Author Archives: Jim Mc.

The Bible according to the History Channel

11 Replies

The Bible is a television mini-series, produced by Roma Downey and Mark Burnett.  It is based, very loosely, on the Bible. Burnett and Downey say that they consulted “a wide range of pastors and academics” while preparing the series.  Their consultants included people like Joel Osteen, rabbi Joshua Garroway, and Catholic cardinal Geoff Tunnicliffe.  Also included were Focus on the Family President Jim Daly, “40 Days of Purpose” creator Rick Warren, noted modalist T.D. Jakes, and a blend of evangelicals, Catholics, Jews, and even the superintendent of the General Council of the Assemblies of God.  A real mishmash of perspectives, ideas, and traditions.

Given my job, I felt obliged to watch the series.  As of this writing, three episodes have been released — each more troubling and problematic than the previous one.  After watching each week’s entry, I wrote short reviews and posted them on the GCA Facebook page.  At the request of some of our readers, I’ve assembled those comments here (along with some updates).  What you’ll gather rather quickly is that I am not a fan.

Week One

Last night I recorded the History Channel’s first episode of their Bible series. I watched it tonight. Just turned it off, in fact. I’m saddened by it. So much money and production value poured into a completely fictitious account of the Old Testament.

But, here’s what really bothers me —

Biblical ignorance runs rampant in our land. People who don’t know any better are going think that this is how the Bible actually reads and what it actually teaches. The critic of the Bible has all the more reason to discount it since the God of this series is cruel and haphazard. And the biblically ignorant folk who watch this will come away with a completely false concept of God, His word, and His interactions with the children of Israel.

The details count. And the producers of this program turned the details into a mishmash of badly scripted soap opera moments while ignoring the great weight of theology and events that really could have been recounted accurately just as easily. For instance, was it really that tough to put a ram in a thicket caught by his horns? Why make it a lamb standing around by a bush? The type of Christ was completely abolished by their lackadaisical retelling of the story. And, by the way, what was Sarah doing running around in the wilderness by herself looking for her boy after taking a headcount of the local flock? Why insert a fairy tale and ignore the important details?

According to the Bible, Abraham took Isaac and a couple young men with him on a three day journey to Moriah —

“So Abraham rose early in the morning and saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him and Isaac his son; and he split wood for the burnt offering, and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. On the third day Abraham raised his eyes and saw the place from a distance. And Abraham said to his young men, ‘Stay here with the donkey, and I and the lad will go yonder; and we will worship and return to you.’” (Gen. 22:3-5)

But, the History Channel’s retelling of this story had Abraham and Isaac alone wandering just around the corner from their camp — close enough that Sarah was able to reach them between the time they built the altar and the time that Abraham raised the knife — and they completely omitted Abraham’s instruction, including his confidence that both he and the boy were going to return.  After all, this was the boy through whom God had promised innumerable seed.  Abraham’s act of utter faith was reduced to him arguing with God that he felt he’d been tested enough.

What a repugnant program this is.

The Moses character was utterly inaccurate (and his motivations were way too Mickey Rourke for me). But why? Why create a lie when the truth would work just as well?

And, of course, the DVD is for sale. And the work book.  And the 30 Days of the Bible program (echoes of 40 Days of Purpose, anyone?).  And you know the producers and pitch men (Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, T.D. Jakes, et. al.) are going to claim that this is a great evangelistic tool. They’ll encourage their listeners to buy the DVD and share it with their friends and family. Apparently, Peter’s description of false prophets didn’t sink in — “And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you.” (2Peter 2:3)

But, if anyone anywhere is moved or convinced by this program, what have they been convinced to believe? Certainly not the truth. Once again the wizards of Hollywood have decided that God’s word needs editing, improving, reworking, and dumbing down. At best the people responsible for this mess are merely ignorant for sake of a payday. At worse, they are the willing accomplices of the father of lies.

I can only imagine what they’re going to do to the gospel account when they get to it.

I’m so sad about this. America needs to repent of a whole litany of sins and rebellion. But, this organized effort to misrepresent the Scripture (while making the rounds of television shows talking about how pious they are and how true to the text they attempted to stay) sits heavy on my conscience because the church at large is not correcting and rejecting it. The producers have done a “good” job of creating ecumenical acceptance and promotion of their hackneyed tale. I wish the church were more devoted to the Word and less enamored with the show-biz that permeates modern evangelicalism.

I need to go to bed. It’s late. My throat hurts. My ears and sinuses are burning. But, my heart hurts more. I am sad for the state of modern Christianity.

Even so, Lord, come soon.

Week Two

Despite making us look like gluttons for punishment, last night David Morris and I fired up the DVR so we could watch the second installment of The Bible series from the History Channel. Oh my. We kept pausing the playback to list the multiple errors in each scene. And again, I wonder why the producers continually chose to tell a novel, made-up version of these stories when then actual Biblical account would have been just as easy to tell and much more compelling. The massive amount of political correctness that permeates this series is nauseating. And the whole thing suffers from both leaving out vital details and inserting soap-opera-like stories and motivations that are utterly foreign to the Biblical text. What a mess.

As I said about the first episode, there are plenty of biblically-ignorant folk in the world who are going to believe that what they saw on the screen was actually what the Bible says, thinks, and promotes. This series is just adding to the confusion and background noise that makes it so difficult to accurately teach Biblical history, doctrine, and theology. They have turned the truth of God into a lie.

<<<heavy sigh>>>

Then again, one accomplishment the producers did achieve was that they managed to take some of the most exciting, compelling stories in human history and make them mind-numbingly boring.

So hey, that’s something ….

