Turning Lemons into Lemonade


Well, you can't keep a good false teacher down. Just when you thought it was safe to put away your put away your replica of the Ark of the Covenant,
Juanita "No More Weeks" Bynum is back to fleece her sheep once again.

It seems that the "new face of domestic abuse" has a new scam, I mean, commission to intercede on behalf of the nations. And she needs you to fork over 200k to do it.

Take a look . . .





Can someone please tell me what advantage Bynum will have by praying before a fake relic of an abrogated ritual? The sad thing is that she will receive thousands of dollars from ignorant people who are absolutely oblivious to the fact that Christians now have the reality to which this outmoded Old Testament symbol pointed. His name is Jesus Christ. Not only is this whole threshing floor/ark of the covenant ritual unprofitable, it is blasphemous. It is an implicit statement that Jesus is not enough. We must simply cease rewarding these flim-flam artists for holding the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ in complete and utter derision.

And how abysmally arrogant can one individual be to elect herself as "the" intercessor for the nations. I find it impossible to believe that Ahmadinejad over in Iran is seeking Bynum's intercession on his behalf.

"For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers . . . They must be silenced since they are upsetting entire families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not teach". Titus 1:10-11

If anyone out there is even giving one nanosecond's thought to actually supporting Bynum in this slap in the face to Jesus, I bid you to meditate on the words of the writer to the Hebrews in the ninth chapter:

"9:1
Now even the first covenant had regulations of divine worship and the earthly sanctuary.

9:2
For there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread; this is called the holy place.

9:3
Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies,

9:4
having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant;

9:5
and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

9:6
Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship,

9:7
but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.

9:8
The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing,

9:9
which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience,

9:10
since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.

9:11
But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation;

9:12
and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

9:13
For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh,

9:14
how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

9:15
For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance . . .

9:23
Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

9:24
For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

9:25
nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.

9:26
Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

9:27
And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
9:28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."

Finally, may the God-breathed words of the Apostle Paul give many pause before they write that check:

"I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed"!
Galatians 1:1-6


Keith,
B.L.B.B!!!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

Holes in the Dike?

Until now I have been silent about the recent news coming from the false teaching front. You know, the beatdown of "Profitess" Juanita Bynum by her obvious WWE fan, soon-to-be ex-husband, "Bash-up" Thomas Weeks. The pending divorce of "Profitess" Paula White from her overshadowed husband, Randy.

Let me first state my obligatory denunciation of spousal abuse: I, in no way, condone or excuse this horrific and despicable act by any man upon his wife. When the accused is supposed to be the under-shepherd of God's people and an example it is especially disgusting.

That said, I can't help hoping that these events are but the beginnings of birth pangs for these and all the perverters of true Christianity. No, I do not hope that more of them receive physical beatings. I just hope that it becomes more and more undeniable that what they preach is truly snake oil. I hope that these wizards of Oz become exposed for the charlatans that they are. I hope that enough of their duplicitous lifestyles become such a public spectacle that their deceived minions will finally have to abandon their worship of them. A guy can dream can't he!

I wonder what would it take to make the duped flee? My mind reels at the possibilities: murder charges, arrest at a crackhouse, long established Republican voting record. But I realize that these Svengali's have their sheep so drunk on their kool-aid that even these "mistakes" would be excused.

Although these reapings within the ranks of heretics have had little effect on their followers; the unfortunate hardening of unbelievers is evident. A brief perusal of the internet will reveal the heyday unbelievers are having with these events. Among the more clever are statements like these: "if Bynum is supposed to be a 'prophetess', shouldn't she have seen this beatdown coming", "I guess Weeks never heard 'touch not my anointed and do my prohpets no harm'", "You mean to tell me God 'told' her to marry this guy, but He didn't 'tell' her to watch out for the left hook", "I guess Bynum's next book will be entitled, 'The Thrashing Floor'"(for those who aren't aware, on of Bynum's best selling books is entitled, "The Threshing Floor").

Using nothing but "worldly" wisdom, the unregenerate are able to discern the folly of these liars. And the eye of Christianity gets a little blacker. Yet, many of those professing to be "blood-washed, Holy Ghost-filled, blessed, sanctified and highly-favored children of God" remain clueless. It's a shame! It's a travesty! It's a sham! It's a mockery of a shame of a travesty of a sham!

I know, I know, I should be praying for the Bynums, Whites and their ilk. Believe me, I do. Want to hear it? Here it goes:

"Our Father, who is in heaven, hallowed be your name. Yes Lord God, dear Father, hallowed be Your name, both in us and throughout the whole world. Destroy and root out abominations, idolatry and heresy of all false teachers and fanatics who wrongly use Your name and in scandalous ways take it in vain and horribly blaspheme it. They insistently boast that they teach Your Word and the laws of the church, though they really use the devil's deceit and trickery in Your name to wretchedly seduce many poor souls throughout the world and in such persecution they believe that they render You a divine service. Dear Lord God, convert and restrain them. Convert those who are still to be converted that they with us and we with them may hallow and praise Your name, both with true and pure doctrine and with a good and holy life. Restrain those who are unwilling to be converted so that they be forced to cease from misusing, defiling and dishonoring Your holy name and from misleading your people. Amen"

Name and claim that!


Keith
B.L.B.B!!!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

The prayer comes from Martin Luther's: "A Simple Way to Pray"

Turning Triumph Into Tragedy: The "Church"'s Abandonment of the Gospel


With all my talk about T.U.L.I.P.s and R.O.S.E.s lately, I somehow forgot to provide any follow-up regarding the recent 2nd annual Stone Mountain Conference on Reformed Theology. As I mentioned in my post leading up to the conference, the theme this year was: "Recovering the Gospel: The Crucial Need of The Church". I won't dare attempt to review the entire conference for you here; but if you would like to listen to the four presentations you may listen to them at the Southwest Christian Fellowship website.

I would like to focus on the last question that was addresses by the conference speakers (Pastor Michael Leach, Pastor Robert Benson, Pastor Roger Skepple and Rev. Anthony Carter) during the final Q&A session. Yours truly submitted this question and the responses to it accurately reflect how far too many "churches" have deviated from the mission given to it by the Lord Jesus Christ. My question was this: "Many professing Christians seem to believe that since they are saved they have the Gospel in their back pocket; it is a done deal. Now they believe that they must go forth and conquer and take authority for the Kingdom. Is this valid? How should we respond"?

Pastor Leach, in his response, stated that this idea is called: "Triumphalism". It also goes under the title of "Dominionism", "Kingdom Triumphalism" and "Kingdom Dominionism". Whatever the title, it is NOT Scriptural. This idea has as it basic tenet that the church is here to take over. As part of that taking over, Christians (having gotten the business of getting saved out of the way) are to go into society and take back the territory that satan has stolen from them. We are to go back into the sectors of business, education and government and show 'em how to do things God's way. It even goes much further. This "triumphalism" even goes to the extreme of preaching that the church holds the key to Christ's return and that all of Jesus' authority has been given to the church to use on earth while He reigns in heaven.

While we certainly are to glorify God in everything aspect of our lives, the triumphalist ideal gives new meaning to the old cliche: " give a n@!#$% a rope and he'll want to be a cowboy"! Proponents of the triumphalist doctrine such as, Earl Paulk and Rod Parsley, believe that the church will one day rule the world thereby allowing Jesus to return. The saddest part of this whole mentality is that while all this conquering and taking authority over the earth is going on; very little preaching of the Gospel and the conquering of personal sin is going on. Whatever happened to "small beginnings"? There is much more to be said about "Triumphalism". Consider this article:Kingdom Triumphalism.

Even more piercing was Pastor Skepple's response. Pastor Skepple stated that those who adhere to the triumphalist doctrine are preaching a gospel; but they are not preaching THE Gospel. And according to the Apostle Paul: "even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed"(Galatians 1:8-9). Skepple warned that "any movement that doesn't allow you to say what Paul says in this passage, you know is false".

Pulling no punches, Skepple further cited Romans 5:1-4:

"Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have* peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and exalt in hope of the glory of God.And not only that, but we also exalt in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance;and perseverance, character; and character, hope."

Emphasizing that as Christians we are commanded not only "to rejoice in hope of the glory of God" but also to rejoice in tribulations, Skepple stated that "any movement that does not advocate or support exalting in tribulation, difficulty, hardship, trial, failure; any movement that does not allow for the exaltation in tribulation, you know is unbiblical . . ." Strong words . . . TRUE words!

Another unfortunate outgrowth of this triumphalist thinking has been the transformation of the church into the corporation. Churches now boast of not being churches but being businesses. Pastors have traded being under-shepherds for becoming CEO's. Inevitably, the church ceases to be house of prayer and spiritual healing and now becomes the clearinghouse of networking, finance, and economic empowerment. How quickly is the lesson of the children of Israel forgotten. In their frenzy for position and power these triumphalist followers blend the faith of Christianity with the savvy of Wall Street, just as the Israelites blended faith in Yahweh with the religions of the Canaanites. It's called syncretism and idolatry and God hates them both. So much so, that He sent His people into captivity under those they so wanted to be like!

