Dominion

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Genesis 1:28


Yesterday was my first time hunting.  


My friend John from church asked me to join him on his family land near LaGrange and I met up with him around 3pm at their camp.  We shot a test round from by rifle (to check the zero) before we headed into the thick.


My uncle died in 2006 and I inhereited his Ruger M77 (300 WinMag) and a Glock .45 - as well as a Mossberg shotgun (don't try to break in my house :)

The rifle zeroed good and we were off.  John took me out to a big feed plot and he showed me the tree stand I was supposed to climb into.  That was the most nerve-racking part of the trip.  I am not overly fond of heights and I was definitely worried about getting us a foot wide ladder thats chained to a medium sized pine tree.  But, at the end of the harrowing climb, I was seated comfortably.


John has two way radios and we were able to quietly chat about life as we sat up in the trees on opposite ends of the plot.  Time passed quick the first hour, then the cold began to show itself and we were both quiet until just before dark.  


Right as the light began to fade into that haze of twilight, two deer came out onto the plot about 100 yards and 180 degrees of me.  I heard John say "theres deer on the field" and then he asked me if I had a shot.  I replied "yes" and he said "take it."  


As I was quietly inching my rifle into place, two more deer arrived.  Now there were 4 deer on the plot and I was in place.  John told me to "shoot the biggest one."  I lined up the crosshairs and began a slow steady trigger squeeze.  I was terribly excited and my breathing was way too sporadic to hit my target (or so I thought).  


BANG!


The gun went off, the deer jumped up in the air and ran off the field.  I observed her flight and I was for sure that I missed.  Then I heard John shoot twice.  I realized that deer were still on the field and I told John as much - he replied "Shoot them!"


I reploaded and set back up.  Unfortunately, by the time I was ready again - the field was clear.  I began to talk with John and tell him that I felt I had missed.  Just then, two deer peeked out back onto the feed plot about 80 yards away from me.  I took aim on one of them  and hastily fired.


BANG!


I was positive that I hit him even as he ran off.  The crash in the woods just ahead of me confirmed my shot.  John radioed me to carefully get down outta the stand.  We met up on the field.


Tracking consumed about an hour.  We found both of my deer via the blood trails.  We also found a lobe of liver from one of them which had fallen out.  As we looked them over we pieced together the scenario...


My first shot was dead on and it felled a 140 lbs doe.  

My second shot went in at an angle and it exited low and back (making it a gut shot - hence the organs falling out)  That kill was a young buck - which is a no-no...of course, in the low light I thought it was a female.

Not bad for my first time out John told me.


We went back to the camp and I soon realized that "the fun ends when you pull the trigger."  Skinning, gutting, and slinging around dead deer is less than stimulating.  I was bloody up to my elbow and the smell was horrible.  


We ended the night by dropping the deer off at a local deer processing establishment.  Meat should be ready middle of the week.


THE VERDICT:


I enjoyed the hunt.  I do not consider hunting a sport however.  I consider it a skill.  Its a skill that is mostly dead in the "civilized" west and I was happy to reconnect with some of that pioneer spirit.  I imagine that I will pester John to go once a year in the future.  


Two shots, two kills...the US Marines taught me well.  Semper Fi.


Thanks John!

Reformed Rap

Most of you have tomorrow off...spend 15 minutes exploring my favorite think to listen to at work...Reformed Rap.  I know it sounds cheesy given all the hokey Christian music out there - but you might be surprised.

Reach Records is the home of my favorite artists: Lecrae and the 116 Clique

http://www.reachrecords.com/

Here is an example of 116 Clique. They did an album where they rapped each of Paul's 13 epistles.

This link is to the rap on Titus:




And to the Colossians rap:



LeCrae teamed up with John Piper for the "Don't Waste your Life" campaign:

http://dontwasteyourlife.com/

This is the music video associated with that:



Here is Thabiti Anyabwile discussing Reformed Rap:

http://www.youtube.com/user/DGdwyl#p/u/11/Sp-8-C9954Q

Also, there are some really good local guys, The Plumbline Collective. A guy at Southpoint works with one of the members of that group.

Check them out:



AND

http://theplumblinecollective.com/

If you want more info or if you want me to burn you a sample CD, let me know.

T-Giving Cartoons

Thanksgiving

Thankful to Who
Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!
2 Cor 9:15

Thankful for What
But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.
2 Thess 2:13

Thankful When
...giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Eph 5:20

Ultimately Why Thankful
For it is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and more people it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God.
2 Cor 4:15

How to express Thanksgiving
...but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.
Phil 4:6
Out of them shall come songs of thanksgiving, and the voices of those who celebrate.
Jer 30:19a
___________________________________

Like so many of our American holidays, Thanksgiving has largely become a commercialized and humanistic model of familial idolatry.

Break that mold tomorrow. 

Be purposeful in centering your day around thanksgiving to God.  Eat lots of food, hang with seldom seen relatives, watch football...but don't let Jesus slip into obscurity as you do those things. 

Don't be like those of Romans 1:21
"For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened."

Make your blessing (grace) before the big meal count.  Use that 30 seconds when everyone is willing to close their eyes and listen to lavish praise and honor on our glorious king.  Without the gift of His Son, the notion of thanksgiving would be of much less importance.

Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift!
2 Cor 9:15

Great Resource!

The H. Henry Meeter Center for Calvin Studies has funded a project at Calvin College that looks to be of monumental importance to theologians, students, pastors, and Christian intellectuals.

Click HERE to go to the "Post-Reformation Digital Library"

As they say on their webpage...

Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerum. Quid enim est aetas hominis, nisi ea memoria rerum veterum cum superiorum aetate contexitur? Cicero, Orator XXXIV [120].


translated:
"Not knowing what happened before you were born is to be stuck in childhood forever. What does a person's life amount to without the historical consciousness that weaves one's life into the life of earlier generations?"

Somethings not right...

I took a momentary break from scanning documents this morning to look up some gift ideas for myself.  This time of year people are always asking what I want for Christmas - much of that has already been decided for 2009...