Week Three

I finally watched the third installment of the Bible series on the History Channel. It’s pretty much everything I expected.  More of the same … same lies, same falsehoods, same heresies, same lack of historic veracity, same utter disrespect for the text of the Bible as written, same dumbing down of the Bible, same insertion of Purpose Drivel, same denial of sin, redemption, the necessity of a Savior … etc, etc, etc.

However, I did notice something significant. I wasn’t surprised at the constant historic revisionism, but when the character playing Daniel told the the character playing Cyrus that there was a prophet living at the time called Isaiah — quote: “There’s a prophet here in Babylon, Isaiah, he says …” — well, that’s just utterly wrong and there’s no reason to get it so wrong. Unless you have an agenda.

Isaiah died a good century before Cyrus was born, but he also predicted Cyrus, by name, as the ruler who would let the people of Israel return to build their temple. [By the way, the Bible series keeps representing the Jewish folk as poor, dusty, downtrodden people, but many Jews did not return to Jerusalem because they had become so prosperous and well-to-do in Babylon.] But, why did the writers of the Bible series insist on placing Isaiah in the Babylonian context?

Late dating.

They did the same sort of dance around the prophecies of Daniel. When Nebuchadnezzar had a dream, Daniel began recounting it. He said, “You are the head of gold …” at which point the king interrupts him and insists, “Tell me about the rock that smashes the other kingdoms,” effectively erasing the prophecy that accurately predicts the succession of kingdoms to follow Babylon — Medo/Persian, Greece, Rome and the ten-toed kingdom that’s on the earth when Christ returns.

I sense a pattern here.

The Bible series insists that the Jews were returned to their land under Cyrus because Daniel was such a brave, vision-casting sort of leader. But, nothing is said of the fact that Jeremiah already prophesied that the captivity in Babylon would last 70 years and that time period was fulfilled. There’s nothing of the angel visiting Daniel and prophesying the 490-year future of the Israelites, leading to the Messiah and time of the end.

It’s obvious that the writers and producers are systematically eliminating or explaining-away all the accurate prophecy in the Old Testament. The TV version of the prophets merely heard from God, but there’s no hint of accurately foretelling future events. (Oh sure, there’s a vague hat-tip to the concept when Herod asks about predictions concerning where the King of the Jews would be born, but the whole episode is brushed away like a fluke. There’s no mention of the nearly 400 OT prophecies that Jesus accurately fulfilled.)

Anyway, here’s what I’ve concluded: The writers and producers of the program eliminated and late-dated OT prophecy on purpose. As I’ve often argued, the consistent accuracy of Biblical prophecy is evidence of the Bible’s divine nature — it is the very word of God, God-breathed. But, if the producers believed the Bible was God’s own word, they would never take the liberties they’ve taken with it. So, they’ve downplayed, underplayed, or ignored the prophetic elements of the very stories they’ve chosen to tell. But, in the end, it’s really a complete denial of the holiness and divinity of the Bible.

And it’s blasphemy. (Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for a religious deity or irreverence towards religious or holy persons or things, like the Holy Bible.)

The whole thing — the whole series — is a mishmash of gratuitous scenes of violence, angels who act like hypnotists, occasional insertions from the inter-testamental period (like the eagle on the temple, a story we find in Josephus, but not the Bible … probably inserted to satisfy the Catholic consultants who include the Apocrypha in their Bible), and historic inaccuracies like the wise men seeing the star prior to the birth of Jesus so that they could make their journey early and get to Herod and then the manger on time. This despite the fact that the Bible says they visited the family at their home when Jesus was a young boy, leading Herod to kill all the boys 2 and under … but hey, those are just details, so why bother getting any of it correct?

 And they came into the house and saw the Child (paidion) with Mary His mother; and they fell down and worshiped Him; and opening their treasures they presented to Him gifts of gold and frankincense and myrrh. (Matt. 2:12)
Then when Herod saw that he had been tricked by the magi, he became very enraged, and sent and slew all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its environs, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the magi. (Matt. 2:16)

Also, there weren’t three wise men. The Bible doesn’t say how many there were. On TV, Herod called the leader Balthazar, which name is not in the Bible, it’s a medieval Catholic tradition that probably dates back to Bede the Venerable in the 8th Century. In this series we saw no attempt to get Mary a room at the inn. When Jesus was baptized there was no dove, no voice from Heaven.

 After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.” (Matt. 3:16-17)

In His dealings with Peter, the show gave us no sense of Jesus’ divine ability to effectively call people to Himself. And, of course, there was the horrid insertion of words into Jesus’ mouth that He simply never said, like, “Change the world.”

Heresy.

(Oh, and when Jesus was in the desert, did that snake come out of him, out from under him, or just emanate from nowhere?)

I don’t know why every modern depiction of Jesus makes him look like a white surfer dude.  He was a middle Eastern Jew.  Here’s how Isaiah described Him —

For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon Him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. (Isa. 53:2 NASB)
For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. (Isa. 53:2 KJV)

Likewise, they always portray Satan as nasty looking.  He slithers and hisses.  He broods and exudes ugliness.  Yet, Ezekiel says of him —

Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. (Ezek. 28:17)

Granted, the fall from Heaven may have had some negative impact on his appearance, but I have always thought that a vital part of Satan’s subtlety was his ability to make himself and his ways appear attractive.  Or, as the apostle Paul put it —

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds. (2 Cor. 11:13-14)

Medieval art has influenced our thinking.  Now we think of Jesus as glowing constantly, with a halo around His head, while Satan is a split-hoofed beast with horns, a pitchfork, and a pointy tail.  That might help sell some Underwood ham, but it’s not what the Bible describes.

