Did He Invite?

In Mark 1, Mark encapsulates the work of the Lord Jesus Christ as: "Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel" (vv. 14, 15). Jesus did not invite people to gatherings. Galilee was the most populous of the regions of Palestine. He went there and preached right where the people were. Paul later tells us that "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation" (Rom. 1:16). Not much gospel preaching is happening today. Two other activities occur: 1) Inviting people to church, and 2) Taking people through a system of verses and repeating a prayer at the end. There isn't one example in the New Testament of anyone inviting someone to church. We are commanded nowhere to invite the unsaved to gather with believers.

People have a lot of reasons why they don't follow the example of Jesus in His work. "It doesn't work." "People get turned off." "You lose opportunities." "People don't like to have it shoved down their throats." Of course, none of these are Scriptural. These reasons manifest pragmatism. Sometimes "if it works, do it" is called "practical." Obeying Scripture is called "impractical." Many point to results to justify. However, none of us can judge results. God always uses the same means to save people---His Word---but He is glorified when we follow the Scriptural pattern. Not doing so is leaning on our own understanding, not acknowledging Him, and then not having Him direct our paths. Who directs the path when we do it our way? We do, of course. Does it work out better when we do it our way? Never. We know that by faith. Living by faith requires putting aside what we think will work. God sees things in one eternal present. We can't know the damage that using false methodology does. We might see numerical success, encourage others to do the same as us, and now dozens and hundreds of churches are mimicking us because what we do has shown results. In all of this, we are honored and God is ignored.

Preaching the wrong gospel is worse. The ones who invented and then perfected the travesty of corrupt evangelism have made it into a slick business presentation. Some of the same ones talk about having the power of God in evangelism, and they go out and misrepresent Scripture. The power of God is found in the Word of God (Heb. 4:12), the sword of the Holy Spirit (Eph. 6:17). Instead, men have taken out repentance, counting the cost, and the message of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Ninety times in Acts Jesus is called Lord and only twice, Savior. Christ's Lordship was the saving message of the apostles. In 2 Peter 2:1, denying Lordship is said to be what most characterizes the apostate. Is it possible that these non-Lordship "evangelists" have simply spread apostacy throughout the land, explaining why so many professions, and yet so much godlessness.

This issue is really simple. Look at the methods of Jesus and the apostles and follow them. They were not complex. These methods did require studying the Word of God to do real spiritual warfare, to pull down strongholds in men's minds. They required faith and courage. They weren't expensive, except to each individual who was setting himself apart as a Christian in a godless society. The emphasis is no longer going out to where people are and preaching the truth. We know that the preaching of the cross is foolishness to the lost. We can't make true preaching into anything else to them. The new emphasis is making the church into something the world will want to visit or the message into something that the world will want to hear, and in so doing, we are dishonoring God, turning men into darkness, glorifying man, and ruining the soil that could perhaps be much more pliant if professing believers had done otherwise.

GREAT READ!

Not often do scholarly articles appear on modesty. This essay comes with a disclaimer, but at least approaches the subject in a thoughtful manner---MODESTY

Perhaps you aren’t a fan of satire, but for a good chuckle at the expense of both the outsourcing controversy and Charismatic prayer lines, see this today: OUTSOURCING?

And maybe you didn't know what John Stossel has to tell you about the congressional record among other examples of fraud in the House of Representatives---STOSSEL

My gut feeling (known by some as the burning in the bosom) told me this was it today.

A New Feature on WHAT IS TRUTH

Every day or two you get a fresh, original blog here for your reading edification, challenge, and even entertainment. If you haven't noticed, you get these blogs ABSOLUTELY FREE, which is, by the way, also my cost for using Blogger. Pay no attention to the credo: You get what you pay for. That was long ago proven fallacious. Now, on the no-blog days, this author will scour the world-wide-web (not to be confused with Dr.-Gary-Webb) for hours, even minutes, to provide for you his top posts of the day. And then, after a certain amount of consideration from absolutely no advisory board, this author will unilaterally and subjectively choose what he thinks you might think is interesting or that he may even deem a must read. Recent studies have shown that the same dentists who recommend chewing gum also recommend checking out this editorial opinion when possible.

