Some comments on a message board from a friend of mine:

Dear Sisters and Brothers,

I've changed the Subject line and thought that I would share some thoughts.

God has given human beings free will, the ability to make authentic choices without coercion. But this does not mean that the human will has not been radically impacted by evil.

First, I believe that it is very basic to a Christian understanding of human nature that we affirm that humankind is not absolutely, biologically determined.

Back in the nineteen-sixties I took a course called "Physiological Psychology and Neurology." Much of the focus of our texts was to the effect that human behavior is mechanistically determined. If that is the case, if our universe is some kind of glorified "Skinner Box," then humankind has no free will and cannot make authentic choices. That being the case, the push must be toward chemical and biological intervention with the human species: psychotropic drugs, not psychoanalysis; DNA manipulation, rather than moral suasion; brain washing, instead of education. That being the case, the solutions to problems such as crime and violence, lie in a comprehensive reshaping of our environment. If human behavior is biologically determined, then the answer lies in a global government that exercises totalitarian control over every aspect of life.

Curiously, the most basic quest of atheism, human autonomy, must be lost. The greater one's belief in materialism, the greater control some human authority must exercise over the mass of humanity. Perversely, the eschatological hope of atheism does not lie in the "glorious freedom of the children of God" (Romans 8:21), but in the most minuscule control of the individual by the most absolute and all encompassing decree of the State, a state not limited by nationalistic boundaries, but truly global.

Man at his most human produces not a "kinder and gentler" "New World Order," but a ferocious Beast. This is the true meaning of 666: "This calls for wisdom: let him who has understanding reckon the number of the beast, for it is a human number, its number is six hundred and sixty-six." (Revelation 13:18) The thirteenth chapter of the Apocalypse is full of irony. The meaning of the mysterious number, 666, is not some obscure thing, such as calculating the numeric value of the Hebrew letters "Neron Qasar" (Nero Caesar), or Roman Kingdom, Lateinos, in Greek letters. As with the rest of the book, the key is found in the passage itself: "It is the number of Man."

The irony is that when Man, as "The measure of all things," creates an order without God, what arises is a "beast that" is "like a leopard, its feet were like a bear's, and its mouth was like a lion's mouth." So powerful and totalitarian is his crushing might that humankind cries: "Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?" (Revelation 13:1-4)

I know that I have gone off on a tangent from free will, but I think that it helps underscore the importance of maintaining the doctrine. I believe that humankind is endowed with free will as over against biological, materialistic, determinism. I think that is essential to people's making authentic choices and to our being responsible for our actions.

I also believe that it is important to assert free will vis-à-vis the Sovereignty of God and predestination: God's will is done in history, yet people act as free moral agents, doing what they choose, without God's forcing his will on them.

"God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established." (Westminster Confession of Faith, § III, i)

I find the above paragraph thoroughly biblical; it asserts God's absolute sovereignty, while affirming that certain seemingly incongruous doctrines are also true:

1. God is not the author of sin;
2. God does not force his will on his creatures;
3. God’s foreordination includes not only the end result, but also all of the means to that end. Biblical predestination is never fatalistic.

Let me expand on those ideas. First, God never sins, nor is he the author of it. The events surrounding the death of the Lord Jesus illustrate not only that God is not the author of sin, but also that God’s will is done in history without his violating people's free will.

"Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen." (Acts 4:27, 28)

Herod, Pilate, the Jews and the Gentiles acted against the Lord Jesus. Each acted according to his own nature, each freely chose his course of action. They did what they wanted to do. God did not violate their wills nor force them to do what they did. What they did was the ultimate act of evil in history: Man killed him who is God and man, in his human nature, on the cross, theocide.

Yet, mysteriously, they did exactly what God ordained to happen before the foundation of the world: "This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross." (Acts 2:23) The Lord Jesus is "the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world." (Revelation 13:8) "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son . . ." (John 3:16) This same action, the execution of the Lord Jesus, is God's greatest act of goodness, kindness and righteousness. He is the author of it. It is the fulfillment of his plan.

So God is the author of the historical incident; it is the carrying out of his eternal decree. As a divine act, it is the supremely good act. At the same time human beings are involved; it is their act, and they sinned. I do not profess to know how such things can be, only to know that such things can be. I will state the mystery; I cannot explain it away. Man is not a puppet on a divine string, an automaton without free will. Yet man fulfills the divine purpose in history, a purpose that extends to the most minute things: "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father." (Matthew 10:29)

Finally, God's sovereignty does not rule out second causes. Muslim predestination, as I have studied it, is fatalistic; biblical predestination is not. If I do not pray, God's will will not be done on earth as it is in heaven. If I do not share the gospel with others, God's elect will not be saved: "Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory." (2 Timothy 2:10).

From the divine perspective, both are secured in God's eternal decree. From the human perspective, it seems so different. There is this popular caricature of a Calvinist as a person who doesn't really pray and who doesn't burden himself with evangelism. But a biblical understanding of God's sovereignty will never lead a person to such inaction.

While God is absolutely sovereign, and history is simply the unfolding of his eternal decree, God nevertheless presents himself as changing his mind in response to the intercession of his people. '"Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a great nation." But Moses sought the favor of the LORD his God. "O LORD," he said, "why should your anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? . . . Then the LORD relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened.' (Exodus 32:10-14) "So the LORD changed His mind (from the root, NCHM, "be sorry, repent") about the harm which He said He would do to His people." (NASB)

Ernest prayer is demanded because spiritual warfare is real. Consider Paul's words: "For we wanted to come to you -- certainly I, Paul, did, again and again -- but Satan stopped us." (1 Thessalonians 2:18) "For this reason, when I could stand it no longer, I sent to find out about your faith. I was afraid that in some way the tempter might have tempted you and our efforts might have been useless." (1 Thessalonians 3:5)

Daniel's experience is similar; God hears and answers Daniel's prayer on the very day that he prayed. Yet because of demonic opposition, it takes three weeks for the answer to come to Daniel: 'Then he continued, "Do not be afraid, Daniel. Since the first day that you set your mind to gain understanding and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have come in response to them. But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia.' (Daniel 10:12, 13) But what would have happened had Daniel not persevered in prayer?

There were times when the power of the Lord was present (Luke 5:17) and times when that was not the case. In Nazareth, for example, Jesus "could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them." (Mark 6:5)

Within the sphere of his absolute sovereignty and freedom, consistent with his own holy character, God has often chosen to limit himself by human beings' lack of faith, even though that very faith itself is God's own work.

If Jesus was unable to do any significant healing miracles in Nazareth because of human unbelief (Matthew 13:58 and Mark 6:6), how much more necessary is it for us to pray with faith and expectation?

Yet all of this human drama is the unfolding of an eternal, immutable decree. Consider the book of Job. At a certain level, everything that happens can be explained by natural phenomena: there were robbers, lightning, mercenaries and a windstorm in chapter one; in chapter two, there was this terrible disease. However, at another level of explanation, everything that happens is the result of the cosmic war between God and Satan, the insight of which is found only in the prologue and epilogue of the book. Yet, at another level of explanation, ultimately, all is simply the unfolding of the divine plan: "They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the LORD had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring." (Job 42:11)

How is the human will not free? All Christians accept some version of the doctrine of original sin. We all believe that Adam's act of disobedience affected more than simply himself.

I believe that the Bible teaches that humankind was radically affected by the fall and that every facet of human nature has been impacted by sin. I affirm total depravity. By that I do not mean that I believe that a person is as bad as he can be, simply that no aspect of human existence is unaffected by the fall. All of us are contaminated by sin, not only morally, but volitionally, emotionally and intellectually as well. That is that to which the word "total" refers in "total depravity."