And here’s the worst part: There are so many people who are functionally illiterate where the Bible is concerned and they are going to think that what they’re seeing is an accurate portrayal of Jesus’ words, actions, and intentions. But, the Jesus of this series is NOT the Jesus of the Bible. The Jesus of this series is the invention of Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, TD Jakes, and their friends in Hollywood.

Read your Bible, people.

“Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar…” (Rom. 3:4)

This series is as damaging as anything Rome, the Mormons, or Islam have done in their denial of the historicity, perspicuity, and trustworthiness of the text of the Bible. And the sub-biblical church in America is all excited about it. Confessing evangelical apologists for this series are making the same error they always make (just as they did with Mel Gibon’s movie, The Passion of the Christ), they are embracing this series, despite its multiple errors, with the assumption that “something is better than nothing.” They like the fact that something called “The Bible” is on TV and getting big ratings, despite the fact that it actually undermines the very Bible they claim to embrace. The Church should be universally outraged at this travesty and they should reject it wholesale in order to send the message to Hollywood that we will not allow our sacred texts to be maligned and manipulated just to sell DVD’s.

But no. The church at large will be silent. And the errors will be compounded. And Christianity will suffer as more people embrace the mis-truths and lies that make up this series.

There’s an agenda at work here, folks. And it’s not good. Despite claiming to present “The Bible,” the producers are systematically undermining the Word of God and inserting the words of men — words that are more acceptable, more palatable, more pleasing to the easily-tickled ears of worldly people.

But, they won’t tell anyone that they’re sinful, depraved, spiritually dead, incapable, and desperately wicked. They won’t explain that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and that no man comes to the Father but by Him. And they won’t tell anyone that the Bible is the very word of God and, as such, humans have no authority to mess with it, alter it, change it, adapt it, or deny it.

They won’t tell the truth.

But, then again, that’s no surprise.

The Bible (the real Bible) said it would be that way —

 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. (2Tim. 4:1-4)

In other words, the Bible is true even when it predicts that people will not tell the truth about it.

Addendum

Let me add that Chris Rosebrough  over at fightingforthefaith.com has been doing a series of programs exposing the various errors of this series, as well.  Drop by and give him a listen.

The Word on the Word

Leave a reply

Well, the third annual Embracing the Truth Conference has come to a close.  Words don’t do it justice.  It was a great time of fellowship, preaching, teaching, camaraderie, and food.  It’s hard to believe it passed so quickly.  But, the folk at Hamilton Chapel treated us with an over-abundance of kindness, generosity, and service.  It’s one of those conferences where we leave “with coming back on our minds.”

I taught twice on Wednesday — morning and evening.  Here are the two lectures from that day.  (All of the audio from the conference will be posted to the main conference website: www.sovereigngracebibleconference.org)

The Word on the Word – 2013 Embracing the Truth – Part 1

The Word on the Word – 2013 Embracing the Truth – Part 2

Philippians 3:3 and the True Circumcision

3 Replies

I was recently listening to an online broadcast where the host was taking questions from callers. The subject of the New Covenant came up and the caller asked the host — a self-identified amillennial Covenantal Baptist — about the fact that both Jeremiah and the author of the book of Hebrews state that the recipients of the New Covenant promises are specifically “the house of Israel and the house of Judah.” The host replied, “Well that means it’s formed with the ‘true Israel.’”

The caller enquired, “So are you saying that now the word Israel has a different, spiritual meaning?” Without hesitation, the host insisted that the apostle Paul referred to the Church that way. “It’s clear,” said he, “when Paul says that we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus.” He then proceeded as if the point had been made. As he continued his defense, the host also referred to the Church as both “spiritual Israel” and “true Israel.”

And there it was. Yet another respected theologian employing language that the New Testament authors simply never use. Nowhere in the New Testament will you find the phrase “spiritual Israel” nor “true Israel.” But, according to the host, Philippians 3:3 clearly drew a direct link between circumcised Israelites and uncircumcised, believing Gentiles. And everyone, he concluded, who worshiped in the spirit of God and who gloried in Christ Jesus was automatically, and mystically, “the true circumcision.”

Not surprisingly, I beg to differ.

It seems to me that when someone advances this type of “Replacement Theology” (a hermeneutic system that replaces Old Testament Israel with the New Testament church), they need to be 100% certain that their understanding and interpretation of a text like Philippians 3:3 is accurate and unassailable. Because, what they are postulating is that the word “Israel” — a word that had a singular meaning ever since God changed Jacob’s name — had somehow in Paul’s economy suddenly and cataclysmically changed its meaning from “the direct descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” to “everyone who believes in Christ.” This, despite the fact that Paul never actually states that the meaning of the term has changed. He makes no plain statement or explains that now Gentiles believers are part of a true, spiritualized version of Israel.

The concept of the change of meaning is an inference drawn from a particular reading of a couple of key texts. And, it seems to me that if a legitimate alternate reading can be offered, based on the rules of proper exegesis, then Philippians 3:3 may not be the bedrock text some folk think it is.

So please allow me to offer an alternate, exegetical understanding of this text.

Context matters. So let’s start there. Let’s read the surrounding text and get a sense of Paul’s argument.

Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things again is no trouble to me, and it is a safeguard for you. Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless. But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. (Phil. 3:1-7 NASB)

There’s an interesting bit of word play going on the Greek text that some English translations miss.  But, it’s important in establishing Paul’s meaning.  In verses 2 and 3, he contrasts two types of people:

  1. Katatomē – evil workers; (KJV) concision; mutilators
  2. Peritomē – circumcision

Katatomē is a compound word, combining kata and temno to mean “cutting down or off.”  It implies mutilation.  Meanwhile, peritomē is the standard noun meaning “circumcision.”

