What Are the Implications of an Old Earth for Christians?

Posted on 02/09/2011 by Paul Pavao

I wrote an email tonight that I just have to put on this blog. There are things I really like saying, and this is one of them.

I wrote the email in response to the following question:

What are the implications concerning Old Earth vs. New Earth? What is all the arguing really about?

To me? One thing. Is our faith based on a real God who gives us a real Spirit, and are we following a being, Jesus Christ the Son of God, who really is the Truth?

If we are, then we can pursue truth. We can look at scientific evidence honestly, knowing that our God is Creator no matter what we find in the scientific evidence.

Or, is our faith based upon stories we read in a book? Sure, I agree the Bible is inspired. But I don’t believe in Jesus because of the Bible. I believe the Bible because I believe in Jesus.

Jesus is God. The Bible has some of the things–not even a very large portion of the things–God has said. I don’t believe God wants us to have faith in a book. It’s not even a book, anyway. It’s letters, poetry, and a few short books–many writings. We didn’t collect them into one until much later.

Jesus didn’t leave us a book. He left us apostles, and he left us a church that the apostles’ writings say is the pillar and support of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).

When the church was being deceived, what did the apostles tell them to do? Paul told them to talk to each other, speaking the truth to one another … in love (Eph. 4:13-16). John told them that together (he used a plural “you” consistently) they would be taught by “the anointing” (1 Jn. 2:26-27).

The Roman Catholic Church wants us to believe that they are the church Paul speaks of that is the pillar and support of the truth. That’s false. The church that the Scriptures know about is the local church. You, your husband, and those who will follow Christ with you. The apostles say that together you, the church in your town, can seek God and be led by him into truth as you follow the anointing and speak the truth in love to one another.

Those whose faith is in the book, rather than in God, end up having to defend the book. We who place our faith in God find that God can defend himself! Rather than defending him, we depend on him to defend us!

I believe it is for this reason that Jesus, the Word of God, didn’t give us a book to be the Word of God. Yes, the Bible is the Word of God, but it’s only a small portion of the Word of God. Surely we don’t believe God’s words are limited to a thousand pages in all of history! Surely we don’t believe he’s been sitting around silent for 2,000 years! I believe he likes us, and he likes to talk to us and guide us.

“I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will guide you with my eye” (Ps. 32:8).

“As many as are led by the Spirit, these are the sons of God” (Rom. 8:14).

(Caveat: I’m not talking about me being led by the Spirit. I’m talking about us, the local church, being led by the Spirit. Here, locally, we follow God together, and I let my brothers and sisters speak to me from the Scriptures and from their own revelation to keep me from being deceived. We test the Spirits by the Scriptures. God won’t say something different–at least not significantly different, though there may be some minor cultural things–to us than he did to the apostles.)

Ok, one more thing. We have to look at the flip side of this. What did Jesus think of those who put all their trust in “the Book”:

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you will find life, but these are they which testify of me! Yet you refuse to come to me so that you may have life” (Jn. 5:39-40).

Beware of modern Pharisees, who tell you that if the Scriptures turn out to be allegorical in some places, or to have scientific errors in another, then you can’t believe the Gospel. That’s ludicrous!

We can believe the Gospel because of its power! Jesus sent the apostles out to be witnesses of the resurrection, so that people would gather together and come to him. He is able to teach his people. Yes, he used the apostles to do some of that teaching, but do you notice in Acts how quickly Paul was willing to leave towns in which he had preached? In Acts 14, we read about him returning to some of those towns, in which he’d spent sometimes only three weeks or so, and appointing elders.

Who trained those elders? I would argue that it was the Spirit of God in the church.

The Scriptures are profitable for instruction in righteousness. They are profitable for correction, reproof, and rebuke. You will notice that all those things concern behavior a lot more than they concern theology. That’s because the point of the Scriptures is to thoroughly equip us for good works, not to make theologians out of us (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

In Titus 2:1, Paul tells Titus to teach “sound doctrine.” Look at the rest of the chapter some time and see what Paul considered to be sound doctrine.

Doesn’t sound much like a modern statement of faith, does it?

Christians desperately need to return to being practical, holy people. On the last day, Jesus doesn’t have a quiz about theology–not even about the atonement. He tells us about whether we fed him when he was hungry, clothed him when he was naked, or visited him when he was sick or in prison.

You want a real shocker? Look in the Book of Acts and find one place where an apostle told a lost person that Jesus died for their sins.

You’ll find where they told the lost that Jesus died. They had to. They were witnesses of the resurrection. You can’t witness of a resurrection if you don’t mention a death.

You’ll find where they said that Jesus forgives sins, but you will never find them tying the two together.

That’s not because it’s false. It is very true and very important that Jesus died for our sins. It’s all over the letters … to the church.

The lost, however, don’t need to know that to be saved.