When you see the following banner,

GREAT READS!

you know that you will be getting fabulous links such as this:
http://www.arthistoryclub.com/art_history/Brandenburg_Gate

One of my potential methods is to throw the web addresses of several posts into a tumble dryer for a 40 minute cycle and then choose the first three hot ones as top for the day. So you can see that this is something that you won't want to miss. Already former maximum security prisoners are clamoring for this new on-line feature.

"What was the name of his blog?"
Stew Pidity, Walla Walla Observer

"Does your computer crash when you click on his links?"
U. B. Duped, The Texarkana Star

Baptism: Why So Far?

How far would you be willing to walk somewhere? This might be something you are considering due to the rising gas prices. I know they've changed my attitude about the use of vehicles. You know gas is getting expensive when your legs have become an alternative energy source. OK, I might walk five miles regularly and ten on a special occasion. Unfortunately, I would be tempted mightily to tell everyone afterwards how far I walked and then how much my feet hurt. Where did Jesus begin his trip to John the Baptist in order to be baptized by him? Mark 1:9, "And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan." John was baptizing in the Jordan River in Judea in the wilderness close to Jerusalem. How far was that from Nazareth? Jerusalem is seventy miles from Nazareth.

Why would Jesus walk seventy miles to get baptized by John the Baptist? What was special about the baptism of John that necessitated Jesus to go all that way? Couldn't Jesus just have asked Joseph or some other believer to baptize Him and save that trip? A short while later, Jesus gets into a discussion with the religious leaders about the baptism of John. He answered the scribes, the priests, and the rulers who challenged His authority, saying, "The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me" (Mark 11:30). They reasoned among themselves, and came up with an answer: "We cannot tell." They knew that if they said "from heaven" he would demand to know why they did not believe John. Or, if they should say, "of men" they knew they would be in trouble with the people, for all men counted John to be a prophet. So John's baptism, we know, came from heaven.

Most often arguments about baptism center on the recipients and the mode of baptism. Is it for infants or adults or for believers? Is sprinkling or pouring acceptable or should we immerse alone? Those are worthy topics, but does the administrator of the baptism make any difference? Does it matter who we are baptized by? Well, Jesus said John's baptism was from heaven. John's baptism wasn't just some Old Testament ritual. It was a brand new ceremony ordained by the Almighty, John the Baptist the miracle child who grew to be the man the Lord designated the proper agent of this baptism. In John 1:33 we read John say: ". . . he that sent me to baptize with water." John didn't invent this thing of baptism. He got it from above.

The only baptism that God approves of and has authorized is John's baptism. All the members of the first church had the baptism of John including the Head and founder of the church, Jesus Christ, who walked seventy miles in order to be baptized by the proper authority. Jesus believed so strongly in this baptism, He declared that those who rejected it were in reality rejecting the counsel of God in Luke 7:29-30, which states: "And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him." Not being baptized of proper authority was rejecting the counsel of God.

Where is this authority to baptize today? The authority passed from heaven to John to Jesus to the church. Jesus ordained the group, not just individuals, to baptize in the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19, 20. That group was the church. Someone may ask, "Isn't Scriptural authority enough." This reasoning would go like this: the Bible commands us to be baptized, so that if folks read the Bible and see that they need to be baptized, they could just baptize one another based upon the authority of the Word of God. Couldn't Jesus have done the same thing? He especially had authority that He could have passed on to anyone He wished. But Jesus walked seventy miles to get baptized of John, an example about the importance of a proper administrator of baptism.

The proper administrator of baptism has become the means by which God's authority is passed from one church to the next. Someone gets baptized with church authority and then sent by that church to evangelize and baptize. Those baptized have a proper administrator of baptism if they are baptized by someone with a legitimate baptism. Not just any administrator will do. It must be someone sent by a true church, a church in the heritage of churches mothered by that original Jerusalem church that originated around John the Baptist and lead by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Roman Catholics, Protestants, Campbellites, and Charismatics have rejected the counsel of God concerning Scriptural baptism; therefore, all true Baptists must consider their administration of baptism null and void.