We're getting a Nintendo Wii from my parents, a video camcorder from my wife's parents, and gift cards from my wife's siblings.  That leaves the gifts from my aunt and the gifts that my wife and I exchange to think about.

I looked over a few pages of MMA fight tee shirts.  I liked this one from Fairtex Muay Thai.

Then I thought about getting a shirt to express my faith.  I headed over to cafe press and found this nice, simple tee that captures the 5 points of biblical truth in subtle way.

As I kept looking at the webpage for Reformed apparel, I ran across something that disturbed me...

Yes, those are TULIP panties...correction, TULIP thongs!

I am all for sex.  Its an awesome gift of God in marriage to bring spouses closer together (and make babies of course!)

I am just fine with a wife wearing a thong or anything else she wants to don for her man...well most anything else...

Something seems wrong to me about putting a TULIP on a thong.  Why would one do that?

I am sort of a theological nerd, but seeing a TULIP on my wife's underwear would NOT be stimulating.

I know we are suppossed to do whatever we do to the glory of God, but some things are best left at the proverbial theological threshold.

Weird.

The New Gospel

I saw this at Kevin DeYoung's blog this morning.  Worth a look. - sorry for the weird format, can't get it straight??
_____________________

The Gospel, Old and New

Have you heard the New Gospel? It’s not been codified. It’s not owned by any one person or movement. But it is increasingly common.

The New Gospel generally has four parts to it.

It usually starts with an apology: “I’m sorry for my fellow Christians. I understand why you hate Christianity. It’s like that thing Ghandi said, ‘why can’t the Christians be more like their Christ?’ Christians are hypocritical, judgmental, and self-righteous. I know we screwed up with the Crusades, slavery, and the Witch Trials. All I can say is: I apologize. We’ve not give you a reason to believe.”

Then there is an appeal to God as love: “I know you’ve seen the preachers with the sandwich boards and bullhorns saying ‘Repent or Die.’ But I’m here to tell you God is love. Look at Jesus. He hung out with prostitutes and tax collectors. He loved unconditionally. There is so much brokenness in the world, but the good news of the Bible is that God came to live right in the middle of our brokenness. He’s a messy God and his mission is love. ‘I did not come into the world to condemn the world,’ that’s what Jesus said (John 3:17). He loved everyone, no matter who you were or what you had done. That’s what got him killed.”


The third part of the New Gospel is an invitation to join God on his mission in the world: “It’s a shame that Christians haven’t shown the world this God. But that’s what we are called to do. God’s kingdom is being established on earth. On earth! Not in some distant heaven after we die, but right here, right now. Even though we all mess up, we are God’s agents to show his love and bring this kingdom. And we don’t do that by scaring people with religious language or by forcing them into some religious mold. We do it by love. That’s the way of Jesus. That’s what it means to follow him. We love our neighbor and work for peace and justice. God wants us to become the good news for a troubled planet.”

And finally, there is a studied ambivalence about eternity: “Don’t get me wrong, I still believe in life after death. But our focus should be on what kind of life we can live right now. Will some people go to hell when they die? Who am I to say? Does God really require the right prayer or the right statement of faith to get into heaven? I don’t know, but I guess I can leave that in his hands. My job is not to judge people, but to bless. In the end, God’s amazing grace may surprise us all. That’s certainly what I hope for.”

Why So Hot?

This way of telling the good news of Christianity is very chic. It’s popular for several reasons

1. It is partially true. God is love. The kingdom has come. Christians can be stupid. The particulars of the New Gospel are often justifiable.


2. It deals with strawmen. The bad guys are apocalyptic street preachers, Crusaders, and caricatures of an evangelical view of salvation.

3. The New Gospel leads people to believe wrong things without explicitly stating those wrong things. That is, Christians who espouse the New Gospel feel safe from criticism because they never actually said belief is unimportant, or there is no hell, or that Jesus isn’t the only way, or that God has no wrath, or that there is no need for repentance. These distortions are not explicitly stated, but the New Gospel is presented in such a way that non-believers could, and by design should, come to these conclusions. In other words, the New Gospel allows the non-Christian to hear what he wants, while still providing an out against criticism from other Christians. The preacher of the New Gospel can always say when challenged, “But I never said I don’t believe those things.”

4. It is manageable. The New Gospel meets people where they are and leaves them there. It appeals to love and helping our neighbors. And it makes the appeal in a way that repudiates any hint of judgmentalism, intolerance, or religiosity. This is bound to be popular. It tells us what we want to hear and gives us something we can do.

5. The New Gospel is inspirational. This is what makes the message so appealing to young people in particular. They get the thrill and purpose of being part of a big cause, without all the baggage of the Church’s history, doctrine, and hard edges. Who wouldn’t want to join a revolution of love?

6. The New Gospel has no offense to it. This is why the message is so attractive. The bad guys are all “out there.” This can be a problem for any of us. We are all prone to soft-pedaling the gospel, only presenting the attractive parts and failing to mention where Christ does not just comfort but also confronts. And it must confront more than the sins of others. It is far too easy to use the New Gospel as a way to differentiate yourself from all the bad Christians. This makes you look good and confirms to the non-Christians that the obstacle to their commitment lies with the hypocrisy and failure of others. There is no talk of repentance or judgment. There is no hint that Jesus was killed, not so much for his inclusive love as his outrageous Godlike claims (Matt. 26:63-66; 27:39-43). The New Gospel only talks of salvation in strictly cosmic terms. In fact, the door is left wide open to imagine that hell, if it even exists, is probably not a big threat for most people.