The NASB translators add the words “false” and “true” in verses 2 and 3 in an apparent effort to demonstrate Paul’s contrast.  But, it’s important to recognize that they are inserted by the translators and have no place in the original Greek text. Other translations render the contrast thusly –

 Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—(NIV)

   Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh— (ESV)

   Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. (KJV)

   Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. (AKJV)

   Watch out for “dogs,” watch out for evil workers, watch out for those who mutilate the flesh. For we are the circumcision, the ones who serve by the Spirit of God, boast in Christ Jesus, and do not put confidence in the flesh—(HCSB)

   Beware of the dogs! Beware of the evil workers! Beware of the mutilators! For it is we who are the circumcision —we who worship in the Spirit of God and find our joy in the Messiah Jesus. We have not placed any confidence in the flesh, (ISV)

   Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the concision: For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh: (ASV)

   Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, who in spirit serve God; and glory in Christ Jesus, not having confidence in the flesh. (DRB)

   Look to the dogs, look to the evil-workers, look to the concision; For we are the circumcision, who by the Spirit are serving God, and glorying in Christ Jesus, and in flesh having no trust, (YLT)

You will notice the lack of the word “true” and “false” in any of those translations. Paul’s contrast is not between false and true circumcision, it’s between those who glory in their flesh and those who do not. But, both groups have undergone physical circumcision.

Paul’s ministry among the Gentiles was plagued by a group of Jewish believers who were also “zealous for the law.” (Acts 21:20)  They came to be known as “Judaizers,” who insisted that Gentile converts be circumcised and follow certain dictates of the Law of Moses.  Paul withstood them adamantly —

But not even Titus who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you. (Galatians 2:3-5)

Paul was fierce in his opposition to this mixing of law and grace, at one point saying that if the Judaizers were so zealous to cut, “I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate (or, emasculate) themselves.” (Gal. 5:12) These were the dogs of Philippians 3, the “concision” or katatomē who wanted to “cut off” and mutilate the flesh.

But importantly, they were indeed circumcised.  Physically, literally, cut in their flesh.  Paul argued that they trusted that fleshly alteration more than they trusted the Spirit of God or the finished work of Christ.  That was their problem.

Then there was the other group – the peritomē – described simply as “the circumcision.”

So, the question before us is: When Paul referenced the peritomē, was he speaking of a physical circumcision, or a “true” or “spiritual” cutting?  As we’ve demonstrated, the text merely says “we are the circumcision…”

The plainest reading of the text would be that Paul was contrasting two groups of circumcised folk.  One group trusted their fleshly connection to Abraham for their salvation and the other was trusting Christ.  Paul, a circumcised Jew, introducing the Jewish Messiah to a Gentile audience, contrasted the Judaizers with himself and his associates.  He warned the Gentiles against the one group, calling them dogs and mutilators.  But, he assured the Gentiles that he and his companions were “the circumcision who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh.”

Then, to really drive home his point, Paul listed his Jewish pedigree, arguing, “If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I more.” (Phil. 3:4)  And his first commendation? “Circumcised the eighth day.”  Paul personalized the contrast between himself and the concision.

There is nothing in the immediate context that would lead to the conclusion that Paul’s use of the word “we” indicated himself and the Gentiles to whom he was writing.  Rather, given the contrast, the use of the words katatomē and peritomē, and Paul’s personalization of his defense, it’s much more likely (and contextually consistent) to conclude that both sides of his contrast included circumcised Jews; on one side “evil workers” and on the other those who “put no confidence in the flesh.”

After all, if Paul were indeed referring to the Gentile converts when he used the term “we,” exactly what fleshly confidence would they have been denying?  Since the Judaizers were circumcised and trusting that fleshly alteration, what similar fleshly sign were the Gentiles abandoning?  Where’s the one-for-one contrast that Paul’s wordplay establishes if he was referring to people who did not first have a similar fleshly cutting to that sported by the concision?

For those reasons, I conclude that Paul was contrasting the circumcised Judaizers and their attendant fleshly confidence with his own circumcision and Jewish pedigree, all of which he counted “to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish in order that I may gain Christ.” (Phil. 3:8)

He was not including the Gentiles in his use of the word “we.”  He was not establishing a “true” circumcision that now included uncircumcised Gentile believers.  Nor was he inspired by a novel conception of “spiritual” or “true” Israel. He was referring to believing, circumcised Israelites, descendants of Abraham, who also had a proper understanding of the Christian faith and who had cast off any confidence in their flesh.

Now, I said all that to say this —

If what I’ve just written is valid.  If the exegesis is sound, the contextual considerations consistent, and the examination of language valid, then the almost knee-jerk appeal to Philippians 3:3 that I heard on the call-in program needs to be examined.  I know I’ve said it before – over and over again – but, the person who made this appeal is a Reformed Baptist fellow who is exceedingly (and appropriately) careful with the text when defending Calvinistic soteriology.  He pours over the language and context with a well-exercised fine-tooth comb in order to prove that the Arminian proof texts cannot withstand scrutiny.  But, for some reason, when the question of Israel arises, or when the subject turns to eschatology, his devotion to Covenantal Amillennialism tosses all of that careful textual devotion out the window.

And I get it!  I really do!  Sometimes, once we’ve settled on an approach to reading and understanding Scripture, we all have a tendency to assume that how we’ve always read a passage is the correct way to read it.  We can’t see it any other way than the way we’ve always seen it.  That’s natural.  But, that assumption can lead to complacency if we’re not careful.  It’s important to challenge ourselves.