I hear your objection, "God never rescinded His original mandate to man that he subdue the earth and have dominion over it". Nice try. First of all, triumphalism is an absolute perversion of the creation mandate. If you reread Genesis chapter one, you'll notice that this mandate is given prior to Adam's fall (it was Eve's fall to0, why do we keep leaving her out!:-)); therefore this mandate was issued to all mankind not just Christians. Every man and woman from Adam forward was supposed to be keeping this mandate. Marriage, procreation, Sabbath-keeping was intended for everybody. Christians do not have a monopoly on these things. Secondly, triumphalism is a self-glorifying theology. It desires the benefits of the Gospel without the suffering of the Gospel. It craves victory now without having to follow the steps of Jesus. Here is the truth: following Jesus inevitably leads to a crucifixion . . . ours! We claim to want to follow Christ, but when we get to the cross we suddenly want to take a detour. The Apostle Paul made it crystal clear: "For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in Him but also suffer for His sake . . ." (Phil 1:29).

We naturally want a crown without the cross, but the writer of Hebrews said,

"Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider Him who has endured such hostility by sinners against Himself, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart. You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood in your striving against sin; and you have forgotten the exhortation which is addressed to you as sons, 'MY SON, DO NOT REGARD LIGHTLY THE DISCIPLINE OF THE LORD, NOR FAINT WHEN YOU ARE REPROVED BY HIM; FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES, AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES.' It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline"?

According to Apostle Peter unjust suffering is the way to glory. The truth is, not many of us here in "persecution-free America" are worthy of it (me included).

We must return to the expository preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. True power exists nowhere else. The Gospel is THE POWER of God for salvation to everyone who believes . . . for in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, 'the just shall live by faith'". Notice, "the righteousness of God" is revealed every time the Gospel is preached. How often do you think God's righteousness should be revealed? Notice, "the just shall LIVE by faith". "Live" here is an ongoing process. "Faith" is the fuel for the just person's living. How many times should we continue to hear the Gospel, even after we have been born again? Once for every sin we commit! That ought to cover it!


Keith,
B.L.B.B!!!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

T.U.L.I.P. vs. R.O.S.E. (Part IV)


For whom did Jesus Christ die? That is the question. Did He die with no one in particular in mind? Did He just intend to put His sacred atoning blood up for grabs so that any "Joe" off the street could choose to treasure it or trash it? Or did He "foreknow", intimately know, each and every individual for whom He would make the supreme sacrifice? Did He sovereignly ordain that each person whom He foreknew would be granted the new birth and given the gift of faith? Let's look to Genesis.


In Genesis 3:15 we have what has come to be called, "the proto-evangelion". This is our LORD Yahweh's first pronouncement of the coming Messiah:

"And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."

It is evident in this passage that there are two "seeds", the "seed" of the woman (Eve) and the "seed" of the serpent (satan). For those of you who are jumping ahead and saying, "the 'seed' refers to Jesus!"; yes that is correct. But do I have to go get a Hebrew grammar text and demonstrate that "seed" in this context has a dual application? Don't test me, cause I'll do it! "Seed" refers to the woman's ultimate "seed", Jesus; and it also refers to each of the woman's offspring throughout time.

The two "seeds" from this point in Scripture forward are embroiled in an epic struggle. We observe this struggle as it is played out between: Abel and Cain, Jacob and Esau, Israel and everybody else. The "seed" of the woman being God's people and the "seed" of the serpent being those enslaved to sin and satan. I hear an objection coming, "we all are enslaved to sin and satan prior to salvation". This is true; but thanks be unto God we have received the "adoption as sons". So this "adoption" that we receive necessarily identifies us as the "seed" of the woman. Question: as with any parent who desires to adopt children, does God have the right to choose whom He will adopt and whom He will not? We find no fault in the couple who chooses to adopt child "A" over child "B". Why do we find fault if the ruler of the universe exercises the same right? The adopting couple chooses based on something they see in the child. God would find nothing in us to make us worthy of His choice, but does so based on His own sovereign will. Who chooses more wisely?

But who did Jesus die for? The "seed" of the woman or the "seed" of the serpent? The "seed" of the serpent by nature hate God. They detest His law. They would destroy Him, if they could. The Jezebels, the Manassehs, the Herods, the Neros, the Nietzsches, the Russells of history demonstrate this. Did Jesus die for them? Millions of the serpent's seed died never even having heard of Jesus? Whole barbaric civilizations came and went before Jesus was ever born and died in their sin knowing nothing of redemption. Did Jesus die for them? Could they make a "decision" for Christ never having heard of Him? What about those who were wiped out in the flood, did Jesus die for them? Those whose "every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually (Genesis 6:5)? Such are the "seed" of the serpent.

The "seed" of the woman, according to Scripture have been chosen from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). These having been regenerated by the Holy Spirit are given the gift of saving faith (Eph 2:4;8-9). These have been granted repentance (II Timothy 2:25) and then place their trust in Jesus Christ alone for the salvation of their souls. For such, and such alone, has the LORD Jesus Christ shed His precious blood.

There is also much debate over the use of words like "all", whole", and "world" in Scripture. Many point to these words and argue that they indicate that God's intent in sending Jesus to the cross was for every human being to have the opportunity to be saved. Hogwash. Have you ever said (or heard some one else say) something like this: "the whole world is ___________" Did you mean that every human being (past, present and future) was doing "____________" including yourself? And if you did, how did you know? Words like these are often axiomatic, general terms that describe a perceived overall condition. The Bible sometimes uses axioms just like we do today. Consider the following examples.

"And all the children of Israel complained against Moses and Aaron, and the whole congregation said to them, "If only we had died in the land of Egypt! Or if only we had died in this wilderness"(Numbers 14:2). Did all the children of Israel complain? The babies, Moses' wife, Moses and Aaron themselves.

Picky you say? How about this one?

"The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, "You see that you are accomplishing nothing. Look, the world has gone after Him" (John 12:19). Had the entire world gone after Jesus? Obviously the Pharisees had not gone after Him. Are they not part of the entire world? What about the ancient aborigines in Australia?

"If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you"
(John 15:19). Did the whole world hate the disciples? Did the disciples hate the disciples? Did Jesus hate the disciples?

Get the picture? Words like those above when used regarding salvation refer to every kind of people. People of every single tribe and tongue and nation; but not every single member of every tribe and tongue and nation. When people try to apply these words to every single human being they habitually forget all those who died prior to Jesus' incarnation. As listed above, these people were long dead before Jesus came. How could they have been included in the "all", the "whole", the "every" or the "world"? Even if everybody since Jesus' death is covered, that leaves out a major chunk of humanity!

Since every single human being (past, present, and future) deserves death and hell, there's no sin in that. Some receive mercy, some receive justice, no one receives injustice. If you have been saved by Jesus Christ, rejoice! You have received mercy! If you think you had anything to do with it, you'll learn better in glory!


Keith
B.L.B.B!!!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!


P.S. I highly recommend "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ" by John Owen. It's a tough read, but you will be highly blessed. Trust me! :-)

T.U.L.I.P. vs R.O.S.E.(Part III)


Let's take a look at our Lord's high priestly prayer in chapter 17 of the Gospel of John.

Just prior to His betrayal and arrest, Jesus in chapter 17 prays for Himself, His disciples and all those who will trust in Him for salvation through the disciples' teaching. Let's consider some facts about Jesus and about prayer.

Fact #1: According to John 9:31,God does not hear the prayers of sinners (except the prayer of repentance). Jesus is the perfect and sinless Son of God. Therefore, Jesus' prayers would always be heard by God.

Fact #2: According to I John 5:14, we have this confidence that if we ask anything in accordance with God's will He will hear us. Jesus clearly proclaimed that He and His father are one and that He always does the will of His Father. Therefore, God always hears His Son's prayers.

Fact #3: I John 5:15 states that if indeed God hears us in whatever we ask (according to His will), we KNOW that we have the requests that we have asked of Him. As established by fact #2 Jesus always prays according to the Father's will; therefore, Jesus (above every other being in history) most certainly obtained every request that He has ever asked of His Father.

With the above facts in mind, let us consider John17:6-9, 20, 24.

17:6 "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.

17:7 Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You.

17:8 For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me.

17:9 I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours.

17:20 "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;

17:24 Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Jesus states in His prayer that He has made known the Father's name to those whom the Father had given Him. In verse 9, Jesus make it very clear that He is only praying for these same people. In fact to avoid any confusion, He further clarifies His request by stating He is "not praying for the world but for those whom You (the Father) has given me, for they are Yours". Now, some might argue that this prayer was made soley for the disciples. I think that upon further inspection this would prove too much. According to the facts listed above, restricting this prayer to the disciples only would mean that only they would ever be saved. Jesus makes misconstruing His words nigh impossible in verse 20 when He states, "I do not ask for these (the disciples) only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word . . ."