Why So Wrong?
It shouldn’t be hard to see what is missing in the new gospel. What’s missing is the old gospel, the one preached by the Apostles, the one defined in 1 Corinthians 15, the one summarized later in The Apostles’ Creed.
“But what you call the New Gospel is not a substitute for the old gospel. We still believe all that stuff.”
Ok, but why don’t you say it? And not just privately to your friends or on a statement of faith somewhere, but in public? You don’t have to be meaner, but you do have to be clearer. You don’t have to unload the whole truck of systematic theology on someone, but to leave the impression that hell is no big deal is so un-Jesus like (Matt. 10:26-33). And when you don’t talk about the need for faith and repentance you are very un-apostolic (Acts 2:38; 16:31)

“But we are just building bridges. We are relating to the culture first, speaking in a language they can understand, presenting the parts of the gospel that make the most sense to them. Once we have their trust and attention, then we can disciple and teach them about sin, repentance, faith and all the rest. This is only pre-evangelism.”
Yes, it’s true, we don’t have to start our conversations where we want to end up. But does the New Gospel really prime the pump for evangelism or just mislead the non-Christian into a false assurance? It’s one thing to open a door for further conversation. It’s another to make Christianity so palatable that it sounds like something the non-Christian already does. And this is assuming the best about the New Gospel, that underneath there really is a desire to get the old gospel out.

Paul’s approach with non-Christians in Athens is instructive for us (Acts 17:16-34). First, Paul is provoked that the city is so full of idols (16). His preaching is not guided by his disappointment with other Christians, but by his anger over unbelief. Next, he gets permission to speak (19-20). Paul did not berate people. He spoke to those who were willing to listen. But then look at what he does. He makes some cultural connection (22-23, 28), but from there he shows the contrast between the Athenian understanding of God and the way God really is (24-29). His message is not about a way of life, but about worshiping the true God in the right way. After that, he urges repentance (30), warns of judgment (31), and talks about Jesus’ resurrection (31).


The result is that some mocked (32). Who in the world mocks the New Gospel? There is nothing not to like. There is no scandal in a message about lame Christians, a loving God, changing the world, and how most of us are most likely not going to hell. This message will never be mocked, but Paul’s Mars Hill sermon was. And keep in mind, this teaching in Athens was only an entre into the Christian message. This was just the beginning, after which some wanted to hear him again (32). Paul said more in his opening salvo than some Christians ever dare to say. We may not be able to say everything Paul said at Athens all at once, but we certainly must not give the impression in our “pre-evangelism” that repentance, judgment, the necessity of faith, the importance of right belief, the centrality of the cross and the resurrection, the sinfulness of sin and the fallenness of man–the stuff that some suggest will be our actual evangelism–are outdated relics of a mean-spirited, hurtful Christianity.

A Final Plea

Please, please, please, if you are enamored with the New Gospel or anything like it, consider if you are really being fair with your fellow Christians in always throwing them under the bus. Consider if you are preaching like Jesus did, who called people, not first of all to a way of life, but to repent and believe (Mark 1:15). And as me and my friends consider if we lack the necessary patience and humility to speak tenderly with non-Christians, consider if your God is a lopsided cartoon God who never takes offense at sin (because sin is more than just un-neighborliness) and never pours out wrath (except for the occasional judgment against the judgmental). Consider if you are giving due attention to the cross and the Lamb of God who died there to take away the sin of the world. Consider if your explanation of the Christian message sounds anything like what we hear from the Apostles in the book of Acts when they engage the world.

This is no small issue. And it is not just a matter of emphasis. The New Gospel will not sustain the church. It cannot change the heart. And it does not save. It is crucial, therefore, that our evangelical schools, camps, conferences, publishing houses, and churches can discern the new gospel from the old.

The Gospel in 3 words...

“Were I asked to focus the New Testament message in three words, my proposal would be adoption through propitiation, and I do not expect ever to meet a richer or more pregnant summary of the gospel than that.”
—J.I. Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove, IL: 1993), 214

(I grabbed this from Of First Importance)

evangelicals/ catholics NOT together

The new issue of Christianity Today arrived in the mail this week. It contains an article titled "Not all Evangelicals and Catholics Together." The article explores the renewed debate on justification between the two facets of the faith.

It brought to mind something I have long tried to comprehend. Despite my play-acting on this blog, I am no theologian and I have a difficult time grasping the nuiansces between Protestant and Catholic views of salvation. I am hoping to give a brief sketch of my thoughts here and the I will stand back and wait for some of my friends (Adam, Doc, Aaron) to weigh in on the matter and set me straight!

I think this is an important issue because I sense that the two sides see the issue more differently than the vast majority of people realize. I also think its important because we need to understand what is believed in each camp to make sound judgments regarding who is a (duh,duh,duh) heretic. Through the years each side has accussed the other of being outside the true faith. I am undecided on the issue of whether or not I think Catholicism is unbiblical. Dialogue here may help sway me one way or the other.

I have a rudimentary understanding of this...

In Protestant theology, we are saved by grace alone thru faith alone in Christ alone. That is determined to mean that by God's grace, Christ died and took our sin upon himself for punishment, then he rose from the grave after conquering death and "imputed" his righteousness to us as a holy covering. In this imputation he doesn't just forgive us for being dirty as we stand before him dirty - he actually washes us and declares that we were never dirty. This declaration is the "justification" of our soul before the Father as worthy to be in his family. Its a one time deal, many Protestants can refer to that moment of "justification" in their life when they were "saved" by God...in obedient response to Christs work they expressed their faith.

So, everything that is done in Protestant soteriology is done by Christ, we have no part to play in our "justification" other than subsequent, declaratory, affirmation of what has been done for us . Afterwards, as we still live out our mortal drama, we stand as "justified sinners" - relying upon the Holy Spirit to guide our lives into a more Christ-like model. This is explained as "santification." Finally, upon our death, we come into the presence of God and all affects of sin are removed as we become wholy clean, in body and spirit, before the Father. That is our "glorification." Thus is my understanding of the basics regarding Protestant salvation.

On the other hand, I understand the Catholic view to be that Chirst does remove our sin on the cross and then he "infuses" his righteousness to us. That is, he doesn't give us his holiness that we might be seen in Gods eyes as pure as he is, he gives us his power to cooperate with God's grace. Here is why so many Catholics are accussed of seeing salvation as being of "faith and works."

This means, at least as I get it, that justification is not a one time deal. Catholics run justification and sanctification together. I think that they would argue that we are never declared pure before God until after our death - when we have finished a life of divine cooperation and when we have been purged of the last bit of our sin.