We’re so confused into thinking that Jesus saves us because of what we know! That’s so unscriptural! He saves us because we want to repent of our sin–in fact, of our whole pointless lives–and follow him! He saves all his followers, which is what having faith in a person means.

We have to talk about “real” faith because we think faith means having faith in some facts about Jesus. If we realized that faith is in a (divine) person, Jesus Christ, and not in some things that he did, then we wouldn’t have to talk about “real” faith. Everyone already knows that you can’t claim to have faith in a person and ignore what he says.

Again, don’t miss what’s in Acts. The apostles never told the lost that Jesus died for their sins. They explained the atonement later, to the church, so that the church could understand the incredible thing that Jesus did for us and praise him and love him more than ever.

We don’t have the fragile faith that Ken Ham preaches. We have a vigorous real faith that comes from having the Spirit of God living in us, which we received through faith in Jesus Christ, the glorious, knowable, real, and living Son of God!

Evolution can’t shake that faith. If evolution is true, then our great God and his great Son did it. If it isn’t, then maybe Genesis 1 is absolutely literal.

Either way, we’re busy learning the proper lessons we should learn from Genesis 1. We want to be a full moon, reflecting as much of the light of the Son as possible in the darkness of the night, until Jesus returns and daylight reigns again. We believe and know that whether Genesis 1 is a literal description or an allegorical one full of spiritual lessons, either way it was our mighty God who created the universe, strewing between a sextillion and an octillion stars across 14.7 billion light years of space.

Wow.

That, to me, is what the argument is about. I am not arguing that evolution is true, even though I’m arguing that evolution is true. I’m arguing that we have to be honest, and I’m arguing that we have to be united, holy, obedient believers in Jesus Christ, not divided, pharisaical defenders of our own particular interpretations of the small portion of God’s words that have been written down.

I hope I haven’t over-spoken nor offended you too much.

I really love our God, and I believe he’s way stronger than our ideas. He can take care of us even while we enjoy searching out the truth. Those who seek find. He doesn’t give snakes to children who ask for eggs. Let us not be “ye of little faith,” but let us address him as Father and trust him as children.

Posted in Bible, Gospel, Modern Doctrines, Unity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Early Christianity, Organic Christianity, and the Rise of the Catholic Church

Posted on 02/09/2011 by Paul Pavao

This post will probably only interest you if you’re a friend of mine and like listening to me already, or if you have an avid interest in early Christianity and how the church became the miserable mess that it became in the middle ages.

This is very general, though I mention some details in establishing that general idea.

This is a response to a question from a friend of mine to whom I probably have no business giving advice, even though he’s younger than me. But, hey, we’re brothers and friends, so God gives me opportunities to be of benefit even to those who might be running ahead of me.

Organic Church, House Churches, and the Early Church

The question was concerning some history passed on by someone in a church planting ministry. The history they passed on was miserably inaccurate in its details, but it’s point was exactly accurate.

I could say more, but I explain all that in the email. Here it is …

My Email on Early Christianity and the Fall of the Church

If anything below needs to be explained, just ask in the comments! I’ll be notified by email, and I’ll answer pretty quickly.

I’m not giving you the original claims by this church-planting group because I don’t think it’s necessary to understand my response.

Poor Ignatius (bishop of Antioch, c. A.D. 70 – 110) had to face gnostics in the church in an empire with no public school system. What that means is that it was typical for philosophers to simply open their schools and try to earn a living teaching people math, science … and philosophy or religion.

So let’s say you’re Ignatius. You’ve got “Christians” in your church saying the right things (or saying nothing) at the assemblies, but then going off to teach gnostic nonsense in their house or in a school on the street. Your precious sheep are being taken in by these charlatans.

Ignatius chose to tell them, “Stick with the bishop. Don’t do baptisms without the bishop, and don’t hold a Lord’s supper without his knowledge.”

We can complain about his solution, but that’s the only legitimate complaint we can make against that great man of God. It’s crazy to charge him with failing to discipline a local body to keep it pure. He fought his guts out to get the gnostics out of the church, and his letters are full of statements that a person is only a Christian if he lives it.

It is better for a man to be silent and be [a Christian], than to talk and not be one. It is good to teach, if he who speaks also acts. … There is nothing that is hidden from God. Our very secrets are near to him. Therefore, let us do everything as those who have him dwelling in us. (Letter to the Ephesians 15)

You have taught others. Now I desire that those things may be confirmed [by your conduct], which in your instructions ye enjoin [on others]. Only pray both inward and outward strength for me, so that I may not only speak, but also be willing; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. For if I be truly found [a Christian], I may also be called one, and be then deemed faithful. (Letter to the Romans 3)

Hardly a guy who justified godlessness.

Real history goes like this. In the 2nd century , the church was so doggone powerful that it grew rapidly, despite poverty, slander, and persecution. Truly, their blood was seed, and that includes Ignatius’ blood.

