Geography Class, Islam, and the Gospel

I vividly remember sitting in World Geography one day in High School. By this time I had become a good little Pharisee in the Purpose Driven and Contemporary Praise Band movements of the Southern Baptist Convention. I remember watching a few films in class about various world religions. I honestly can't tell you the name of the film series or even the individuals they got to speak on the program. I do remember a young charismatic Muslim with a Koran in his hand speaking about the merits of his religion.

At one point he said something to the effect of, "Islam actually tells you what you need to do and then tells you how to do these things. Christianity does not do this. This is the strength of Islam. It teaches the principles and then it teaches you how to actually live by what it teaches."

For a moment, my young impressionable mind was threatened by what he had said. It was true that I carried a great deal of guilt and sense of failure about these standards that I was supposed to meet. For a moment, the legalist in me envied the Muslim for his attainable religion. Then my charismatic sensibilities kicked back in. "He's totally off base!" I mused. I thought back to all the practical preaching I had sat through. I thought about all the promises and commitments I had made. I thought about all the principles that my church had shown us buried in the Scriptures. We had Purpose, Spiritual Gift Surveys, the Prayer of Jabez, Promise Keepers, Small Groups, Accountability Partners, etc, etc. All the "progress" I had been making along the path. I thought about all of the works and steps and programs. I thought about all the training in sanctification.

Over the next couple years, I was impressed by the progress that the church was making in these areas. Eventually, the "Bible as Life's Instruction Manual" had been perfected and several cottage industries had sprung up in support of it. In my own mind I had thought back to that guy in class and been proud of how we sure were proving that silly Muslim wrong!

Looking back, that Muslim understood the Law in the Christian Bible better than I did. The reason why I found such commonality in my own faith and his description of Islam was that my faith was in my own works. The proof was in the things that I turned to for comfort: my works. I thought I was pulling things off just like he did. I was a legalist... just like him. No wonder we had so much in common.

Where was Christ in all of that? Did Christ even matter and was He even needed? On what had I set my hope and faith? Did I really believe in Christ or was "belief in Christ" just another self-righteous work that I had achieved on my way to pleasing God? All of the other stuff had obscured the cross... the very thing that I needed most.

The missing piece that he had not said on that video was something that I should have been clinging to all along. Yes, the Christian Law cannot be followed by sinful man. Yes, it cannot be done because it must be done perfectly. That is true. But Christ has fulfilled the Law on my behalf and justified me, a poor miserable sinner, through His vicarious atonement by death on the cross. There is nothing left for me to do. Christ has done it all in my stead.

And yet many churches today fall for the arguement that I first heard from this Muslim in Geography class. The church has to be practical. It has to be relevant and achievable.

It has to be like Islam. Achievable Law... no Gospel required.

Decoding Law Usage in Modern Language

7. "Have to", "Got to", "Ought to", "Need to", "Should", and "Must"

Along with their Southern Baptist cousins "Havta", "Gotta", "Otta", "Needta", and "Shoulda", these words are all verbs and verb phrases. Verbs--as I'm sure you learned in grammar class--are action words. Now when one thinks of the Law, one thinks of direct verbs that you use when you want to form a good imperative phrase. An imperative phrase is a command... which is Law. "You start acting right." and "You repent!" This is obviously Law and, when we think of Law preaching, we invision some red-faced parson yelling these kinds of phrases at his parishoners with a finger wagging.

But it doesn't just stop there. Verbs can be used to make all kinds of phrases. How about an indicative phrase? Indicatives are descriptive statements. Here's a good example: "Fathers should be spending time with their kids." Or here's one: "The people of this church are a people who care about the poor." Now one wouldn't think that phrases in the indicative mood are Law exactly. That's not "fire and brimstone" stuff. It's just good advice and descriptive phrases, right? Indicative mood isn't Law, right? Check out your Ten Commandments:

1. You shall have no other gods before me.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
4. Honor your father and your mother.
5. You shall not murder.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.

...well what do you know! The LAW of Moses is all indicatives! They aren't in the command mood at all, but are--in fact--descriptions of what good behavior looks like. And yet the Law always accuses... because you do not meet this discription, do you? That's the implied imparative inside of most Law-based indicatives. Everyone knows the mom who uses the indicative, "We don't curse in this house." The command is implied. She is saying, "Stop cursing!"

So when a pastor says, "Fathers should be spending time with their kids." The implied command is "Take care of your kids!" When a pastor says, "We need to be a people who care deeply about lost people." The implied command is, "Get off your lazy butt and go care deeply about lost people."

If it has to do with human action the statement is Law no matter how it's worded. When understood and analyzed, we find that most churches these days are actually 90% or more about Law and Law-related concepts.