I wonder if I understand the Catholic view correctly - they say they espouse "salvation by grace alone thru faith alone," but the teaching of cooperation with grace as a necessity for salvation appears to contradict that view. If you have to cooperate, thats an addition to grace/ faith - a "Jesus plus______" position on getting saved.

SO...

Where did I get it wrong, in either view, and how can I better understand this issue?

Selling Birthdays, Smoke Rings, and a Right Hook to some Ants.

Odd title I know.  I was trying to encapsulate my weekend with a quick phrase.

On Thursday night I was up until 1:30 am getting ready for our big Friday yard sale.  Then I was up at 4:30 on Friday to finish the prep.  It paid off pretty well thought - $400.  All of that went to Tiffany for her to buy a new lens that she has been wanting for her photography business.  

The rest of Friday night was prepping for my youngest son's 1st birthday party.  We decided to host the festivities in our backyard - that required some work.  I also got up butt-early on Saturday to finish the arrangements for the celebration.  It was worth it though, things turned out GREAT!  And we made our ritualistic Chic-Fil-A birthday meal run that night for din-din.  Check out the photos HERE.

After those exhausting 2 days you might think I would go home and crash.  Not so, the fights were on...StrikeForce MMA was being broadcast live on CBS from 9 until 11 and a friend from church invited me over to watch the action on a projector - NICE.  Two other friends from church were there, and artist and an accountant.  Also present was a blog buddy I had yet to meet in person.  Good men, one and all.  I blogged about the results at one of my other thought arenas.

As Presbyterians, we enjoyed some fine brewed beverages and some tobacco in moderation.  It is so nice to belong to a denomination that loves Jesus and the Gospel so enormously while also knowing how to enjoy all of Gods good creation in responsible liberty.

In fact, it was my first foray into smoking a pipe.  I had some difficulty keeping it lit, but thats apparently par for the course as a newbie.  I certainly felt like a hobbit and that made me very happy.

On a last note, we got invaded by ants again.  They took over my boys bedroom.  I waged war on them with the Terro gel that my friend recommended.  Great stuff.  They eat it, take it back to the hive, then hours later it hardens in their belly and they die.  Its nice having dominion.

UPDATE:  I checked on-line.  The new ants are carpenter ants.  The bait might not always wipe them put completely, they have some tricks up their sleeves - I will get them though!

Prosperity Gospel in Africa

The Prosperity Gospel from The Global Conversation on Vimeo.

An Odd Couple: Keller and Kreeft

The "Handbook of Christian Apologetics: Hundreds of Answers to Crucial Questions" is a book authored by Boston College professor Peter Kreeft (Krayfth) and co-authored by R. Tacelli.

As I looked at the webpage for Tim Keller's Redeemer Presbyterian Church today, I saw this book under the recommended resources tab for Apologetics.

This book being recommended by Keller surprised me. I have this book at home, I bought it shortly after my regeneration 5 years ago (a time when I was deeply into evidentiary apologetics). Much of the book is useful, unfortunately there is a large theological problem expounded upon in the book which is very serious.

The issue which I believe is heterodox and which is advocated in "HofCA" is Christian Inclusivism. Inclusivism is the theory that why Christ is the only way to salvation, one does not need to know of him to be saved. This translates into the idea that salvation is possible for those of different religions, if they are sincere and good devotees that seek truth (as they have access to it) and strive to live a moral life, they can make it into eternal life. This indirect and unknowing way to heaven is said to still hinge on what Jesus did, even if the one saved never hears the gospel, thus the Christian moniker.

I guess I should not be terribly surprised by the fact that Kreeft holds this view. He is a Roman Catholic and this view was offically dictated at Vatican II. He does go into much further detail on this in his book "Ecumenical Jihad," which describes his belief that he will enter heaven one day to be greeted by people like Buddha, Mohammed, and Confucius. See this LINK for a review of that book. Its a sharp and thought-provoking review, be warned.

The weird thing for me is that Tim Keller is endorsing a book with Inclusivistic claims. As a PCA pastor, I know that Keller is a conservative, Reformed, exclusivist at heart. Whay he would recommend a Kreeft book is beyond me.

Of course, lots of pastors quote another inclusivists on a regular basis and they may not even know it. C.S. Lewis was also a proponent in the idea that we can see Jesus as the underlying means for salvation, if not the understood method. Another famous inclusivist is evangelist Billy Graham. See THIS interview with R. Schuller for his take on the subject.

I can't stand behind inclusivism because the Bible does not teach it. I consider inclusivism a severe misinterpretation of John 14:6 (Jesus says he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life) in light of the rest of the redemptive narrative. If hearing the gospel is unnecessary for salvation, why does Jesus command the Great Commission? Why did so many early saints die for the sake of gospel proclamation? Whats the point of making such a big deal about Jesus if people don't need to know about him to be saved?

I feel that inclusivism is a unbiblical belief that was created to justify the Amrinian view of salvation. It stems from questions like that of the tribesman in the jungle.

"What about the guy who lives in the rainforest and who never hears about Jesus - but, who worships his god(s) sincerely and who tries to live a good life?"

The traditional reformed (that is biblical) answer is that persons who do not hear and trust in the gospel message of Christ's death and resurrection as payment for their sin have not been elected into God's family. They justly perish as a result of their own rebellion, since God is obligated to save none and his grace is his to grant thru Christ alone. See the WCF 8.8 This is why the role of missions and evangelism is so important, regeneration and new birth do not take place except thru faith in the gospel. Without knowledge of Jesus it is impossible to be saved.

Since the libertarian free-will advocates could not abide by the biblical doctrines of sovereign grace and election, they interjected themselves into the equation and made salvation a choice given to us by God that we make effectual by our own decision. This presented a problem for their "tribesmen in the jungle" scenario. If salvation is no longer the sole choice of God, but rather the ultimate decision of man - then, a God who never gives tribesmen the choice of Jesus or not Jesus is unfairly damning that individual (so they would say). Therefore, they skirt the issue by saying that all men have a choice - some have knowledge of Jesus, others only have the knowledge provided to them by general revelation - in either case they can pick the right choice and be saved.