In the fall, humankind did not simply lose a gift of original righteousness or super-added grace (donum superadditum), rather the image of God (imago Dei) was radically marred. Christian and non-Christian alike are created in the image of God, but, like a mirror that has been broken, we distort that image as a result of the fall.

The fall has affected all of our drives: "This only have I found: God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)

Consider the pattern of work and rest that was part of the original order at creation. Those good drives have become twisted into either sloth or sinful obsession with work. God created us with a desire and need for food, but we distort that into gluttony or anorexia. Or, take human sexuality as another example: God created the male different than the female, but we have distorted that difference into everything from adultery to homosexual acts. The original pattern of a male being perceptive to female openness, has been gnarled into the male's "having eyes full of adultery" and being polygamous.

As an interesting aside, having counseled many homosexuals, I would submit that rather than their being a blend of the two genders, they are at the extreme ends. Homosexuals are notoriously promiscuous; this is the fallen, male sexual drive in its most masculine form. Whereas, every lesbian to whom I have ever ministered was pathologically connected to her partner by a "you and me against the world" attitude; that is a neurotic exaggeration of the female approach to sex which is not genitally centered, but relationship centered.

Intellectually, our species is not neutral and objective, we "suppress the truth by" our "wickedness." (Romans 1:18) That is why we cannot "prove" the existence of God; people already have all the proof they need and repress the data.

Jeremiah said, "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" (17:9)

The Apostle Paul's words in the last part of Romans five are most instructive: "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned (5:12) . . . the many died by the trespass of the one man, (5:15) . . . The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, (5:16) . . . by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, (5:17) . . . the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, (5:18) . . . through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners," (5:19)

This means that even my good deeds are colored by the presence of sin that is in me. Isaiah put it this way, "All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away." (64:6) The word translated in the NIV as "filthy rags" refers to cloth that has been contaminated by organic, human waste, something odious and repulsive, something that under the ceremonial code of the Old Testament was defiling. That does not mean that people cannot do morally correct deeds; it means that we never act without the contaminating influence of sin affecting what we do. The implications of Isaiah's words are obvious: not only my sins, but my "righteous acts" as well have no saving merit before God. I need the blood and righteousness of the Lord Jesus, not only for my sins, but so that my good deeds might truly be good in the sight of God. So an aspect of total depravity is the concept of total inability, meaning that we are unable to please God by our unaided human efforts and that we are unable to come to God apart from his grace drawing us.

When it comes to our response to the gospel invitation, all Christians affirm that grace must precede our response. That is the Roman Catholic position, as well as that of the Orthodox, Lutherans, Arminians and Calvinists.

Saint Paul said, "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions -- it is by grace you have been saved." (Ephesians 2:1-5)

Our Lord said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:44)

In the biblical understanding of that prevenient grace is the affirmation that with regard to the elect there is a grace that always accomplishes its purpose: "All that the Father gives me will come to me . . . .." (John 6:37)

I hope that helps.

Cordially in Christ,
Bob

"We have only one doctrine--Christ is our righteousness" (Bugenhagen).

Robert Benn Vincent, Sr.
Grace Presbyterian Church
4900 Jackson Street
Alexandria, LA 71303-2509

Tutissimum Refugium Sanguinis Christi
80 Hickory Hill Drive
Boyce, Louisiana 71409-8784

318.445.7271 church
318.443.1034 fax
318.793.5354 home
bob@rbvincent.com
http://www.rbvincent.com
http://www.grace-presbyterian.org
http://www.gcsla.org

A Summary Critique: Welcome, Holy Spirit


Just a few miles from Pastor Benny Hinn’s Orlando Christian Center (now called World Outreach Center) in Florida, at Universal Studios, one can see what, at first glance and from a distance, looks like a New York street. A closer took reveals cleverly built facades with nothing behind them.



Hinn’s latest literary offering, Welcome, Holy Spirit, is like those facades. He has crafted a book intended to be mainstream and as inoffensive as possible. He has even tried to paper over some old errors. But a closer look reveals the same Benny Hinn who fabricates events to demonstrate his alleged supernatural powers from God.



One example is his backing off the claim that his father once was the mayor of Jaffa, Israel. His new characterization of his father as having “a prominent position... in the political life of Israel” (p. 74) still remains an overstatement.



Another is his story of escaping serious injury in a 1983 plane crash. “I did not have a scratch,” he writes on page 254. Newspa­per and other reports from the time, howev­er, reveal that he was in a state of shock and was hospitalized for three days. He might not have had a scratch, but the inference one draws from his statement — that he was not harmed — is hardly accurate.



Hinn writes on page 50 that he knows whom God is healing and from what. Yet during a March 1993 interview with Inside Edition, when questioned about an actress who pretended to be healed of polio, Hinn told reporter Steve Wilson, “That was one we missed.”



The most notable example of Hinn’s per­sistence in fabricating the miraculous begins on page 230, where he claims fulfillment of prophecies by Demos Shakarian and Kathryn Kuhlman. Shakarian prophe­sied that someone would walk through a hospital and instantaneously heal patients. Kuhimans prophecy was an aspiration that all would be healed in one of her own ser­vices. These “prophecies” caused Hinn to wonder, “Would God raise masses of people from their beds of affliction?” (230).



In 1976, Hinn went to Sault Sainte Marie, Ontario for a crusade at the invita­tion of Pastor Fred Spring at Elim Pentecostal Tabernacle. Hinn said that “God moved mightily in that city” and that his meetings drew overflow crowds (231).



Hinn continues: “I received a special invitation from the Reverend Mother of a Catholic Hospital in the area. She wanted me to conduct a service for the patients — along with three other Pentecostal preachers and seven Catholic priests. The chapel of the large hospital seated about 150” (231). Hinn describes the chapel as being filled with chronically ill bed and wheelchair patients, with doctors and nurses watching “from the balcony.” Some were turned away because of limited space (231).



The hospital under discussion is General Hospital, located at 941 Queen St. E., in Sault Sainte Marie, and has 182 beds. The picture being paint­ed here is that many of the patients from those 182 beds were at the meeting, since the 150-seat chapel was so full “that many could not attend because of the limited space” (231).



Hinn recounts that he took control that day, and with anointing bottles in hand, ministers and priests were told to anoint and pray for everyone present. Hinn says one priest kept knocking down patients as he anointed them. Hinn adds that patients all over the chapel were being healed instantly (233-34).



At this point even Mother Superior got caught up in the excitement, according to Hinn: “After the service in the chapel, the Reverend Mother asked, ‘Oh this is won­derful. Would you mind coming now and laying hands on all the patients in the rooms?’ …More than fifty doctors, nurses, Pentecostal preachers, priests and nuns joined this ‘Miracle Invasion’ team as we headed for those hospital rooms” (234).



Hinn recounts that as they walked down the hall “you could feel God’s Spirit all over the building. Within a few minutes the hos­pital looked like it had been hit by an earth­quake. People were under the power of the Holy Spirit up and down the hallways as well as in the rooms” (234).



Even the visitor’s lounge could not escape the power: “We entered the lounge...One by one, they fell under the power. In fact, as we began to pray for one gentleman who was smoking, he fell under the power with a lit cigarette still in his mouth” (235).