Decoding Law Usage in Modern Language

3. "Principle" can mean an "idea" or "concept", but in the modern church it is a Law term.

Principle: 1. a basic generalization that is accepted as true and that can be used as a basis for reasoning or conduct; 2. a rule or standard especially of good behavior; 3. a rule or law concerning a natural phenomenon or the function of a complex system; 4. a rule of personal conduct.

Coming from a Latin root that means "foundation" or "beginning", a principle is a rule or standard. It is a system of conduct. It is a work. It is law.


4. "Step" as in "Here are four easy steps to a happy marriage" is mega-Law [for full effect say "mega-Law" out loud like you are booming into a mega phone at a monster truck ralley].

Step: A measure: any maneuver made as part of progress toward a goal; "the situation called for strong measures so the police took steps to reduce crime".

If it is something that you must do, it is a work and therefore it falls under the purview of the Law.


5. "Purpose" as in "Purpose Driven Church" or "Purpose Driven Life" or "Discover Your Purpose" etc, etc, etc, etc

Purpose: 1. A result, end, aim, or goal of an action intentionally undertaken, or of an object being brought into use or existence, whether or not the purpose was a primary or secondary effect. 2. A function: what something is used for.

Every tool has a purpose. That purpose is to perform a specific kind of work. Those are Law categories.


6. "Love" as in "We don't get all tied up in doctrine. It's just important to love God and love other people."

Love... Perhaps you should get tied up in doctrine because you have no idea what you are talking about. You think you are protecting against legalism, but the Law is summarized in our love for God and our neighbors. This one doesn't need a dictionary definition. Instead, what is appropriate is a Bible verse:

"Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" And [Jesus] said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets."

-Matthew 22:36-40

Decoding Law Usage in Modern Language

Often times, the common misunderstanding is that the contemporary church is Antinomian and is not teaching much of anything. The truth is that they are often teaching nothing but the Law. They may be doing it badly and they may be using non-Biblical language to do it, but the themes are essentially Law when they are analyzed. Just because the Law is delivered with a hands-off smile and some trendy music doesn't make it any less distressing for those who hear it. Allow me decode some of the langague for you.

1. "Encouragement" is almost always a Law term.

Encouragement: 1. the expression of approval and support. 2. The act of encouraging; incitement to action or to practice; as, the encouragement of youth in generosity; That which serves to incite, support, promote or advance, as favor, countenance, reward etc.; incentive; increase of confidence.

A term from Old French that means "to put in courage", encouragement is used several ways in contemporary churches. They are almost always related to the Law. Most often, encouragement is used to "encourage" someone to do a particular thing... which is a work... which is Law. There is also a kind of encouragement which is intended to lift the spirit up (which is not the same as the "hope" one finds in hearing the Gospel). In this use, it is almost to counter discouragement which is a consequence of previous applications of the Law. Instead of providing the Gospel, this form almost always turns us back to more works. This is what we converts who have left Purpose Drivenism cynically call the "rat wheel". Most often encouragement in Christian circles is equated with "strength for the day" which is essentially the power to do what you are supposed to do. That's Law... fuzzy-sounding hippy kind of law... but Law none the less.


2. "Practical" is another Law term.

Practical: concerned with actual use or practice

Having something in the church that possess the quality of being "practical" sounds good... but then again the Law makes alot of sense to us because it is written on our hearts. Practical means that you can do something with it. That's a work. That's Law. It may be nice, useful Law... but it's still Law.

Psych on Biblical Knowledge

As indicated by my "Skydiving Judi Dench" reference, I am a big fan of the TV show Psych. Here is a wonderfully hilarious case of art imitating life. :P

------

Shawn: "Samson, that's just a great name. Straight out of film noir, like an old detective who drinks hard, but loves even harder. Or, go with me on this, Samson, a tiny little orphan mouse who must find his way home to Wolverhampton."

Gus: "...Or Samson, the legendary figure from the Bible."

Shawn: "Naw, that doesn’t work. All those guys had names like Ben Hur and Prometheus."

Gus: "You have never read the Bible, have you, Shawn?"

Shawn: [counting the book titles on his fingers] "Pfffhh. Genesis. Exorcist. Leviathan. Dooo…the right thing…"

Gus: "Oh. My gosh."

Lassiter: "Stop Talking!"

What Have I Been Missing?!?

I just ate something called "Bacon Ends and Pieces".


Skydiving Judi Dench! ....why in the world do they cut the tastiest part of bacon off?!?