Unfortunately, this last Arminian inclusivistic idea is nowhere in the Scriptures. Putting national Israel aside for a moment (thats a different topic), no one in the NT appears to have been saved without knowing the gospel message of Christ. In fact the Word appears to be pretty clear in the opposite direction. That means that we have no good reason to believe that inclusivism is true. It may seem "nicer" to the fallen side of our nature, but its simply not truth.

At the end of the day I know that we will all eventually reference inclusivists in our messages, blogs, and the like - I just implore us to be careful about which people we quote, the quotes we use, and how deeply we endorse those individuals.

10,000 Doors

I listen to NPR on the way to/ from work each day.  Thats my only news source.  I don't spend any other time in my life hunkered down in front of TV or internet news.  I wasted years of my life, just after 9/11, glued to the 24 hours news networks...never again.

Today I was driving home and I heard a commercial on NPR for something called "10,000 Doors."  Apparently this is a new website/ movement by the United Methodist Church to "rethink church."  You can see their site HERE.

What bothered me about this radio commercial was that the tagline went like this...

"What if church was a place where God believed in you?"

I began laughing.  I know that such massive anthropocentrism isn't really funny - but, I could not help busting a gut.  I mean, how ridiculous is this joke of a thing called American Christianity.  We have so deceived ourselves in thinking that we can use religious vocabulary, regardless of theology, and call ourselves believers.

I guess that I should expect this from ardent Wesleyans.  It is a complete system that focuses on the free will of man to choose his own salvation, the logical outcome of which is simply being realized now - God is here to be our helper, we're the real center-point in the show.

Expect to see more of this in the future.  Christianity is being twisted into a social action network with passing reference to God, and sometimes Jesus.  Its a form of works-salvation that rarely mentions sin, the cross, grace, or judgement - those things that Jesus said and did so clearly.

I think that it is primarily a product of a low view of Scripture.  Folks have largely decided to read the Bible, the few who actually read it, as a nice story with lots of example of how we can be better people despite all that fairy tale stuff.  Once a person or a denomination begins to let their view of Scripture slide, they will soon deny all the essential doctrines of the faith and anthropocentric, feel-good, humanitarian assistance is all that they will have to stand for.

I'm probably ramblin' now - I am going to bed now.

Why I am not a Young-Earth Creationist

Here are 3 brief reasons that I am not a YEC...

1) It does not mesh with modern science (cosmology, astronomy, geology, etc...) Latest estimations put the planet at almost 14 billion years old. So that leaves one of three options on the table:

a) Science is wrong about all its current data and the earth is not that old, its actually 6000-10,000 years old. (The YEC view)
b) The planet was made to look old despite its young age when God made it. (This makes God a deceiver, thats unbiblical)
c) Both YEC and the deception views are wrong and the planet is very old just as science says it is.  (What seems the only answer in face of the natural and special revelation we have)

2) The creation account in Genesis does not force itself to be read uber-literally. The 6 days of creation are probably not literal days, a very sound way to translate the Hebrew word used (yom) refers to a long period of time. In any case, the account is certainly vague enough to be legitimately viewed as something besides 6 literal days. Furthermore, despite the opinions of some, a non-uber-literal reading of these passages does not seem to have any logical bearing on wether or not one accepts that God did the creating. More over, it doesn't affect an understanding of who Christ was, why he died, and that he rose again.

3) I believe that placing a huge emphasis on the age of the earth as young, loudly proclaiming that belief, and holding fast to it in the midst of overwhelming evidence...that does more to hinder the gospel than to help spread it. Too often, the world sees Young-Earthers as crackpots and superstitious wierdos who button their polos all the way up and think that humans rode on saddles attached to vegetarian dinosaurs. Since the age of the earth is a non-essential doctrine, I argue that we should take the worlds view on this into account and leave it alone.

The best thing we can do is to love people, serve their needs, and tell them the good news of a Saviour that died for them. If we can see unbelievers moving to accept the essentials of the faith, then we can have in-house discussions on the secondary and tertiary issues. To place emphasis on those non-essentials, like YEC, is to take the focus off Jesus and to actually put up walls between an unbeliever and Christ that impede that person from finding true joy.

Most often, I find that ardent YEC are more interested in being correct than in proclaiming the gospel. I would urge them to drop their hard-line stance, even if they turn out to be right, for the sake of the central message of our faith.

Reformation Day

While most people know October 31st as Halloween, it is actually the date of another holiday as well.

On a blustery day in Germany 492 years ago, a young man named Martin Luther nailed his famous "95 Theses" to the church door at Wittenberg. As we all know, this protest aganist unbiblical Catholic doctrines was the major incident that is considered to have begun the Reformation.

The break from Rome took many turns through the years, and through several of those twists the Presbyterian Church of America was born. This Reformation day I am going to be celebrating that I belong to a Christocentric, Gospel-driven, Bible-exalting denomination.

Beyond that, I am going to celebrate the battle cries of the Reformation:

Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
Sola fide ("by faith alone")
Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
Solus Christus ("Christ alone")
Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")

Thanks to the power of the Holy Spirit and the courage of a German monk, this October 31st is more than a day of fall festivaties or a ghostly night of costumes and candy. Above all, this 31st is a time for us to give thanks to God that he has provided his Son, Jesus, with a bride; and that we, the bride, are constantly being prepared (through events like the "95 Theses") to be ready for our glorious wedding banquet in the future!

Happy Reformation Day!

An Idolatry of Theology

As humans we are prone to make idols and subsequently, to worship those things above the Lord. This can happen even in the midst of miracles, as it did with the Hebrews who came out of Egypt when they made the golden calf. That means it certainly still happens today.

Idolatry is a serious offense to a sovereign God, notice the 10 Commandments. Often, we are quick to point out the idols worshipped by our culture - money, sex, TV, etc...Sometimes we will even admit to struggling with those idols in our own lives. What we hardly ever do is talk about the idols that sneak up on us because we tend to see them as inherently good things.

Family is a great example of this category. Many people have made an idol of thier family, putting it before God in their hearts. They do this because the have difficulty seeing typically good things as potential idols. Family is a good thing. God blesses marriage and childrearing. Unfortunately, we are so depraved that we find a way to twist the goodness of family into an idol before our God.