It is apparent here that Jesus is distinguishing between two different groups of people. One group consists of His disciples and those who would trust Him because of their teaching. The other group consists of the world, i.e., everybody else. It is also apparent that this high priestly prayer is basically a prayer for the salvation of the people included in the former group. In accordance with Fact #1 (above), the Father would definitely hear this prayer of Jesus because Jesus is not a sinner. In accordance with Fact #2 (above), The Father would also hear this prayer of Jesus because it was in accordance with His will. In accordance with Fact #3 (above), Jesus would definitely obtain His desire in this prayer be cause of its adhereing to Facts #1 and #2.

Without question, I believe that each and every person who is included in the group for whom Jesus did pray are the exact same persons for whom Jesus made atonement. What about the other group, the world?

Did Jesus go to the cross and make atonement for those whom He did not even care to include in His high priestly prayer? Jesus was certainly aware of the truths expressed in the facts listed above. If He intended to atone for the world's sin also, why did He leave them out of His prayer? Surely had He intended for the world to be saved, His prayer would have cinched it.

Conversely, it follows that the atonement of the world's sin was not the Father's will. If it had been His will, Jesus could not truthfully state that He and the Father were one and that He always did what the Father did. This is so because, nowhere in Scripture does Jesus ever pray like this for the world.

Did Jesus still atone for those for whom He did not care to pray but they still somehow end up in Hell? Based on the listed facts this is impossible. The Father would have heard, agreed with and granted Jesus' request for the entire world's salvation.

Did Jesus or the Father intend for the precious blood of Jesus to be shed for those that they knew had no chance in hell of getting to heaven? For this to be the case, the Father would have to intend to waste the precious, innocent and altogether holy blood of His sinless Son to a great degree. Consider, Jesus in addtion to atoning for sin also suffered the unfettered wrath of God while on the cross. The combined weight of all the sin of mankind and the wrath of God all endured knowing that it would be wasted on the vast majority of mankind. Is man so precious in God's sight that He would treat His perfect Son's blood as such a common thing? I think not. I believe that God is victorious in everything He does. Every drop of Jesus' precious blood was effective in bringing to salvation those He intended to save. Not a single molecule of it was wasted. If His atonement is just available, and only made it possible for whoever would take Him up on it; then there was always the possibility that no one would ever take Him up on it. I'm sorry, but I just believe God thinks more of His Son than that!

Jesus also identifies who His atonement is intended for in chapter 10 of John's Gospel. One of Jesus' famous "I am" statements was the He is "the Good Shepherd".
In verse 14 He states, "I am the good shepherd. I know My own and My own know Me, just as the Father know Me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep". In verses 26-28, Jesus told some of the Jews that they did not believe Him because they were "not part of my flock". He continued to say that His sheep hear His voice and follow Him and that He gives them, His sheep, eternal life . . .

The language in these passages is very exclusive. Earlier in the chapter Jesus makes it clear that He calls His own sheep by name (v.3-4)In verse 14, who is that knows Jesus? It is His own. Who is it that Jesus lays His life down for? It is the sheep. Matthew makes it clear in his Gospel that there are sheep and there are goats. In the end the sheep go on to eternal life with God, the goats go on to eternal damnation. So, who here wants to pitch his tent on the belief that Jesus intended to atone for the goats? Again, this absolutely smacks of treating the blood of Jesus as a common thing.

In my next, and hopefully concluding, post I will tackle Genesis 3:15 and the use of the words "all", "every" and "world" in Scripture. Study up!


Keith
B.L.B.B!!!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

T.U.L.I.P vs. R.O.S.E (Part II)


Well, now comes the big one . . . the “L”. "Limited Atonement". The very words send shivers up the spines of many. To reduce the shock some have renamed this tenet as: “definite atonement”, “particular atonement”, “particular redemption” and others. The bottom line is, who did Jesus die for?

But before we explore the possible answers to that ultimate question, let’s deal with some preliminary issues. First, why did Jesus give His life on the cross in the first place? The short answer is: in order to satisfy the just penalty of death and separation from God for sin. Second, was Jesus successful in this quest? In other words, has the penalty for sin been fully and completely paid/satisfied? I hope we all will agree He most certainly has done so. Third, does their remain any portion of this payment/satisfaction yet to be paid? The Reformed response is that there is absolutely NOTHING that must be added; Jesus + 0 = Salvation. Fourth, Jesus’ death on the cross was also redemptive for the Old Testament saints due to their looking forward in faith for the then coming Messiah. Therefore, Jesus’ victory on the cross is effectual for all eras: past, present and future.

With these issues in mind, I can conceive of only three options for the scope of Jesus’ atonement:

Option “A”: Jesus died for everybody on planet Earth. This position is known as “Universalism”.

Option “B”: Jesus died to make salvation “possible” for everybody. This is a major tenet of Arminianism.

Option “C”: Jesus died to absolutely guarantee salvation for only a portion of humanity. This is a major tenet of Calvinism.

No doubt, veterans of the Calvinist/ Arminian/Universalist debate are familiar with the texts each side uses to support their position. I will not post an exhaustive list of them here, but I will list a few for the Calvinist (and therefore, correct) argument. You “Arminians” out there may feel free to provide your texts in the “comments” section and I will promptly show you your error in response. As for any “Universalists” in our midst, I must dismiss you with one simple statement from our Almighty, All-Knowing Savior, “I tell you, many will come from the east and west and recline at the table with Abraham , Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth”. (Matthew 8:11-12). That doesn’t sound like salvation to me!

Matthew 1:21 states in regard to Jesus that, “ . . .He will save His people from their sins”. I derive two conclusions from this statement from the inerrant, infallible Word of God.

1) Jesus, being sovereign and invincible God, cannot fail in anything He attempts. If indeed He intended to save everyone and some one ends up unsaved; then Jesus has failed in this thing which He has attempted. But that is impossible because He is the sovereign and invincible God. Therefore, Jesus did not intend to save everyone.

2) If indeed, He will save His people from their sins and some people end up unsaved; then all people cannot possibly be His people. Therefore, Jesus did not intend to save everyone.

The Arminian will often point out II Peter 3:9 in response to verses like Matthew 1:21. This verse states: “The Lord is not slow to fulfill His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance”. There are a couple of issues which must be understood with this passage. First of all, who are the “you”,the “any” and the "all" referred to in the verse? Speculation is unnecessary for who the "you" are as the answer is provided in the very first verse of Peter’s letter. In verse 1, Peter addresses those for whom his instructions are intended: “To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours . . .” The “you” of chapter 3 verse 9 are these same people (and consequently all people throughout time) who have obtained this faith, no one else. The “any” in verse 9 has a referent, that referent is the “you” of the same verse. God is not willing that any (of “you”, you who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours, you of all eras) should perish . . . The "all", consequently, are of those referred to by the "you". Peter is quite simply addressing true Christians in this passage. And God will not allow true Christians to perish.

Second, there is the matter of God’s not “willing” that any should perish. On the surface it might be assumed that since God is not “willing” that any perish, then none should perish. Well, that leads us back to “universalism” which is patently false (previous discussion on Matthew 8:11-12). So there must be some caveat regarding God’s will. Dr. R.C. Sproul delineates this caveat for us in his, “Chosen by God”:

“In the first place we must understand that the Bible speaks of the will of God in more than one way. For example, the Bible speaks of what we call God's sovereign efficacious will. The sovereign will of God is that will by which God brings things to pass with absolute certainty. Nothing can resist the will of God in this sense. By his sovereign will he created the world. The light could not have refused to shine.

The second way in which the Bible speaks of the will of God is with respect to what we call his preceptive will. God's preceptive will refers to his commands, his laws. It is God's will that we do the things he mandates. We are capable of disobeying this will. We do in fact break his commandments. We cannot do it with impunity. We do it without his permission or sanction. Yet we do it. We sin.

A third way the Bible speaks of the will of God has reference to God's disposition, to what is pleasing to him. God does not take delight in the death of the wicked. There is a sense in which the punishment of the wicked does not bring joy to God. He chooses to do it because it is good to punish evil. He delights in the righteousness of his judgment but is “sad” that such righteous judgment must be carried out. It is something like a judge sitting on a bench and sentencing his own son to prison.

Let us apply these three possible definitions to the passage in 2 Peter. If we take the blanket statement, “God is not willing that any should perish,” and apply the sovereign efficacious will to it, the conclusion is obvious. No one will perish. If God sovereignly decrees that no one should perish, and God is God, then certainly no one will ever perish. This would then be a proof text not for Arminianism but for universalism. The text would then prove too much for Arminians.

Suppose we apply the definition of the preceptive will of God to this passage? Then the passage would mean that God does not allow anyone to perish. That is, he forbids the perishing of people. It is against his law. If people then went ahead and perished, God would have to punish them for perishing. His punishment for perishing would be more perishing. But how does one engage in more perishing than perishing? This definition will not work in this passage. It makes no sense.

The third alternative is that God takes no delight in the perishing of people. This squares with what the Bible says elsewhere about God's disposition toward the lost. This definition could fit this passage. Peter may simply be saying here that God takes no delight in the perishing of anyone.”