If the understanding of Philippians 3:2-3 presented in this article has some validity, then those folk who use it to defend a “spiritual Israel” hermeneutic need to be cautious.  And, let me add, by way of closing, in all my years of engaging these topics and listening to various interpreters, exegetes, apologists, and theologians, whenever the subject of New Covenant arises and they are faced the fact that the promises of that covenant are made “with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,” and they immediately reply that the church is “the new, spiritual Israel” …

… I have yet to hear one of them explain how the church is “the house of Judah.”

But, that’s another subject for another day.

For more on this topic, please see my book, “Is The Church Israel?”  It’s a free pdf download you can find here:

http://www.salvationbygrace.org/uc/sub/docs/church_israel.pdf

What I Do Not Want For 2013

2 Replies

2013Back in 2010, I began the year by writing an article for my blog entitled “What I Don’t Want for 2010.” I reviewed it today and discovered that, without exception, I feel the same way for 2013. So, three years after its original writing, I thought I’d share it again, with a bit of appropriate updating.
__________________________

WHAT I DON’T WANT FOR 2013

I don’t normally make resolutions when the calendar changes. In fact, I don’t remember ever making New Year’s resolutions. It’s just not in my emotional or psychological makeup, I suppose.

This year, however, I’ve been doing some thinking. As opposed to resolving to do particular things, I’ve been considering the things I no longer want in my life.

Here are the basic facts: I am now 57 years old. In my brain, I’m still about 24. Mirrors are no longer my friends. But, I’ve lived long enough to know a few things about myself. And I’ve grown weary of my most tenacious tendencies. So here is my 2013 list of things I no longer want:

MY OWN WAY

I’ve spent a great deal of my life pursuing, and pretty effectively attaining, my wants and desires. Unfortunately, because I’m a depraved person (a fact that I can prove with ample evidence), my wants and desires were equally depraved. And eventually the constant diet of fulfilled sinful desire became wearying and soul-stultifying.

As I look back, I’ve learned two important lessons. One: every bad, painful, horrid thing that ever happened to me, I didn’t see coming. And two: every truly good thing that has occurred in my life happened despite me. So, what is instantly clear is that I am not in control. And on those occasions where it appeared that I had some influence over the outcome of things, I always messed them up. So, why would I want control? Why would I want things to work my way?

Early on in my Christian conversion I was taught a wonderful guiding principle: God is too holy not to that which brings Him the greatest glory and He loves us too much not to do that which is for our greatest good. In other words, He’s going to do things His way whether we like it or not. That’s what sovereign providence is all about.

So, from 2010 onward, I want no more of my own way.

MY OWN FAME

In my early 20’s, I decided to move to Los Angeles. That decision was driven by the need to be famous. It was no longer sufficient to have people in the Detroit area know me, I wanted a national stage. And rock music was the vehicle that would take me there. I had performed for two seasons and toured Great Britain with the Houston All-City Symphony. I had played intimate jazz and “big band” swing. I had played in garage bands, club bands, marching bands, pit bands, and shows bands. But, rock’n’roll was like the express elevator to worldwide recognition. It was hard work. It was emotionally draining. But, it paid big dividends. And that was just fine with me.

But, as Christianity took hold in my heart and mind, thoughts of my own personal advancement and fame became increasingly upsetting and revolting. “How,” I began to wonder, “can Christ truly be ‘all and in all’ if I am constantly making sure there’s adequate room for me?”

I cannot save anyone. My death will not result in anyone else’s redemption. I am quite utterly imperfect. I cannot heal sickness, solve crises, prevent catastrophes, or bring the dead to life. All in all, I am hardly a person to be admired or imitated because, when it comes to the really important matters, I can only point to the One who actually matters. So then, why should I be famous? He should have all the fame because He has all the power. And I need Him far more than He needs me.

So, from 2010 onward, I want no more of my own fame.

MY OWN ART

At one point in my life, I reveled in the notion that I was the quintessential “tortured artist.” My thoughts, emotions, and feelings were significant enough that they needed to be shared with the world. I wrote songs, I wrote poems, I wrote stories, I wrote … well, I wrote about me. I basked in my unmitigated emotional depth and imaginary courage. As I was wont to say, “Hurt me; I’ll make it art.” If hubris had a cousin, I was it.

I have several folders and notebooks full of poems and scribblings. I took them out the other night and realized that it had been years since I’d written anything poetic. Self-expression seems vain … in every meaning of the word.

Now whatever gifts God may have given me with which to communicate thoughts and ideas, I prefer to convey those thoughts and ideas that exalt Him for His great kindness to me, and those which “minister grace to the hearer.” (Eph. 4:29)

So, from 2010 onward, I want no more of my own art.

MY OWN CLEVERNESS

Sometimes, cleverness is its own reward. People gravitate to clever people who can devise inventions, turn a pithy phrase, or appear to be a few steps ahead of the madding crowd. Cleverness is also akin to sarcasm — the ability to slice and dice others with a bit of witty repartee. For many years, my sharp tongue was the chief weapon in my arsenal of tools used to keep everyone at arm’s distance.

As I have aged, I have been cursed with the ability to remember all the verbally-bloodied victims I’ve left in my wake. And, successful in my attempt to keep people at a safe distance, I found myself alone. Cleverness is also its own worst enemy.

Christianity, by contrast, insists on putting the wellbeing of others ahead of our own. Christianity instructs us to keep a civil tongue and use kind words. Christianity is not about being clever, it’s about being a servant, about giving yourself away and investing in the fruitful outcome of others. That’s not done by wit. It’s done by humility. And no matter how clever I think my thoughts or words are, they are of absolutely no significance if they do not aid the Christian progress of the person who hears them.