Proper Perspective and Materialism

It's sad when pagans understand certain ethical matters better than many Christians. A while ago I came across this clever quote:

"He who knows that enough is enough will always have enough."
-Laozi

Finally Counting the Cost

The feature article for the November edition of Lutheran Witness is interesting. It is called "Living a Life of Significance in a Post-Christian Culture" by Dr. Kurt Senske. You can find the article here.

I have to admit, the title worried me when I first saw it. An article with that kind of title could go a bunch of ways in the wrong hands. With great relief I saw that there were no trendy gimmicks or new doctrines here. Instead, Dr. Senske did a fantastic job of communicating some very old ideas about the doctrine of vocation in a fresh, new way that uses the modern language of today's audience to address the modern perceptions of the timeless problems of discipleship. It's a good read.

I got to thinking about the topics discussed in this article in view of the Parable of the Pearl of Great Price. Dr. Senske's reference to Bonhoeffer reminded me of many things that I had considered for the first time when reading the "Cost of Discipleship".

It's sad really. Sometimes I get it in my head that I am pulling this off to some extent. I look at the Pearl of Great Price and think that I am eagerly selling all that I have and turning my back on temporary materialism for the eternal treasure in Christ. I realize in my head and my heart that these things pass away and that my security is in Jesus. Then what happens? The moth comes in and destroys. The thieves break in and steal. The cost of discipleship actually requires something of me more than mere lip-service. The cause of Christ heaps the smallest amount of shame, persecution, and hardship on me. The test comes.

...and I find myself resenting it.

I find myself hating that I can't have my cake and eat it too. I find myself disappointed and dissatisfied. I find myself getting angry that the wicked prosper and the cheaters always seem to finish first. I find myself upset that I am losing at a pointless game that I told myself I was no longer playing. I talk a good game about being counter-cultural, but my heart is not in the fight like I thought it was. I realize that in my heart of hearts I really want it both ways. I want the Pearl of Great Price and I want my worldly treasures. Like the disciples, I claim to be willing to follow Christ to death, but I shun participating in His rejection and shame.

I want to be a disciple of Christ..... but also remain a son of the world at the same time. The truth is that I really love this materialism and self-worship. Denial of self just causes me to miss self-gratification more intensely. I've been paying bills with my mouth that my pocket can't afford. I've been arrogantly building my tower and have not first sat down to count the cost. What does this theology of the cross really mean in my life? Where has my heart been set really?

Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

Reformation Day - The Church Militant Continues Her 2,000 Year Journey of Reformation and Exile

In 1949, a communist uprising and takeover within the Republic of China resulted in the Chinese Civil War. The war ended with the freedom of mainland China being handed over to the communist dictatorship that remains to this day. The original government, still called the Republic of China was forced into exile to the island off the coast of their country.

The usurping government took the name "People's Republic of China" even though the humanitarian record of the regime proved that it is not a government of the "People" and it is only superficially a "Republic". The power, size, and propaganda of the communist government has been such that the name "China" now refers to the communist regime and the Republic of China in exile has been largely forgotten. They still call themselves "The Republic of China" 50+ years later, but everyone knows them as "Taiwan".

If you say "China", people think of the communists. If you try to call Taiwan the "Republic of China" to the uninitiated, great confusion abounds. Yet the people of Taiwan remain true to their roots and look forward to the day when freedom may return to their homeland.

On this day, hundreds of years ago, a reform movement from within the western church began to restore the freedom of the Gospel to millions of Christians. The defense of the gospel met with only limited success and the reformers were expelled by imposters who stole the moniker "Catholic" (meaning "Universal") for themselves. These reformers in exile have come to be known as "Lutherans" a name as unfortunate as "Taiwanese" but a name that must exist to differentiate the tyrannical majority from the freedom-loving minority in exile.

Are the Taiwanese the Republic of China? Yes! And they are fully entitled to the name. Are the communists also called and well known as the Republic of China? Yes! ......but it is not a Republic in any real sense. Are they Chinese? Yes! ....but unfortunately they are also tyrannical communists.

By the same token the Lutheran church is catholic ("universal"). We are fully entitled to the name but it confuses the uninitiated. It is just easier to use the name "Lutheran" to tell us from those who are not Lutheran. Is the Roman Catholic church also called and well known as Catholic? Yes! ....but it is no longer "universal" in any real sense because it casts out Christians who seek to return her to the freedom of the Gospel. Are they Christian? Yes! ... but unfortunately they are also papists and legalistic enthusiasts.

Are there faithful Christians in Rome? Yes! ...but they labor for Christ under duress in spite of their church in the same way that communist government of China rules over her victimized, silenced, oppressed, and deceived citizens who are in desperate need of freedom and relief.