Wow, I know this is a lot to chew on. So why don’t I break here and let you digest this. I ‘ll see you next time with T.U.L.I.P. vs. R.O.S.E. (Part III)!


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans Baby!!!

T.U.L.I.P. vs. R.O.S.E.


Well, it's good to be back! In case you hadn't noticed, I've been away for a while. I have recently returned from a wonderful vacation ( or as they say these days, "vay-kay") with my family. The high point (figuratively and literally) was our visit to
Mt. Rushmore in South Dakota. Beautiful country out there and quite a thrill to see the monument up close and personal. For any of my readers in the Black Hills area, "thanks for your hospitality"

Back to cases . . . my pastor, Michael Leach, and I are currently discussing the "Doctrines of Grace" on our radio program "The Glory of the Gospel" ( Sunday mornings @ 9:30 on WNIV-970AM in Atlanta or on the 'net @ www.wniv.com). Of course this is still a heavily debated issue and we certainly cannot fully exhaust the topic on the radio. Over the next couple of posts, however, I would like to take a shot at the two most contested members of the T.U.L.I.P., Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement.

As you may know the chief question concerning the Doctrines of Grace is: how does a person receive salvation. Without going into all the history of how they came about, I will jump ahead to the doctrines themselves ( "TULIP: The Five Points of Calvinism in the Light of Scripture" by Duane Edward Spencer is a good concise history of the meetings that lead to the development of the doctrines). Here are the five points as described by the acronym:

T=total depravity
U=unconditional election
L=limited atonement
I=irresistible grace
P=perseverance of the saints.

As I stated, the most hotly debated members of the T.U.L.I.P. are the "U" and the "L". First the "U". The fact that God elects people to salvation should be rather plain. I can't list all the verses here, but I would challenge you to look up the words "elect" and "election" in a concordance and count for yourself how many times the people of God are referred to in this manner. So the real issue is, on what basis does God elect people to salvation. It is the testimony of Scripture and therefore the Reformed position that God elects individuals to salvation unconditionally and according to His own good pleasure. Opponents of this position generally argue that God foresees something in the individual that prompts Him to elect that individual to salvation. Basically the argument goes that God, with His omniscience, looks into the future and observes that the person will eventually be receptive to the Gospel. Or that God foresees great promise in an individual and on that basis elects the individual. These arguments are really a misinterpretation of Romans chapter 8, where the "golden chain of salvation" is described by the Apostle Paul. The misinterpretation centers on the meaning of the word "foreknew".

Thanks to the "Open Theists" among us, God's omniscience has become doubted by many professing Christians. But for the remaining faithful, God's knowledge of ALL things, past present and future, PERFECTLY is undisputed. However, in the case of Romans 8, it is not God's knowledge of things or events that is described. It is God's intimate knowledge of PERSONS that is extolled. Just as Adam's "knowing" his wife Eve leading to the birth of Cain and Abel, portrays intimate love; God's foreknowledge of those He has elected to salvation portrays intimate love of them. These verses do not describe God as foreseeing any particular action by His elected persons. They describe Him as intimately loving these person long before the foundations of the earth and having purposed to save them even before they have been born. As for any future promise they might have or good they might do, how could that possibly figure into God's decision? What do they have that God has not given them? Any promise they have is given to them by God, so how can that help them get elected? Jonah chapter 2 makes clear, salvation is ALL of God.

The great American ideal of fairness and equality leads many to ask, why doesn't God elect everyone to salvation. "In the interest of fairness; if God elects one, He should elect all". Don't ask God to be fair, you wouldn't want to see God when He's fair. Fairness demands that every human being that has ever walked the earth go to Hell. Don't pass "Go", don't collect 100 dollars, go directly to Hell! We are justly condemned sinners, God owes salvation to NO ONE. That He saves anyone is a testimony to His mercy and grace. Perhaps the following diagram will help illustrate:

Some sinners sent to Hell= JUSTICE/NO MERCY
Some sinners are saved= MERCY/NO JUSTICE
No sinner receives INJUSTICE

Justice requires a good judge to punish sin, God is THE good Judge. God is not embarrassed by His wrath and He is glorified by His perfect justice. He sovereignly chooses those in whom His glorifying, righteous wrath will be displayed. Mercy requires love and forbearance, God is love. God's love is glorified in His perfect mercy by granting pardon to undeserving sinners of His sole choice via the shed blood of His sinless son, Jesus Christ. No man will ever be able to accuse God of injustice. And no man will be able to boast that God chose him because of anything within himself.

I think that the main reason that so many can't come to grips with T.U.L.I.P. these days is that far too many of us subscribe to another acronym: R.O.S.E.

R= restricted sovereignty
O= obnoxious egoism
S= Sick in trespasses
E= extreme equality

As I've said before, most professing Christians will claim that God is sovereign. But for some odd reason, when it comes to our salvation (in their minds) God restricts His sovereignty and hopes and prays that people will "make a decision for Christ". Evidently, there are some people who God desperately wants to save, but He is helpless unless they exert their "free will" to accept Him. Sounds more like Sally Fields to me, "You like me, you really like me"!!!

It can only be Obnoxious Egoism that makes the creature believe that the creator would not overrule their hell bound will in order to save it. The constant refrain that states, "God will not violate your will" is blatantly false. Ask Abimelech, who willed to violate Sarah, but whose will God violated (Genesis 13). Ask Jonah who willed to go to Tarshish, but God violated his will and landed in Nineveh. Have you ever prayed for someone to be saved? What are you asking God to do, but to violate their will?

Contrary to the report of the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 2, which states that prior to salvation we are "DEAD" in trespasses and sins; R.O.S.E. subscribers must only believe that we are only Sick in trespasses and sins. Because the last time I checked, dead men don't do anything. They can't move , they can't breath, they can't eat and they certainly can't CHOOSE! The Bible, however, reports that God said to Adam and Eve that in the day they ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil the would surely DIE. Not that they would get really sick, but still be able to reach out. Not that they'd get really sick, but would improve. No, they would die. And everyone that would come after them would be born spiritually dead. Unresponsive to God, out of fellowship with God, unable to please God. Not choosing the good, not knowing the good, not wanting the good. Therefore, if anything good was going to come from them or be chosen by them, God would have to bring them back to spiritual life FIRST=REGENERATION.

Extreme Equality suggests, once again, that if God offers this wonderful gift of salvation to one of us, He is somehow obligated to offer it to us all. That's as american as hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet. God is SOVEREIGN. God would be just to send us all to Hell and start all over. Get over yourself.

God is the author and finisher of our salvation.


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!

Recovering the Gospel: The Crucial Need for the Church


I would like to take this opportunity to invite you to the

2nd Annual Stone Mountain
Conference on Reformed Theology


Borrowing on the theme of the Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology, I invite you to join us at Grace Presbyterian Church, 650 Rowland Road in Stone Mountain, Georgia. The dates for the conference are Friday, July 27 through Saturday, July 28.

The Speakers will be: Pastor Roberts Benson, of Southwest Christian Fellowship in Atlanta, Georgia, Rev. Anthony Carter, Associate Pastor of Southwest Christian Fellowship and author of "On Being Black and Reformed", Pastor Roger Skepple, of Berean Bible Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia and
Pastor Michael Leach, of All Saints Redeemer Church in Decatur, Georgia.

The theme for this year's conference is: Recovering the Gospel: The Crucial Need for the Church. There are many "gospels" being preached today; but the glorious Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is largely neglected. These thoroughly Biblical expositors will demonstrate to you that no gospel but the Gospel of Jesus Christ will lead His church into the only kind of worship He is seeking . . . worship in spirit and truth. It is only this gospel that will draw men to the Savior.

Please join us for this important conference. For further information and directions please contact Pastor Leach at (678)849-0048. You can also e-mail yours truly at
sound-doctrine@myway.com

Be there, or be Arminian!


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

The Subtle Sinfulness of Silence


I knew when I began publishing this blog that my comments about heretical teachers, aberrant theologies, etc. would ruffle a lot of feathers. I expected to encounter fierce opposition and that many would be offended by what I have to say. I can honestly state, however, that it is not my intention to offend. It is my hope that someone, somewhere is given pause to think about what their being taught and then to move in a God-honoring direction. One of the unfortunate side-effects of "truth" is frequently "offense".

Of greater concern to me, is the prospect of having to stand before God one day and having to explain why I was silent. Having to explain why I said nothing when I observed some of those very near and dear to me walking toward a cliff. I firmly believe that my salvation is a done deal and that my sinful silence would be forgiven; but let's just say that I want to be able to cast as many crowns before the feet of my Savior as is possible.

That said, I would like for you to consider a few scenarios and honestly answer for yourself . . . what would you do?

Imagine, your mother needs serious medical treatment. She selects a physician whom you know to have been misdiagnosing illnesses, prescribing improper medications and has been successfully sued for malpractice multiple times. Would you warn your mother? She really likes this doctor. She really trusts this doctor. What would you do?

