ANGELS ON HIGH

December 26, 2017

THE RELUCTANT TOPIC

I hesitate to even bring this topic up because of all the abuse and false information about angels. However, that leads me to realize that is the very reason we will at least broach the subject briefly.

When areas of theology are slighted, this will likely be one of them, at least in standard books of theology. One has only to note the amount of space devoted to angelology in standard theologies to demonstrate this. However, in the last years of the twenty first century there has been an increasing interest in the subject as well as in Satan and demons. Articles, books, and TV programs featuring angels, though more often “warm and fuzzy” than theologically accurate, have helped generate this interest in angelology. Nevertheless, only the Bible gives us totally accurate information about angels.

Even the great theologian Calvin (1500 AD) was cautious in discussing this subject. Also, neo-orthodoxy’s denial of the objective existence of angels has been countered by the widespread publicity given to demons and their activity. Although people may deny theologically the existence of an order of beings called angels (and demons), practically their reported activity seems to make it impossible to deny their existence. Thus on the one hand man’s bias against anything supernatural rules out in his mind the existence of angels; while on the other hand activity that he cannot explain rationally makes their existence seem necessary.

One book I do recommend is Billy Graham’s book “Angels” for both biblical explanations and some ‘vetted’ stories.

If one accepts the biblical revelation, then there can be no question about the existence of angels. There are three significant characteristics about that revelation. First, it is extensive. The Old Testament speaks about angels just over 100 times, while the New Testament mentions them about 165 times. Of course, any truth has to be stated only one time in the Bible for us to acknowledge it as truth, but when a subject is mentioned as often as angels are, then it becomes that much more difficult to deny it.

Second, angels are mentioned throughout the Bible. The truth about them is not confined to one period of history or one part of the Scriptures or a few writers. They do not belong to some primitive era. Their existence is mentioned in thirty-four books of the Bible from the earliest (whether Genesis or Job) to the last.

Third, the teaching of our Lord includes a number of references to angels as real beings. So to deny their existence is to cast doubt on His veracity.

  1. In the Old Testament

The Old Testament always presents angels as real, objective, existing creatures. In no way are they considered illusions or figments of the imagination. In the thirty-four occurrences of the word in the Mosaic writings, angels always appear as real creatures who do specific things in character with their service as messengers (which is, of course, the meaning of both the Hebrew and Greek words for angels). For example, Abraham ate and conversed with angels (Gen. 18). Many of the references in the Pentateuch and in Judges are to the Angel of Yahweh, who seems to be Deity. An angel executed the judgment on Israel after David wrongly took a census of the people (2 Sam. 24:16—hardly an illusion). Isaiah refers to seraphim (6:2) and Ezekiel, to cherubim (10:1-3). Daniel mentions Gabriel (9:20-27) and Michael (10:13; 12:1). Zechariah mentions angels frequently as agents of God (Zechariah 1) and interpreters of visions (chaps. 1-6). In the psalms angels are depicted as God’s servants who worship Him and who deliver God’s people from harm (34:7; 91:11; 103:20).

  1. In the New Testament

In addition to what our Lord taught about angels, the writers of the New Testament also affirmed their real existence. The Gospel writers relate their ministry to Christ’s birth, life, resurrection, and ascension (Matt. 2:19; Mark 1:13; Luke 2:13; John 20:12; Acts 1:10-11).

In the record of the book of Acts angels were involved in helping God’s servants, opening prison doors for the apostles (5:19; 12:5-11), directing Philip and Cornelius in ministry (8:26; 10:1-7), and encouraging Paul during the storm on his voyage to Rome (27:23-25).

Paul (Gal. 3:19; 1 Tim. 5:21), the writer of Hebrews (1:4), Peter (1 Pet. 1:12), and Jude (v. 6) all assumed the existence of angels in their writings. About sixty-five clear references to angels occur in the Revelation, more than in any other single book of the Bible. Clearly the New Testament furnishes clear, undebatable, and abundant evidence of the existence of angels.

  1. In the Teachings of Christ

Angels ministered to Christ in the wilderness after His temptation by Satan (and, of course, no reporter was present at the Temptation, so His truthfulness is behind the account). He taught that the human state in the resurrection would be like the angels; i.e., non-procreative (Matt. 22:30). Angels will separate the righteous from the wicked at the end of the age (13:39) and will accompany the Lord at His second coming (25:31).

Angels are personal spiritual beings who have intelligence, emotions, and will. This is true of both the good and evil angels (demons). Angels possess intelligence (Matthew 8:29; 2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Peter 1:12), show emotion (Luke 2:13; James 2:19; Revelation 12:17), and exercise will (Luke 8:28-31; 2 Timothy 2:26; Jude 6). Angels are spirit beings (Hebrews 1:14) without true physical bodies. Although they do not have physical bodies, they are still personalities.

Because they are created beings, their knowledge is limited. This means they do not know all things as God does (Matthew 24:36). They do seem to have greater knowledge than humans, however, which may be due to three things. First, angels were created as an order of creatures higher than humans. Therefore, they innately possess greater knowledge. Second, angels study the Bible and the world more thoroughly than humans do and gain knowledge from it (James 2:19; Revelation 12:12). Third, angels gain knowledge through long observation of human activities. Unlike humans, angels do not have to study the past; they have experienced it. Therefore, they know how others have acted and reacted in situations and can predict with a greater degree of accuracy how we may act in similar circumstances.

Though they have wills, angels, like all creatures, are subject to the will of God. Good angels are sent by God to help believers (Hebrews 1:14). Here are some activities the Bible ascribes to angels:

They praise God (Psalm 148:1-2; Isaiah 6:3). They worship God (Hebrews 1:6; Revelation 5:8-13). They rejoice in what God does (Job 38:6-7). They serve God (Psalm 103:20; Revelation 22:9). They appear before God (Job 1:6; 2:1). They are instruments of God’s judgments (Revelation 7:1; 8:2). They bring answers to prayer (Acts 12:5-10). They aid in winning people to Christ (Acts 8:26; 10:3). They observe Christian order, work, and suffering (1 Corinthians 4:9; 11:10; Ephesians 3:10; 1 Peter 1:12). They encourage in times of danger (Acts 27:23-24). They care for the righteous at the time of death (Luke 16:22).

Angels are an entirely different order of being than humans. Human beings do not become angels after they die. Angels will never become, and never were, human beings. God created the angels, just as He created humanity. The Bible nowhere states that angels are created in the image and likeness of God, as humans are (Genesis 1:26). Angels are spiritual beings that can, to a certain degree, take on physical form. Humans are primarily physical beings, but with a spiritual aspect. The greatest thing we can learn from the holy angels is their instant, unquestioning obedience to God’s commands.

You can’t call your angel, can’t name or summon an angel. Angels are always male in the bible, so all you feminists with your own personal female angel you’re smoking crack.

WARNING; IF YOU READ ANYTHING THAT TELLS YOU HOW TO TALK OR CONTACT AN ANGEL YOU ARE REALLY GETTING IN TOUCH WITH DEMONS. (ALSO VERY REAL).