So, from 2010 onward, I want no more of my own cleverness.

MY OWN SINFUL PASSIONS

As a human, I crave. I have deep, entrenched desires. There was a time when I thought my passion for the things of this world was noble. I was never more alive than when I was lunging headlong into my latest craving. I was “deep,” after all. I felt things more vividly and violently than most folk … or, at least that’s how I saw myself. It made me unique and worth all the attention I was getting.

Consider Psalm 37:4 for a moment. It says, “Delight yourself in the Lord; and He will give you the desires of your heart.” That’s a dangerous statement unless the Lord changes the desires of your heart. And that’s what has happened to me. The more I have learned to delight myself in the Lord, the more He has become my primary desire. And, sure enough, the more of Himself He reveals to me, the more I am delighted. Now my passion is for Him; His glory, His word, His worship, and His people.

One of the most amazing things about genuine conversion is that God does not suppress our emotions — He redirects them. What was once self-love becomes brotherly love. What was once fleshly desire becomes Heavenly desire. What was once selfish passion becomes the desire to spread His word, to call sinners to repentance, and to help them see the One who is gracious, kind, patient, and altogether lovely.

So, from 2010 onward, I want no more of my own sinful passions.

WHAT I DESERVE

Through an act of amazing charity, I was recently given a set of drums. There was a time when I was defined by my ability to play drums and if I didn’t practice for at least three hours each day, I wasn’t alive. Playing drums was as natural as breathing. Although I used to own several drum kits, I haven’t owned any drums for fifteen years or more. When the kids were young and I was struggling financially, I had fallen behind on the house payments. I sold my last Pearl kit for exactly the amount it took to keep us in our house. Since then, I had been drum-less.

I told you that story to tell you this one. After I was given a beautiful set of Pearl drums — my favorite, by the way — I told a musician friend of mine about the remarkable circumstances that led to the gift. He said, “That’s great! You deserve them.” Those words hung in the air for a moment. Then I replied, “No, I don’t deserve them. And the last thing I want is what I deserve.”

You see, one essential element of a really advanced ego (trust me here, I’m an expert in this area) is the assumption that you deserve all the good things that come your way. And if something bad happens, it’s an aberration. That’s the sort of thinking that leads to questions like “Why do bad things happen to good people?”

The Bible declares that there are no good people. There are only sinners, enemies of God, haters of everything that is holy — wicked, depraved people. The proper question then is, “Why do good things happen to bad people?” And that’s the essence of grace.

What I deserve, it turns out, is hell forever. What I deserve is God’s eternal wrath. What I deserve is to be separated from Him permanently and perpetually. Fire, brimstone, torment — that’s what I deserve.

But, what I’m promised is Heaven. Through no goodness on my part, as the result of no good works I’ve performed, but merely as a matter of God’s mercy, I will not receive what I deserve.

I have received grace. I am receiving grace. I will receive grace.

So, from 2010 onward, the very, very last thing I ever want is what I deserve.

IN SUMMARY

Now here’s the great irony of God’s genius. As much as I do not want my own way, my way is inexorably becoming conformed to His way. In other words, I do not feel in any way cheated or short-changed. I am fulfilled and happy. Just as I grew tired of “my way,” He changed my way to suit His way and I most joyfully now pursue the way I find most pleasing — His way.

As much as I am no longer interested in my own fame, I get great joy from seeing Him exalted. And though I could never have predicted it, GCA and Salvation By Grace have become widely known through the Internet. I receive wonderful letters and email from people who share their lives and testimonies with us. We hear from all corners of the globe and people tell us how their lives and faith have been enriched by listening and reading at our site. Honestly, it’s overwhelming and deeply gratifying. But this new-found recognition is not fame. It’s not a matter of ego. It’s God’s providential wisdom at work. He allowed me to bask in my own aggrandizement until I could smell ego a mile away. Once that smell was repugnant, He put me into His service. Then He let people know who we were and what we were about.

His ways are wonderful.

As much as I do not want my own art, God does not destroy the individuality of His people. He gifts His own with the abilities that are best suited to their place in His kingdom. I was given the gift to communicate. Being Irish, I’ve always thought of it as “the gift of gab.” When folk tell me that the Bible finally makes sense to them, or that I have helped them understand complex biblical concepts in a way that makes it simple and approachable, that’s just God turning my “art” to His glory. It’s no longer about self-expression. It’s about Heavenly-expression. Same ability, new purpose.

Cleverness, I suppose, falls into that same rubric. But, where I used to show off my own verbal and intellectual dexterity, my concern now is to show off God’s astounding wisdom and the limitless value of His word. It’s not about being clever; it’s about being clear, being precise, being a tool in the hands of a Master Craftsman.

As much as I do not want my own sinful passions, God has redirected my passion. He has not squelched it. Much as He used the temperament of Moses or the boldness of Peter, God has taken what was once debauched and turned it toward His holy purposes. Christianity has enlivened and enriched my passion, giving it a righteous purpose and restraining it from its unseemly past.

His grace is beyond comprehension.

And, as much as I do not want what I deserve, as Christ has been formed in my heart I want Him to receive everything that He deserves. He deserves a church that will recognize their status as His elect and beloved bride … and act like it. He deserves to have His word revered, respected, and rightly handled. He deserves to be glorified through the eternal ages because of His finished, complete, fully-effective atoning work and the full salvation of His chosen people. He deserves to sit at the Father’s right hand and be lifted up above all names and all creation. He deserves to be worshiped and adored. He deserves the very best that His Father can prepare and give Him.