In the 3rd century, the church was large enough that in many places they were known. Persecution was very limited. They were respected in some places. They had some size. Some leaders were leaders for the glory it gave them, and each person’s “place” was emphasized more than ever. There was more fighting about doctrine, more worldliness, and a lot more people pew sitting (though they may not have had pews).

The real disaster didn’t come until Constantine, though. And it’s not because he gave authority to the bishop of Rome. He didn’t do that, nor did the Council of Nicea. The disaster was because he embraced Christianity as honestly as he knew how. The problem was not that he was fake; the problem was that he was sincere.

Suddenly, the church was filled with most of the Roman populace, unconverted in any spiritual sense, and the devil sent Arius of Alexandria and Eusebius of Nicomedia to focus the church on doctrine. Suddenly, everyone cared whether you had to say that the Son was “same substance as the Father,” but no one seemed to care that Christians were killing each other with their bare hands!!!

Unbelievable.

Irenaeus was a 2nd century missionary to the Gauls. He was awesome. Cyprian was a mid-3rd-century bishop of Carthage who actually called a council to oppose the Roman bishop on the baptism of heretics. Stephen of Rome was claiming the right to decide on that issue, at least for the bishops in his area: Italy, Gaul, and north Africa (including Cyprian’s Carthage). The Council of Carthage, led by Cyprian, determined that no bishop had the right to call himself a bishop of other bishops. (This council is not quoted by Catholics for some reason, even though it’s in The Ante-Nicene Fathers set, and everyone knows about it.)

The authoritarian Roman structure was not imposed by the bishop of Rome, by the way. That simply happened. The 3rd century churches were already too top-heavy, and Christians were already failing to use their gifts as one body with many equally important members. When the emperor converted and everyone come flocking in, they wanted the Roman government structure to function in the church as well.

After that, yes, new churches had a political culture rather than a Scriptural authority, but there’s no sense blaming the pope for that. He’s a product of the problem, not a cause.

Of course, the end of all this is that real history still backs up the organic church model. I wish we’d quit slandering great men like Ignatius, Irenaeus, and Cyprian, but it’s nonetheless true that the early churches were not led by foreign missionaries. They were, in that sense, indigenous. Their leaders knew about every member using their gift.

And the fact is, while it’s not Cyprian’s fault, that did all get forgotten, and the church became political and forgot that Jesus said about the authority of the Gentiles, “It shall not be so among you.”

Posted in History, Roman Catholic & Orthodox | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Jesus Never Claimed To Be God

Posted on 02/05/2011 by Paul Pavao

Have you ever had someone tell you that Jesus never claimed to be God or the Son of God?

I was a part of the fledgling New Age Movement as a teenager and young adult in the 70’s and early 80’s. The New Age Movement loves to claim Jesus as its own, but it can’t have Jesus teaching the things he teaches. The New Age is all about feeling good and living for yourself. Staying married, denying yourself, or changing in any way so that you might benefit others is an abridgment on New Age freedom and enlightenment.

The New Age is sort of like the far left in politics. Its adherents simply invent their own reality and live in a dream world all the time. That way, they feel really good about themselves and even believe they’ve transformed the world, while never having actually met or touched the people they talk about helping.

Actually, I guess they’re also like many (most?) Christians, who say glowing, worshipful things about the Bible, but who don’t actually read it, do what it says, or even believe the things it teaches.

Okay, I’m off track. (And to think I did so well being brief in my last post.)

The Outrageous Claims of Jesus

Despite what I was told in the New Age Movement, Jesus most certainly did claim to be the Son of God (Matt. 26:63-64; Luk. 22:70; Jn. 3:18; 5:25; 9:35; 10:36; etc.). Yes, the apostles taught that we could all be sons of God, but it was Jesus alone who could say, "Before Abraham was, I am" (Jn. 8:58).

It’s not the words, "I am the Son of God," that make Jesus’ claims stand out. It’s everything else!

It’s not the rest of us who can say, "I saw satan falling from heaven like lightning" (Luke 10:18). We hear about it from Jesus, who has existed since before the beginning.

He’s the one for whose coming we wait, and he’s the one who will sit down on his glorious throne and judge the nations (Luke 17:24-25; Matt. 25:31-46). He’s also the one who will call the dead out of the graves (Jn. 5:25-29). Now that’s an audacious claim!

But today I want to talk about the simply implied claim I was reading about in Matthew 10.

Matthew 10 and the Implied Claim of Jesus

Picture this scenario. You’re a Jew; you are listening to a man expound the Law of Moses, the greatest of the prophets, and towards the end of his exposition, he says the following:

The person who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; the person who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And whoever doesn’t take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of me. Anyone finding his life will lose it, and anyone losing his life because of Me will find it. (Matt. 10:37-39, Holman Christian Standard Bible)

The HCSB capitalizes "Me" in this passage, but those who were listening to him, even though they were apostles, did not yet know that pronouns referring to him ought to be capitalized. (Actually, I don’t even agree with that; let’s honor him with our obedience, not by adjusting our grammar.) Statements like these had to take the apostles’ collective breath away!