Imagine, your brother receives a large sum of money and decides to invest in the stock market. Your brother chooses a stockbroker whom you know to be entirely disreputable. He charges exorbitant fees for his services, all his clients have lost large sums of money while he continually prospers greatly. Would you warn your brother?

Imagine, your sister falls in love with the man of her dreams. They become engaged and begin to plan their wedding. One night, your staying at a hotel and you hear the unmistakable sounds of a loud sexual encounter going on in the room next to you. When you leave the next morning, you observe your sister's fiance exiting that same room with another woman (or man, you pick). He looks at you winks and says, "C'mon, dog, you know the deal"! Would you tell your sister?

I'm not the "Amazing Kreskin", but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that in each of the scenarios, you would be singing like a canary. So why is that where health, money and romance is concerned we feel duty bound to reveal the truth; but where the more eternally consequential effects of false teaching are concerned, we suddenly clam up? Why are we not concerned about being perceived as judgmental, arrogant and holier-than-thou in those scenarios; but just want to live and let live when a person's walk with Christ is endangered?

I recently received a couple of answers to this sort of question. One person said that they would pray for the person and wait for God to reveal to them that their place of worship was apostate. Then they hoped that the person would see it for themselves and leave. Let's apply this solution to the scenarios that I have just presented. Praying is absolutely necessary and should be the first step; but are you going to tell me that as your mother is being prepped for surgery by Dr. Hamhands, all you are going to do is pray?! Please don't tell your brother that you prayed for him as he cashes in his son's college fund to pay his mortgage because Dewey, Cheatum and Howe landed him in the poor house! And after your sister contracts AIDS from her philandering husband, I'd keep that "I prayed you would find out" stuff on the down-low!

As bad as these results are, the result of failing to speak up to our brothers and sisters who are under the thrall of false teaching and counterfeit christianity is far more detrimental. A false teacher, by definition, teaches falsehood and a house built on the sands of falsehood will surely collapse. And unfortunately, no one who has been ensnared by these lies can point their finger at the teacher on the day of judgment. They failed to study to show themselves approved and they will reap what they have sown. But you said nothing.

It was also suggested that since the person is "saved" it doesn't matter that he is under false teaching because he's going to Heaven anyway. My response to this is always, "are you sure"? I mean you have to be omniscient (God) to rest in this assumption. It was further suggested that, if a person walks down the isle and has the Gospel explained to him and he receives Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior, then he is "saved". My answer to this is, "possibly". It depends on which Jesus he "received". If he received the Jesus of the prosperity gospel, or the Jesus who according to Creflo Dollar was not God is he really "saved"? These are false Jesuses and a false Jesus cannot save, truly. If, however, they somehow trust in the Biblical Jesus Christ (how that is possible in places that barely mention Him is truly a miracle) they are now obliged to forsake false teaching! A "profession" doesn't save anyone. A life of obedience and trust in the person and work of the Biblical Jesus Christ is evidence of our salvation. To paraphrase "Forrest Gump": "saved is as saved does" (see James 2:14-26).

In my humble opinion, there are four main reasons why a person who knows better would remain silent in the face of a loved one's peril.

1. Fear of losing friends/relations.

You might remember the old cliche': "If you love something set it free. If it comes back, then it's yours. If it doesn't come back, then it never was". As mushy as it sounds, I believe that it is true. If you are not allowed to openly express your heart and concerns to someone whom you call "friend", I suspect the term "friend" has been misapplied in this particular arrangement. It is said that "friendship is essential to the soul". Can it be denied that trust is essential to friendship?

The stance I have taken has caused major arguments with members of my family; it has even loosened bonds with those who once pledged that nothing could ever do so. I would like to think that if the situation was reversed they would love me enough to warn me, regardless of my reaction. The Word of God says to do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Matthew 7:12). I can sleep well at night knowing that I have.

If someday I am shown to have been wrong about the deeds I have charged any of these teachers with, I will be the first to repent and apologize. If the future proves me to be correct, my door will always stand open to them.


2. Fear of confrontation.

Going along just to get along. I don't have a lot of sympathy for this situation. Let's just say I'm happy that Martin Luther King didn't suffer with this problem. I'm glad Muhammad Ali didn't have this problem. I'm really glad Jesus didn't have this problem.

Jude urges us to "contend earnestly for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). Paul instructs us to ". . . rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not devoting themselves to . . . the commands of people who turn away from the truth" (Titus 1:13-14).Peter warns us to ". . .take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose you own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (II Peter 3:17-18).

"For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind" (II Timothy 1:7). Go grow a backbone!

3. Individualism.

We as the body of Christ have lost our understanding of community, the communion of the saints. An "I've got mine, you better go get yours" mentality pervades. We are saved individually, but we are ingrafted into a shared vine. We are our brother's keeper. Paul vividly illustrated that we all are to function together and if one of us is damaged, we all are damaged (I Corinthians 12:12-26).

4. Lack of love.

Oh, I can hear the jaws tightening already. "Who are you to suggest that I don't love my family/friends"! Hold on there, Tex! Don't get your drawers in a wad! As shown in the previous scenarios, "Love" compels us to act in the best interest of those we love. Love compels us to protect those we love. Love sacrifices it own comfort for the sake of others. Love weathers the misunderstandings and anger directed at it. If your "love" is lacking these qualities, maybe your heavy on emotional love and a little light on volitional love, agape love.

"Faithful are the wounds of a friend,
But the kisses of an enemy are deceitful". Proverbs 27:6

---------------

Is this silence sin? Here's the bottom line, the Word of God states that to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin (James 4:17). We really have no excuse for our silence. Are we going to repeat Adam's folly in the Garden of Eden? Are we just going to stand there knowing the commands of God and say nothing while the serpent seduces our friends and family? That's how we all got into this mess in the first place!

"Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman: If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul. But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand." Ezekiel 33:2-6


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

All the Homers in the House Say, "D'oooh"!!!


My friend, the good Reverend Anthony Carter ( www.cyreneministries1.blogspot.com ) put me to shame recently. He was so kind as to mention the radio program that Pastor Michael Leach and myself host every Sunday morning on WNIV-970am in Atlanta. Thanks, Tony!

The name of the program is, "The Glory of the Gospel". Mike and I are striving to join the effort to bring the glorious gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ back to the forefront of American Christian consciousness . . . Help!!! I say that Tony shamed me because he has helped to publicize us when I have failed to do so. We've been on for a month now and I have said nothing about it on my very own blog. D'oh!!!

So at last, I invite you to tune to "The Glory of the Gospel" with Michael Leach and Keith Tolbert every Sunday morning from 9:30am to 10:00am on 970am, WNIV. If you live outside of the Atlanta area you can catch us on the web on www.wniv.com during the program. We hope to also be available at oneplace.com (anytime) in the near future.

I'd also like to acknowledge Christian rap artists, "Christcentric". They are three reformed Christian brothers who are matching sound (and I mean, SOUND) Christian doctrine with Christ-exalting, creative hip-hop (something your "Boogie Down Bronx" blogger can truly appreciate). Their thought-provoking song, "Sufficiency of Scripture" will serve as our opening and closing theme for "The Glory of the Gospel" in the very near future. Please visit the "Christcentric" website and check out their music and their story.

www.christcentric.net/main.html

Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

Bringing Knives to a Gunfight


I recently visited a relatively new website, The Black Church Page www.blackchurchpage.com . I guess you might call this the Wal-Mart of online "black" church information. You name it, you can find some info about it at this site. Unfortunately, like many "black" churches this site is heavy on culture and light on Scripture.

Desiring to understand the foundation on which this site was built, I naturally visited the site's "About Us" page. I could not help but to shake my head in disbelief at what I found. You know that I had to get in touch with "The Black Church Page". Here is my e-mail . . .

" Dear Mr. Matthews,

My name is Keith L. Tolbert. I am a newcomer to your website. I was struck by the opening paragraph of the "about us" section . . .

'God implanted into the spirit of Alphonse D. Matthews long ago that the answers to the socio-economic problems that exist with The African American community are within the African American church. The answers to unemployment, wealth creation, education, poverty, drug abuse all are within the walls of the African American church.'

I have always heard that the best way to chop down a tree is not by cutting off the branches, one by one; but by chopping it down at the trunk where the whole tree will fall down. Why is solving 'socio-economic problems' viewed to be the most pressing need in the 'black' church? It is plainly evident, according to Scripture, that the most pressing need for the "black" church as well as the body of Christ as a whole (where does the Bible ever address a 'black' church?) is to deal with that which so easily entangles us all . . . sin. "Sin" is the tree, our 'socio-economic' problems, et al, are but branches on this tree.

All of us (black, white, yellow, red, etc.), even the saved among us, are still encumbered with a sin nature (indewlling sin). And until this root issue is confronted by the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ, the tree (sin) will live and the branches will grow back two for every one you chop off. When will we, especially the 'black' church, understand that our temporal issues such as racism, poverty, education, equal opportunity, etc. are just that, TEMPORAL. As Christians, we are to be fervently mindful of eternal verities. As we deal with the true culprit behind our temporal troubles, we become less vulnerable to them.