GOD BLESS FROM SCUMLIKEUSCHURCH@GMAIL.COM

 

ONCE IS ENOUGH

December 18, 2017

You are eternally secure because of the nature of your salvation. Your security comes from the nature of your salvation. Now, your salvation is rooted in the abundant mercy of God. Look at it again, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us…” (1 Peter 1:3). Do you see the words “abundant mercy?” Do you know why you were saved? Because of God’s abundant mercy.

Do you think you’re saved by your merit? No: you are saved by God’s mercy. And, that which is the gift of mercy can never be withdrawn because of the lack of merit. Do you understand that? Salvation is not in your merit, it’s in God’s mercy and that which is the gift of mercy can never be withdrawn from the lack of merit. How do you keep your salvation? You keep your salvation exactly the same way you got it.

How did you get it? By the mercy of God. How do you keep it? By the mercy of God. Now, my dear friend, it is rooted in abundant mercy, it results in a new birth. Look again in verse 3: “According to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again “—that’s just another way of saying born-again— “He hath begotten us again…” (1 Peter 1:3). Now, look at the word “begotten.” Do you see it? In verse 3. It is in the Aorist (original Greek) tense. You say, “What does that mean, pastor?” It means dear friend, that when you were born-again, you were born-again once and for all. Something that is in the Aorist tense means it happened never, ever to be repeated. How many times can a man be born physically? One time. How many times can a man be born spiritually? One time. Have you ever seen a human being who was born twice physically? Of course not. And, you will never see a child of God who is born twice spiritually. Never, ever.

Don’t confuse carnal living and revival with a false theology or believe you can backslide out of God’s love, you can’t. trust me I’ve heard all the stories, “preacher, you don’t know how bad I got, and then I got saved a second time.” Not going to happen. It’s either real or it wasn’t.

Trust me, I’ve been that person. I’ve done the carnal, crazy, screw up everything you can, it was an act of repentance not re-salvation.

No, you can became carnal, and backslide, but not out of God’s salvation.

Renewal, yes, repenting, (many, many times) yes, revival, yes. One TRUE salvation experience.

God’s love does it all.

Now there are people who are deceived about their salvation, there are preachers delivering sermons in evangelical, Pentecostal, Baptist, Cowboy churches, that have never truly been saved. And then pow, it hits the fan and they have their first real salvation experience, showing the marvelous grace of God.

If you have doubts about your faith, your walk with God please email us at scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

I will arrange a chance for us to talk.

God bless.

 

THE RABBIT TRAIL

December 17, 2017

The main idea behind the Hebrew concept of wisdom is “skill.” The men who were able to construct the tabernacle according to God’s plan as revealed to Moses are called “wise,” meaning skillful (Exod. 31:3, 6; 36:1-2). Just as a skilled carpenter can take a piece of rough wood and shape it according to a plan into a beautiful and useful piece of furniture, so the wise person is able to take the rough elements of life and shape them according to God’s plan into something beautiful and useful to Him. Spiritual wisdom requires learning about God and how He wants us to live so that our lives will not be ruined by sin, but rather will become a finely crafted product that will cause others to be attracted to the Maker, who displays His glory in us.

So where does that bring us today?

God wants us to have knowledge and wisdom and skill to discern and comprehend His plan for our lives, our brothers and sisters in Christ, (the body) and to understand the spiritual warfare we are in.

We need to understand the pluralism that has taken deep roots in our culture.

Diversity and Inclusion are the battle cry of those who seek to pull down every standard and symbol of Christianity. Our core concepts of decency and morality no longer matter.

How rampant and successful are they?

Imagine this you’ve sent your precious child (I’m not being facetious here) to Wheaton College, a Christian college and there a tenured well known professor makes this statement in class; “The God of the Bible and the god of the muslim faith are the same god.”

Thankfully the majority of students walked out, this time.

So even our sacred halls of Christian education have succumbed to pluralism.

Fourth most disturbing word I hear in Christian dialogue, Christian consumerism in the place of worship.

“Our worship of God needs to be defined by Christian consumerism, if not we will lose a generation of young believers.” WHAT THE HECK DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

If the snowflake generation can’t have wifi during the service we are going to lose them. If that’s the case we’ve lost the battle already. Encouraging ‘selfies’ during the sermon posted on the church website to show enthusiasm. That’s not worship but disrespect to God and others in service.

Ok I have to quit before I have stroke.

REVERENCE, HOLINESS ARE WORDS I UNDERSTAND.

GOD BLESS FROM SCUMLIKEUSCHURCH@GMAIL.COM

 

INSTANT VS. BREWED

December 16, 2017

INSTANT COFFEE VS. BREWED

YOU MAY NOT BE AWARE OF A DEBATE GOING ON IN SOME THEOLOGICAL WORLDS.

IN THE SIMPLEST FORM; IT’S HYPER HOLINESS VS. MATURITY.

OR, INSTANT SANCTIFICATION REALIZED NOW VS. GROWTH.

SO ONE CAMP SAYS YOU SHOULD HAVE IT ALL RIGHT NOW, YOU’RE SAVED, SANCTIFIED (IN PRACTICE AS WELL AS STANDING). AND THE OTHER SIDE BASICALLY SAYS THERE ARE STEPS, OR PHASES TO YOUR CHRISTIAN MATURITY.

THE INSTANT NOW GROUP BELIEVES THAT UPON YOUR SALVATION YOU NO LONGER SIN BECAUSE YOU ARE SANCTIFIED. THE OTHER GROUP SAYS IT’S A BATTLE.

JUST SO THERE IS NO DOUBT IN YOUR MIND I’M IN THE GROWTH GROUP.

THE INSTANT GROUP IGNORES ROMANS 7 AND REFACTORIZES IT TO PAUL TALKING ABOUT A CARNAL BACKSLIDDEN PERSON (IN THEIR EYES UNSAVED).THEY DON’T BELIEVE IN ETERNAL SECURITY EITHER.

MY CHIEF CONCERN WITH THIS GROUP IS THEY ARE SUPER LEGALISTIC AND WHEN THEY GIVE AN ALTAR CALL TO BELIEVERS YOU HAVE TO CONFESS TO AN ELDER YOU HAVEN’T SINNED SO YOU CAN TAKE COMMUNION AND HAVE THE HAND OF CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP EXTENDED TO YOU.

NOW THIS GROUP OF “INSTANTS” IS SMALL, OF COURSE THEY ARE PENTECOSTAL WHICH IRONICALLY IS A “SECOND BLESSING” TO THEM, WHICH COUNTER ACTS THEIR OTHER THEOLOGY. AND SOME GROUPS DON’T BELIEVE YOU ARE SAVED UNLESS YOU SPEAK IN TONGUES AT YOUR SALVATION.

THIS IS ONE OF THE POOREST FORMS OF THEOLOGY.

IF ONE PERSON FOLLOWING THIS DEVOTIONAL PAGE FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME CAN TELL ME THEY DON’T STRUGGLE, NEVER FAIL, NEVER SIN, NEVER STUMBLE. THEN I WILL TELL YOU YOUR DELUDED OR IN A CULT OR BOTH.

(Colossians 1:9-12) I GUESS DOESN’T EXIST TO THEM.

9 And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, 10 so as to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him: bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God; 11 being strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy; 12 giving thanks[a] to the Father, who has qualified you[b] to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.