This general idea was hammered home for me in our weekly mens discipleship group on Tuesday. The discussion included the thought that we must be vigilant lest we make an idol of good men like Piper, Keller, or Driscoll. We can learn much from them about Jesus, but they are not Jesus.

Less obvious, if equally as dangerous is our potential idolatry of reformed theology/ Calvinism. I am fully committed to RT because I believe that it is the system that best captures the theology of the Bible. I am a strong believer that understanding TULIP is the best way to dig deep into God's truth and to grasp the beauty of God's grace. That said, I know that it is very easy for me to fall into a trap of idolizing RT.

I can spend hours on the subject, living inside my head and my thoughts, oblivious to the outside world. By being so enamoured by the "headiness" of RT, I think I often lose out on my complete surrender and worship of God. I see Scripture as telling us that correct theology is vital, else faith would be in vain, AND that we are to express that theological conviction is simplicity and love.

When my fascination with the doctrines of RT becomes such a preoccupation that it leads me into hostile confontation and arguement with fellow believers, rather than civil discussions for the glory of God, I make theology an idol.

When my love of RT reaches a level where I cloister myself away with a copy of "The Institutes" rather than venture out to engage the world in self-sacrifical love as I proclaim the good news, then my theology has become an idol.

I pray that God will keep me from making RT an idol even as he keeps me an advocate of its tenets.

Ultimately, I should be seeking 2 things:

- to see unbelievers saved by grace thru faith and adopted into God's family (even if they don't understand that and they come in as confused Arminian brothers)

- to see brothers in Christ stand together globally, agreeing on the essentials of the faith, and partenering in fellowship and evangelism.

Desiring to see all Christians become 5-pointers is a good thing for their growth and God's glory. Letting that desire eclipse the call that we have to proclaim simple gospel truth in love, thats when an idolatry of theology begins.

I am committing to be more aware of when I lead discussions into overly deep theological concepts and thereby I look to keep my usual conversations on basic truth and personal matters. Rather than pondering the Order of Decrees for 2 hours in our mens group,it may be better to engage in more prayer and more discussion of how each of us is really doing in life, in our personal walk with Christ, and in our efforts to proclaim the gospel to those lost around us, by word and deed.

I am thankful for the thought-provoking word I received at group on Tuesday and I pray that it will be useful in balancing my Christian life. Thanks guys.

Hinn: Holy or Haughty?

Is this a strong affirmation of the Trinity?

The one true God has revealed Himself as the eternally self-existent, self-revealed "I AM" and has further revealed Himself as embodying the principles of relationship and association, i.e., Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (from the Benny Hinn Ministries Statement of Faith)

Last night on Nightline, there was a feature segment about Binny Hinn. It was very interesting to see clip after clip of people falling down after being "healed" by Benny. Several things caught my attention...

1 - There has never been any evidence collected to show conclusively that Benny Hinn actually heals people. In fact, in the interview he admits that he doesn't have any evidence of healing. It seems to me that anyone really healing to the degree he "can" would want to have those miracles documented for God's glory...huh.

2 - When you watch the clips of Benny healing folks, you tend to see lots of people on stage who appear to be from an uneducated, low socioeconomic status. Yes, I stereotyped and no, I am not saying that means those individuals are worth less than any of us. However, it is a fact that low education, lack of finances, and akward social abilities often lead people in vulnerable and desperate situations where they can be easily confused and/or easily given in to the emotional exagerations that I believe we see at Hinn revivials...but maybe I am just overly profiling..?

3 - Even though Benny Hinn claims to have given all financial records from his ministry to the Senator who is investigating prosperity gospel leaders, Benny said that he was unable to provide the same info for public disclosure. He claimed that his witholding of the financial data was due to a confidentiality agreement with the Senator. The Senators office denied the existence of an agreement...interesting.

4 - Several times in the interview, when the questions got tough for Benny, his off-camera publicist would interupt the reporter and try to steer the conversation off of healing and finances. (Strange since that is the bread and butter of Hinn's work) For his part, Benny was akward in these moments, telling his publicist that he was glad to be asked hard questions and even reaching forward to oddly shake the reporters hand in thanks for the difficult interogatives...run away, run away!

5 - Mostly, when the reporter asked a very plain question to Benny that was along the lines of: "Do you take advantage of people in need by providing false healing for a fee?" Well, Benny begin to get really animated. He sat up, moved his hands, swallowed hard, and essentially changed his whole demeanor for that question. No where else in the show did he get so worked up. I am no expert (like Tim Roth on Lie to Me), but I am pretty sure that his body language indicated a lie.
Check it out HERE.

How can people be so duped? It blows my mind. I guess that such false ministires gain success because they appeal to the carnal selfishness inside us. Its so sad.

All that to get back to my original question, is the statement of faith regarding the Trinity by Hinn an adequate one or is it so vague as to be outside the faith? I am going with the latter.

God is Love

He sure is, and you need to understand exactly what that means. Most of the West is very confused. Try these two resources:

Buy an awesome, cheap, and short treatise on the subject


At first thought, understanding the doctrine of the love of God seems simple compared to trying to fathom other doctrines like that of the Trinity or predestination. Especially since the overwhelming majority of those who believe in God view Him as a loving being.That is precisely what makes this doctrine so difficult.

The only aspect of God's character the world still believes in is His love. His holiness, His sovereignty, His wrath are often rejected as being incompatible with a "loving" God. Because pop culture has so distorted and secularized God's love, many Christians have lost a biblical understanding of it and, in turn, lost a vital means to knowing who God is.

The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of Godseeks to restore what we have lost. In this treatment of many of the Bible's passages regarding divine love, noted evangelical scholar D. A. Carson not only critiques sentimental ideas such as "God hates the sin but loves the sinner," but provides a compelling perspective on the nature of God and why He loves as He does.

Carson blends his discourse with discussion of how God's sovereignty and holiness complete the biblical picture of who He is and how He loves.In doing away with trivialities and cliches, this work gets to the heart of this all-important doctrine from an unflinching evangelical perspective. Yet it does so without losing its personal emphasis: for in understanding more of the comprehensive nature of God's love as declared in His Word, you will come to understand God and His unending love for you more completely.