The truth is we may not overcome most of these temporal issues in this life. Contrary to popular teaching, the Kingdom of God has not been consumated yet and this life is filled with tribulations and trials. All due to our own sinfulness. The Gospel of Jesus Christ ALONE is the antidote for all of this. And there is less and less of this being taught today in the church, yes even the 'black church.

And when I say the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I do not only mean Jesus' death, burial and resurrection that is only part of the story which is all too easily romanticized. I additionally mean Jesus' sinless life that fulfilled the requirements of God's holy law which qualified Jesus as a perfect sacrifice. I mean His selfless suffering in our stead that we now (as was the apostle Paul) are blessed (yes, BLESSED) to share in (see Phillipians 1:29; Romans 8:17 etc.). His current reign and intercession at the right hand of the Father on behalf of His people.

We often acknowledge that this life is brief and but a vapor; but we still cling to it as if it were all there is. Should not our attitude, and consequently the message of websites like this one, be like that of Paul's who taught us in ll Corinthians 4:7-18 that 'though we are afflicted, we are not crushed. Though we are perplexed, we are not driven to despair. Though persecuted, we are not forsaken; struck down but not destroyed. That this "slight momentary affliction is PREPARING for us an ETERNAL (not temporal) weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look NOT to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are UNSEEN are ETERNAL'.

Since Jesus' ascension back to the Father the church has endured great suffering for the cause of the Gospel. Our brothers and sisters in Christ (not just black folks) have endured being fed to lions, burnings, disembowelment, and relentless torture for THIS cause. Not for "socio-economic" empowerment. I think that it is past time for this shallow, Christ-betraying selfish hew and cry for material health and prosperity. Jesus made it crystal clear that these things make entering His Kingdom
difficult (Matthew 19:23), please consider why we should play up a mindset that only makes our ultimate goal of living with our LORD and Savior, eternally, more difficult.

I think you would be hard pressed to confirm anywhere in Scripture where the goal of the church has been to remedy 'unemployment, wealth creation, education, poverty' and 'drug abuse'. The clear purpose of the church, biblically, is to train God's people in holiness and righteousness and to facilitate their maturing in Jesus Christ and the Christian faith. Success in these areas will necesarily lead to a Christ-like response to the problems you have cited.

Pleae don't misunderstand me, I am not suggesting that we show no concern about these problems. But if any of these issues of socio-economic problems are to be lessened in this lifetime, it will NOT be by focusing the 'branches', we absolutely must deal with the "trunk" continuously. You have quite an opportunity to make a difference with this website. Please do not squander it by joining in with the 'popular' nonsense that is being promoted by far too many pulpits ( black and white) today. We must stand on the firm foundation of Jesus Christ and His Word. Not what itching ears want to hear.

He who has an ear . . . "

To this Matthews replied . . .

"Keith Tolbert,

I appreciate you sharing your viewpoint, however with all due respect this is misdirected. Unless your view is one of I am either lying on God, or I am mistaken about what He shared with me...You would have to take this up with God as to why He gave me this information.

If you do feel that I am lying, or that I am mistaken, then you should pray me and/or this site.

But based on the fruit of this site, and where He is currently taking us, I am going to hold on to what I believe He told me.

Thank you for your comments,
Alphonse D. Matthews
The Black Church Page"

Now, I have no problem with Mr. Matthews sticking to the direction he has chosen; but I would have appreciated a response to the BIBLICAL objections that I raised. Do you notice how he immediately retreated to a self-defensive posture? I didn't accuse him of lying on God or lying at all. I merely challenged him to do what Scripture tells us to do anytime we receive an impression on our "spirit". I John 4:1 admonishes us to "test the spirits". Had Mr. Matthews done this, I believe there would have been a chance that he might have discerned much of what I said to him in my e-mail.

I replied to Mr. Matthews reply with this . . .

"Mr. Matthews,

I am in no way accusing you of lying on God. In fact, I'm not accusing you of anything at all. I just wanted to express my hope that your website would be bold enough to take the less traveled path of refusing to cater to the least common denominators among man: self and materialism. I wanted to both encourage you and prove to you that there is in the 'black' church a market for the strong meat of God's word, sound Biblical exposition and a Christianity that is not characterized by earthly-mindedness. Please do not leave us out of your considerations for the content of this website.

Thanks for reading, considering and responding to my comments. May God bless all of your Christ-centered endeavors!"

And . . .

"Mr. Matthews,

Upon further reflection on your response to my e-mail, I just wanted to ask you what you meant by my viewpoint being "misdirected". I am positive that I presented a purely Biblical viewpoint which was worthy of consideration.

Your response addressed none of the Biblical points I made and seemed to immediately retreat to a defensive position. Please understand that my comments were not an attack upon your website. As I stated in my previous reply, I only hope that you will also consider the needs of the full spectrum of believers within the "black" church community. Such as those who hold to a Reformed, Christ-centered, Biblical perspective of the historic Christian faith; rather than only the man-centered, materialistic, emotion-driven variety. Or should we look for another . . ."

To which he replied . . .

"Mr. Tolbert,

The way your email was presented, it basically stated that the direction that I received from God was not correct. You are entitled to your opinion, but this one you would have to take up with God; not me. (Misdirected)

-Alphonse"

O.K., maybe I got a little dig in there with the "the man-centered, materialistic, emotion-driven variety." thing; but if this website wants to be the site for the "black" church, it ought to "represent" for all of the "black" church! You betta reckanize!

It seems that the Bible is off-limits at this website. So, if you are in the mood for more "Christianity-lite" please visit "The Black Church Page". Be warned, if you want to be armed for a deeper walk with Jesus, these guys can only give you a knife for a gunfight.


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!

HOW NOT TO WALK THE PLANK (The one in our eye, that is)


I'm still being enthralled by Jeremiah Burroughs this week. Although I had completed my reading of his, "A Treatise on Earthly-Mindedness" a week ago, I felt compelled to read it once again. This time I observed a stern warning for those of us who are reformed and are strongly drawn to apologetics. So for all you "word-faith" fans and "little gods" out there, we reformed folk do turn the radar on ourselves!

In chapter five of this superbly insightful book (Nine Proofs of Earthly-Mindedness), Burroughs warns us to beware that "through some predominant lust for something else, a man may seem to despise some earthly thing". Basically, he is saying that a man's apparent despising of one sin may actually be due to a lust for another rather than a true hatred for the first. For example, a man may apparently despise the love of money but only because he doesn't want to be generous. This, according to Burroughs, is also a proof of earthly-mindedness.

Burroughs uses Isaiah 13:17 for a text that illustrates this principle. Scripture, here, describes the Medes as a people that did "not regard silver, and as for gold they shall not delight in it", apparently the love of money was not a problem for them. God, however, still describes them as wicked and heathen and having no grace in them at all. Burroughs elaborates, "Some men think it is through the work of grace because they are above the base covetousness they see in other men. They do not regard silver and gold, or getting all for themselves and they despise those men who are of such a base, covetous way". Burroughs states that this makes a man no better than a Mede. Although he may disregard silver and gold, it is only because his spirit entertains a different lust.

Herein, I believe, lies the stern warning for those of us who are reformed and love apologetics. Is our readiness to hold others' feet to the fire only a means to deflect further investigation of ourselves? Is our love for sound doctrine and biblical accuracy somehow a disguise for our own sin? In other words, have we removed the plank in our own eyes in order that we may see more clearly to remove the speck in another's eye? This calls for much self-examination.

Burroughs provides a strong test. He challenges us with this: "Can you say this, you who seem to scorn covetousness, and hate such base sordidness as you see in some men, "The LORD has made me to know what communion with Himself in Jesus Christ means; and since that time I bless God that my heart has been above all these earthly things. And that's the reason that I look upon all these earthly things as vanity, because the LORD has revealed to me those excellent and glorious thing that are infinitely above these earthly things . . . where lies the chief joy and sorrow of men's hearts? What is it that most troubles your heart? Is it the loss of the light of God's face or the loss of an estate; the loss of a voyage, or the commission of a sin? What's your chief joy, your profiting from the Word or gaining from a bargain? You have come to the Word and, sometimes, God has there revealed some truth to you, and you have profited. Can you go away rejoicing because God has made you to know His Law?" This is indeed a stern test. May all who endeavor to decry the abuses of the modern pulpit first pass it before ever uttering a single criticism.

The Apostle Paul instructs us through Titus to "rebuke them sharply (false teachers), that they may be sound in the faith . . ."(Titus 1:13) and this is not to be disregarded. However, the Apostle James also warns, "My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment". For,with the same measure that we mete, so shall it be meted unto us!

There. Now, having fulfilled my contractual obligation to be self-effacing let us return to the business at hand; that Benny Hinn is a . . .


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans Baby!