INCREASING IN KNOWLEDGE, BEING STRENGTHENED, ENDURANCE, PATIENCE, SOUNDS LIKE A GROWTH PROCESS TO ME.

I’m approaching Paul’s prayer as a picture of spiritual growth, but don’t miss the fact that it is a prayer. It shows us how Paul prayed for these new believers, most of whom he did not know personally. Along with Paul’s other recorded prayers (Eph. 1:15-23; 3:14-21; Phil. 1:9-11; 1 Thess. 3:9-13; 2 Thess. 1:3-12), we can learn how to pray for our families, our friends, for ourselves, and for other believers. When Paul says here that he and Timothy had “not ceased to pray” for the Colossians, he means that they had often remembered them in their prayers. Use this prayer as a guide for your prayers!

SO DON’T BE ALARMED IF YOU HAVE ACCEPTED JESUS CHRIST AS YOUR SAVIOR AND HAVE STRUGGLES. WHEN I GOT SAVED THE DRUGS DROPPED AWAY RIGHT THERE. A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE (ALSO A PASTOR) GOT SAVED AND TOOK 3 YEARS TO BEAT HIS HEROIN ADDICTION 100%. I CAN’T EXPLAIN WHY IT WORKED LIKE THAT. I PERSONALLY THINK HIS FAITH IS GREATER THAN MINE, IF YOU KNEW WHAT HE’S BEEN THROUGH.

IT’S LIKE BOXING (MY SECOND FAVORITE SPORT) THE SECRET IS GETTING BACK UP. (AND IN CASE YOU’RE WONDERING MY FAVORITE SPORT IS JUJITSU. (ESPECIALLY AS TAUGHT BY THE GREAT PROFESSOR WALLY JAY).

SO GET UP, GET OVER IT, GET ON WITH IT.

GOD BLESS FROM SCUMLIKEUSCHURCH@GMAIL.COM

26

December 6, 2017

So a few things you may have noticed about this devotional site.

  1. There are no ads

  2. There are no buttons to push

  3. There are pictures occasionally

  4. It’s about Theology

  5. It’s about Your Walk with God

  6. It’s about Growing into Christian Maturity

  7. We fight bad theology, crack pot preachers, bad books

  8. We dig rock and roll

  9. It is a daily devotion

  10. Some are long

  11. Some are short

  12. Prayer requests are taken through scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

  13. Questions are answered

  14. We do offer counseling

  15. I’ve been a Pastor and Professional Counselor for over 40 years.

  16. Everyone deserves a second chance

  17. Yes it is true that I don’t recommend authors unless they’ve been dead for 25 years (it takes that long for all the skeletons to come out of the closet and be time tested).

  18. And it’s kind of the same with Hymns, I listen to Hymns not gospel music (just my personal preference).

  19. I’m a veteran

  20. And lifetime NRA member

  21. Was a Pentecostal Pastor for 20 years

  22. Now I’m in the middle of the Road, and have gone in a semi-non-Pentecostal ministry, although I still believe in the gifts being used properly.

  23. Believe that Bible Reading and Prayer are to be the two major operations, habit, daily exercise, of all believers.

  24. Traveled extensively with all the big name whoop de doos of Pentecost during the 70’s and 80’s; point being ‘some’ of the them I wouldn’t let near a dog in heat. Other’s were stand up guys on the road and in hotels.

  25. And last but not least there is not one shred of political correctness or tolerance of non-biblical lifestyles.

  26. I’ve been married 43 years to the greatest, most lovely and supportive wife in the world. I still almost pass out when we kiss.

And that’s the short list. Not sure why the devotion went this way but it did.

I WANT TO HEARTILY THANK THE FAITHFUL THAT ENCOURAGE, PRAY AND BLESS US CONTINUALLY, GOD BLESS YOU GREATLY.

AND AS ALWAYS, SHOUT OUT TO US AT SCUMLIKEUSCHURCH@GMAIL.COM

 

oh yes you are

November 25, 2017

Bring back solid biblical thinking, stop apple picking, you know where you get to ignore the bible truths you want and pick the ones you do. Making all kinds of excuses. It’s either all the bible or none at all.

I argue that one of the most important truths that needs to be re-emphasized in our day is the doctrine of the total depravity of the human heart. If we do not properly understand the Bible on this matter, we cannot fully understand the gospel for ourselves, let alone make it plain to others. Nor will we understand what the Bible teaches about sanctification (growth in holiness) if we are not clear on the evil that lurks within our hearts, even as regenerate people.

That doctrine could hardly be stated more emphatically than it is in Genesis 6:5: “Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” We are not basically good, decent folks who will do what is right if we’re only given the chance. The very core of our being–”every intent of the thoughts of our hearts” is “only evil continually.” It’s not just that people have a mean streak or that we occasionally sin. God’s declaration is that “every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” In case we missed it or are inclined to apply it only to the Hitler’s of the world, God repeats the assessment after the flood with reference to the most godly man on earth, Noah, and his descendents, “the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (8:21).

Because the doctrine of total depravity is often misunderstood, I first will define it. Because it is often disbelieved, minimized, or attacked, I then will defend it biblically. Finally, because we live in a day that often despises doctrine as boring and impractical, I will apply it.

Total depravity defined:

  1. WHAT TOTAL DEPRAVITY IS NOT:

Total depravity does not mean that people are as wicked and sinful as they could be. Nor does it mean that people are incapable of doing good deeds. Even those who have never heard of Jesus Christ are able to love their children and even sacrifice their own lives for the sake of family, friends, or sometimes even for strangers. Many people who do not know Christ are honest, even when it costs them.

  1. WHAT TOTAL DEPRAVITY MEANS:

Total depravity refers to the nature of fallen persons, not to their deeds. The word “total” refers to the total person–that every aspect of the person–mind, will, emotions, body–is corrupted by sin; and to the total human race, that every person since Adam and Eve, except for Jesus Christ, has been born with a nature that is alienated from God and in rebellion against God. Also, depravity must be viewed in relation to God, not by comparing men with men. With reference to God, total depravity means that no one is able in and of himself to do anything to choose God, to seek God, to please God, to love God, to glorify God, or to merit His salvation. Left to himself, every person will seek the things of self and sin. We are as unable to seek God as a corpse can choose to get up and walk (Eph. 2:1-3). The Westminster Confession states it clearly. Speaking of Adam and Eve it says (VI:II, III, IV),

By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed; and the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.

So total depravity refers to the extent of the damage, not necessarily to the degree. To illustrate, if you put a drop of deadly bacteria in a glass of water, it contaminates the entire glass. You may add a spoonful of bacteria, which makes it more potent, but the little drop is enough to pollute it all. Adam’s transgression was imputed to his posterity, so that all are polluted by sin.

Adam was the representative of the human race, so that his sin was charged to all who followed. Some will protest, “That’s not fair!” But several things must be said. First, there is nothing unfair about the concept of representation. Our entire government is built on it. The decisions our elected officials make affect us. But you may still protest, “I didn’t vote for Adam to represent me.” But, God did! God determined that Adam’s choice would represent the human race. We have no reason to believe that we would have acted any differently had we been there ourselves. When our representative fell into sin, the human race was linked to him, so that all are born in sin. We are not sinners because we sin; we sin because by nature we are sinners. This is what total depravity means.

