in his natural state apart from the work of the Holy Spirit. So he is saying that apart from this Holy Spirit, all we do apart from God is not good.

Romans 12:23 says, “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” As Dr. John Piper said, “This is a radical indictment of all natural ‘virtue’ that does not flow from a heart humbly relying on God’s grace.”[iii]

Dr. Piper wrote, “Of course totally depraved men can be very religious and very philanthropic. They can pray and give alms and fast as Jesus said. But their very religion is rebellion against the rights of their Creator, if it does not come from a childlike heart of trust in the free grace of God.”[iv]

These caring gestures are not done for God’s glory and out of submission to the Lord’s will - even though He gives us everything (Romans 11:36). After all, we are called to “do all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31). Dr. Piper said, “Therefore even these ‘good’ acts are part of our rebellion and are not “good” in the sense that really counts in the end – in relation to God.”[v]

Prior to receiving Christ – and the perpetual state of unbelievers- we are enemies of God (Romans 5:10), dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1), alienated from the life of God (Ephesians 4:18) and blinded by Satan to see “the light of the gospel of the glory of God” (2 Corinthians 4:5).

Further, as Paul noted in Romans 8:7-8, “For the mind that is set on the flesh is death…it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, in cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” The mind of people set on the flesh are people who do have the Spirit of God within them.

In contrast, those whose mind is not set on the flesh focus on God. “You are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God really dwells in you.” (Romans 8:9).

The study’s conclusions are obvious in light of Scripture. After all, 1 Corinthians 2:14 says, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.”

Ironically the reporter’s term “empty gestures” is more accurate than the reporter intended.

The Westminister Confession states: “Works done by unregenerate men, although for the matter of them they may be things which God commands, and of good use both to themselves and others; yet, because they proceed not from a heart purified by faith; nor are done in a right manner, according to the Word; nor to a right end, the glory of God; they are therefore sinful and can not please God, or make a man meet to receive grace from God.”[vi]


[i] Julian Baggini, “What is sin?” The Guardian. 9 May 2006. Accessed 10 May 2006. Available:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,1770605,00.html
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Bethlehem Baptist Church staff, “What We Believe about the Five Points of Calvinism.” Bethlehem Baptist Church. Revised 1998. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available:
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/topics/doctrines_grace/tulip.html
[iv] Ibid.
[v] Ibid.
[vi] The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1646. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/

The end is near?

A friend told me he was dismayed at a Bible study because the belief that we are living in the last days was accepted as truth and based on the assumption that the world is getting worse.

Much has been written about the End Times. It’s a fascination among so many. I don’t think a lot about the end of the world, believing that while it is certainly possible the world will end soon I don’t think it will.

While liberals can be accused of marching toward their garden of paradise (all the while forgetting the reality of original sin imputed to Adam’s descendants) in their assumption that the world is ever improving, end times advocates are resolute in their belief the world is in a constant decline.

Both positions, I believe, originate from an ignorance of history.

John Piper points out that the letter of Jude teaches us something about the value of learning history in his book Life as a Vapour, which as a side note, was recently given to President George W. Bush as a gift from a Christian family.

He points out that Jude assumes that knowing history will help the church understand their own situation better. Dr. Piper writes, “The Christians will handle the error better today if they know similar situations from yesterday.”[i]

Along with being blessed with a great name, Stanton P. Durham is also blessed with a great mind. He divides history into seven eras, and explains that while the specific obstacles God’s people endure change, enemies always batter the church.

Jesus said this would happen (John 16:33).

Here is a summary of the seven ages Mr. Durham describes:

Pre-Christian era: Adversaries include Egypt and the inhabitants of Canaan, but Abraham’s promised seed endures.

Proto-Christian era: Mr. Durham writes, “Redemption accomplished, God continues calling His people. God’s adversaries are the city of Rome (the world-wide pagan culture) and Jewry (the unbelieving religious community). The latter adversary is destined to be crushed by the former enemy, while the former enemy is destined to be converted ere long.”[ii]

Pro-Christian era: Although this is the era of Christendom, there are God’s enemies in the church at Rome, in Islam, in struggles between Barbarism and Christianity, and in the consolidation of world empires.[iii]

Paleo-Christian era: Despite opposition from the church at Rome and the neo-pagan Classicism of the humanistic Renaissance, God uses reformers to bring His people to the Scriptures.

Public Christian era: The Copernican and Newtonian revolutions usher in the Enlightenment. God’s enemies including cultists, the Enlightenment itself, darwinian evolution, Eurocentrism and slave-holding.

Protest-Christian: Ushered in by theological liberalism, technology, over-optimism and pragmatism. “Accompanying this reaction appears an eschatological malaise over the world’s pitiable condition, as if the believer were convinced God is no longer in control.”[iv]

Proletarian Christian: God’s kingdom battles liberationism, pluralism and relativism.

Clearly God’s people have always faced challenges. May we be as vigilant as the saints of yesteryear in proclaiming the truth in the face of opposition!


[i] John Piper. “The Value of Learning History.” Life as a Vapor. Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, pp. 93-97 (p 95).
[ii] Stanton P Durham. “Believers in a Post-Christian Era.” The Banner of Truth. Issue 428. May 1999, pp. 25-27 (p 25).
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid, p. 26.