And so the Lutheran quest to reform the visible church here on earth and return her to the teaching of Scripture continues as she labors as an exiled, marginalized, and mocked minority. Lutheranism is in good company because--unlike the Chinese War that only occurred recently--the true church of Jesus Christ that clings to pure doctrine has always been rejected, hated, and rather small when she is compared to the false religions, persecuters, sects, heretics, and other enemies around and among her. The true church of Jesus always shares in Christ's rejection [Matt 21:42, John 16:33, Matt 10:5-42].

The Reformation of the middle ages was started by Martin Luther, but he is but one in a long line of prophetic voices of reform that have corrected error and legalism since the very dawn of the church 2,000 years ago. In fact, this lineage traces back through Christ's wrestling with the religious majority of His day, through John the Baptist, and through centuries of Old Testament prophets and judges who watched over the spiritual Isreal that was always kept by God within the visible body of the Israelites. Like those who come before us, we bold and faithful few continue to call ourselves and our neighbors back to Christ to hear the Word of the Lord and live in unity under the truth that was once for all delivered to the saints.

Let us always remain orthodox, catholic, and Christian as we hold steadfast to God's Word within the exile of the Lutheran Church... our island and last line of defense against legalistic tyranny and false doctrine.


The Church's One Foundation
Lyrics by Samuel J. Stone
Music by Charles Wesley
(LSB #644)


The church's one foundation
is Jesus Christ her Lord;
she is his new creation
by water and the Word.
From heaven he came and sought her
to be his holy bride;
with his own blood he bought her,
and for her life he died.

Elect from every nation,
yet one o'er all the earth;
her charter of salvation,
one Lord, one faith, one birth;
one holy name she blesses,
partakes one holy food,
and to one hope she presses,
with every grace endued.

Though with a scornful wonder
we see her sore oppressed,
by schisms rent asunder,
by heresies distressed,
yet saints their watch are keeping;
their cry goes up, "How long?"
And soon the night of weeping
shall be the morn of song.

Mid toil and tribulation,
and tumult of her war,
she waits the consummation
of peace forevermore;
till, with the vision glorious,
her longing eyes are blest,
and the great church victorious
shall be the church at rest.

Yet she on earth hath union
with God the Three in One,
and mystic sweet communion
with those whose rest is won.
O happy ones and holy!
Lord, give us grace that we
like them, the meek and lowly,
on high may dwell with thee.

The Folly of "Immersion Only Believer's Baptism... Only"

I used to hold that the only valid baptism was a believer's baptism (consenting confessing adult) by immersion (full dunking). Not only was that requirement not Biblical, I never stopped to consider what that means.

Using some rough estimates, here is what this accusation says when taken to its logical conclusion:

1.115 billion Roman Catholics are not properly baptized.
225 million Eastern Orthodox are not properly baptized.
75 million Calvinists are not properly baptized.
75 million Methodists are not properly baptized.
73 million Anglicans are not properly baptized.
72 million Oriental Orthodox are not properly baptized.
70 million Lutherans are not properly baptized.

...that adds up to almost 1.75 billion Christians currently living who are not properly baptized according to your particular interpretation of some pretty vague passages. It doesn't end there. Imagine if we add to that total the incalculable sum of all the Christians who ever lived and held to these denominations dating back to the early church. That is a HUGE majority of the church. This immense throng of your brothers and sisters were all baptized as infants.

You are saying they were never baptized and their rite is an erroneous violation of Holy Scripture. That's a pretty serious charge to make.... especially when you have no Biblical text that explicitly forbids the practice.

It's okay to make a charge that accuses so many faithful in all times and places if it is clearly supported by Scripture, but this is why the burden of proof is on the Anabaptists. The church shouldn't have to defend itself from such an unwarranted attack. Where is your clear proof? You are the ones accusing the majority of the current church and all or their ancestors of not being baptized in accordance with Christ's institution. That is a more serious charge than you realize. Since you consider baptism an ordinance of God, those who do not follow it are being disobedient. You are accusing 1.75 billion Christians and all their ancestors of disobedience to what Christ commanded of them. One should never accuse a brother of disobedience without clear proof from God's Word... especially when that blanket accusation numbers in the billions of brothers and sisters both living and dead.

Wouldn't you want to base such a sweeping accusation that effects so many of your fellow brothers and sisters on more than just mere human opinion, a few fallible lexicons and commentaries, and a textual interpretation that amounts to nothing more than the logical fallacy called "an argument from silence"?

.......if I'm going to publicly rebuke that much of the Body of Christ, I want to be absolutely sure that I am right beyond any and all doubt. I want to be able to point to some very clear passages that support my position and clearly reject all other positions.