Power: Use or Abuse

Someone recently complained on their blog: "The large emphasis fundamentalism puts on authority does much to enforce the list and to squelch any independent questioning/research into the validity of the list." Interpreted: "Waaaah, I want my own way. Give me my binky!" Over at Sharper Iron, someone wrote this: "We (Type B types) tend to believe and organize ministries around a de-centralized approach - sharing power and decision-making authority to a variety of Godly men. I don't know that I've ever met a Type-A guy who shares authority with anyone - So your decision-making style would be centralized - on steroids!" Interpreted: "I'd like to keep my job as long as I can, and I don't think I can do that with this group if I act like I'm the boss." Those both sound very popular in the world in which we live. The typical person loves hearing them. I remember talking to a woman about our church and she asked me if "there were any women in our power triangle."

We know Satan wants to eradicate Scriptural authority. All authority is of God (Romans 13:1, 2). Apostates "walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities" (2 Peter 2:10). Jude says they "despise dominion" (1:8). Without authority in Israel during the Judges, "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" (Judges 17:6; 21:25). As we get closer to the end 2 Timothy 3 says (v. 2) "men shall be lovers of their own selves." People don't want to be told what to do, which is why you will see the bumper sticker: "Question authority." Today in many instances coaches can't coach, teachers can't teach, and parents can't parent. Even in the military, some would like to make the drill sergeant their personal therapist. Punky kids on the street vandalize and steal without retribution because they know their rights. Adults helplessly look on with a fear of lawsuit. Children throw public temper tantrums and parents allow it, afraid what people might think if they were to use some discipline.

Some might excuse their disrespect of authority with examples of Nazi Germany, Stalin Russia, Richard Nixon, Jim and Tammy Baker, and Jack Hyles. They explain that through years of abusive leadership, their trust in authority has eroded to an all time low. Often Bill Clinton doesn't get thrown into that list. Instead, they skip straight from Iran-Contra to "no weapons of mass destruction." Often these attacks on offices of power serve as plays from others seeking to take them. As long as authoritative institutions have existed, corruption has occurred. None of this erases God's design. He still wants to use men to rule.

Even greater influence toward headlessness has come through institutionalized child care. Without the security of a Scriptural home arrangement, in the first few formative years, the child develops a lack of trust. The break up of home authority through state education and a two-income economy, propaganda-like bombardment of the modern mind with poor examples on television and in movies, and popular music pounds its message of rebellion against the restraint of marriage and acquiescence to rightful leaders. Divorce often undermines beliefs in Scriptural and traditional roles. Women struggle to trust again in male headship. Of course, since God originated the chain of command, Satan wants to do everything possible to cut its links, eliminating the ultimate submission to God. Every day he orchestrates compounding consent to the enticement of sinners, making insubordination a new ethic in society.

Satan ruins worship with the wrong object of worship and corrupt methods. He alleviates authority with spotty submission until finally we have no real authority at all. When every man was doing what he wanted in Judges, there was no king in Israel. The people who do rule have often abdicated the God-designed purpose. Very little is left of their leadership except a figure-head.

Several years ago we had a young lady leave our church because, she said, disagreement over pastoral authority. She professed to believe that pastors had authority only in issues of Biblical command. In other words, if the Bible didn't command it, the pastor had no say in it. If a pastor wanted to start a new prayer meeting, he would need a church vote. Another church hired her on staff; I told them of her clearly stated view, but they took her anyway. This lack of accountability diminishes the strength of authority in churches. Finally, few to none pay attention to much of what he says should get done, leaving the man of God toothless. A good way to hurt his ability to influence others toward Godliness is to help others have the impression that he is a dictator, an authoritarian.

With churches hunkered down in the middle of all this, the world prods and provokes them to become like the world. Even though Paul told Titus, "These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority" (Titus 2:15), the new way is to share that authority with those to whom God has not given it. No one should be surprised that many like it better, and as a church becomes more worldly, this becomes the new leadershp paradigm. You've seen what has happened to parenting in the last 30 years--unrestrained children abound. Even authoritative dads and moms are parenting dinosaurs. Shift this to the church and the pastor who tells people what to do is a remnant of an earlier, paleozoic era, long ago dismissed for its insensitivity and chauvenism.