Total depravity defended:

We can only look at a few of the many verses in both the Old and New Testaments which defend this doctrine:

In Psalm 51:5, David laments, “I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.” We are born in sin.

Jeremiah 17:9: “The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?” The word “sick” is used of an incurable wound; here, the meaning is metaphorical of sin that is beyond human hope of fixing. We’re terminal!

The doctrine is also inherent in Ezekiel 36:25-27, when the Lord promises, “I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from al your idols. Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.” The sinner cannot follow God unless God performs a heart transplant and gives him His Spirit.

Jesus taught the depravity of our hearts in Mark 7:20-23: “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”

In John 8:34, Jesus taught that “everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin,” and that only He could set us free.

Paul, quoting from the Old Testament, spells it out forcefully in Romans 3:10-18 (citing only 10-13 here): “There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one.”

In Romans 8:7-8, he emphasizes the inability of the sinner to follow God: “… the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.”

In 1 Corinthians 2:14 Paul states that the natural man not only does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, but cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. In 2 Corinthians 4:4 he explains that Satan, “the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, …”

In Ephesians 2:1-3, he says that we were all dead in our trespasses and sins and that by nature we are children of wrath. In Ephesians 4:18, he states that unbelievers are “darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their hearts.”

While believers are freed from sin’s penalty and from sin’s power, so that we can now live to please God, our sin nature (or, “the flesh”) is not eradicated until we are with the Lord. Romans 7 clearly teaches this, as do many other verses, such as 1 John 1:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”

If you compile all these and many other verses, we see that fallen man is incurably wounded; blind; ignorant and unable and unwilling to know; born in sin and with a nature oriented to sin; hard-hearted; enslaved to sin; polluted at the very core of his being; and, dead. The Westminster Confession (IX:III) sums it up: “Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.”

In spite of the overwhelming biblical evidence of man’s total inability to do anything about his state of alienation from God, man’s proud flesh keeps inventing ways around this doctrine. Many deny it outright and insist that people are basically good at heart. Others deny it by insisting that fallen men have the “free will” to choose God, and thus be saved. But this gives man a part in God’s work of salvation and a ground for boasting, which contradicts many Scriptures:

John 1:13: “Who were born [spiritually] not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”

Romans 9:16: “So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.”

Philippians 2:13: “For it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.”

1 Corinthians 1:27-31, where three times Paul stresses that salvation rests on the fact that “God has chosen,” so “that no man should boast before God. But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus…”

Those who argue in favor of so-called “free will” say that it is pointless, absurd, and a sham for God to command men to believe in Christ if they are not able by their own free will to believe. This objection was soundly refuted by Martin Luther in his diatribe against the Roman Catholic scholar, Erasmus, The Bondage of the Will [Revell], where he argues, rather, that by commanding us to do what no fallen sinner can do, God brings us to something we proud sinners deny, namely, the knowledge of our utter impotence, pride, and independence from God. In his words, “by thus breaking him down, and confounding him in his self-knowledge, he may make him ready for grace, and send him to Christ to be saved” (p. 162). Or, in the words of Augustine (1,000 years before Luther), “God bids us do what we cannot, that we may know what we ought to seek from him” (cited by Calvin, Institutes [II:V:7]).

Of course, before Augustine the Apostle Paul dealt with this same objection. In Romans 9, after arguing that man cannot choose God by his free will, but that salvation depends on God’s choosing men according to His sovereign mercy, he states (9:19), “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?’” Note carefully Paul’s inspired answer, because it strikes at the very root of human depravity: “On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God?” (9:20). In other words, our very question shows the arrogance of our sinful hearts! If the righteous God chooses to damn the entire race of rebellious sinners, that is His just prerogative. If He chooses to save some who otherwise would helplessly perish in their sin, that is His right. But no one can boast by saying, “I chose God by my own free will.” Scripture is clear that if God had not rescued us by His sovereign grace, we all would have perished in our willful, proud rebellion against Him.

In the same vein, the Lord Jesus Christ stated (Matt. 11:25-27) that God had hidden spiritual truth from the “wise and intelligent,” and that no one knows God except “anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.” Then He proceeded to command men to do what He just stated they cannot do: “Come unto Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.”

Total depravity applied:

The doctrine of total depravity is at the very heart of the gospel, and thus the applications are many. But I must limit myself to four:

  1. THE DOCTRINE OF TOTAL DEPRAVITY SHOULD CAUSE ME TO DESPAIR COMPLETELY OF MYSELF, MY ABILITY, MY MERIT, AND MY WILL, AND TO CAST MYSELF COMPLETELY UPON CHRIST ALONE FOR SALVATION.

If my salvation depends upon my choosing Christ, it is most shaky, because I may decide to walk away from Christ and go my own way. But, if it depends upon Christ’s choice of me, wretched in my sin, with absolutely no merit of my own, then it is as certain as the promise of God who cannot lie. Scripture is abundantly clear, you can do nothing to save yourself from God’s rightful judgment. Only Christ can save, and He has promised to save all who trust in Him. If you say, “But I cannot even trust in Him,” you are right! Call out to Him for mercy and faith, with the man who said to Jesus, “I do believe; help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24). Or again, “God, be merciful to me, the sinner!” (Luke 18:13).

  1. THE DOCTRINE OF TOTAL DEPRAVITY HUMBLES MY PRIDE.

Ever since Eve thought that she could be like God, the human race has been infected with pride. Even many who profess Christ dislike this doctrine, because it removes every ground for boasting. Luther said it well (Bondage of the Will, p. 100, 101),

God has surely promised His grace to the humbled: that is, to those who mourn over and despair of themselves. But a man cannot be thoroughly humbled till he realizes that his salvation is utterly beyond his own powers, counsels, efforts, will and works, and depends absolutely on the will, counsel, pleasure and work of Another–God alone. As long as he is persuaded that he can make even the smallest contribution to his salvation, he remains self-confident and does not utterly despair of himself, and so is not humbled before God; but plans out for himself (or at least hopes and longs for) a position, an occasion, a work, which shall bring him final salvation. But he who is out of doubt that his destiny depends entirely on the will of God despairs entirely of himself, chooses nothing for himself, but waits for God to work in him; and such a man is very near to grace for his salvation.

So these truths are published for the sake of the elect, that they may be humbled and brought down to nothing, and so saved. The rest of men resist this humiliation; indeed, they condemn the teaching of self-despair; they want a little something left that they can do for themselves. Secretly they continue proud, and enemies of the grace of God.

  1. THE DOCTRINE OF TOTAL DEPRAVITY CAUSES ME TO FEAR TRUSTING IN MYSELF.

As I grow to know my own heart, and the sin that still indwells me, I realize that if I am to know victory over sin, I must not trust in myself at all, but only in the Savior who said, “Apart from Me, you can do nothing” (John 15:5). The Apostle Paul warned, “Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). He affirmed from his own experience, “When I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Cor. 12:10), because when he was aware of his own weakness, he relied totally upon God’s grace and power, not at all on himself.