THE ANTIDOTE FOR "WORD-FAITH" THEOLOGY


Recently, it has been my privilege to read another convicting and growth-provoking book from one of the most piercingly insightful and most beloved writer/pastors of the English Puritan era; Jeremiah Burroughs (1599-1646). In his "A Treatise on Earthly-Mindedness", Burroughs accurately diagnoses what remains a blight on Christianity today. We have often heard the cliche that someone can be so "heavenly-minded that they are no earthly-good". I think that it is safe to say that much of Christianity, especially that sector that subscribes to "word-faith" theology (oxymoron), need not have any fear of that because the lion share of the popular preaching and teaching in the American church is firmly rooted and grounded in the dust of the earth.

In the foreword, Dr. R. C. Sproul (founder of Ligonier Ministries) is quite forthright about his low expectations for the reception of this venerated book by today's Christians. He states, "My guess is that few people will ever pick up this book and read it. Its theme and content are too alien to modern Christianity. Twentieth-century Christians have been seduced by a world-view that makes the thrust of this book seem archaic. It simply doesn't fit our times . . . Our thinking is earth-bound . . . Gone is the Biblical doctrine of the soul. There is much concern about self-image, self-esteem, and self-gratification. Yet, in all this, the 'self' itself has become a philosophical conundrum."

In focusing on only a portion of one verse of Scripture, " . . . who minds earthly things . . ." (Phil. 3:19), Burroughs sets out to defend his doctrinal statement: "The great difference between a wicked man and a godly man is that one minds earthly things and the other has his conversation in heaven". Burroughs explains that in the preceding 17th verse, the Apostle Paul argues that the earthly-minded are " . . . enemies of the cross of Christ, and they make their belly their god, and they mind earthly things". His defense of this point is irrefutably expounded throughout the remainder of the treatise. For the purposes of this post, I wish to focus on that part of this treatise that, I believe, is particularly contradictory of the far too popular "word-faith" teaching that is infesting the minds of far too many professed Christians today.

In chapter six of his treatise, Burroughs presents "Seven Reasons of Men's Earthly-Mindedness". Reason #4 gives us the first ingredient of the antidote for "word-faith" teaching, " . . . these things of the earth have a fair show in the flesh. Under this head, Burroughs directly addresses what drives false teachers. Quoting Galatians 6:12, Burroughs explains that there will be men who dress themselves luxuriously and having handsome features will be splendid to the eyes of all who behold them. These, he says , are false teachers who desire to make a "fair show in the flesh". They take satisfaction in having fine estates and appealing apparel and all creature comforts. They, according to Burroughs, are here enemies of the cross of Christ. They think suffering for Christ, poverty, or disgrace looks bad. But those who would make a fair show in the flesh and be somebody in this world, forsake the truths of God and seek to provide for themselves in the things of the flesh (pp. 70-71). This was first published in 1649 people! Same dog, same tricks!

What do the false teachers of our day, (the Dollars, the Harrison-Bryants, the Jakeses) all have in common? Among other things, is it not a virtual deluge of temporal and material goods. The very things that Jesus warned us would make entering His kingdom all the more difficult. I guess these guys are willing to take the risk after all they are spiritual giants; so they must be able to handle it.
Of course, they always frame they're riches as a means to demonstrate what Jesus can do for His people. Yeah, so that whole fulfilling the law, being savagely beaten, being nailed to a cross and dying thing was just so we could have the wealth of the world! Which is going to be destroyed anyway. How could I have missed that? Talk about rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic!

In chapter seven,"Eleven Considerations to Take the Mind of Earthly-mindedness" (pp.73-75),Burroughs deals another death-blow to "word-faith" teaching. He says, "First consider this: if you could possess all the thing of the earth that your mind and heart are upon, there is still not enough good in them as to undo the evil of the least sin, not the least sin of thought . . . if you had but one sinful thought, there is more evil in that than there is good in all that you shall get all the days of your life". He further explains that if this is so it concerns us rather to have our minds on how to avoid sin, how to get the evil of sin removed, and how to mortify (kill) our sin. In other words we much too concerned with the wrong problem. It's not about to get back the stuff that "satan" has stolen from us (which usually translates to material things in "word-faith" circles); it's about dealing with our all too present and persistent sin.

A second consideration under this heading is this: "the chief things that are in the earth have been the portion of reprobates (the unsaved) heretofore and are to this day, and shall be the portion of multitudes whom God hates and has set apart to glorify His infinite justice eternally". The reprobate has his reward now, in finite time. Our treasures in Heaven are eternal and without regret. God has made man for higher things than the things of this earth. Consider, these earthly treasures are the treasures of a fallen creation. Of how much greater worth are eternal treasures. Here's a four-letter word for you: delayed gratification.

Consider what Jesus had done, he took man's nature and died for man. As Burroughs exclaims, "Surely there must be some other manner of things that are the fruit of the purchase of the blood of Christ than the things of the earth". He says, of all the creatures God has made on earth we are the only ones capable of knowing Him. God has given us a nature that is capable of conversing with Him. therefore there are infinitely higher things that God has made us for than to have meat, drink, and clothes just to live here for awhile and enjoy creature features. Doubtless meat drink and clothes are necessary but when we live for the material, the eternal suffers greatly. Ask the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:1-30).

I would ask my "word-faith" believing friends to consider who is truly the focus of this atheology. Is it truly Yahweh, or is it Yourway. Yahweh is eternal. Yourway leads to death. "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death" (Proverbs 14:12).


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!

A Lil’ Somethin’-Somethin’ for the Ladies (one in particular)


Dear Readers,

I have to venture out on a slightly different path with this post. Please allow me a little unburdening time as I deal with the 800-pound gorilla in my living room. Maybe those of you who have had their daily dose of theology and doctrine will be interested in a little “nuts-n-bolts,” “rubber-meets-the-road” Christianity.

I confess to you that there is currently trouble in my home. That’s right, Mr. “In Submission to Sovereignty” and his spare rib are at odds. Of course, I won’t go into detail (c’mon, I hardly even know you!), but I just want to comment on some analysis I received from a mutual friend of ours.

Among many other valuable insights our friend said to me, “Well, y’know Keith, Lisa has been through a lot with you . . .” That little chestnut sent me into a firestorm of self examination. I hope some of what I have gleaned will give some of my female readers (if I have any) some food for thought when dealing with the strange creature that God has made called, “husband.”

"Y'know, Keith, Lisa has been through a lot with you . . ." Well, yeah! I make no claim as to being the easiest guy to live with. I’m argumentative, I’m opinionated and I’m rarely wrong. Gimme a break I’m a Marine, I’m Reformed and I am Blanton W. Tolbert’s son fer cryin' out loud! I also have a very clear sense of right and wrong. It seems to me that the “wrong” way always seems to lead to regret and pain in the end. So I figure, “hey, just for spits and giggles, let’s just try it the ‘right’ way, God’s way.” Yes, He’s a little slow sometimes for our taste, but I say what the heck, let’s give Him a crack at it.

One thing that I have pretty much settled in my mind is that the Bible is true. I know that “truth” is a very fluid concept in our postmodern times; however, for my purposes “truth” is objective, it is absolute and it is epitomized in God’s Word, the Bible. Now, call me “foolish,” but I hold all professing Christians to the same standard. I can hear you all saying in unison, “O.K., you’re ‘foolish’.” A guy can dream, can’t he? Just for the sake of argument, let’s assume (yikes) for a moment that my wife, our friend and I are absolutely convinced of the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible. To say that my wife has “been through a lot” with me brings loads of what the Bible teaches to mind for me.

Immediately my mind flies to I Corinthians 10:6, “Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did.” I also flash back to Malachi 3:6 in which Yahweh declares, “For I am the LORD, I do not change.” With these passages in mind, I am led to believe that for a wife to “go through a lot” with her husband is the Biblical norm, rather than the exception.

I think of Noah’s wife. Picture Noah coming home one evening and saying this, “Honey, pack up the kids and get all of your stuff together; we’re going for a ride on the ark that I’m about to build. It’s gonna rain. A lot!” Can you imagine the conversations she had with her girlfriends the next day?

I think of Sarah, wife of the father of the faithful. Abe comes in one day and says, “Sarai, pack up all your stuff, kiss momma and all your family good-bye cause we’re leaving Ur.” Sarah says, “Abe, sweetheart, where are we going?” Abe responds, “I have no idea.” I can imagine Abe’s mother-in-law had her ear bent that night!

Then a few months later, Abe approaches Sarah with this bombshell: “Sarah, sweetie, while we’re here in Egypt, would you mind saying that you’re my 'sister'? Oh, and would you mind being in Pharaoh’s harem . . . just for a little while? So he won’t kill me.”

Lot’s wife also had to go through a lot. One night, Lot walks into their bedroom and says, “Saltina, there are two strangers in the living room and they say we have to leave Sodom, NOW.”
She didn’t even have time to take the rollers out of her hair!

These men received directives from God and responded in faith. If they are our example, should we not be doing so as well and with even greater confidence. For we have the completed text of the “truth” in God’s inerrant and infallible Word. Now, I’m not ringing my own chimes here, but I have trusted Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the cross for my sin. Because of that, God now calls me a “righteous” man. God has promised me in Psalm 37:23 that the steps of a “righteous” man are ordered by the LORD. Therefore, knowing that He ordered the steps of Noah, Abraham, and Lot (righteous men), I’ve gotta believe He’s ordering mine too.