I've got one bit of counsel in all this: Rule the church exactly how God has shown in His Word. After having done so, defend your leadership style with the verses from which you developed your conviction. Don't apologize because you choose to rule, to make strong decisions. You'll hear from the weak and whiny who want things their way. Be sure you have on your spiritual armor and be strong. Stand firm. God expects it and your people need it.

Power Blogging

I don't know if you know it, but Machiavelli was never able to use the strategies he wrote in his book, The Prince, to get back into office. After the people read his book, there was no way they wanted someone like him in power. He should have written a later addendum entitled: Don't Publish a Book Revealing Your Strategy. His power trip was short lived and mainly in his mind, like a whole lot of other people. They do power lunches wearing power ties to discuss power plays and forget all about gravity. Yes, gravity. Gravity is where the real power is, and it isn't even noticed during most power meals. Gravity was what kept their power corned beef on rye with bean sprouts fastened to their power plates. Jesus said in Matthew 28:18 that He personally possesses all power in heaven and in earth. Then He transferred all of that power to His institution, the church. He authenticated that power just a short time later on the Day of Pentecost. The church still has that authority and will until He raptures the saints.

When I was in college, I travelled with a choir through New York City and we stopped in to look at the United Nations building. A friend of mine and I proceeded to act like ambassadors from a foreign nation. We had as much authority in that building as most bloggers on the world wide web. I think most people already know this, but does it matter? Having a keyboard and an above average vocabulary doesn't equal Divine approval. The blog becomes a shortcut for them. With their new blog, they've landed on 'skip eleven spaces.' They missed the faithful study and obedience in the local church, the spiritual mentoring from the Godly man of God, and at least some kind of concurrence that they are ready to go. They've gotten their theological decoder ring and official blog certificate from Texarkana and now they are ready to tell people who is wrong, what everyone should believe, and how people should live the Christian life. They develop a hugely inflated sense of who they are from comments from people who don't know them. They get the attention of quasi-legitimate authorities with whom they agree, and think that this stands for authentication. They have had cyber-hands laid on them. They have opinion, will travel. On top of this, on the internet you would not know if your latest blog guru was a genuine church-sent believer, a legitimate pastor, a warlock in the Church of Solar Subconsciousness, or a teenager typing during a break from playstation.

No doubt a certain amount of fellowship and sharpening can occur between believers isolated from substantive theological conversation. However, it shouldn't circumvent a very important institution, which just happens to be the pillar and ground of the truth. The comments and ideas and streams of consciousness often avoid the important grid of local church agreement. In many cases this proceeds from an extrapolation of Christian liberty. 'No verse says: Thou Shalt Not Blog; the absence of this command equals permission.' No, it doesn't. A person speaking without authority, speaks without God's approval. No approval might equal disobedience. It certainly equals danger. False teaching bouncing around the universe at the speed of light. "And how shall they preach unless they be sent?"

But how can all of this matter when I've got a decoder ring and a laser printed certificate that says Brussels, Belgium? "I'm ready to change the world from behind this keyboard. I'm Microsoft called and Blogger sent."

A Confused Stand

I'm sure that I think that I mean this. I do. Am. Sure that is. About thinking. Meaning it. Well, I feel sorry for confused young fundamentalists. To start, they don't know who they are. What is a fundamentalist? Most of them can't figure it out. I have a hard time helping them. The early fundamentalists had a solid thing to stand against. They had to stop liberalism. But what about those who fellowshipped with liberals? But maybe the five fundamentals weren't enough. But we don't want it to be too much. And how exactly should we define these terms? What is inerrancy? What is Scripture?

What's the problem? They know they believe in unity. They also know they believe in separation. But they believe that the church is all believers. If it is all believers, then they have to unify with all believers. They have to be kind, and yet not put up with everything. They can't get along with everyone. So where do they take their stand?