The detailed account of the miraculous in Welcome, Holy Spirit tops anything in the Book of Acts or in the annals of church his­tory. Something of this magnitude probably never would have been forgotten in Sault Sainte Marie (1977 population: 80,219) or especially at General Hospital. Yet there is neither anyone at the hospital who remem­bers it as Hinn tells it, nor any records to confirm facts clouded by faulty memories. The real story is neither extraordinary nor miraculous.



Contacting the hospital got us the response, “Benny who?” Lois C. Krause, director of community relations for Sault Sainte Marie General Hospital, denied all that Hinn claimed. She said it could not have happened in the way Hinn’s book describes. She laughed after reading a copy of the story. No miracles occurred in the hospital as Hinn claims, she said, adding that “no patients left that day” due to mirac­ulous occurrences.



Some older staff members did recall Hinn’s name, but did not remember anything as extraordinary as his book describes. They did not deny the possibility that the chapel meeting was held, but did not recall the meet­ing as recounted in Welcome, Holy Spirit.



Mother Superior Mary Francis, of the Gray Sisters of the Immaculate Conception order, also disputed Hinn’s account. She said she did not invite Hinn, but reluctantly allowed his chapel service in deference to the pastoral care department, which initiated the service.



The hospital then released a statement, which included the following remarks: “No such events have ever occurred at General Hospital. His pronouncement can neither be verified through the medical records nor by testimony from past or present personnel of this hospital. Mr. Hinn’s claims are Out­landish and unwarranted.”



Equally offensive to Hinn’s myth-making in Welcome, Holy Spirit is his appealing to the likes of Charles Ryrie, Lewis Chafer, John Walvoord, D. L. Moody, R. A. Torrey, and A. J. Gordon to support his teaching on the third person of the Trinity. It is obvious that Hinn is working overtime to make it appear that he is in line with many of the greats in recent church history.



Bearing in mind that Hinn (a Pentecostal) has spent the last year or so with one foot in the Word-Faith camp and the other in the Assemblies of God camp, anyone familiar with the above list of theologians and evan­gelists is going to see a contradiction akin to Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses favorably citing the works of Walter R. Martin. Ryrie, for example, believed the Pentecostal posi­tion of tongues “is not valid” (The Holy Spirit, 89) and that sign gifts “were also temporary” (92). Lewis Chafer, in volume 7 of his Systematic Theology, lists seven errors of professional healers (183-85), call­ing their teachings cruel and unscriptural.” He says that “many are driven insane” by the treatment and teachings of modern-day healers.



A.J. Gordon was a Baptist minister in Boston during the 19th century, and evangelist heavily involved in foreign and local missions. He was clearly a noncharismatic who lived long before the modern Pentecostal movement. The book Who Was Who on Church History (Keats Publishing, 1974) details the sound, sane, scriptural, and practical life (168-69) of this ardent supporter of D. L. Moody.



R. A. Torrey deplored mysticism and emotionalism, writing, “filling with the Spirit that is not maintained by persistent study of the Word of God will soon vanish…Anyone who wishes to obtain and maintain fullness of power in Christian life and service must constantly feed upon the Word of God” (How to Obtain Fullness o Power, 18).



The way Hinn uses sources is misleading and wrong. It creates an illusion of credibility, respectability, endorsement, and scholarship. The cults have been doing this for years. Indeed, it is a cultic distinctive to make it appear that there is scholarly support for one’s position when there is no such support.



Hinn, like many big-name Christian authors, has editors and ghostwriters who help produce his books. However, the buck still stops with Hinn. His name on the book’s cover confers responsibility for its contents. Hinn and the creators of Welcome, Holy Spirit have promulgated a scholastic deception.



- G. Richard Fisher and M. Kurt Goedelman



G. Richard Fisher and M. Kurt Goedelman serve on the board of directors of Personal Freedom Outreach (PFO). PFO materials on Benny Hinn and other Christian discernment issues are available. Write to Personal Freedom Outreach, P.O. Box 26062, St. Louis, MO 63136.

Excerpt from an interview with Derek Webb:

What does it mean on your new album when it says don’t label my music?

DW: It’s more of a personal liberty type comment, more than put a label on my music that I listen to so that I can discern between what is safe and right and what is dangerous and wrong. The whole secular/Christian thing, which is a total fiction, rather than just teaching me to listen to the Spirit and have the Spirit guide me into the truth and learn how to discern truth and beauty and find it in all kinds of places, which is more of the Francis Schaeffer model. Discern truth and beauty and don’t put your faith in categories.

Don’t let your local Christian bookstore do your thinking for you and believe that everything they have there for sale is good and spiritually beneficial to you. If anything, we have proven that the Church unfortunately is identified with really poor art. The Church certainly does not have the market cornered on beauty. A lot of what we do is not very beautiful. The art we make is not very good. A lot of the songs I have heard on Christian radio are just outright misrepresentations of the character of God.

I think you have to learn to discern and look elsewhere and say, “I need to learn how to engage with a God everywhere I can find truth and beauty, regardless of the intention of the maker of that art.” I really believe that is a more biblical worldview. It also keeps us from being people who live in fear. There is no room for living in fear. There is no reason to be afraid. There is no reason to be fearful of secular music. We should learn how to chew on the meat, spit out the bones, to discern the truth and beauty, to commend that rather than to be just completely fearful and put all our security in these categories that don’t mean anything. It’s a dangerous way to live.

The Christian industry, ridiculous as its existence I believe is, is an industry that literally markets records based on the worldview of the artists, which no other industry does. The one thing they do really well is get resources to Christians. I thought this is something I want in the hands of fellow believers. I think that is the audience that this content would be relevant to and so that is the avenue that I took. Providentially, I landed with a label that I had no idea was really given the freedom to go beyond that. That is what I’m trying to do now. I’m not making records specifically and exclusively for the Church anymore.

Like I said, Mockingbird, I believe, deals with much broader issues. There are many more points of connection with even our neighbors that don’t believe what we believe about Jesus but do believe it is right to care for the poor. Maybe that is our connection point. Regardless, the label allows me the freedom to do that. That is a great provision for me, but I do think it is strange that I am in Christian music.

See the entire interview at http://www.relevantmagazine.com/beta/issue_20_webb.php