And, I want Him to have it all.

Let me close this bit of new year’s observation by driving home one more vital point:

This is nothing like me.

Left to myself, I would always want my way, my fame, my art, my cleverness, and every sinful passion my evil heart could inspire. And I would be fully convinced that I deserved every moment of pleasure and egocentric gratification. That’s exactly what I’m like.

This short treatise is evidence of how effectively and sovereignly God has overcome and overwhelmed a wretch like me. I get no glory from it; nor have I earned any. He gets all the glory because He has done all the work, invested all the effort, and is fully responsible for any and all good results.

I am astounded at His grace.

I am secured by His mercy.

I am reassured by His love.

I am thankful.

I am humbled.

And I want Him more than I want myself.

Happy New Year.

AN UPDATE FOR 2013

I have to admit that since writing this article three years ago, not only have I witnessed God’s kindness in many, many facets of life, but I have quite-nearly reached the most elusive of all human goals: Contentment.

The apostle Paul wrote —

“But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at last you have revived your concern for me; indeed, you were concerned before, but you lacked opportunity. Not that I speak from want, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.” (Phil. 4:10-13)

I knew this attitude doctrinally, but now I am learning it experientially.  And it’s great.  The more I lean on God’s sovereign providence and admit repeatedly that whatever He does is good, the more content I’ve become with every decision He has made regarding my life and ministry.

It’s not about wealth or poverty, full or hungry, abundance or neediness.  It’s about knowing who we are in Christ, our Heavenly destiny, and His faithfulness to His people in all circumstances.  After beatings, stonings, shipwreck, imprisonment, and being abandoned by “everyone in Asia” (2Tim. 1:15), Paul wrote that he was content. After receiving a gift while under house arrest, he wrote that he had no wants. I find that astounding.

I live in air conditioning, carpeting, plentiful food, a variety of entertainments, and an army of friends and supporters.  My needs are more than supplied.  I have abundance. Yet, I still have wants. And I still struggle to be content. But, I’m getting there.  I am closer than I was three years ago.

To be content in this life is the goal.  And, by His grace, by His providence, despite the ups and downs of life, I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.

So here’s the one thing I WANT for 2013: to be conformed to His will and to learn to be truly content.  That would make for a mighty fine new year.

Local News Articles From Years Past

1 Reply

Over the years, I’ve contributed various Christian articles to the local newspapers and they’ve been very cooperative in running them “as written,” without additional editing (although they did insert their own titles).  These articles have even been responsible for bringing some of our current members through the doors for the first time.

As they were published, these articles were pinned to our bulletin board until they took up the majority of the cork real estate.  So it was time for a bit of cleaning.  I took them down, scanned them, and thought I’d share them here on the blog.  The text of each article is included below the image for easier reading.

The first three articles appeared in the Smyrna A.M. paper back in 2007.  Smyrna A.M. is a production of the Tennessean newspaper and is distributed freely to every household in the Smyrna area.  The fourth article appeared in the Murfreesboro Post back on November 12, 2006.

Who Is Jesus

Be Careful When Answering “Who is Jesus?”

Jesus is not your homeboy. He’s not your co-pilot. And he’s not your boyfriend. Despite the marketing techniques that are in vogue today, which attempt to make Jesus more approachable by making him more “cool,” the trend toward redefining our Savior may soon make Him indistinguishable from any other pop star or celebrity. And sadly, like most celebrities, he is too often viewed as an optional accessory to be used or ignored according to the whim of the consumer. And as we all know, audiences are fickle.

What’s worse, notions of Jesus as God – one to be worshiped and obeyed – are markedly absent from most modern sermons, and the “dumbing down” of Christ is reaching a sort of critical mass in the contemporary church. Soon the Jesus of the Bible will disappear altogether.

Here’s a fact: You are not like God and God is not like you. He is different. He is “completely other.” As the prophet Isaiah records, “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8-9)

In the attempt to fill pews and keep their coffers fat, the modern church has attempted to humanize Jesus in sub-biblical ways. They assume that His love is tantamount to human love, or that His jealousy and zeal are the same as ours. As a result, we have a generation of Christians who redefine their Christianity by their feelings and thoughts, rather than by aligning their thinking with the dictates of Scripture. And that’s not just theologically clumsy. It’s lethal.

Jesus once asked His apostles, “Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” When they responded that some thought he was John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or some other prophet, Jesus asked them pointedly, “But who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:13-15)

That’s an excellent question – one that we all have to come to grips with at some point in life. Who do we say that Jesus is? Is he merely a man with some good social ideas? Is he another in a succession of Hebrew prophets? Or is he the figment of someone’s fertile imagination foisted on all humankind as some sort of grand, cosmic joke?

Biblically, there is only one right answer. Faced with that penetrating question, Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.” In response, Jesus made sure that God received the credit for that realization, saying, “Blessed are you, Simon bar Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in Heaven.” (Matthew 16:16-17)

That means that the only correct answer to the question, “Who is Jesus?” is the answer God reveals – “He is my son. He is Christ. He is Lord.”

Of course, all of that begs the question, “Who do you say he is?”

Be careful. Your answer matters.

 

Fun Fundamentalism

 Putting the ‘Fun’ in Fundamentalism

“So what kind of preacher are you?” a woman recently asked. “You’re not one of those fundamentalists are you?”

I knew what she was driving at. One small segment of evangelical Christianity has usurped the term “fundamentalism” and redefined it so that only they fit in the category. Now when we think of “fundamentalists,” we imagine fire-breathing pulpiteers who spend their time listing all the things they reject and condemning everyone with whom they disagree. And that’s a shame because fundamentalism is not a bad word.