The crowds had wondered who he was just because there was so much authority in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 7:28-29). This passage from Matthew 10 is only directed at his disciples, but what a statement!

I’m more important than your parents, and if you love them more than me, then you’re not worthy of me?

What???

Jesus had better be more than just one of many sons of God if he’s going to be making statements like these!

The Foolishness of Preaching Christ

Let’s forget about New Agers. We’ve addressed some Scriptures to answer them with. People who live in a fantasy world are always easy to answer.

But what about us?

Do we know what religion we’ve joined and what religious leader we’ve chosen to follow?

We’re making some outrageous claims. Jesus rose from the dead? He created the universe? Somewhere around an octillion stars (a number so big that WordPress’ spellchecker doesn’t recognize it!) spread across 14 billion light years of space? 14 billion light years is 5.88 trillion miles … times 14 billion, or 82 sextillion miles.

Jesus, if we believe what we teach, lived a highly supernatural life, and he sent his apostles to live a highly supernatural life. In Matthew 10, he sent his disciples to heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, and cast out demons.

Have you ever thought about those people knocking at Jesus’ door on the last day, asking to be let into the kingdom? Jesus said many would tell him that they prophesied, cast out demons, and did miracles in his name.

He’s not going to let them in because it’s not faith that matters on the last day, but what your faith accomplished: good works. So they are kept out because they didn’t obey the Father but were lawless instead (Matt. 7:21-23).

But despite the fact that they were locked out of the kingdom, the King—Jesus—doesn’t deny that they performed these supernatural feats. If we’re going to be Bible believers, then we have to acknowledge that miracles are a somewhat normal part of the Bible’s picture of the Christian life.

Does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the Law or by hearing with faith? (Gal. 3:5)
CAVEAT: I’ve been a part of the Word/Faith (or ambition/greed) movement. I’ve seen the awful, embarrassing behavior of lots of people pursuing God for their own gain and pursuing miracles like late-night, psychic-TV watchers. According to Jesus in Mark 16, miracles follow the preaching of the Word, not vice versa. We pursue Christ, not miracles.

But for those who pursue Christ with a white-hot diligence (Rom. 12:10), miracles are not an unusual part of life.

We’re making outrageous claims. We had better have outrageous power.

One Final Caveat and One Final Plea

Matthew 13:58 says that Jesus couldn’t do many miracles in his own country because of their unbelief.

In the history of the world, there has never been a more unbelieving culture than modern western society, primarily the US, Canada, and western Europe. Miracles are limited here.

I’ve spent a relatively significant amount of time in 3rd world countries, and I’ve had good friends raised in countries like Kenya, Nigeria, Surinam, India, and Togo. Miracles are not so uncommon there. I know atheists would believe they’re just confused or inventing the stories, but I’ve been too close to too many absolutely stunning events to disbelieve so easily. While I’ve personally witnessed only a few of those events, I’ve spoken firsthand with literally dozens of people who have recounted amazing miraculous occurrences.

In fact, one of South Africa’s national rugby players was healed of a knee injury by a faith healer from Nigeria. That was a public event, and there are videos of it on the internet.

I’m not giving a plug for the prophet who healed him. Obviously, if we believe in Jesus, some miracle workers are lawless; Jesus said so in Matt. 7:21-23. I don’t know anything about T.B. Joshua.

But we’re not in Nigeria. We’re in America, a breeding nest for venomous unbelief.

But just because America’s full of unbelief doesn’t mean we who are Jesus followers should be. Let’s give some actual thought to whom (Whom) exactly we’re following.

Posted in Bible, Miscellaneous, prayer | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Do You Believe in the Church

Posted on 02/02/2011 by Paul Pavao

Five hundred years ago Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, and John Calvin led Europe in rejecting the Roman Catholic Church and its pope as the mouth of God.

Note that Luther and Calvin did not choose to leave the Catholic Church (although Zwingli, if I remember correctly, did). Luther was horrified at the sale of indulgences, in which the pope’s salesmen threatened dead Catholics with torture from God if they didn’t give money to build St. Peter’s Basilica. All 95 of Luther’s 95 Theses were directed against the sale of indulgences, and the rejection of the doctrine of indulgences was what led to Luther being ejected from the Roman church at the Diet of Worms in 1521.

The problem is, the result has been that Protestants reject any church as being the mouth of God.

The Church and the Promises of God

There are some amazing promises to the church in the Bible.

  • The church is called "the pillar and support of the truth" in 1 Tim. 3:15
  • The church is called "the fullness of him that fills all in all" in Eph. 1:23
  • In 1 Jn. 2:26-27, the church is promised to be protected from deception and led into truth if they will follow the anointing.
  • In Eph. 4:11-16, we are told that the church will be protected from deception and that its members will grow into the fullness of Christ together if they will speak the truth to one another in love.