  1. THE DOCTRINE OF TOTAL DEPRAVITY MOVES ME TO GREATER LOVE AND DEVOTION TO GOD FOR HIS AMAZING GRACE.

One of the problems of the weak gospel being preached today, the gospel that does not wound and totally disable the proud sinner from thinking that he has anything he can bring to God, is that those who profess faith in Christ have no idea of the awful pit from which He rescued them, and of that fact that He did it in spite of their sin, not because they were “worthy.” The truth is, even the best of us were worthy a million times over of spending eternity in the lake of fire! Forgiven little, such “Christians” love little!

The Baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon, said, “Too many think lightly of sin, and therefore think lightly of the Saviour. He who has stood before his God, convicted and condemned, with the rope about his neck, is the man to weep for joy when he is pardoned, to hate the evil which has been forgiven him, and to live to the honour of the Redeemer by whose blood he has been cleansed.” (C. H. Spurgeon Autobiography [Banner of Truth], 1:54). When we see the utter depravity of our sinful hearts, and then realize the abundant grace and mercy of our Lord and Savior, we will be caught up in wonder, love, and praise to Him for His glorious, sovereign grace! I pray that God will impress on each of us the biblical doctrine of total depravity.

Thanks for wading through this long devotional post.

God bless from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

Pray for Lydia, she fell and broke her hip, she’s 88

Pray for Robert C, 32, and told he has prostate cancer (and yes that is the correct spelling).

Praise from Jorge, he just finished his 100th bible correspondence class, that’s every single class, Congrats.

WE ARE NOT TRYING TO PERSUADE YOU TO ONE FORM OF THEOLOGY OR ANOTHER, WE ARE JUST INFORMING YOU OF TWO PREDOMINATE SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT. YOU AS A CHRISTIAN MUST BE READY TO GIVE AN ANSWER TO ALL.

Part two on theology

Yesterday we talked about Reformed or Covenant Theology. So that would be some Presbyterians, and Baptist, not all but most.

Today we’ll cover Dispensationalist’s. first a cautionary note. And that’s jumping to conclusions. Not all Pentecostals are Dispensationalists. In fact a great many are Reformed in theology except for the speaking in tongues part.

Some great Dispensationalist for you are John MacArthur and The Dallas Theological Seminary. Foundation.

.Plymouth Brethren Movement -J. N.Darby, WilliamKelly . C.I.Scofield . WilliamTrotter . C.H.Mackintosh

Key Influencial Preachers .L. S. Chafer F.W.Grant

.Harry Ironside Erich Sauer .W. A. Criswell John Walvoord

Charles Ryrie

Wiliam Newell

  1. C. Gaebelein- Our Hope Magazine

Institutions

Moody Bible Institute

Dallas Theological Seminary

Grace Seminary, Indiana

Talbot Seminary, California

1930s-1940s

Harry Ironside

William Newell

  1. C. Gaebelein

  2. S. Chafer

Theodore Epp-Back to the Bible (1939)

Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry(1938)

1950s-1960s

Dallas Seminary, Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, Dwight Pentecost

  1. E. Vine, Erich Sauer

Warren Weirsbe

Lehman Strauss

Charles Swindoll

Quite a surprising list and not to mention there are Classical Dispensationalist and Neo Classic and Modern and Ultra Modern Dispensationalists.

And the New Reformed Movement is attacking Dispensationalists like they were a cult. Which they are really attacking the Ultra Modern’s and not the classics.

So enough of that; here is some info to help you converse and understand the other side of the coin compared to the Reformed Movement.

Dispensational theology is probably the most popular theological understanding in America at this time, even though it has a more recent origin than Covenant theology. The development of Dispensational theology dates back to the nineteenth century in Britain. J.N. Darby (1800-1882), an Irish lawyer, sought to explain the uniqueness of the Christians’ spiritual condition “in Christ.” To explain the radical different in Christian “benefits” from that afforded to peoples in all prior times, Mr. Darby employed the division of time into distinct “dispensations.” Harry Ironside, a later proponent of Dispensational theology, noted that “until Mr. J.N. Darby…it (the dispensational idea of a postponed kingdom) is scarcely to be found in a single book or sermon through a period of sixteen hundred years.” Darby’s novel idea of distinguishing “dispensations” of time became the basis of a new theological system known as “Dispensationalism.”

   As with Covenant theology, it is equally important to explore the socio-political climate in which Dispensational theology emerged. In nineteenth century Britain there existed an abundance of oppressive and depressing sociological conditions, out of which grew an anti-establishment movement of thought against both governmental and ecclesiastical authority. Historical analyst, George Marsden, has noted that two individuals who were contemporaries of one another both became the catalysts of popular systems of thought. J.N. Darby (1800-1882) and Karl Marx (1818-1883), both reacted to the existing conditions in nineteenth century Britain.  Whereas Darby came to the forefront in saying the church must look forward to ‘The Rapture’ as the world was to evil to successfully reform.

   J.N. Darby became an instrumental leader in the movement which became known as the “Plymouth Brethren. (not the same as the Brethren Church)” This independent religious group was outside of the mainline institutional churches of that.Other British Dispensationalists include C.H. Mackintosh, William Kelly and E.W. Bullinger. Darby made at least eight visits to America to promulgate his new interpretations, and they were espoused by such American leaders as Dwight L. Moody (1837-1899) and J.H. Brookes (1830-1897). Other prominent names associated with Dispensational theology in the twentieth century include W.E. Blackstone, L.S. Chafer who founded Dallas Theological Seminary, and C.I. Scofield who popularized Dispensational theology with his explanatory notes in The Scofield Bible. Dispensational theology became entrenched in the “Fundamentalist” movement of the 1920s and 1930s. More recent Dispensational writers included John E. Walvoord, and Charles Ryrie who like Scofield has added explanatory notes in hisRyrie Study Bible.

   Dispensational theology is not as closely connected with Calvinistic theology as is Covenant theology. This explains in part why it so quickly and easily found favor across denominational and theological lines in America, for there were many American Christians who did not appreciate the rigid dogmatism of five-point Calvinism and desired more freedom for diversity, in typical American pluralistic fashion. One could wish that Dispensationalists could have maintained such tolerance for diversity without becoming so dogmatic and exclusivistic about their own theological and eschatological opinions, which led eventually to the “Evangelical” movement breaking free from the “Fundamentalist” movement in the 1940s. Dispensational distancing from strict Calvinism allows Pentecostal and Holiness theologies, which are quite Arminian, to be Dispensational in theology as well. Covenant theologians are quick to fault Dispensational theology for not adhering to pure Calvinism, but sometimes unfairly charge all Dispensationalists with being Arminian in their theology. (which the majority are not Arminian). (Arminian’s believe you can be saved and then lose your salvation).

   Some of the prominent features of Dispensational theology include (1) distinct dispensations of time, (2) the dichotomy of Israel and the Church, (3) the unconditional covenant of God with Abraham, to be fulfilled physically and literally for the Jewish people in the future Davidic/millennial kingdom. Upon these basic presuppositions the system of Dispensational theology is constructed.

the early formulators of Dispensational theology defined a “dispensation” as “a period of time with a test that ends in failure,” and began to divide all history accordingly. A more complete Dispensational definition of a “dispensation” might be “a period of time wherein (1) a distinctive idea of revelation is given by God, (2) a specific test of obedience is given based on that revelation, (3) man fails the test of obedience, (4) God judges man for his disobedience, and then establishes another dispensation.” These dispensations do not build upon one another, but are regarded as totally distinct and separate from one another.