“The contemporary American church is so largely enculturated to the American ethos of consumerism that it has little power to believe or act.” These words are written in some of the very first pages of Walter Brueggemann’s The Prophetic Imagination. If one year of seminary has done anything for me, it has made me conclude that the American way of life, our focus on consumerism, materialism, and greed, is wrong.
Bruggemann talks in detail about what he calls “The Royal Consciousness,” going in detail first of all about the alternative community that Moses portrayed, breaking away from Egyptian consciousness, and then the days of Solomon. The reign of Solomon was the embodiment of the royal consciousness because it contained sexual immorality, a large bureaucratic government, an army that no longer acted on authentic national interest, a fascination with wisdom (which Bruggemann argues was an effort to rationalize reality), and conscripted labor. Although the Solomic empire was one of affluence, it also led to an oppressive social policy and static religion. These three things, according to Bruggemann, embody the royal consciousness. No longer did Solomon stand in the Mosaic tradition of equality, but affluence gained the upper hand. Justice was replaced with oppression. When criticism came, he silenced it through prohibition or imperviousness.
So what is the prophetic imagination? Bruggemann says that it is the task of prophetic imagination “to cut through the numbness, to penetrate the self-deception, so that the God of endings is confessed as Lord.” The prophet offers symbols that confront the numbness. The prophet brings to the surface those fears which we no longer even admit that we have. The prophet speaks metaphorically about the death we feel around us with anger and passion. Bruggemann says, “The riddle and insight of biblical faith is the awareness that only anguish leads to life, only grieving leads to joy, and only embraced endings permit new beginnings.”
As I read this book, I was struck at how the comparisons between the Solomic empire and America today. I commented to my professor that the books he assigned to read were “really screwing my world up.” Dr. Hawk smiled in that fantastic smile he has and his eyes lit up and he said, “Heaven forbid you should be forced to think in seminary.”
One of the more interesting things about going to an evangelical seminary that has seventy different denominations represented is the frequency you will run into someone who disagrees with you. This has been the case this year at the Brethren-sponsored school that I attend. Although the school is sponsored by Brethren Church, it also has a large United Methodist influence. Being the “questioning Calvinist” that I am, I’ve had some interesting conversations. The funny thing is though that I now count among some of my very best friends a member of the PCUSA, several Anglicans (broken off from the Episcopal Diocese), several United Methodists, a Quaker, and at least one American Baptist. There are others who I do not consider my friends, in particular, one man who likes to spout his borderline prosperity theology and even had the guts to try and use this book to support it. (You ever met one of those guys that when he talks, he is so wrong, you do not know even where to start?) With this consortium of people sitting in our Old Testament class the last day of class, we discussed this book. While others were tip-toeing around the tulips, and my very wrong colleague spewing venomous thoughts, I finally had to say something. Below is a paraphrase:

“As I read this book, I found it hard not to compare the culture of Solomon to American culture. The American church has slid so far downhill that it has embraced the philosophies of the culture and replaced the gospel with marketing strategies and feel-good theology and the [I raised my voice a bit here] the absolute heresy of prosperity theology. We want to sit back in our comfortable chairs and watch life get better while out brothers and sisters in other countries are being persecuted and discovering what it really means to be Christ-followers. I find it hard not to believe that very soon, the American church will soon fall under persecution.”

There were audible gasps. And then there was silence. Until my professor finally broke up the silence and said, “Well on that note…” At that point, a nervous laughter escaped from the class. “…we’ll dismiss the class.” Suddenly, and only for a moment, I was a celebrity. I was getting pats on the back and handshakes. People were saying, “I have been thinking that and wanted to say it all year.” I gingerly approached Dr. Hawk who greeted me with a smile. “I didn’t ruffle too many feathers, did I?” I asked him.
“It’s ok. I was trying to get someone to speak up and contribute to the conversation and you did and you said exactly what I was thinking.”
After class, I was a little dismayed. I did not consider myself a prophet at that moment, but I thought of Jeremiah and his weeping. I did not want pats on the back or handshakes. I wanted someone to say it before I had to. I wanted to turn around and look at all my friends and scream at them, “Why can’t you see this? You are all good students of God’s Word and good student theologians. Why can’t you see this?” I admit, I was even a bit angry. For someone to congratulate me that I had announced that I thought that this country would fall under judgment some day just seemed to not leave me. I really did hurt for my country and I still do.
This is the part of the essay where I’m supposed to give concluding thoughts and wrap up this nice little story in a neat package and serve it to you. The problem is that I can’t. I do not what to say or what to write that will make you or me feel as sense of conclusion, nor do I think that you should. I will say that I am finally learning what it means to be called to ministry and it is a burden that I would not wish on anyone.

So I took a “spiritual retreat” last week. There were some things in my head and in my spirit that I really needed to get straight. I went out to the local park, Brookside Park, here in Ashland. I found a nice park bench and just sat there for a few moments. I really had no plans, just wanted to spend some time with God. I finally started to read about the kings of Israel and Judah and all the fun that they had trying to duke it out and find who was going to be on top. Although I love history (btw, someone should make that a movie), it was not really spiritually nourishing. I went back to watching the ducks in the pond…and I think I learned more from them than I thought.
There were about five families of ducks. Each family of ducks seemed to be in a different stage of development. There were the very young ducks, the ones that had just learned to swim. The mama duck kept pretty close to them. Then there were the slightly older ducks; the mama duck was close, but not too close. The third group of ducks were like junior highers, always wanting to run off and get themselves in trouble, but the mama duck was never far behind, honking her admonishments. The fourth and fifth groups looked like teenagers, getting ready to leave home for good. You could barely tell the difference between the ducklings and their mama.
Then there was the mallard, the guardian of the pond. Of course, he is regaled in his green-feathered head, very much looking like a warrior and acting like one. He would slowly circle the pond, for the most part, and if any, and I do mean any duck tried to get in the pond and did not belong there, he would honk and flutter his wings, and do his best to get those ducks out of there.
I guess what struck me the most is how much God is like a mama duck. By the way, this isn’t going to be some huge theological argument. It might even sound trite, but bear with me. I think that God lets us explore a bit on our own until we get to a point where we might go too far. He continually honks at us to let us know that He is there and when we might go too far, those honks get a little louder.
That mallard duck reminded me of a guardian. The church really needs those. Its not that we do not want people to come to church, but even in that, we must be on guard against those people that only come to us to stir up trouble, those “other ducks” that might only be there to destroy the pond, i.e., the church.
The rest of the retreat was great. I read some in 1 Peter and walked around and prayed. The biggest thing on my heart was Kandice. It has been so hard seeing God through all of this. There are times when I feel like he is just out of reach. I think that it is these times that he uses to test us. There seem to be many competing and confusing voices in my head and somehow I am supposed to discern the voice of God. It’s not easy, let me tell you.
June 22nd is coming soon, so please keep her in your prayers. You will be undergoing a total colectomy (her entire large intestine will be removed). We both covet your prayers.


I Can't Do This - Plumb
Genre/Lang. : Christian
I woke up late. Guess I'm never really early. I hesitate, Only to fail. I get so tired Of procrastinating. I need a change. I can't do this. I can't do this. I can't do this by myself. I can't do this. I can't do this. Oh God, I need your help. I'm standing still, Moved so peaceful. I can't pretend That I'm fine. I get so ill, Crazy, agitated When I'm not really dying. I can't do this. I can't do this. I can't do this by myself. I can't do this. I can't do this. Oh God, I need your help. Press into me. (Press into me.) Breathe the air. (Breathe the air.) Bask in me. (Bask in me.) You'll be free To do anything. I can't do this. I can't do this. I can't do this by myself. I can't do this. I can't do this. Oh God, I need your help. I can't do this. I can't do this. I can't do this by myself. I can't do this. I can't do this. Oh God, I need your help.

Announcer:
And now, a message from the President of the United States.

President Al Gore:
Good evening, my fellow Americans.

In 2000 when you overwhelmingly made the decision to elect me as your 43rd president, I knew the road ahead would be difficult. We have accomplished so much yet challenges lie ahead.

In the last 6 years we have been able to stop global warming. No one could have predicted the negative results of this. Glaciers that once were melting are now on the attack.

As you know, these renegade glaciers have already captured parts of upper Michigan and northern Maine, but I assure you: we will not let the glaciers win.

Right now, in the 2nd week of May 2006, we are facing perhaps the worst gas crisis in history.

We have way too much gasoline. Gas is down to $0.19 a gallon and the oil companies are hurting.

I know that I am partly to blame by insisting that cars run on trash.

I am therefore proposing a federal bailout to our oil companies because - hey if it were the other way around, you know the oil companies would help us.

On a positive note, we worked hard to save Welfare, fix Social Security and of course provide the free universal health care we all enjoy today.

But all this came at a high cost. As I speak, the gigantic national budget surplus is down to a perilously low $11 trillion dollars.