Don’t those things seem important?

Isn’t "important" an understatement?

Believing

Maybe you could look at those promises again.

Do you believe them? If you do, shouldn’t you do something about them?

Which Church?

I want to suggest that the church that receives and experiences those promises is the only church the Scripture and the apostles know anything about: the local church.

Christians called out of the world and gathered together into a new family in Christ.

Most Christians today don’t want to participate in that church. They just want to attend meetings at their local Christian club.

Jesus promised to be in the midst of any two or three who are gathered in his name. Doesn’t it make sense that those two or three would then have access to all the above promises?

(Keep in mind that Eph. 4:11-16 talks about apostles, shepherds, and other ministers teaching the saints how to take advantage of those promises and build one another up. It can start with 2 or 3, but there is growth needed to walk in the fullness of those promises.)

Practical Application

If you can be attached to believers that are not trapped in tradition, but can be led by the Holy Spirit and by the Scriptures away from deception and into truth, then there’s an important application to consider.

That application is that you would not trust yourself, because you alone are prone to being deceived (Heb. 3:13), and that you would walk together with your brothers and sisters, who are the pillar and support of the truth.

Scary, huh?

But do you believe what the Bible says about the church? Do you believe that it’s Christ’s body? Do you believe that the head can control the body? Or do you believe instead that Jesus is quadriplegic?

Then in the church, you’re going to have to learn to think, "They’re right; I’m wrong."

Posted in Church | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Final Judgments and False Gospels: A Comment

Posted on 01/31/2011 by Paul Pavao

This is an additional thought on that heretical false gospel displayed in the godtube video in my last post.

Note that in the video, the Christian is the worst of all the people there. What will a non-Christian conclude from watching that video? He can conclude only one thing, which is that Jesus has to ignore sin because he doesn’t have the power to deliver us from sin.

We are so careful to avoid a holier-than-thou attitude or saying that we are better than non-Christians.

Did Christ make you better? Did he change your life? Did he make you more righteous in your behavior?

If he didn’t, then you’ve never met him because that’s what he does.

If he did, then Christians are holier than non-Christians, and we are better than non-Christians. They need to know that! We’re not trying to prove we’re wonderful; we’re trying to let non-Christians have some idea that Jesus actually has the power to help them!!!

That godtube video is embarrassing to me and insulting to Jesus.

I wish y’all would go over there and leave them some sensible comments. I’m writing this several days before it goes up on my blog, but as of today I’m unable to leave a comment there. Some technical glitch on my computer or their site.

Posted in Gospel, Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Final Judgments and False Gospels

Posted on 01/29/2011 by Paul Pavao

Will the judgment be like many modern Christians describe it?

Or will it be like Jesus describes it?

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. Before him, all the nations will be gathered, and he shall separate them from one another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Then the King will say to the ones on his right, "Come, you who are blessed by my Father; inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me food; I was thirsty, and you gave me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in, naked, and you clothed me. I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me.

Then the righteous will answer him, saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty, and give you something to drink? When did we see you as a stranger and take you in? Or naked and clothe you? Or when did we see you sick or in prison and come to you?

And the King shall answer and and tell them, "Truly I tell you, when you have done it to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you have done it to me."

Then he will tell those at his left, "Depart from me, you cursed ones, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me no food; I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink;
I was a stranger, and you did not take me in; naked, and you did not clothe me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit me.

Then they too will answer him, saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry, thirsty, a stranger, naked, sick, or in prison, and did not serve you?"

Then he will answer them, saying, "Truly I tell you, when you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me."

And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.

I ask you, could there be a greater difference between the two descriptions?

In one, kindness and compassion don’t matter at all. In the other, they’re the only things that matter.

Heresy?

When we come up a with a doctrine that produces that much difference with Jesus, should we not consider it heresy?

Is it possible that our modern teachings about the atonement and salvation are false gospels? (Actually, it’s not possible; we’ve just seen that it’s certain.)

Or would we rather go on thinking that Jesus didn’t know what he was talking about?

Posted in Gospel, Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

The Power of Zeal for God

Posted on 01/26/2011 by Paul Pavao

My plan for the future is to put up on blog post on Wednesday and one on Saturday. From now on, hopefully it will be at 6 a.m. on each of those days.

I will schedule them to go up consistently, assuming I can follow through on this commitment.

Today, there’s a blog post I can’t beat, and I want to refer you to it.

J. Lee Grady is an editor for Charisma magazine. To be honest, I can’t imagine thinking highly of a mainstream, charismatic magazine. Grady’s articles, however, are consistently excellent. When you get there today, I highly recommend you sign up to get his articles by email. They come out once or twice a week.

His newsletter today is A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Campus Union.