OR

listen to this mp3 for a summary

Both resources are from D.A. Carson. Dr. Carson is one of the most distinguished New Testament scholars in the world. He is a professor at TEDS and a member of The Gospel Coalition.

Help!

The Scripture records that just after Jesus death, an amazing thing occurred. A thing which really bothers me and I need to pick you guys brains for assistance. Whats up with this:

Matthew 27:52-53
The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Were these the Old Testament saints coming out of Abraham's bosom and into heaven?

How does that concur with the end times when the dead in Christ shall rise first?

If they appeared to many, why didn't it get recorded anywhere but the Gospels?

Help me figure this one out!

The Lord's Table

Today at our home church (Southpoint Presbyterian) we celebrated communion. It was the most moving instance of remembering the Lord that I have ever had. I think that the main reason for that was something our pastor said this morning.

He quoted the verse in 1 Corinthians 11 that tells us to examine ourselves before we come to the table. Too often I have spent my Sunday morning before communion dwelling on this verse and picking thru my recent (and distant) past to find some sin that would keep me from receiving the bread and wine (or grape juice..lol).

However, the way Matthew explained it this morning I found myself understanding that the requirement for coming before the table is not being blameless in our moral life - we never can be - the requirement for taking communion is that you truly place your faith in Christ and what he did for us by taking our punishment for sin.

When I stopped searching for a nit-picky reason that I was unworthy and I simply examined my heart to be sure that I did have real relationship with the Lord, I felt very unburdened and my joy in communion this morning was unlike any other time in my life. Awesome.

Justification

A short Piper video that I found helpful because he made this point:

God doesn't look at those who are "In Christ" as guilty but forgiven, he actually declares us not guilty. Wow.

lol

Piper in 1979

To celebrate or not to celebrate...

What do I feel about celebrating Halloween, the Easter Bunny, and Santa in light of my beliefs as a Christian?

Before I answer, let me say a few words about the various attitudes out there. On one side of the equation are believers who embrace the demonic side of Halloween, who give more "airtime" to the Easter Bunny than the ressurection, and who spend most of the Christmas season trapped in consumerism and Santa stories. On the other side are those individuals who feel convicted that these cultural festivities detract from the true meanings and beliefs of our faith, sometimes to the extreme of cloistering themselves away lest the secular icons taint them.

I believe that anyone who spends Halloween dressed up as a hooker or a demon is probably not walking very closely with Christ. They are not recognizing the reality of spiritual warfare, which probably indicates they don't take the bible too seriously. Likewise, if a family is so engrossed with bunnies and elves that they essentially deny the celebration and power of the nativity and the gospel - then I would have real difficulty in saying that was ok. I tend to think that such actions might even be denying Christ to some degree.

On the other hand, if someone is a sound believer with orthodox faith and they feel convicted that their family should not participate in the cultural activities - so be it. I don't believe that we should injure our conscience when it bears out decisions that are believed to be biblically-based (where the bible doesn't speak). I would also argue that no other believers should give that individual grief over their beliefs. If that person was trying to condemn others for participating in the holidays - then it may be appropriate to respectfully debate the issue, but we should never seek to make others (acting in accordance with their biblically based conscience) feel as if they are outsiders. Reasonable discussion may persuade, insults and mocking never does.

I personally advocate the Way of the Mean (thanks Aristotle!) - that is, we should seek to avoid deficiency (withdrawing from the world) and we should also seek to avoid excess (emersing ourselves in the world). We should strive to be "in the world, but not of the world." (I do not have a bible handy to give reference on that, sorry)

My family does participate in Halloween, we do talk about mythical bunnies, and yes we lie to our child about the existence of that jolly old soul. It is my belief that culture is so full of these things that we can't lock ourselves away from them. Yet, I also feel that culture is too enamoured with these things for its own good. Thus, I walk a middle road...

We celebrate Halloween with pumpkins, scarecrows, and hay rides - not ghosts, skulls, and zombies. We dress up as firemen, lions, and knights - not demons, monsters, or vampires.

We talk about the Easter Bunny as the bearer of an Easter morning fun basket - but we stay focused that the basket is to celebrate the ressurection of Jesus. Our Easter books aren't about Peter Cottontail, they are about the empty tomb.

We play the Christmas Eve game about St. Nick coming down our non-existent fireplace and we put up a Christmas tree - but, it is our Little People Nativity Set and our emphasis on the birth narative that hold the central place in our home.

I believe that you can do great damage to your children by allowing them to fall into the faithless vacumn of holiday celebration that our "Christian nation" has created. Don't start off your kids life by teaching them to value dark spirits and fairy tale creatures more than the risen Lord. When they grow up, their foundation will be weak and a storm may surely sweep them away.

I also think that damage (but much less damage) can be done by attempting to remove your kids from the culture around us. One day they will be exposed to these things and they will have to make independent, intelligent decisions on how to balance the mocking they will receive at school with the fundamentalism they were taught. Why put them in a position where it may be difficult for them to share the gospel because they are seen as "those weird Christian kids."

There is a better way, be in this world (just as Jesus ate with sinners) and yet, do not partake in those activities that overshadow or bring shame on the cross. I think we can play a role in Halloween, talk about the Easter Bunny, and allow our kids to believe in Santa without doing so to an extreme that blots out Christ. I encourage everyone to think about this issue and seek the middle ground.

Ultimately, we want to raise our kids with the ability to proclaim the Gospel. To do that they must venture into "enemy territory", our job is to equip them to survive and make headway in that battle. Sending them out unarmed AND keeping them back at base are both ineffective ways to raise the flag for the glory of God in Christ!

Shouting Match at GSU

It was relayed to me today that there was a recent student demonstration by some overly zealous evangelicals at Georgia State University this week…

Apparently, earlier this week, some Christians decided to stand in one of the main throughways at the college and display some large signs which read along the lines of: “Liars, Gays, Drunks, etc…are going to hell.”

This attracted the ire of some of the homosexual advocates on campus and there was a verbal confrontation that ensued. That confrontation sparked a protest by the homosexual supporters against the religious group the next day.