   Dispensationalists are not agreed as to the number of dispensations of time wherein God deals with men in different ways. At least three dispensations are required for the theological system to provide the contrasts necessary; these are the dispensation of law, the dispensation of grace, and the dispensation of the millennial kingdom. The most popular calculation of dispensational time periods is seven. They are usually identified as

(1) The dispensation of innocence (Gen. 1-3), wherein the test was the eating from the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” and the failure was the fall of man into sin.

(2) The dispensation of conscience (Gen. 4 8:14), wherein the test was proper sacrifice and the failure was the continual evil of men’s hearts judged by the flood.

(3) The dispensation of human government (Gen. 8:15 11), wherein the test was governance and compliance with government and the failure was evidenced at the tower of Babel.

(4) The dispensation of promise (Gen 12 Exod. 18), wherein the test came when God offered the Law to the Israelites, and the failure is alleged to be their abandonment of a prior grace/faith relationship with God by their rash and foolish acceptance of the Law.

(5) The dispensation of Law (Exod. 19 Acts 1), the test of which came when Jesus came to earth and offered the Jews the Davidic kingdom which they refused, so God postponed the fulfillment of the kingdom promise.

(6) The dispensation of grace (Acts 2 Rev. 19), wherein the test is for Christians to live obediently in grace, but the failure is predicted to be the apostasy of the institutional church.

(7) The dispensation of the kingdom (Rev. 20), a thousand year period which will end in final rebellion leading to the judgment of God upon the earth and the inauguration of a “new heaven and new earth.”

Dispensationalist’s believe in a more literal interpretation and less allegorical than the Reformed tradition.

A second prominent feature of Dispensational theology is the radical dichotomy and disjuncture of Israel and the Church. In an apparent attempt to keep law and grace distinctly separated, Dispensational theology has divided the nation of Israel from any connection with the Church of Jesus Christ, the Body of Christ. They are alleged to be so mutually exclusive as two separate peoples that “never the twain shall meet.” J.N. Darby indicated that “the Jewish nation is never to enter into the Church.”The physical race of Jewish people is regarded as God’s “earthly people” while Christians are regarded as God’s “heavenly people.” Dispensational theology indicates that separate promises are given to Jews and to Christians.

That is why a Dispensationalist has a problem with Messianic Jews. You are either a Christian or you are not. There are to the Dispensationalists Kingdom promises and then promises to the Church.

A third basic presupposition of Dispensational theology is the unconditional covenant with Abraham, to be fulfilled physically and literally for the Jewish people in the future Davidic/millennial kingdom. Beginning with the promises of God to Abraham in Genesis 12, 15 and 17, the Dispensationalist argues for a literal fulfillment of these promises for the physical race and nation of the Jews. Such fulfillment is alleged to be the epitome of God’s intent and the primary message of the Bible. Charles Ryrie states that “the goal of history is the earthly millennium…(which is) the climax of history and the great goal of God’s program for the ages. John E. Walvoord further explains that “the Abrahamic covenant furnishes the key to the entire Old Testament…(and) sets the mold for the entire body of Scripture truth. Thus, there will be after the Rapture, the time of Tribulation and Jesus returning to set up a literal kingdom on earth for a 1000 year reign.

God therefore postponed the re-implementation of the Kingdom until Jesus comes again to set up the millennial kingdom, which will be the fulfillment of the “new covenant” promised to the Jews. The period of the postponed kingdom, the “dispensation of grace,” is a parenthetical time period wherein God’s primary purpose is interrupted and held in abeyance. The Church is not to be identified with God’s kingdom and was unforeseen by all of the Old Testament prophets whose prophesies never refer to the Church age. The Church, which is primarily for Gentiles, began on Pentecost, and there are many “mysteries” concerning God’s revelation of Himself in Jesus Christ so as to “call out” a “heavenly people” whose destiny is to be seated with Christ on the throne in the New Jerusalem of heaven. Meanwhile the primary futuristic focus is on the return of Jesus Christ to re-establish the realm of the earthly Davidic Kingdom in Palestine during the 1000 year millennial period which fulfills the promised “new covenant,” the “dispensation of the kingdom.” (Some Dispensationalists will allow that the “new covenant” may have a double application: a spiritual application for the church and a physical application for Israel.) The return of Christ is “imminent,” expected at “any moment.” It will be preceded by the “rapture” in order to remove the Church and keep Israel and the Church separated. Dispensational theology is necessarily premillennial, but that does not mean that all premillennialists subscribe to Dispensational theology. There are covenant theologians who believe in a premillennial return of Christ.

There are of course many other ‘schools’ of theology, and most borrow bit and pieces from the other. There are those who say we only have ‘Biblical Theology’ of we only have a ‘Christocentric’ theology. Each borrow strongly from the other.

The more you study you will probably end up like me and say I have an Adaptive Theology. It is the sum of all the parts. There are quotes attributed to Calvin (Reformed) that he never said. As well as quotes to Darby and Dispensationalists that are pure myth. Find out the truth, for one reason, you make sense when you talk and can give a better answer than ‘because’.

Where do i fall, Reformed, Dispensationalist, semi Pentecostal, brethren, Mennonite.

That’s it, no more theology, back to rant and rave, prod and poke.

Blessings from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

 

what am I?

October 15, 2017

Following our weekly theme of questions, here is a statement that will answer some questions for you or cause even more.

Being a professor and perpetual student of Theology, you can guess my favorite topic. ‘theology’. For some people they think it boring, believe me it is anything but.

Every Christian has a theology. Everyone engages in theology. Everyone has a theology. The word “theology” is derived from two Greek words, theos meaning “God,” and logos meaning “word” with extended meanings of “reasoning” or “logic.” Theology refers to “reasoning about God.” Everyone has some “reasoning about God,” including the atheist who rejects the “god” he has reasoned about.

Here is part one of the two basic Christian theologies, most people fall into one or the other of these two groups. Neither group can claim to be exclusively right or wrong. And these explanations are simplistic at best. But see which group you fall into. And just like the newest hybrid dog i.e. labradoodle, you can be a mix and develop over your lifetime.

Covenant theology is also referred to as “Reformed theology” and occasionally as “Federal theology.” Reformed theology is not equivalent to Reformation theology. In their protestation against the theology of Roman Catholicism, Martin Luther and John Calvin, among others, developed distinctive theological interpretations, so that Lutheran theology and Calvinistic theology both existed prior to Reformed or Covenant theology.

   It was not until the seventeenth century that a systematized theology based upon the idea of “covenant” developed. Samuel Rutherford (1600-1661) from Scotland, and Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669) of Holland, were both instrumental in the establishment of Covenant theology. It became firmly entrenched in Reformed Protestant theology after the Church of Scotland accepted the Westminster Confession in 1647, which incorporated the idea of federal or covenant theology into a creedal statement for the first time.