Posted in Holiness, Miscellaneous | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Practical, Visible Christianity

Posted on 01/25/2011 by Paul Pavao

Christians today love to argue doctrines. The problem is, almost all the doctrine we argue is theoretical and cannot be tested. There is nothing practical about our doctrines; there are no ways to see whether they work.

Our forefathers did not see Christianity this way. Theirs was a practical, visible Christianity.

It was a Christianity that is “real world” and that could only be justified if it produced results.

Early Christian Arguments for Christianity

Christianity in its early days was not a major world religion. Paul’s first churches were likely very small, and even by the 2nd century Christians were a small, unpopular, and often persecuted “cult.”

Rumors abounded concerning them. Among the most popular were that they engaged in orgies, tricked new converts into killing babies, then forced them to eat the babies.

Between the rumors and the fact that Christianity was a product of Judaism, but didn’t keep any Jewish rituals (circumcision, animal sacrifices, Sabbath-keeping, and kosher foods), Christians found the need to explain and defend Christianity on a regular basis. Some of those defenses, called “apologies,” are still extant for us to read.

Is there any other matter, my friends, in which we are blamed, than this: that we do not live according to the Law [of Moses], are not circumcised in the flesh as your forefathers were, and do not observe Sabbaths as you do? Are our lives and customs also slandered among you? And I ask this: have you also believed … that we eat men; and that after the feast, having extinguished the lights, we engage in promiscuity? (Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew 10, c. A.D. 150)

Over and over, the early Christian answer is that their lives are marked by a righteousness that all acknowledge as good and godly.

An excellent example is Trypho’s response to Justin after his statement in the quote above. First, Trypho acknowledges that he doesn’t believe the rumors of cannablism and promiscuity. Then, he expresses surprise that Christians expect a reward from God when they don’t keep his “commandments.”

This is what we are most at a loss about: that you, professing to be pious and supposing yourselves to be better than others, are not separated from them in any particular way. You do not alter your mode of living from that of the nations, in that you observe no festivals or Sabbaths, and you do not have the rite of circumcision. Further, resting your hopes on a crucified man, you still expect to obtain some good thing from God, while you do not obey his commandments! Have you not read that the soul will be cut off from God who is not circumcised on the eighth day? (ibid.)

To Trypho, a Jew, righteousness consisted of rituals like festivals and circumcision that separated the Jews from the cultures around them. As a result, despite knowing of the remarkable lives of Christians, he considered them disobedient to God.

I am aware that your precepts in the so-called Gospel are so wonderful and so great, that I suspect no one can keep them, for I have carefully read them. (ibid.)

The fact is, though, that because of “resting your hopes in a crucified man,” the Christians were keeping them!

And if you wish to compare Christians with yourselves, then even if in some things our discipline is inferior, yet we shall be found much better than you. You forbid, yet commit, adulteries; we are born men only for our own wives. You punish crimes when committed; with us, even to think of crimes is to sin. You are afraid of those who are aware of what you do; we are afraid even of our own consciences, without which we cannot exist. Finally, from your numbers the prisons boil over, but there is no Christian there unless he is accused on account of his religion or has deserted it. (Minucius Felix, The Octavius, c. 150 – 230)

Justin explains to Trypho what really matters to God:

If, therefore, God proclaimed a new covenant … and this for a light of the nations [which Justin had just quoted Hebrew Scripture to prove], we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and abide by their confession even unto death, and maintain piety. (Justin, ibid. 11)

What piety was Justin talking about?

We have seen already that Minucius Felix chose avoiding adultery, guarding our thoughts, living by our consciences, and avoiding crimes to illustrate righteousness. We have also seen that Trypho knew about “precepts in the so-called Gospel … so wonderful and so great.”

Surely Trypho is referring to things such as those we read in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7). Jesus said the humble, the poor in spirit, the merciful, and those who endure persecution are those who are blessed (Matt. 5:3-12). He adds that we will be judged on the last day for our care for those in need that we have met (Matt. 25:31-46).

The early Christians agree that these are the things that matter:

Among us you will find uneducated persons, craftsmen, and old women, who, if they are unable in words to prove the benefit of our doctrine, yet by their deeds exhibit the benefit arising from their persuasion of its truth. They do not rehearse speeches, but exhibit good works; when struck, they do not strike again; when robbed, they do not go to law; they give to those that ask of them, and love their neighbors as themselves. (Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians 11, A.D. 177)

He has exhorted us to lead all men, by patience and gentleness, from shame and the love of evil. And this indeed is proved in the case of many who once were of your way of thinking, but have changed their violent and tyrannical disposition, being overcome either by the constancy which they have witnessed in their neighbors’ lives, or by the extraordinary forbearance they have observed in their fellow travelers when defrauded, or by the honesty of those with whom they have transacted business. (Justin, First Apology 16, c. A.D. 150)