And don't get any ideas. That money is staying in the very successful lockbox. We're not touching it.

Of course, we could give economic aid to China, or lend money to the Saudis... again.

But right now we're already so loved by everyone in the world that American tourists can't even go over to Europe anymore... without getting hugged.

There are some of you that want to spend our money on some made-up war. To you I say: what part of "lockbox" don't you understand?

What if there's a hurricane or a tornado? Unlikely I know because of the Anti-Hurricane and Tornado Machine I was instrumental in helping to develop.

But... what if? What if the scientists are right and one of those giant glaciers hits Boston? That's why we have the lockbox!

As for immigration, solving that came at a heavy cost, and I personally regret the loss of California. However, the new Mexifornian economy is strong and el Presidente Schwarznegger is doing a great job.

There have been some setbacks. Unfortunately, the confirmation process for Supreme Court Justice Michael Moore was bitter and devisive. However, I could not be more proud of how the House and Senate pulled together to confirm the nomination of Chief Justice George Clooney.

Baseball, our national passtime, still lies under the shadow of steroid accusations. But I have faith in baseball commissioner George W. Bush when he says, "We will find the steroid users if we have to tap every phone in America!"

In 2001 when I came into office, our national security was the most important issue. The threat of terrorism was real.

Who knew that six years later, Afghanistan would be the most popular Spring Break destination? Or that Six Flags Tehran is the fastest growing amusement park in the Middle East?

And the scariest thing we Americans have to fear is ... Live From New York, its Saturday Night!

test

SHUT ME OUT (Kutless)

Video Code provided by VideoCodeZone.Com

Thoughts on the Eucharist


As a person who grew up Southern Baptist, I held a memorial view of the Eucharist. It is called "The Lord's Supper" in the SBC. I have since left the church, not really for doctrinal reasons at the time, but more for geographical reasons. Moving into the reformed camp a bit stronger, I have also adjusted my view of the Eucharist. I called it a "high symbolism" at the time, but now I am beginning to understand the direction that I was going.

From everything that I can read in Scripture and from other sources that have helped to clarify what I believe, I have moved to a more Presbyterian view of Communion. I do not believe in the Catholic view of transubstantiation and I do not believe in the Lutheran view of consubstantiation. I am now leaning very strongly toward a Calvinistic view of the Eucharist, not because I am Calvinist in my beliefs regarding election, but because this just seems to make theological sense to me.

It seems relatively obvious from the way I read things in the New Testament, that when Jesus said, "This is my body" and "This is my blood," he was not simply using a metaphor or even a "high metaphor" as I would call it. The bottom line is that it is either symbolic or it is not. I tend to believe that it is not symbolic. That imagery is beautiful, even as mere symbolism, but it does not seem to be meant as mere symbolism. This is a much better view:



"Following a phrase of Augustine, the Calvinist view is that 'no one bears away from this Sacrament more than is gathered with the vessel of faith'. 'The flesh and blood of Christ are no less truly given to the unworthy than to God's elect believers', Calvin said, 'but those who partake by faith receive benefit from Christ, and the unbelieving are condemned by partaking. By faith (not a mere mental apprehension), and in the Holy Spirit, the partaker beholds God incarnate, and in the same sense touches him with hands, so that by eating and drinking of bread and wine Christ's actual presence penetrates to the heart of the believer more nearly than food swallowed with the mouth can enter in.'

Calvin specifically rejected adoration of the Eucharistic bread and wine as "idolatry", however. The elements may be disposed of without ceremony; they are unchanged, and as such the meal directs attention toward Christ's bodily resurrection and return." [Italics and bold type mine]

Any thoughts on this are appreciated.

David M.

The Fundamentalist on My Shoulder

Many people have seen the old cartoons of the devil sitting on the shoulder of the person or animal and the angel on the other shoulder. The devil whispers in the ear of the person or animal “Go ahead and do it. You’ll enjoy it. You know you want to.” Then the angel will whisper in the other ear of the person and say, “But the better part of you knows that it is wrong to do this. You want to be a better person so resist the temptation to do evil and do what is right.”
As I sit in seminary class, I often hear this little fundamentalist that seems to be sitting on my shoulder. As I listen to my Old Testament professor try to explain the two versions of the creation story that appear in Genesis, the little fundamentalist whispers in my ear that this professor is denying the validity of the Word of God. As I sit in my Christian Theology class and hear my professor explain the good points of postmodernism, the little fundamentalist on my shoulder whispers in my ear that she is denying the real truth.
That little fundamentalist made a home on my shoulder when I was born into a Southern Baptist home. He upgraded his home on my shoulder when I was enrolled as a kindergartener as a fundamentalist Baptist school. He whispered in my ear the whole time that I was not good enough, that there was no way that I could ever be good enough for God to look with favor on me.
When I was eighteen, the Holy Spirit joined the fundamentalist and my head and heart were often filled with the sounds of war. The moment that I began to try and apply the objective truth of God’s word to the subjective truth of my experience, the fundamentalist would whisper to me that this was not possible. The fundamentalist would demand of me that I follow the rules, that I dutifully hold my head down and submit to God’s Word. Whenever I dared to question the validity of any teaching, the fundamentalist would scream in my ear, “Who are you to question the Word of God?” The war between the Spirit and the fundamentalist took its toll and I called a truce. I did not call it because either side had won. I silenced both of them by living the life that I wanted to.
A year later, the Holy Spirit invited me to reengage…and I did. The Spirit fired the opening shot and he began to trounce the fundamentalist. Very soon, the fundamentalist was relegated to a defeated, but still very vocal part of me. He has remained there until this day.
I do not want to flick him off my shoulder and disregard him completely, because in that whispering and sometimes yelling, there is an underlying commitment to the truth. I always want to be concerned with truth, but never at the expense of the gospel. The gospel is a freeing, liberating, wonderful thing. As I read about the theology of Martin Luther and his experience with the gospel, I am reminded that the gospel liberates us from the law that we cannot uphold and brings to a place of worship of Christ.
With all due respect to the fundamentalist and the concern for truth, I now realize that God is more concerned with my love for him and my relationship with him than whether or not I get every single doctrinal issue correct. The process I now begin is the flicking of the fundamentalist off of my shoulder, but only after I have extracted the truth-seeking passion from him.
My relationship with God should exist first and foremost as just that, the relationship. Once I get that right, truth becomes secondary, but also consequential, the results of my right relationship with my Creator.

John Piper Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer
January 6, 2006

Dear Friends,

I hope this letter will encourage your prayer, strengthen your hope, and minister peace. I am writing with the blessing of the Council of Elders of Bethlehem Baptist Church to help you receive the news about my prostate cancer.

At my annual urological exam on Wednesday, December 21, the doctor felt an abnormality in the prostate and suggested a biopsy. He called the next day with the following facts: 1) cancer cells were found in two of the ten samples and the estimate is that perhaps 5% of the gland is affected; 2) my PSA count was 1.6, which is good (below 4 is normal); 3) the Gleason score is 6 (signaling that the cancer is not aggressive). These three facts incline the doctor to think that it is unlikely that the cancer has spread beyond the prostate, and that it is possible with successful treatment to be cancer-free.

Before going with my wife, Noël, to consult in person with the doctor on December 29 about treatment options, I shared this news with the Bethlehem staff on Tuesday morning, December 27, and with the elders that evening. Both groups prayed over me for healing and for wisdom in the treatment choices that lie before us. These were sweet times before the throne of grace with much-loved colleagues.