I'm finding that it works sort of like this. And I mean sort of. They can't fellowship with Billy Graham---denial of literal hell, too much. They like Al Mohler, the Calvinistic voice of intelligence in the Southern Baptist Convention. He likes John MacArthur who is cool about exposition, which they like. They don't like Hyles. Oh no. And anyone like him. But Al Mohler fellowships with Billy Graham, and he is in the same convention as Rick Warren. But he isn't a Hyles guy, and that's good. Because the gospel is important. They want to be considered intelligent, intellectuals. That means new versions. All of them are done by people they don't fellowship with, but that's OK, because they found out that there are mistakes, not too many, in the text. But that's good, because it's reasonable. Anyone who says there isn't just doesn't get it. And they do. Multitude of the manuscripts. Perfect preservation. But not any Bible that anyone uses. But no one should worry. And they love evangelism and new converts can't read Elizabethan English. And Piper preaches with passion and wants unity and uses the ESV, easy to understand, but his music is the pits. They like his passion about worship, but not his worship, but they'll defend him until you say they really like him. You can't fellowship with David Cloud. Or anyone who wants to put culottes on every girl they can see. Because that's what those people want, and they hate legalism except with the ones who are legalistic, and for them they are legalistically unlegalistic. So they will fight against the KJVO and the 1-2-3s, and against anyone who says they fight too much, and their women don't wear pants, but they love Together for the Gospel, but not really. And Phil Johnson is the man. They love those guys, not enough for fellowship, but enough to show that they aren't like the old fundamentalists, even though they want to respect them. And they post. They blog. They sharpen. But don't like fighting. Like discussion. Agree to disagree. Except with certain ones. They don't drink but are fine with drinking, but not really, and even though you drink that's fine, but they don't like it. A fine cigar and a movie. Let's talk about it. They'll talk. Not going to commit. Not the theater, but the DVD, so since DVDs are the same, movies are OK. And are very cool with women. Speak up. But all for male authority. They are against the inclusive language version but for including women in the discussion because they're strong but sensitive or the other way around. Moused up hair good, pants hanging down bad, but daycare is good even though its bad. And they don't like the tone of the old fundamentalists, except for slacks, versions, and people who disagree with them.

Are you getting all this?

Oxymorons

Plastic silverware. Objective opinion. Artificial intelligence. Educated guess. Microsoft Works. Genuine naughahyde. Government worker. Airline food. Postal service. French resistance. Adult male. Oxymorons.

I thought of another one just as I was writing this. Parachurch ministry. But how about "boring worship"? Can we really be worshiping God and have it be boring? The thing isn't to make it entertaining. The thing is that if it's worship, then it isn't boring. The "need" for entertainment says that people are bored. It reminds me of the kid who asked his mom how far she had counted in her lifetime? She said, "I don't know. What about you?" "25, 657," he answered. She asked, "So why did you stop at that particular number?" He replied, "Church was over." Jesus said to "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart" (our affections) and "all thy mind" (our attention). You tell me what gets the most affection and attention, and I will tell you what you worship. A key word with worship is "focus." Does God get your focus? Does He get your attention and your affection? If not, what does?

If God isn't getting your affection and attention, then your worship probably is boring. You probably aren't thinking about the songs you sing in church. You are probably not really exalting God. You are just singing words, probably mostly thoughtlessly. You are probably not extending God to the nations. You are probably not talking about Him to the people around you. Why? He isn't your focus. And when He's not your focus, then you are bored with Him.

What will change that? You need to find out Who He is. He is a "rewarder of them who diligently seek Him" (Hebrews 11:6). He is a good God. God can't seem like a rip-off to you if you are going to focus on Him, give Him affection and attention. You can't think that He doesn't know what is best for you. You have to recognize Him for Who He really is, that is, the giver of every good and perfect gift (James 1:17). All the good things that you enjoy come from God. Why? He wants you to enjoy them. When you blow it by sinning, guess Who can take care of that sin and its results? God alone, of course. If we confess the sin, He's faithful and just to forgive us (1 John 1:9), because the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7). He sent His dear Son to you when you were ungodly to die for you, and in so doing, He demonstrated His love for you (Romans 5:8). Only believers can worship God. Only believers can sacrifice for Him. And believers will not find Him to be boring, but new every morning and every day.

Let's stop joyous Christian from being an oxymoron. Let's start today. Start today. That's not an oxymoron. Start tomorrow would be.