It is mainly the deeds of a love so noble that lead many to label us. “See,” they say, “How they love one another!” For they themselves are animated by mutual hatred. “How they are ready even to die for one another!” For they themselves will sooner put to death. They are angry with us, too, because we call each other brothers and sisters. … But perhaps the very reason we are regarded as having less right to be considered true brothers is that no tragedy causes dissension in our brotherhood. Or maybe it is that the family possessions, which generally destroy brotherhood among you, create fraternal bonds among us. One in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. (Tertullian, Apology 39, c. A.D. 210)

God’s Foundation

Paul once said that the sure, firm foundation of God has an inscription on it (2 Tim. 2:19). According to the apostle, it says two things:

  • The Lord knows those who are his.
  • Let those who name the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

Over the last 2,000 years, have we found new foundations to lay? Or perhaps new and additional inscriptions to write on God’s foundation?

Conclusion

That last sentence would have made a good ending, but I have to pass on one more thought.

On the last day, which Jesus described in Matthew 25:31-46, is the great Judge of all going to add the doctrines that matter to modern Christians in his judgment of the sheep and the goats? While we’ve been learning new ways to judge who is a sheep and who isn’t, has Jesus been learning, too? Is he changing his plans for the final judgment?

I suspect that his plans for the judgment have not changed at all. I suspect that he is still the great Shepherd of the sheep, that he still knows those who are his, and that the standards that will be used at that final judgment are still being used today … at least by Jesus, who Paul says “knows those who are his.”

Perhaps it would behoove us to conform our judgment to his.

Posted in History, Holiness, Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Really Important Things a Christian Should Know

Posted on 01/14/2011 by Paul Pavao

I’ve been promising myself and friends I would upload this list for a few weeks. These are just a random assortment of issues. I’m sure there’s some important ones I’m missing. Feel free to add those in the comments.

In fact, more permanently, I’d love you to add them at Christian History for Everyman, where I’ve uploaded a longer version of this page.

You can do anything.

Following Christ is all about faith. There is a zeal that is the product of really believing that “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Php. 4:13)

Your zeal to follow Jesus will make up for almost any mistakes in what follows

Tremendous faith in and love for Jesus will resolve almost any lack of knowledge or misunderstandings you have about the Christian faith. Love him, love his commands, and spend much time in fellowship with him. That is more important than anything else, and it will make up for mistakes in every other area.

Christianity is a spiritual religion.

It is those who walk by the Spirit who are the sons of God (Rom. 8:14). Like it or not, Christianity is a highly subjective religion, and we are going to have to give room to one another to be moved by the Spirit of God.
Christianity is a CORPORATE, spiritual religion
God does promise to lead us into all things by the Spirit, but 1 Jn. 2:27 has all plural yous, no singular ones. It is together that we are led into truth, and while we have to give each other freedom to follow God’s Spirit, we must all be aware that we are easily deceived and need our brother’s exhortations (Heb. 3:13). Eph. 4:11-16 is another great passage, and 1 Jn. 2:27 and Eph. 4:11-16 explain why the church is called the pillar and support of the truth by Paul in 1 Tim. 3:15.

The modern churches often worship the Bible, and we must not follow them in that.

Modern American Christians almost universally trust their intellect over the leading of the Spirit. They claim to be following the Bible, but they’re not. They’re following tradition and their interpretations of the Bible, which are almost never based on any real, honest, skilled analysis of what the Bible teaches. Thus, American churches are almost universally powerless and embarrassing (even if some individual Christians are not) because they refuse to be taught by God to deliver them from their chains of tradition and complacency.

Christians can’t be afraid of the truth

It’s not very nice to say that American churches are almost universally powerless and embarrassing, but it’s the truth. If we want to see Jesus glorified, then it’s more important to do his will and concern ourselves with his feelings than to worry about hurting each other’s feelings.

The local church is incredibly important. If we don’t know that, the devil certainly does.

For most Americans the local church is only important insofar as it helps us be better Christians. Nonsense. You are not Jesus’ bride or body; the church is. Thus, what benefits the church is far, far more important than what might benefit you. The light that Jesus wants to shine to the world is not “this little light of mine,” but the great light of the church (Matt. 5:13-16, where all the yous are plural; cf. also Isaiah 60:1ff). Even in America, if Christians come together in wholehearted submission to Christ, agreeing that they need one another (1 Cor. 12), and giving themselves to each other for life as the family of God, they will experience a miraculous level of persecution, and they will understand why Paul says that all who desire to live godly in Christ suffer persecution (2 Tim. 3:12). The key is “in Christ,” which is in his church, which is his body.

Our unity is based on obedience, not theological arguments.

2 Tim. 2:19 is a terribly important verse in our day. The foundation of God is that he himself knows who belongs to him. We don’t need to concern ourselves with that. But Paul adds that the other part of the foundation is that those who name the name of Christ must depart from iniquity. Those who say we need not depart from iniquity to be in fellowship with Christ are false preachers of the Gospel who must be anathematized. But also, those who divide over tongues, eternal security (as long as everyone acknowledges that those who go to heaven are those obedient to Christ by his Spirit), the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the role of water baptism, etc. are sinning. The church needs to be reunited, and the church consists of all those who name the name of Christ and depart from iniquity.