All things considered, Noël and I believe that I should pursue the treatment called radical prostatectomy, which means the surgical removal of the prostate. We would ask you to pray that the surgery be completely successful in the removal of all cancer and freedom from possible side effects.

With the approval of Bethlehem’s executive staff and elder leadership, we are planning surgery in February. The recovery time is about three weeks before returning to a slow work pace, and six weeks to be back to all normal activities.

This news has, of course, been good for me. The most dangerous thing in the world is the sin of self-reliance and the stupor of worldliness. The news of cancer has a wonderfully blasting effect on both. I thank God for that. The times with Christ in these days have been unusually sweet.

For example, is there anything greater to hear and believe in the bottom of your heart than this: “God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him” (1 Thessalonians 5:9-10)?

God has designed this trial for my good and for your good. You can see this in 2 Corinthians 1:9, “Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead.” And in 2 Corinthians 1:4-6, “He comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God . . . If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation.”

So I am praying: “Lord, for your great glory, 1) don’t let me miss any of the sanctifying blessings that you have for me in this experience; 2) don’t let the people of Bethlehem miss any of the sanctifying blessings that you have for us in this; 3) grant that the surgery be successful in removing cancer and sparing important nerves; 4) grant that this light and momentary trial would work to spread a passion for you supremacy for the joy of all peoples through Jesus Christ; 5) may Noël and all close to me be given great peace—and all of this through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever, Amen.” I hope God will lead you to pray in a similar way.

With deep confidence that

“Death is swallowed up in victory.
O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting.
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.
But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
1 Corinthians 15:54-57

Pastor John

With Sam Crabtree, Lead Pastor for Life Training
Kenny Stokes, Lead Pastor for Spreading
Tim Johnson, Chairman of the Council of Elders
Ross Anderson, MD, Bethlehem Elder

Project Wittenberg
Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther, 1517



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Martin Luther - Project Wittenberg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther (1517)


Published in:

Works of Martin Luther:
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol.1, pp. 29-38
_______________


[10] [20] [30] [40] [50] [60] [70] [80] [90]
Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God's remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope's pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter's church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope's wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The "treasures of the Church," out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God -- this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: -- "Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."

83. Again: -- "Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

84. Again: -- "What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"

85. Again: -- "Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?"

86. Again: -- "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"

87. Again: -- "What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"

88. Again: -- "What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"

89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?"

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This text was converted to ASCII text for Project Wittenberg by Allen Mulvey, and is in the public domain. You may freely distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any comments or suggestions to:


Rev. Robert E. Smith
Walther Library
Concordia Theological Seminary.


E-mail: smithre@mail.ctsfw.edu
Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA
Phone: (260) 452-3149 - Fax: (260) 452-2126



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was written by a friend of mine named Duane Harris whom I graduated high school with in 1994. We recently reunited and I will be going to a high school reunion held in Gatlinbug, TN in a few months and will see him as well as other friends for the first time in years. Can't wait!

"I just finished watching Saving Private Ryan. I have watched this movie probably ten times before tonight. As I sit here tonight I was moved with thoughts and emotions that compelled me to write you all today. I know there is a chance that you guys would think it is just another cheesy thought from Harry, but I figured since you know how I am any way you would forgive me if you did. As I watched that movie I had thought about the ultimate sacrifice that was made by so many. We as Americans so easily forget what those who have gone before us and served in combat have given up. Not only has the cause they fought for been so just, but the life that they could have would be a life in the most privilaged nation on Earth. I think about the men and women who have served our country in war over the decades. I thought about how each man who lost his life in combat lost all of the things we enjoy every day as well. We live in America. We are the richest, most powerful, and most enveyed nation in the world. Why?, because God has chosen to bless this nation. I feel a big reason for that is because the American fighting man has always faught for what was right. He bled and died for people who he never met in foriegn countries so that they may be free from oppression, dictatorship, and slavery. The American military has been the only force capable of accomplishing those tasks. The American soldier has not only preserved our own nation's freedom but the freedom of many nations all over the world. That, I believe, is a big reason God has chosen to bless and keep this great nation we call home. The ultimate sacrifice has been made by so many, but not only those who have died need to be remembered. The ones who are currently serving over seas and the ones who have been badly wounded in combat, never to live a normal life should also be remembered. I know that Veterans Day is over but that doesn't mean that we can't take a moment to thank our God for the men and women who have made it possible for us to live our lives as we do in this great nation. Everything we enjoy can be traced back to a lonely, scared, cold, tired, strong, brave, well trained, and unwavoring soldier fighting on the battlefied of today or on the battlefieds over years gone by. I don't want anyone to thank me today for my service. This is not about that at all. I have done nothing compared to the ones I have referred to in this email. I just want everyone to take a moment today to thank God for the American fighting man, pray for the ones serving right now, and thank a Veteran if you get a chance. Especially a WWII vet. Love you guys and I hope you all have a great day. God bless America. Honor the flag, and when you see one flying today where ever it is, remember them."

TO: Commander In Chief, Spiritual Armed Forces, Jesus Christ.
FROM: Officer of Battle, Spiritual Armed Forces, Weary Warrior
RE: Request For Transfer

Dear Sir,

I am writing this to You to request a transfer to a desk job. I herewith present my reasons: I began my career as a private but because of the intensity of the battle You have quickly moved me up in the ranks. You have made me an officer and given me a tremendous amount of responsibility. There are many soldiers and recruits under my charge. I am constantly being called upon to dispense wisdom, make judgements, and find solutions to complex problems. You have placed me in a position to function as an officer, when in my heart I know I have only the skills of a private. I realize that You have promised to supply all I would need for the battle but Sir, I must present You a realistic picture of my equipment. My uniform; once so crisp and starched is now stained with tears and blood of those I have tried to assist. The soles of my boots are cracked and worn from the miles I have walked trying to enlist and encourage and instruct the troops. My weapons are marred, tarnished and chipped from constant use in battle against the enemy. Even the Book of Regulations I was issued has been torn and tattered from endless use. The Words are now smeared. You have promised You would be with me throughout, but when the noise of the battle is so loud and the confusion is so great, I can neither see nor hear You. I feel so alone. I am tired. I am discouraged. I have Battle Fatigue. I would never ask You for a discharge. I love being in Your service but I humbly request a demotion and transfer. I will file papers; anything. Just get me out of the battle; PLEASE Sir!

Your Faithful But Tired Servant,
Weary Warrior


TO: Officer of Battle, Spiritual Armed Forces, Weary Warrior
FROM: Commander In Chief, Spiritual Armed Forces, Jesus Christ
RE: Your Request For Transfer

Dear Soldier,

Your request for transfer has been denied. I herewith present my reasons.....

You are needed in this battle. If you leave your post, your comrades-in-arms will be exposed to the enemy. I have personally selected you and I will keep My word to supply your need. You do not need a demotion or transfer. You need a period of R and R (Renewal and
Rekindling) I have set aside a place on the battlefield that is insulated from all sound and is fully protected from the enemy. I will meet you there and will give you rest. I will remove your old equipment and make all things new. You have been wounded in the battle, my precious soldier. Your wounds are not visible, but you have received grave internal injuries. You need to be healed and I will heal you. You have been weakened in the battle and need to be strengthened. I will strengthen you and be your strength. I will instill in you confidence and ability. My words will rekindle within you a renewed love, zeal and passion to fight the enemy. Report to me tattered and empty for I will refill you, soldier.