What of the wives? Knowing that their husbands were “righteous” men, they trusted them and were spared even while having no direct word from God. Noah’s wife trusted him and was spared having to tread water for 150 days. Lot’s wife was spared from real acid rain, but got homesick and was turned into a table seasoning. Sarah trusted Abraham and became the mother of all the faithful. In fact, she even made the “Faith Hall of Fame” (Hebrews 11:8-39). Sarah, as it turns out is the standard to which the Apostle Peter holds all godly wives in I Peter 3:5-6.

So ladies, having these examples and having been forewarned of having to “go through a lot” (Phil 1:29), what then should be your response when these “truths” show up at your door? Should you let what you see and feel dictate your response? Should you pull away from your spouse and regard him as your enemy? It’s my guess that the devil is planning on just that reaction. It would provide just the foothold that he needs to wreak havoc on your family, your marriage and your life.

Shouldn’t you rather turn back to the inerrant and infallible Word of God and heed His charge to walk by faith and not by sight? Is it not wiser that when these “truths” show up at your door we should cling even more tenaciously to each other? Shouldn’t we hold at the very front of our minds the vows we pledged to each other that rainy Saturday, September 5, 1992 afternoon? When we looked deeply into each others’ eyes and promised before God and man that for better or worse, through sickness and in health . . . to love, honor and cherish each other until death do us part. Shouldn’t our words be as inerrant and infallible as our heavenly Father’s words?

Ladies, the Scriptures tell us that we are wise to the devil’s schemes. We know that he comes to you today, just the way he came to Eve in the garden. He slithers up to you and he whispers seductively into your ear: “Adam doesn’t love you. Adam is only thinking of himself. Adam doesn’t care about how you feeelll.” But you are wise to his schemes. When he speaks, he speaks in his native tongue: “lie-lie.” He is the one who doesn’t love you. He is the one who is only thinking of himself (he knows his time is short). He not only doesn’t care about how you feel, he wants to destroy your life and that of your entire family.

God, in His Word, has told us how to respond. He said, “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you” (James 4:7). God, the Omniscient, has declared that you and your husband are “one flesh.” Do not allow the one who was a murderer and a deceiver, from the beginning, to rob, steal and kill yet again. What God hath joined together let no man or demon put asunder. Your war is not against the flesh and blood of your husband. It is against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Yeah, I’m not the easiest guy to live with. Yeah, I have taken her through a lot. But never, no never have I taken a major step without first bathing it in prayer and getting God’s answer. Never, no never have I wanted anything less than the absolute best for my best friend, my helpmate, my wife. Never, no never have I done anything to betray my love’s trust. Never, no never have I tried to crush the gifts that God has blessed her with. Never, no never has my love for her waned or wandered. And with the Holy Spirit to strengthen me, I never, no never will.

Lisa, I don’t know if only two or two million eyes will ever read this post. But I unabashedly declare to you my undying, unyielding and irrepressible love to you. If ever this should change then may my tongue be cleaved to the roof of my mouth and my left hand lose its cunning for naught but Almighty God, Himself, shall ever be able to cleave me from you.

To you other ladies out there . . . remember if your husband is saved, God calls him a “righteous” man. The sovereign God of the universe says that He is ordering your husband’s footsteps. So if bruh’man comes home one day and says: “Babe, we’re moving to New Zealand” or “I think we should get the 72-inch plasma HDTV” and you know that he’s a man of prayer, try giving him the benefit of the doubt. After all, Sarah didn’t make it to the “Faith Hall of Fame” by rolling her neck and watching “Oprah.” As long as he is not asking you to sell your body, knock over a liquor store or cheer for the Boston Red Sox, he ‘s not leading you into sin. Just think about this, do you want to be the one who got in the way of the steps of a righteous man whose steps were being ordered by the LORD?


Keith
B.L.B.B!
Be Like the Bereans, Baby!


P.S. To the end that we professing Christians may walk our talk, I leave you with some poetry. I have held this poem near and dear to my heart ever since that dark and crisp night of March 5, 1983 when I crossed the burning sands of
Omega Psi Phi. Enjoy!

Live Your Creed


I'd rather see a sermon than to hear one any day.

I'd rather one walk with me than just to show the way.

The eye is a better pupil and more willing than the ear.

Advice may be misleading but examples are always clear.

And the very best of teachers are the ones who live their creed,

For to see good put into action is what everybody needs.

I can soon learn to do it if you let me see it done.

I can watch your hand in motion but your tongue too fast may run

And the lectures you deliver may be very fine and true

But I'd rather get my lesson by observing what you do.

For I may misunderstand you and the fine advice you give

But there's no misunderstanding how you act and how you live.

SIN 2007: WHY DIDN'T GOD ALLOW THIS to HAPPEN to US?


I think it's pretty safe to say that by now most of us have heard about the horrific events that took place at Virginia Tech this past Monday. My prayers are with all the families of the victims as well as the family of the killer. More specifically, I have prayed that the God of All comfort would indeed comfort these sorely bereaved families in the wake of this senseless act. I also pray that those among these families who have saving faith in Jesus Christ as their LORD and Savior and rest in the assurance of dwelling eternally with that very same God, will so intimately know His comfort that they will in turn so shine and glorify God that the unsaved families will at last find hope and comfort. I have prayed that a "peace that surpasses all understanding" among these believers will stand out in such stark contrast to all the despair that the media is promoting that hearts related and unrelated to the victims and their families will be convicted and effectually called. I have prayed that, as is His modus operandi, God will take this heinous, vile act and turn it around for His own glory and the salvation of many.

I also pray that it will give those of us, who have been thus far spared of such a fate pause to consider,"why didn't God allow this to happen to us"? I realize that a question of this nature is counter-intuitive. We naturally ask the more common questions, "why did God allow this to happen" or "where was God when this happened"? Indeed, this event brings into focus, once again, "the problem of evil". Men who were and are of far greater preeminence than myself have tackled this problem with little ultimate success. What little I have to offer is this and it is in no wise original: the "problem" is not the existence of evil, the "problem" is the existence of any "good" in this fallen world.

The LORD Jesus gives us, in Luke 13:1-5, the perspective that we who have been spared tragedies such as Virginia Tech, Colombine or 9/11 should have. Jesus was, for all intents and purposes, asked: "where was God when Pilate mingled the blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices" and "why did God allow the tower in Siloam fall on and kill eighteen people"? Jesus didn't give a sermon on the "problem of evil" or provide a thesis regarding God's ultimate intentions for these events. Jesus responded with His own penetrating question: "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered this way . . . or those on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem"? He answered for them twice, "No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish".

Why didn't God allow this to happen to us? We are all guilty of sin (cosmic treason and rebellion) against a Holy God. A Holy God, who in order to be true to His own holy nature MUST punish sin. Who are we in His sight without Jesus? The Apostle Paul describes us: "They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.  Though they know the decree of God, that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them, but give approval to those who practice them" (Romans 1:29-32). Earlier Paul charges us with suppressing the truth of God in our unrighteousness. He exposes our guilt saying that we are without excuse because we do know that God exists from creation alone; yet although we know God we do not honor Him as God and rebelliously turn to worship idols of our own creation. I challenge you to study the first chapter of Romans again. Do it while sitting in front of a mirror . . . ouch!

Indeed, it is truly a testament to the mercy and grace of God that there aren't Virginia Techs, Colombines and 9/11's every hour. We deserve worse, BUT thanks be unto God for His Son Jesus Christ!!! Yes, these tragedies strike Christians and non-Christians alike, for all of us are citizens of a sin sick world. The difference, however, is that those who have received God's gift of saving faith in the LORD Jesus Christ live on eternally in the massacre-free, terrorist-free, sickness-free, death-free loving presence of the Almighty Invincible Holy Triune God of All comfort. With Him there will be no more death, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain anymore (Rev 21:4).

There is another ending, however, for the unbeliever. Having rejected the mercy of God as displayed in Jesus, the unbeliever freely chooses to receive the justice of God. Without the atoning blood of Jesus to expiate the sin guilt of the unbeliever, a Holy and Just God must punish that sinner, if indeed He is holy and just. The one who faces death, either violently or in the peace of sleep, not having accepted God's gift will enter an eternity of unending conscious torment, a place the Bible calls, "Hell". The horrific experience of this place will dwarf the total combined suffering and evil of the entire existence of planet Earth.

What do these two outcomes have in common? In both, by displaying His mercy and grace or by displaying His justice and wrath, God is glorified! Amen!

That leaves us who have been spared, thus far, from tragedies like last Monday with a decision to make. "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). I've made my choice, how about you?


Keith,
B.L.B.B!
(Be Like the Bereans, Baby!!!)


P.S. I received an e-mail containing a video which seemed truly appropriate at a time such as this. I would like to share it with you for your consideration.

www.oldtruth.com/blog.cfm/id.2.pid.646