   The socio-political climate in which these ideas germinated is important.1 In the seventeenth century, the European societies were breaking free from the old feudalistic system of governance. There was strong emphasis on national sovereignty and on social contracts or “covenants” to defend national freedom. Societal and moral law was emphasized to maintain the new social structures. These sociological and cultural factors lent themselves to the development of a corresponding political theology which emphasized law and covenant and sovereignty. Covenant theology has been conducive to political enmeshment throughout its history, as is evidenced by the contemporary resurgence of “theonomy” and “reconstructionism.”

   Theologians and authors identified with Covenant theology include Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), Charles Hodge (1797-1878), Philip Mauro, Albertus Pieters, Oswald Allis, William Cox, Anthony Hoekema, Herman Ridderbos and John Murray, as well as many others.
Covenant theology is closely connected with “five-point” Calvinistic theology, though not to be equated with such. Some of the prominent features of Covenant theology include (1) the idea of a common “covenant of grace,” (2) emphasize on the singular collective “people of God,” (3) unity and uniformity of God’s people and the Bible.

   A single, over-all, everlasting “covenant of grace” is postulated by covenant theology. The mention of an “everlasting covenant” in Genesis 17:7,13,19 serves as the basis for this single, unified covenant, within which a series of subordinate covenants are said to build upon one another so as to culminate in the “new covenant.” Even so, the old and new covenants are not viewed as two separate covenants, but only as two forms of the one “covenant of grace.” The progressive sequence of subordinate covenants includes (1) the covenant of works (Gen. 1,2) in the garden of Eden with the promise of perfect environment, (2) the Adamic covenant (Gen. 3) with the first promise of a Savior, (3) the Noahic covenant (Gen. 6-9) with the promise never to destroy the earth by flood again, (4) the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12-35) with the promise of multitudinous “seed,” (5) the Mosaic covenant (Exod. 19-24) with the promise of grace, (6) the Davidic covenant (II Sam. 7:1-16) with the promised throne of David, and (7) the New covenant (Heb. 8:8) which fulfills the promise of Jeremiah 31:31 and God’s ultimate purpose for an “elect people” in covenant relationship with Himself.

   Does the emphasis on “covenant” serve to cast God’s dealings with man into a legal, judicial, contractual framework? Is God the ultimate “legal contractor” who keeps adding clauses to the contract? Does the whole framework of legality diminish the dynamic and ontological essence of God’s function? Does the covenantal and legal framework lend itself to external behavioral legalism?

   A second prominent feature of Covenant theology is the focus upon the “people of God.” God, the Father, chose a “people” for Himself; the Son agreed to pay the penalty for their sin; the Holy Spirit agreed to apply the benefits of the Son’s work to the “people of God.” Does this not divide the Godhead into work assignments? Does God need a “people” so necessarily as to become contingent on man for such? Does the sociological collectivism of an identified “people” overshadow the individual response to God in faith? Does the application of “benefits” adequately explain the life and work of Jesus Christ?

   A third feature of Covenant theology is the “unity” of all God’s people spiritually throughout the covenantal development. This is also identified and applied as the “unity of the Bible.” Does not the unity thesis become a “uniformity grid” which imposes a singularity of divine function, which effectively puts God into a straight-jacket? When all subsequent covenantal actions of God must incorporate all precedent actions, so that there is an equivalency among all the “people of God” in every age, is God really free to do something “new” and unique and novel? Is God unable to change His modus operandi?

   When Covenant theology explains the connections of old covenant and new covenant, it is heavily weighted toward a correspondence of theological content throughout all of the history of God’s dealings with mankind. Both law and grace are said to be co-existent within each era or covenantal period. Despite the almost antithetical contrast that Paul draws between law and grace,2 Covenant theology often attempts to balance these concepts or amalgamate them in such non-biblical phrases as “the grace of the law,” or “the law of grace.” Does God talk out of both sides of His mouth at the same time with different emphases?

   Covenant theology asserts that the gospel has been preached in every covenantal period. Grace has been available to all men with a singular plan of salvation offered to all in every age. God’s divine declaration of righteousness, the activities of the Holy Spirit, and the personal regeneration unto spiritual life are attributed to believers both in the new covenant and in prior times. All of the so-called “divine benefits” are regarded as having an “eternality” of existence based on God’s eternality. Does this not deify God’s actions apart from His Being?

   Emphasizing the eternality of God’s activities in the continuity of historical continuum, covenant theology seems to stereotype God into a commonality of continuous content and action that disallows God from every doing anything different or new. If all subsequent actions are consistent with precedent actions, God is trapped in the box of precedency.

   To sidestep some of these logical contingencies of the covenant theological system, explanation is sometimes given that attempts to show some discorrespondence of theological content and discontinuity of historical continuum between old and new covenants. It is explained that law took precedence over grace during the Mosaic covenant, but that grace predominates over law in the new covenant, even though law still has its function. The on-going function of the law is explained in the arbitrary categories of moral law, ceremonial law and judicial law. One segment of covenant theology has advocated the contemporary application of God’s law in theonomy and reconstructionism,3 which involves the application of their understanding of God’s law as the “law of the land” in the United States.

   A sense of discorrespondence and discontinuity is also suggested by covenant theology when they are forced to admit that new covenant Christians experience “superior” spiritual “benefits,” or that these “benefits” take on “deeper meaning” in the new covenant. Within their emphasis on the “people of God,” there is also a discorrespondence and discontinuity in the explanation that the physical application of this designation predominated in the previous covenant periods, but a spiritual application of the “people of God” predominates in the new covenant period.

   Over-all, the presuppositional insistence on a singular and common “covenant of grace” in Covenant theology leads to an emphasis on a concordance and correlation of covenant peoples, a solidarity and unity of divine activity, which verges on complete identification and equivalence. The “people of God” are one collective and corporate unity, albeit with multiple manifestation in old and new covenants, having one common heavenly destiny in the presence of God. Israel and the Church are in essence the same entity, the “elect people” of God. The Church, the ecclesia, the “called out people of God,” existed all the way back to Adam. The events on Pentecost (Acts 2) comprised but the empowering of the Body of Christ in the new covenant. The kingdom of God, defined by His “right to rule,” has existed from the beginning of God’s dealings with man.

   What, then, was the purpose of Christ’s coming to earth in His redemptive mission? Covenant theology seems to explain that Jesus came to make the final addition to the covenantal progression in order to establish the new covenant manifestation of Israel, the church, the kingdom, wherein the “people of God” might have right relationship with God.

   What are the expectations, the hope of covenant theology? When God’s “people” evidence commitment and obedience within the legal and contractual framework of the covenant relationship, then the situation will progress toward the perfection of God’s intent for the new covenant community. Things will get better and better. Most who accept the covenant theological premises arrive at eschatological conclusions which are amillenial or postmillenial. There are premillenial covenant theologians, though, so eschatological persuasions alone are not the basis for determining whether one subscribes to Covenant or Reformed theology. Likewise, there are those who have amillennial or postmillennial eschatological beliefs, but have an Arminian theology, and could never be identified with Covenant theology which is strongly connected with Calvinistic theology.