Compassionately Yours,
Jesus Christ, Commander In Chief

This is a message that I sent to another group that I believe never got posted because of an "end of thread notice." It was a bit off-topic for that group, but I thought that others that read this blog might get some helpful info from it:

"I am a first-year seminary student studying for my Masters of Divinity degree at Ashland Theological Seminary in Ashland, Ohio. I received a free copy of Today's New International Version from my seminary which I believe is the translation that the gender-neutrality has come up. I might be wrong about that, but that is my understanding of it. If that is the case, I did peruse the translation and looked up some key passages. In particular interest to me was the 1 Timothy passages on requirements for overseers and elders. It is important to note that these passages were not changed to be gender-neutral. As a matter of fact, from what I could see, there were no changes made to parts of the Bible that obviously had to do with one gender. In other words, Jesus was never made out to be a woman and masculitnity or feminity (sp?) was not stripped of anything where context showed the gender being obviously specified. What was changed was phrases such as "brothers" now read "brothers and sisters" and the like.

"David, you are right. There are no perfect Bible translations. According to the textbook which I am using right now in my Hermeneutics class, Michael Gorman lists the versions which he will and will not use for exegesis. Please keep in mind that this was written before the current TNIV controversy. They are as follows:

Versions Preferred For Exegesis:
Revised Standard Version (RSV)
New American Bible (NAB)
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

Versions Acceptable For Exegesis, With Caution:
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Revised English Bible (REB)
New International Version (NIV)

Versions Unacceptable as the Basis for Exegesis, but useful in other ways:
The Message
Good News Bible (GNB)
Contemporary English Bible (CEV)
New Living Translation (NLT)
New Jersuselem Bible (NJB)

Versions Unacceptable for Exegesis:
The Living Bible (LB)
King James Version (KJV) or Authorized Version (AV)
New King James Version (NKJV)

"That's right. Gorman considers the King James an unacceptable Bible for exegesis. The reason being is, "Since 1611, many older and better manuscripts of the Bible have been discovered..." and the increase in textual criticism. All of this information is taken from Elements of Biblical Exegesis by Michael J. Gorman. From everything that I could read, Gorman is moderate in his theology, so I do not agree with everything he writes, but the point about the KJV version of the Bible is well taken. My preferred translation is the NIV, but I also have the priviledge of being able to read some of the original Greek and there is no better way to read it. However, a caution must be added here also. If you want to learn Greek or Hebrew in order to read the Bible in the original language to "find out what it really says," you will be very dissapointed. For the most part, the Bible in English as we have it today is a very accurate reflection of what the Greek and Hebrew says. Greek and Hebrew help you increase your knowledge of what the Greeks mean when they use certain words, but rarely does it aid you in changing the meaning of a passage when it is read in English. A good example of what I'm talking about is the use of three words for love in Greek that mean different things versus the one word that we have.

A good tool for any layperson who wants to increase his knowledge of Scripture and his enjoyment of the study of Scripture is a good Hermeneutics textbook which could be recommended by your pastor and learning how to use a Greek and Hebrew lexicon. I would never suggest, however, to simply use a Hebrew and Greek lexicon without some knowledge of hermeneutics because just because that word means something and it is in that particular place does not mean that it means that in that particular place. As the old saying goes, "A text without a context is a pretext" and as my undergrad Greek professor drilled into our heads: 'Context is king.'"

The Conversational Lord's Prayer

Man: Our Father Who Art In Heaven.

God: Yes?

Man: Don't interrupt me. I'm praying.

God: But -- you called ME!

Man: Called you? No, I didn't call you. I'm praying. Our Father who art in Heaven.

God: There -- you did it again!

Man: Did what?

God: Called ME. You said, "Our Father who art in Heaven" Well, here I am. What's on your mind?

Man: But I didn't mean anything by it. I was, you know, just saying my prayers for the day. I always say the Lord's Prayer. It makes me feel good, kind of like fulfilling a duty.

God: Well, all right. Go on.

Man: Okay, Hallowed be thy name . .

God: Hold it right there. What do you mean by that?

Man: By what?

God: By "Hallowed be thy name"?

Man: It means, it means . . .good grief, I don't know what it means. How in the world should I know? It's just a part of the prayer. By the way, what does it mean?

God: It means honored, holy, wonderful.

Man: Hey, that makes sense. I never thought about what 'hallowed' meant before.
Thanks. Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven.

God: Do you really mean that?

Man: Sure, why not?

God: What are you doing about it?

Man: Doing? Why, nothing, I guess. I just think it would be kind of neat if you got control, of everything down here like you have up there. We're kinda in a mess down here you know.

God: Yes, I know; but, have I got control of you?

Man: Well, I go to church.

God: That isn't what I asked you. What about your bad temper? You've really got a problem there, you know. And then there's the way you spend your money --all on yourself. And what about the kind of books you read?

Man: Now hold on just a minute! Stop picking on me! I'm just as good as some of the rest of those people at church!

God: Excuse ME. I thought you were praying for my will to be done. If that is to happen, it will have to start with the ones who are praying for it. Like you -- for example.

Man: Oh, all right. I guess I do have some hang-ups. Now that you mention it, I could probably name some others.

God: So could I.

Man: I haven't thought about it very much until now, but I really would like to cut out some of those things. I would like to, you know, be really free.

God: Good. Now we're getting somewhere.We'll work together -- You and ME. I'm proud of You.

Man: Look, Lord, if you don't mind, I need to finish up here. This is taking a lot longer than it usually does. Give us this day, our daily bread.

God: You need to cut out the bread. You're overweight as it is.

Man: Hey, wait a minute! What is this? Here I was doing my religious duty, and all of a sudden you break in and remind me of all my hang-ups.

God: Praying is a dangerous thing. You just might get what you ask for. Remember, you called ME -- and here I am. It's too late to stop now. Keep praying. ( . . pause . . ) Well, go on.

Man: I'm scared to.

God: Scared? Of what? I know what you'll say. Try ME.

Man: Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us.

God: What about Ann?

Man: See? I knew it! I knew you would bring her up! Why, Lord, she's told lies about me, spread stories. She never paid back the money she owes me. I've sworn to get even with her!

God: But -- your prayer -- What about your prayer?

Man: I didn't -- mean it.

God: Well, at least you're honest. But, it's quite a load carrying around all that bitterness and resentment isn't it?

Man: Yes, but I'll feel better as soon as I get even with her. Boy, have I got some plans for her. She'll wish she had never been born.

God: No, you won't feel any better. You'll feel worse. Revenge isn't sweet. You know how unhappy you are -- Well, I can change that.

Man: You can? How?

God: Forgive Ann. Then, I'll forgive you; And the hate and the sin, will be Ann's problem -- not yours. You will have settled the problem as far as you are concerned.

Man: Oh, you know, you're right. You always are. And more than I want revenge, I want to be right with You…(sigh)…All right, all right…I forgive her.

God: There now! Wonderful! How do you feel?

Man: Hmmmm. Well, not bad. Not bad at all! In fact, I feel pretty great!
You know, I don't think I'll go to bed uptight tonight. I haven't been getting much rest, you know.

God: Yeah, I know. But, you're not through with your prayer are you? Go on.

Man: Oh, all right. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

God: Good! Good! I'll do that. Just don't put yourself in a place where you can be tempted.

Man: What do you mean by that?

God: You know what I mean.

Man: Yeah. I know. Okay.
God: Go ahead. Finish your prayer.

Man: For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever. Amen.

God: Do you know what would bring me glory --What would really make me happy?