You’ll know this is true because it’s possible to have the witness of the Spirit between those who depart from iniquity. Don’t let stupid modern doctrines that we fool ourselves into thinking we understand prevent that marvelous unity that is created only by the Spirit of God.

Real Christianity is not theoretical; it’s eminently practical

Faith vs. works is a worthless discussion. Jesus wants us to do works by faith, and we’re only distracted by the arguments. Paul discussed faith to get people away from depending on the Law. James slammed faith only (Jam. 2:14-26) to stop people from trusting in faith apart from works. Jesus just wants you to keep his commands (Jn. 15:10). Yes, you can only do that by abiding in him (Jn. 15:5), but don’t worry, if you try to obey him without his power, you’ll figure out you need him on your own. Talking about faith and works is conterproductive. You must do works to go to heaven (Matt. 7:21-23; 25:31-46; Paul agrees throughout his writings, but you shouldn’t need anyone else’s word but Jesus’), and you have to come to Jesus for the power to do those works. Talking about it is a waste of time. Just get busy obeying him because you’re not going to heaven if you don’t (Matt. 7:21-23; Eph. 5:3-8; 1 Jn. 2:3-4).

Posted in Miscellaneous | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

A Little Politics: Sarah Palin, Targets, and Assassinations

Posted on 01/13/2011 by Paul Pavao

Yesterday, I was in the remarkably unusual position of having to agree with … Sean Hannity.

I can’t remember when the last time I agreed with Sean Hannity was, and I certainly could never have imagined being proud of agreeing with him. I don’t even listen to him very much, perhaps 2 hours a year.

Yesterday, though, I was driving, and I couldn’t find any other news to listen to.

What he said was that the (stupid, rude, embarrassing, unthinking, shameful, politically-motivated) accusation that Sarah Palin helped encourage the shooting of congresswoman Gabby Giffords would backfire on them.

Yep.

I gave up agreeing with right-wing political talk show hosts like Hannity and Limbaugh over a decade ago. I roll my eyes when I hear their conspiracy theories being brought up.

Yesterday, though, Hannity was like a sage, calmly and clearly refuting the sick, politically-motivated accusation that Sarah Palin helped fuel Jared Loughner’s shooting spree in Tucson on January 8. Of course, it was easy for Hannity to be calm and clear because the accusation is ludicrous, and anyone making that accusation ought to be embarrassed. Only the most unthinking extreme of the left will pay attention to it.

In this case, though, I really just want to talk about that one statement. This accusation is going to backfire. That’s the statement I agree with.

I’m living proof of it.

I’ve done everything I could to drive the idea out of my mind that the mainstream media leans far to the left. In some cases, that’s not too hard. Some mainstream anchors are clearly doing their best to simply report the news in an open-minded way.

Talk radio, however, accuses especially the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times as being the worst culprits.

Sure enough, every article I’ve seen listed in my Google news update that has been marketing the accusation against Palin—and slandering her without quotes when she responded—has come from those three newspapers.

In fact, you should see this hymn of praise to Obama by the Washington Post. It’s followed by a brief attack on Palin for using the words "blood libel" in her response to morons blaming her for someone’s death because she used crosshairs in an ad; crosshairs pointed not at a person but at a map.

Good grief.

I think that I no longer qualify as a supporter of the right, and I certainly don’t qualify as a supporter of Republicans (I voted for Obama), but the behavior of the Washington Post, the LA Times, and the NY Times makes me want to go back to supporting them. They may have some awful ideas, be arrogant, and be mostly white, but at least they’re living in the real world, where you can talk about and try to change those problems.

Liberals tend to live in an imaginary world where homeless people are mostly responsible dads out of work; and where the best way we can repay blacks and Indians for the awful things our ancestors did to them is by referring to them with more acceptable names like African Americans and Native Americans. In the meanwhile we keep them on welfare, leave them feeling awful about themselves, and refuse to address their their alcohol, drug, and illegitimacy problems because we’re not allowed to admit they have them!

I’m sure everything I just said is politically incorrect, but I’m also sure that the people who disagree with me have not spent large portions of time actually hanging out with those homeless people, many of whom would never want back into our lonely, locked-up-in-the-house society. They’re happy to to exchange our air conditioners and comfortable beds for friends and freedom. Others, however, are hopelessly addicted to drugs and alcohol, and giving them checks every week is no help to them.

Actually, I want to repent for using "politics" in the title of this post. This post is not about politics; it’s about common sense and not pretending like things are the way they are. We can work on problems, but not if we pretend they’re not there and mandate certain ways of speaking in order to maintain our illusions.

Posted in Miscellaneous | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments