Encouraging Sunday Video, 6.29.08

Do the Gnostic Gospels Present a Credible Alternative?

Leading Jesusanity scholar Bart Ehrman would like us to believe that the views expressed in the Gnostic gospels expose Christianity’s diverse roots, and that the reason modern mainstream Christianity appears more united in thought is simply because one system prevailed over the rest. Ehrman said, “one of the competing groups in Christianity succeeded in overwhelming all the others.” This is the Jesusanity’s take on Christian history.

Jesusanity is defined in Dethroning Jesus by Darrell Bock and Dan Wallace:

“(Jesusanity is) an ideology advocated in universities and in the media which depicts Jesus of Nazareth as a first-century political radical, and advocate for social justice, and a prophet of mystic wisdom. It explicitly denies any historical basis to the Jesus of faith and the creeds.”

This is the view being promoted, to a greater or lesser extent, by Bishop Spong, John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, Elaine Pagels, and the Jesus Seminar. As such, it is not a friend to true Christianity. Christians need to be aware of this mentality, for it underlies much of what is being sold as a scholarly and honest look at Christian origins. Many people are being tricked into believing that the views presented by Jesusanity are more credible than those beliefs to which Christians subscribed for centuries. As more books hit the shelves, and movies such as “Angels and Demons” (based on the novel by Dan Brown, of the Da Vinci Code fame), are in the works, we must confront these challenges. One such challenge is the place of the Gnostic gospels. Do they really give us a look into what could be a credible alternative to traditional Christianity?

Dealing with Discouragement

“How long wilt thou forget me, O LORD? for ever? how long wilt thou hide thy face from me? How long shall I take counsel in my soul, having sorrow in my heart daily? how long shall mine enemy be exalted over me? Consider and hear me, O LORD my God: lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death; Lest mine enemy say, I have prevailed against him; and those that trouble me rejoice when I am moved.” (Psalms 13:1-4)

It would be hard for us to honestly say that we have been through things equal to what David went through to bring him to this point. However, if we are honest we have to admit that we have all felt at least somewhat this level of discouragement. I have not been in the ministry very long, but I have already experienced the times of discouragement that I so often heard about. It gets to the point where discouragement is almost a practical matter, simply because it can so greatly affect our daily responsibilities in our respective ministries. So, the question is, How do we deal with discouragement?

Double Standards in Fundamentalism Today, #5: Me

Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

Galatians 4:16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

True friends tell you what you need to hear. As much as I covet those comments in which people say, “great website!”, I need much more to hear about the things I need to change. Those things have been brought to my attention, and it seems like I’ve been one of the biggest Double Standards all along. I hope now to articulate some of the problems, and offer some possible solutions.

(No, that’s not really me in the picture.)

Liberalism and the Dignity of Life

Separation vs. Penetration vs. Both

There is no way to deny that we live in perilous times. Ethics are personally defined, absolutes are generally denied and any belief system goes as long as it does not impede upon another system, be it one of belief or unbelief. Tolerance is the buzzword of the day, and intolerance is the only thing intolerable. As Carl F. H. Henry put it, “These days are as hectic as Nero’s Rome, and they demand attention as immediate as Luke’s Macedonia.”

But who is a fault here? How much, if any, of the responsibility can Christians carry for the tragic demoralization that marks our culture? We have become so good at pointing our fingers of indictment. We blame the secularists with their declared independence from God. We blame the pagans with their disillusioned cults. We even blame our own liberal wing for having no backbone and the wherewithal to take a stand against the first two culprits.

We examine the pulse our culture and give a self-righteous diagnosis. We hone our skill of flaying those at fault, all the while, forgetting a most important question: “What about us?” What have we done or not done that has contributed to this slippery slide into decadence and abandonment of the truth?

Encouraging Sunday Video 6.22.08

 

KJVO Arguments That Don’t Hold Up

The following is a response I wrote to a website I highly respect. My response, however, was apparently not approved, for it’s been over two months and it’s nowhere to be found. I completely understand and mean no ill toward the writer of the website. He is writing to the KJVO crowd and probably isn’t looking for an argument. However, the article, which gives reasons why the KJV is accepted as the exclusive English version, warrants a reaction. What I want people in fundamentalism to see, from all sides of the issue, is that these kinds of arguments simply don’t hold up. If one wishes to reduce the controversy to a text issue, there are tons of more reasonable discussions that can take place.

The article is titled, “The King James Version of the Bible” by Steven Houck, a Protestant Reformed minister.

On Headset Microphones. . .

Yes, headset microphones – those oh-so-liberal looking devices of the devil! They have done almost as much damage as screens being employed in the services. No self-respecting fundamentalist would ever be caught preaching with one of those!

Or so we’re told to believe. But all sarcasm aside, the headset microphone has taught me a few valuable lessons.

Maybe It’s the Change We Need

There’s a lot of talk about change from the Democratic side of the Presidential election, and it’s literally making conservative sick. Presumptive Democratic nominee Barak Obama is running his campaign on such an idea, but political pundits are rightly pointing out, “where’s the substance behind the claims?” As most Bible believing Christians tend to be political conservatives, we are saying the same thing. The only “change” we could imagine a very liberal political leader bringing to the White House is an agenda that is more socialistic than ever, and more secular than ever.

As we have made clear, and will continue to do so, on this blog, we believe that Christianity thrives on challenge. You and I may not want someone in the oval office who is all talk and no walk. We may not want someone who will make the government even bigger than it is now and fund more unnecessary projects and unmotivated people with our money. We may not want someone who says he’s a Christian, but his liberal leaning only seems to pave way for more religious regulation in this country. In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find a conservative evangelical who is going to vote for Obama. Yet with all that said, maybe a victory for the liberals is what we need. Not what America needs, but what the church in America needs for a wake-up call.

The Bibliography of the New Testament

In a previous post, we examined the reliability of the Old Testament by testing it bibliographically. We found that despite the small amount of extant manuscripts, the few Massoretic texts that we do have are of outstanding integrity. This is proven by comparison with the Dead Sea Scrolls which predate the oldest Massoretic manuscript by about 1000 years. The reliability of the Old Testament, therefore, is proven bibliographically.

By contrast, the reliability of the New Testament is not only proven by the integrity of extant copies, but it is confirmed even further by an overwhelming number of manuscripts that we have today. It has been said that on the basis of manuscript evidence alone, the documents that make up the New Testament are the most frequently copied and widely distributed books of antiquity.

We will put the New Testament to the same bibliographical test by examining the number of extant manuscripts in comparison to other works of antiquity and by examining the accuracy within those manuscripts. We will also mention the support that is provided by the variety of translations and the writings of the Church Fathers.

The Bibliography of the Old Testament

Christianity is the religious faith of the Bible. The foundation for our entire belief system is found in the Scriptures. If any idea or practice is incompatible with the Bible, then it is incompatible with the Christian faith. So, naturally the Bible is the target for much of the scrutiny of skeptics and non-Christian opponents.

Historically, most of the charges brought against the Bible have to do with its reliability. However, there are literary tests which are commonly used to determine the reliability of literary works that can be held against the Bible to determine whether it is reliable or not. One of those tests deals with the bibliography of the piece.

The bibliographical test is an examination of the textual transmission or the process by which documents reach us. This test is necessary when original documents are not available, as is the case with the Bible. Because we do not have the original documents of the Bible (commonly called autographs), we must determine how reliable the copies (commonly called manuscripts, or written as MSS) are. We can test the reliability of the text itself by examining #1 – the number of manuscripts and #2 – the time interval between the original and existing copies (referred to as extant) and #3 – the accuracy of the manuscripts.

When the Bible is tested bibliographically, it does more than pass. Simply put, it aces the tests.

Ambition in the Ministry

Get this picture: a conference with a couple thousand in attendance, an older but very prominent figure in southern IFB circles as the keynote speaker, the host pastor introduces the preacher.

Truth be told, a large percentage of the audience in attendance was a result of the old preacher’s ministry, either directly or indirectly. He had pastored the same church longer than many of the pastors at the conference had been alive. As the hosting pastor introduced the preacher, he waxed eloquent about having vision and attempting to do “big things” for God. He quoted Proverbs 29:18 (“Where there is no vision, the people perish:”) and maked several honorable statements about the old preacher’s vision and the resulting ministry that was built. The crowd gave a hearty “Amen” and the preacher approached the pulpit. He gave a few comments in salutation and appreciation. He then explained, “Really, in the beginning, I had no vision. I only asked God to use me as he saw fit.” Oddly, there were fewer amens.

That night, I sat amongst those in attendance. I can only speak for myself, but the litany of accomplishments that were listed prior to that statement seemed to pale in comparison to the humility with which the veteran preacher spoke. At that moment and each time I replay it in my mind, I have to ask the question: is it supposed to be any other way?

God’s All-Conquering Love (Romans 8:31-39)

Romans 8:31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
³² He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
³³ Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.
³⁴ Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
³⁵ Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
³⁶ As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
³⁷ Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
³⁸ For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
³⁹ Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

These closing verses of Romans chapter 8 provide the pinnacle of Paul’s defense of the Gospel. He has powerfully contested every argument that could have been brought against the concept of justification by faith alone. The fact that he answers every seemingly imaginable objection to the Gospel is a mark of divine inspiration in itself. And now that the case has been presented, defended, and exhausted, the Apostle Paul, through the inspiration of the Spirit of God, asks this important question, “What shall we then say to these things?” And then he answers with a rhetorical question, “If God be for us, who can be against us?” Look at how amazing the love of God is! Look at what He has done for us in the Gospel! With all the was against us, look at how He saved us! Not only that look at what He gave us! He gave us everything – His own Son! And if He didn’t spare Jesus, but delivered Him up for us, then how can He not give us all things freely? The point is very clear and has been all along. The summation here is that God is in control, He loves us, and because of that, nothing can separate us from His love. His love conquers all.

Don’t Just Sit There! (Romans 12:11)

Most of us have a tendency to be lazy, but we know full well that the Christian life is a tremendous contrast to that kind of attitude. It seems that the blogosphere highlights this even more, as it produces more and more armchair theologians. Knowing that I fall into the same trap, the following sermon is mainly preaching to myself. I know, however, that it’s powerful, because this time – it’s alliterated!

 The Right Kind of Business

Romans 12:11 Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord

When Christ said to His disciples, “upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”, He carefully chose the words that He used. He could have said, “I will build my synagogue” in order to differentiate His gathered flock from those of the Jews. Synagogue means just that – a gathering. But there was more to the word He chose for church. Ekklesia means “called out assembly”, and when the disciples heard this word, they didn’t think of a synagogue. They thought of the city-state, in which the assembly was called out in order to do the business of that particular city-state. Hence, when Christ used this term for His church, the illustration was apparent – this is to be the called out assembly to do the business of the Lord.

“Well, what are ya!?!”

Perhaps this is a story to which only a preacher’s kid can relate, nonetheless it starts a good conversation.

A few years ago, my father (who is a preacher) and I were in our hometown area attending the funeral of the wife of a long time missionary and long time friend of my father. The missionary was originally from the area, so the funeral home was packed with local preachers and church members who knew him well. One such preacher, a loud and imposing man, approached my dad and struck up one of those “long-time, no-see” conversations.

In the process of catching up, the man asked my father about my brother, who is also a preacher. The preacher then turned to me and asked about recent events in my life. I was obliged to tell him that I was an education major at a particular Bible college with which he was familiar. His disinterest in those details was made obvious, though, when he abruptly asked me, “Are you a preacher?”

At that point, a multitude of thoughts flooded my mind. During that period of time, I had been asking myself very similar questions concerning God’s will for my life. The problem was my time at Bible college had left me a bit discontented with the modern fundamentalist’s definition of a preacher. I knew that every Christian was in a sense “called to preach”, but I also knew that there are specific men who are called out to be “preachers.” Despite all this, I knew what that preacher was asking for, so I simply answered, “No.” After an awkward pause and a befuddled look, he retorted, “Well,… what are ya!?!”

How The Information Age is Changing Fundamentalism

In 1993, Gail Riplinger contributed her infamous book, New Age Versions to the world of fundamentalism. The work claimed to contain “exhaustive documentation” that proved that the occult was really behind all those new translations of the Bible. Despite the “acrostic algebra” and conspiracy theories (including one about the Titanic sinking because of it being a part of the Whitestar line), Riplinger’s book was well received in non-Ruckmanite circles, because it offered a fresh look at the issues. After all, it contained hundreds of footnotes and this mysterious G.A. Riplinger was apparently well educated. However, in time, the Information Age got a hold of the situation. Fundamentalists learned that her book was not trustworthy. This became documented even by other KJVO fundamentalists. Now Riplinger has been pushed into her rightful place – the radical wing of the fundamentalist KJVO movement, right beside Ruckman himself, Texe Marrs, Jack Chick, and Samp Gipp. Fundamentalism benefited from the Information Age because the works of these vitriolic conspiracy theorists could not pass the scrutiny of evidence. Thankfully, they cannot enter a church, bring a PowerPoint presentation, and make mind-boggling assertions without some members of that church going home and checking things for themselves. 

We’re going beyond Berea here. Not only is it imperative for us today to search the scriptures daily, it is our responsibility to be good stewards of the Information Age. When special speaker so-and-so comes to town to prove his point of view, he is coming with a ton of extra-biblical sources. You and I would love to trust him, but the sad truth is fundamentalists have lost credibility here, as will be shown. So it is now our obligation to check those sources, and in doing so, change the face of fundamentalism.

A Little Lower than the Animals (part 2)

I would like to suggest a few reasons for the austere view of humanity and humanity’s achievements that is a direct result of the naturalistic worldview. I believe there is a process of thought that leads to such a devaluation of humanity. I realize, of course, that there is a world of scientific and philosophical ideas behind all of this. However, I am keeping in mind that this is a blog and not a collegiate periodical.

A Little Lower than the Animals (part 1)

This past Christmas, my wife and I received the DVD edition of the Discovery Channel series, Planet Earth. To my surprise, after seeing only a couple episodes, we were hooked. The cinematography in the series is absolutely phenomenal and many of the shots and scenes are unprecedented. The biggest surprise, however, was that comments about evolution from a naturalistic worldview were, for the most part, few and far between.

The filming and the efforts to present such a massive project in such a presentable medium are very much commendable. That kind of glimpse at nature is priceless. Plants, birds and animals that one would otherwise never know existed are seen in their natural habitat. But, of all the creatures that are included in this series, there is one “creature” that is for the most part left unnoticed.

One Way

People love having their options. It’s not so much that we love choosing; we just have to have the ability to choose. Be it buying a house, car, tool, or whatever, there is nothing quite as satisfying as knowing that you have searched every possible avenue and have chosen the very best option. It seems as though it isn’t truly a choice if we do not have plenty of options.

Perhaps that is why some have such a problem when they come to a religion that is centered on the phrase, “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6) There are no options here. There is only an ultimatum: the way or no way; the truth or no truth; the life or no life. Jesus laid it all out. It’s either Him or nothing.

Why John Piper Continues to Teach Fundamentalists

He never ceases to amaze. He has influenced untold scores of people across various doctrinal persuasions. He has helped bring an emphasis of personal love for God that is much needed in our time. He is John Piper, evangelicalism’s very own rock star. His impact has been felt not only in evangelicalism, but within the ranks of fundamentalism. And this is not a circumstance that everyone can agree with. In fact, some fundamentalists despise him.

Yet, John Piper continues to exude Christian maturity with a charitable spirit. His recent blog entry highlights 20 reasons why he does not take potshots at fundamentalists. Reading his response about those who have criticized him the most certainly is thought provoking. I could only imagine his biggest critics reading it, staring at the computer with their mouths wide open like the time Jesus said, “let him without sin cast the first stone.”

Archaeology and the Bible

Some of the most prevalent criticisms leveled against the Bible are concerning its historical reliability. These criticisms are usually based on a supposed lack of evidence from non-biblical sources to confirm the Biblical record. Because the Bible is filled with supernatural claims and is inherently a religious book, many take the position that its record cannot be trusted as historical fact. Some stop there and say that the Bible is still a good book of moral lessons despite historical inaccuracy. Others go further and claim that it cannot be a standard of morality because of its historical errors. Either way, their claims spring from a “guilty until proven innocent” charge based on a lack of outside evidence. Nevertheless, the Bible’s “innocence”, and more specifically its reliability, has been evidenced time and again, particularly in the field of archaeology.

Christianity and Civilization

As with the oppression of women, the principles found in the Bible will always be found to contrast those of the heathen nations. Nations without biblical influence, or those who have rejected that influence, have also treated children terribly, despised labor, limited education to a select few, and sacrificed the “imperfect.” Of course, these societies totally changed when Christian missionaries brought the influence of the Bible.

Now we are witnessing many societies degenerate back into tribal barbarism. The odd thing, though, is that those who oppose God’s revelation see things differently.