   The prominent feature by which Covenant theology is identified is the distinctive idea of a common “covenant of grace,” and this colors their interpretation of all the Scriptures. The covenant idea was, to some degree, sociologically, politically and culturally derived from the sixteenth and seventeenth century transition from feudalism. Covenant theology is closely allied with the closed-system theology of Calvinistic determinism which emphasizes the “sovereignty” of God in the implementation of His covenants. If one accepts the ideological premise of a “predetermined, unified covenant people,” then Covenant theology can be a consistent theological system.

This is basically the theology of the Baptists.

God bless from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

 

RAMBLING MAN

September 16, 2017

Consider the difference between love and lust. “How can it be wrong if it feels so right?” is the excuse many give. But love is not merely a feeling. The supreme test for determining if something is right is not how it feels, but what God says about it. If sin never felt good, no one would ever be tempted to sin. Love is a choice—for you to do what is best for another person, and for you to make a personal sacrifice. “Husbands, love

your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Ephesians 5:25). Count the cost. The excuse “As long as no one knows, no one will be hurt” is a myth. Adultery hurts everyone involved. Guilt and God’s judgment is brought not only upon one person, but both parties involved. Adultery destroys truthfulness, credibility, and one’s testimony. “A man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself” (Proverbs 6:32).

I’ve lost count of the number of pastors that have fallen to lust and believed they had a right, or even it was biblical, or God told them it was all right. One pastor actually convinced his congregation it was biblical for a pastor to have a concubine, which he did. Thank goodness, his denomination found out and kicked him out.

I was asked many years ago to counsel a famous TV evangelist and the denomination told me that if he didn’t make himself accountable to me and follow through with one year of counseling as well as absent himself from the pulpit for that same period, they would defrock him.

In no uncertain terms, he told me his ministry was to important, and God had already forgave him and he didn’t believe the denomination would shut him down. Well it did and today what’s left of his ministry is a shadow of what it was. And he’s still as arrogant and unteachable as always. The funny thing is you will never meet a more legalistic, unforgiving man than him.

A church with a sweet spirit usually has a sweet pastor and vice versa, but there must be accountability. Besides all the bad theology Pentecostals have caused they have created a even bigger monster with the independent pastor, accountable to no one, not in finances or in theology. And thus gave birth to the toxic church.

Friends if your church is causing you harm, or is legalistic or the pastor is accountable to no one, I seriously suggest you examine its viability, and your own spiritual wellbeing. I get phone calls all the time wondering if I can recommend a church and to be honest, finding a church that is theologically sound, full of grace and not legalism, a pastor that is not a tyrant or just padding his bank account and truly evangelical. Well let’s say it’s harder than you think.

A few years back some well-known pastors got together and asked some pastors if they would take a survey and submit one month of sermons to be examined by a well-respected group of elders and pastors. In a city of 2 million, only one church went along with the plan. That church is a thriving, well regulated, healthy church and has gone through 4 building programs and didn’t build until they had the cash and would not go into debt.

Once when on a sabbatical, I visited a dozen or so churches and I always asked the pastor if I could see his bible. If the bible was blank (no notes) usually so was the pastor.

So good luck in your church hunting.

God bless from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

 

potato chips

September 15, 2017

MOST REQUESTED DEVOTIONAL FOR REPOSTING, WHICH WE ONLY DO ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR.

SO BECAUSE YOU ASK, WE RESPOND, BLESSINGS AND PEACE

SO WHO’S WITH ME, YOU WANT TO GROW UP AND BE A POTATO CHIP.

BETTER LET ME EXPLAIN, LAYS POTATO CHIPS THEY HAVE ONE THAT’S LABELED, ‘LIGHTLY SALTED; IN A WEIRD WAY IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT THAT EXPLAINS THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE BOOK OF ACTS (NOT COMPLETELY BUT ALMOST).

GOD IS LIGHT, HIS SON IS LIGHT, AND WE ARE CALLED TO BE LIGHT. IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN IT SAYS THAT DARKNESS (EVIL, THE DEVIL) CANNOT OVERCOME THE LIGHT OR EVEN UNDERSTAND IT. THAT’S HOW POWERFUL LIGHT IS.

SO WE ARE CALLED TO LIGHT.

WE ARE ALSO CALLED TO BE SALT

THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW 5:13 SAYS WE ARE TO BE THE SALT OF THE EARTH. WE ARE TO BRING FLAVOR AND BE A PRESERVATIVE TO THE WORLD. BUT IF THE SALT LOSES ITS FLAVOR IT IS NO GOOD; AND THERE IS THE PROBLEM.

FOUR THINGS WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO AS CHRISTIANS.ONE, BE LIGHT, TWO BE SALT, THREE BE CHRIST LIKE, AND FOUR BE MATURE.

WE CAN’T LEAVE ONE PART OUT, WE ARE TO SHINE IN DARKNESS AND LET THE WORLD KNOW A RESURRECTED CHRIST; WE ARE TO HAVE AN INFLUENCE IN THE WORLD THAT ACTUALLY STOPS OR RETARDS THE PEOPLE AND THEIR SINS (CONVICTION AND THAT GOD LOVES THEM). BE CHRIST LIKE IN ALL WE DO SO THE LIGHT SHINES FROM US. AND GROW UP SO WE CAN GROW OUT.

SO HERE’S MY PROPOSITION, SPEAKING JUST ABOUT AMERICA, WE HAVE PRETTY MUCH FAILED IN EVANGELISM, WITNESSING AND SPREADING THE HOPE OF GOD. SO EVERYTHING THAT IS WRONG IN OUR COUNTRY IS PRETTY MUCH THE CHURCHES FAULT AND OF COURSE THE SINFULNESS OF MAN.

ONE WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER, THE OTHER WE DO. DON’T BLAME THE GOVERNMENT, OR POLITICIANS, THE QUESTION WE HAVE TO ASK IS ‘HAVE OUR LIGHTS GONE OUT AND IS THE SALT GONE FROM OUR LIVES.

HOW MANY FAMOUS TV AND BOOK PASTORS ARE SAYING THE BIBLE ISN’T HISTORICALLY RELEVANT, IT HAS NO PLACE IN THE PLACE OF MODERN MAN. HOW ABOUT ALL THE CHURCHES THAT HAVE ONE GOAL ON SUNDAY, TO MAKE YOU FEEL HAPPY AND GOOD ABOUT YOUR SELF (BIG NEWS FLASH, GOD DOESN’T ACTUALLY CARE IF YOUR HAPPY).

THERE IS A WELL KNOWN PASTOR NEAR HERE THAT TOLD ME HE HASN’T PREACHED A MESSAGE ABOUT SIN IN OVER 15 YEARS AND WOULDN’T BECAUSE HE THINKS THAT MESSAGE WOULD DRIVE THE CROWDS AWAY.

ASK YOUR SELF ‘WHY DO I GO TO CHURCH?’ HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN SINCE YOU’VE WITNESSED TO SOMEONE, OR TRIED TO HOLD A BROTHER OR SISTER ACCOUNTABLE FOR SOMETHING THEY ARE HAVING A PROBLEM WITH.

BE BIG

BE BOLD

BE BRAVE

SO TODAY WILL YOU RENEW YOUR VOW TO BE A POTATO CHIP, VOTE YES.

God bless from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com for questions, comments or prayer requests.