That group versus group dynamic is described as turning into a shouting match with the zealots screaming that the gays were going to hell and the gays screaming that they loved everyone, specifically “we love all you GD MFers!”

In the end everyone lost their cool and both groups looked stupid – or so I’m told.

These events influenced me to restate my position on homosexuality:

I wrote a position paper on this subject a few months ago that may be useful - I will reprint it here:
____________________________
A Position Paper on Homosexuality
November 1, 2008

Preface:
It is my intention in writing this paper to express my current opinion on the issue of homosexuality. This paper is a response to the onslaught of pro-homosexual media in America today and the bewildering confusion regarding this issue in the church. My views on this subject have been defined after much thought, prayer, and consultation of Scripture.[1] As always, please read this with the prayer that God will open your eyes to the truth of his will. Most importantly, keep your heart guarded against letting this (or any other immoral social issue) become the emphasis of your Christian walk or understanding of the faith writ large. Remember that it is the gospel of the grace of Jesus that is the "good news" which saves us from ourselves.

2 Corinthians 5:21
"For our sake (God) made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in (Jesus) we might become the righteousness of God."
____________________________
1. Homosexuality is an abomination before the Lord. It is an egregious sin in the eyes of a perfectly holy being.[2]

2. The immorality of homosexuality is not my personal opinion or a societal more. It is the recorded decision of the unchanging Lord of all creation.[3]

3. In no way should this truth be used as an excuse for abusing homosexuals either verbally or physically.[4]

4. Although homosexuality was a capital offense according to the Mosaic Law in the Old Covenant[5], it is understood that we are now removed from that theocratic system and are under a different relationship with God. We are in the New Covenant, instituted by Jesus Christ[6], wherein the moral principles (but not the punitive prescriptions) apply.

5. Homosexuality is too often the prevailing focus of Christians as we discuss and rightly discourage sexual sins. This sin is grouped with several other sexual immoralities in Scripture[7] and they are all equally grievous to the Lord as they all separate us from him if we are without Christ.[8] We must never push aside the battle against lust, fornication, adultery, masturbation, incest, etc as we address homosexuality.[9]

6. Our response to this issue in contemporary society should be to refrain from judgment on non-Christian homosexuals whom we know and to love and pray for them as well as to share the gospel with them.[10] Once they are regenerate, we should pray for the Spirit to speedily convict them of their sin and assist them to turn from that lifestyle. At the same time, we must be watchful of brethren who call themselves Christ-followers while continuing to habitually engage in immorality. In that case, church discipline may be necessary.[11]

7. Politically we may stand up against the tide of pro-homosexual propaganda coming from the Hollywood gay media lobby and the proponents of same-sex marriage; however we must always do so peacefully and graciously[12]. Dissemination of the truth is our best weapon. In this battle against declining moral values we must be bold with the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of our God.[13]
_____________________________
FAQ:

Q: Can a homosexual be a Christian?

A: Absolutely. Even after we have been justified by Christ’s blood and adopted into God’s children do we not all still sin? There is no sin that can separate us from Christ once we have been elected.[14] However, as the believer progresses in his sanctification we should see the casting off of the old flesh and a heart/ lifestyle which more closely resembles that of our Lord Jesus.[15]

Q: Can a homosexual be a leader in the church?

A: Absolutely not. The guidelines for elders, deacons, and overseers in the local church are detailed in Scripture and give a clear picture of a man who is the husband of only one wife amongst multiple other virtues.[16] Would we allow a man engaged in ongoing fornication or adultery function as a leader in the church? I imagine not. Neither should anyone who has not completely renounced their homosexual lifestyle.

Q: What about gay marriage?

A: Same-sex marriage (gays can already legally marry someone of the opposite sex) is obviously against God’s intention of a man and a woman as expressed in Genesis 2:18 and 2:24. Additionally, it serves no purpose for the state as a social contract. Benefits are bestowed upon married couples (i.e. tax breaks) because of the general expectation for the production of progeny to continue the citizenry. By nature and design, same-sex marriages cannot function in that way and therefore should not be legally recognized. Additionally, civil unions should not be granted. Once the homosexuals have all of the benefits of marriage but not the name, they will be correct in their cry of “discrimination.”
____________________________________
A final word against homosexuality for those who do not believe in God and/or the Bible:

If nature is the ultimate reality then it is clear that homosexuality was never its intent. Males and females are born with very different anatomical structures that when used according to their proper telos produce the specific result of continued life.

While some species of animal have been seen engaging in homosexual behaviors, it must be understood that those actions (results of confused stimuli) are never an exclusive “orientation”; as such a manufactured lifestyle would be evidently detrimental to the utmost concern of nature herself, the preservation and continuation of life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES:

[1] All my reading of God’s Word, and all quotes in this paper, are from the English Standard Version of the Holy Bible.

[2] Leviticus 18:22 – “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”

[3] 2 Timothy 3:16 –“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,” If the existence of God and/ or the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible is questioned at this point, the gospel message and a secular argument, which is made at the end of this paper, may be appropriate.

[4] Romans 12:17 –“Repay no one evil for evil,”

[5] Leviticus 20:13 – “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

[6] Luke 22:20 – “And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.”

[7] 1 Thessalonians 4:3 – “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;”

[8] Ephesians 2:13-16 – “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”

[9] Editorial – The tendency to be vocal in our discussion of homosexuality and not the other sins (like adultery and fornication) may be due to the prevailing number of individuals, even church members and leaders, who are participating in the unspoken sins. With premarital sex, cheating, and porn addiction on the rise our sin nature may be pushing us to ignore our own shortcomings by revealing others. We must be prayerful and repentant to prevent this occurrence.

[10] 1 Corinthians 5:12 – “For what have I to do with judging outsiders?”

[11] 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 – “Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you.’”

[12] 1 Peter 3:15-16 – “…but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect…”

[13] Ephesians 6:17 and Hebrews 4:12 – “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

[14] Romans 8:38-39 – “For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

[15] Ephesians 4:22-24 – “…to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

[16] 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9.