“Yes,” I replied. “I am a fundamentalist.”

She took a couple steps back. I assured her that I wouldn’t bite. “You see, I am an adamant defender of the fundamentals of the Christian faith. The Virgin birth. The sinless life. The death, burial, and resurrection. Those are all fundamental to Christianity. Without those basics you have no faith.”

I asked her, “Would you go to a doctor who didn’t understand the rudiments of medicine? Or would you trust an auto mechanic who didn’t know how engines work?”

“Of course not.”

She was catching my drift. The same way that we would never trust our bodies or even our cars to the care of someone who lacked the fundamentals, we should never entrust our spiritual well-being to someone who ignores the basics. In theological circles, those fundamentals are called “doctrines.” A doctrine is simply something taught as a rule or principle of the faith. And, the principles of Christianity are built on those fundamental doctrines.

So don’t be afraid to call yourself a fundamentalist. Study the doctrines and construct your faith from those basic building blocks. That’s the method Jesus prescribed: “Therefore, whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock.” (Matthew 7:24)

Yep, I’m a fundamentalist. I love the doctrines of the Christian faith and am not ashamed to say so. Recently, one of our congregants told me, “As we keep teaching the Bible, we are going to be known as the church to put the ‘mental’ back into fundamentalism.”

I smiled. “You’re right. But, wouldn’t it be great to be known as the church to put the ‘fun’ back, too?”

 

Theology = education

 Theology = Education, Not Entertainment
(I had entitled this: Theology Matters)

I get a lot of email. Due to the popularity of our website, I receive comments and observations from a wide range of denominations and countries. One of the most consistent themes emerging from my inbox is the general lack of doctrine and theology being taught in most churches. In its place, churches offer showmanship – clowns, puppets, light shows, theatrical productions, surround-sound, smoke machines, rock bands, etc.

An elemental shift has occurred in the contemporary church. According to the Bible, although the followers of Christ are in the world, we are not to be of the world (John 17:14-16). We are called to reflect the principles and teaching of Christ, as salt and light in an otherwise decaying and dark environment. But, as church buildings and budgets have grown, churches have begun competing with the world over the disposable income people spend on entertainment. And in the process, doctrine and theology have suffered.

So, does that really matter? I mean, what’s the point of theology anyway? Is doctrine really that important?

The word “theology” is a contraction of two Greek words, meaning “words about God.” The Bible is full of such words. As you learn the Bible, you learn what God is like, how He thinks, how He acts, and what it takes to approach Him. It’s not enough to simply think about God. It matters what you think about God. Proper theology teaches you how to think about God properly.

In his epistles, the apostle Paul urged the church repeatedly to concentrate on “sound doctrine.” That means: solid teaching. They were not to merely imagine what Christ was like or what He taught. They were to devote themselves to the solid, provable teaching handed down to them by the apostles. Proper theology leads to proper Christianity.

Biblical theology answers the most pressing, important question any of us will ever face: “How can sinners stand forgiven and un-condemned before a righteous, holy God?” Given that we are all mortal and the ratio of death so far is a perfect 1:1, what you think about God’s salvation is a very important consideration. Proper theology leads to peace with God.

And finally, once we understand our relationship with God and His Son, that knowledge affects every aspect of our lives. How we treat people, how we raise our kids, how we live in society, and how we treat our marriage are all directly impacted by a genuine understanding of our position before God. In other words: Proper theology leads to a proper life.

So Does Theology Matter? Yes. In fact there is no other subject in this lifetime that will have a greater impact on your eternal destiny than the words you say about God.

Theology matters.

 

Big Deal With Jesus

So What Is The Big Deal With Jesus?

How many people have heard that name all their lives and still don’t know why we Christians care so much about this Jesus fellow? Most folk know the basics. He was born in a manger in Bethlehem to a virgin girl named Mary. He was venerated by shepherds and later by wise men that were following a star. You can learn that much by watching the Peanuts Christmas Special. But there’s much more to Jesus than that.

First off, Jesus of Nazareth is a verifiable historical person. In other words, it is a fact that he actually lived on planet Earth and was crucified during the reign of Tiberius Caesar. Even Tacitus, the Roman historian, confirms this.

The Hebrew Scriptures that make up what we call the Old Testament are replete with predictions about a Messiah, a Deliverer, who would come to bring peace and justice. In fact, there are so many details in the Scriptures concerning the Messiah, that the odds against any one man fulfilling them all or practically incalculable. Nevertheless, Jesus matched the details verbatim.

Christianity makes many claims that are utterly unique when compared to the religions of the world, past and present. For instance, Christianity starts with a fact: Jesus lived and was crucified. Then it follows up with the central event of historic Christianity: the resurrection. The Bible declares that Jesus was dead and buried. He remained in the grave for three days and three nights. And, He rose from the dead, ate and drank with his apostles, and rose into heaven, taking His seat at the right hand of God.

This central event – the resurrection – has come under all sorts of scrutiny and criticism over the last 2000 years, but it remains one of the most enduring and powerful events of human history. Books and volumes have been constructed proving the veracity of the biblical account and after years of hard-headed study I am equally convinced that the total sum of Christian doctrine stands or falls on that central reality.

And perhaps the most convincing proof of the truth of the resurrection is that Christianity continues to make cataclysmic changes in people even today. People are converted from cynicism to faith; from anger to lovingkindness; from self-centeredness to charity and service. There is a power that continues to overwhelm people, driving them toward those things that are good and true, despite themselves. The same power that resurrected Jesus continues to bring people from their spiritual darkness into the light of understanding and grace.

And that, my friends, is a very big deal.