Man: No, but I'd like to know. I want to please you now. I've really made a mess of things. I want to truly follow you. I can see now how great that would be. So, tell me . . .How do I make you happy?

God: YOU just did.

Someone just brought up in a class that I am in the similarities between Gnosticism and the modern-day cult Scientology. After some brief research, I came across this famous article written in 1991 by Time magazine about Scientology.

Check it out at:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/time-behar.html

Dave M.

David G. McDowell
IT501: Biblical Hermeneutics
Historical Components of Deuteronomy 4:1-31
Introduction
The theme of this passage is obedience to the law of the Lord, the fruition of the covenant given to the people of Israel for inheritance of the Promised Land and, because of the gift of the law and covenant, the abstinence from idol worship. In the context of its chapter, it is the first half of a transitional passage from the history mentioned in the first three chapters of Deuteronomy to the reiteration and exposition of the law given after it.

Book-wide Insights
The author of this passage appears to be Moses, writing at the end of his life to the Israelites before they take possession of the Promised Land. This is evidenced according to the reference in Deuteronomy 4:21-22 where Moses laments that he will not be allowed in the Promised Land. The books of 1 Kings and 2 Kings also attests to the authorship of Moses as well as the very words of Jesus in the gospels . However, controversy exists on the exact meaning of the word “Moses” and if it refers to authorship or simply a reference to the law in general. Uncertainty also exists in regards to how the book may have been edited in later dates. Scholars range the authorship of the book as early as during the life of Moses to as far away as the 7th century B.C. However, it is clear that the majority of the material found in the book of Deuteronomy did come from the mouth or the pen of Moses, even if was compiled at the latest of dates.

Passage-Specific Insights
On the solemn occasion of Moses not being allowed into the Promised Land, he seems to use this book as his last will and testament. In the chapter before this, the book speaks of Moses on top of a mountain looking in all directions. It must have been a bittersweet moment for Moses, looking behind at the lands that they had conquered, which were highlighted in the first three chapters, and looking forward to the Promised Land that, because of his sin, he would not be able to enter. In Numbers 20, Moses was commanded by God to speak to a rock in order to produce water for the Israelites to drink. Instead, Moses struck the rock and according to Numbers 20:12, Moses was not allowed into the Promised Land because he “did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites.” It is important to note here that this passage is often misquoted as Moses striking the rock given as the reason that Moses is not allowed in the Promised Land. The banning of Moses from the Promised Land goes beyond mere disobedience. Moses was a leader, and as a leader, and as one who had conversed with God, he had a responsibility to represent God and his holiness. When Moses struck the rock in anger, he did much more than merely lose his temper; he misrepresented God, and as such, was banned from entering the Promised Land.
He gives a brief history and reminds the Israelites of God’s faithfulness as he expounds the law and the covenant. It is apparent that Moses has high regard for the law because it comes straight from God and he cautions the Israelites not to subtract from it (vs. 2). It strikes this writer as very interesting that the verse only says “subtract.” Was not adding to the law the problem in Jesus’ time? Yet, that is not mentioned here. One could glean from this passage that God may have stricter standards for those who subtract or ignore laws rather than those who add to it.
There is a reference to Baal Peor in verse three that is also referenced in 3:29. This reference in chapter four refers to a situation recorded in Numbers 25 where men began having sex with the women of Moab. In the Moabite culture, sex was linked with idol worship. According to Numbers 25, the men were even going to the sacrificial rituals associated with pagan idol worship to have sex with these women, eat with them and bow down to their gods as part of their worship. God demanded that Moses use the leaders of the people and kill those who did this. According to this passage, twenty-four thousand men died as a result of this sin. The importance of this is the reinforcement to the children of Israel, and this writer would even say to God’s covenant children today, that God, as revealed in his law and covenant, does not tolerate idol worship.
Another reference to a historical and geographical place is in verse ten when Moses refers to Horeb. For all practical purposes, Horeb is synonymous with Mt. Sinai. This is the place where Moses gave the Ten Commandments. This place is of great significance because it is a geographic reminder to the people of Israel that their law was given directly to them by God and a reminder to them, according to verse nine, that they should pass these laws down to their children.
Conclusion
It is important in this passage to understand the historical significance of this moment. Without a proper understanding of the meaning of Horeb, one might lose the significance of the symbolism it has with the law. Without an understanding of the events at Baal-Peor, one may miss the importance that God places on having no other gods before him. Without this background, it would be increasingly hard to understand the intricate roles that the law and the covenant play in our rich Judeo/Christian history as well as the importance of passing those down to future generations.
















Bibliography
Howard Marshal ed. et al. New Bible Dictionary 3rd ed. (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1996) , 275.
David Noel Freedman, ed, The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol 1 (New York: Doubleday, 1992, 553.
George Arthur Buttrick, ed, Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible vol. 4, 21st ed. ( Nashville: Abingen Press, 1990), 377
The Holy Bible. New International Version

With hurricanes, tornado's, flooding and severe t-storms tearing up the country from one end to another, the quote of the month is from Jay Leno!!

"Are we sure this is a good time to take God
out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"

The Semi-Pelagian Narrow Catechism


1. Q: What is the chief end of each individual Christian?

A: Each individual Christian's chief end is to get saved. This is the first and great commandment.

2. Q: And what is the second great commandment?

A: The second, which is like unto it, is to get as many others saved as he can.

3. Q: What one work is required of thee for thy salvation?

A: It is required of me for my salvation that I make a Decision for Christ, which meaneth to accept Him into my heart to be my personallordandsaviour

4. Q: At what time must thou perform this work?

A: I must perform this work at such time as I have reached the Age of Accountability.

5. Q: At what time wilt thou have reached this Age?

A: That is a trick question. In order to determine this time, my mind must needs be sharper than any two-edged sword, able to pierce even to the division of bone and marrow; for, alas, the Age of Accountability is different for each individual, and is thus unknowable.

6. Q: By what means is a Decision for Christ made?

A: A Decision for Christ is made, not according to His own purpose and grace which was given to me in Christ Jesus before the world began, but according to the exercise of my own Free Will in saying the Sinner's Prayer in my own words.

7. Q: If it be true then that man is responsible for this Decision, how then can God be sovereign?

A: He cannot be. God sovereignly chose not to be sovereign, and is therefore dependent upon me to come to Him for salvation. He standeth outside the door of my heart, forlornly knocking, until such time as I Decide to let Him in.

8. Q: How then can we make such a Decision, seeing that the Scripture saith, we are dead in our trespasses and sins?

A: By this the Scripture meaneth, not that we are dead, but only that we are sick or injured in them.

9. Q: What is the assurance of thy salvation?

A: The assurance of thy salvation is, that I know the date on which I prayed the Sinner's Prayer, and have duly written this date on an official Decision card.

10. Q: What is thy story? What is thy song?

A: Praising my Savior all the day long.

11. Q: You ask me how I know he lives?

A: He lives within my heart.

12. Q: And what else hast thou got in thine heart?

A: I've got the joy, joy, joy, joy down in my heart.

13. Q: Where??

A: Down in my heart!

14. Q: Where???

A: Down in my heart!!

15. Q: What witness aid hath been given us as a technique by which we may win souls?

A: The tract known commonly as the Four Spiritual Laws, is the chief aid whereby we may win souls.

16. Q: What doth this tract principally teach?

A: The Four Spiritual Laws principally teach, that God's entire plan for history and the universe centereth on me, and that I am powerful enough to thwart His divine purpose if I refuse to let Him pursue His Wonderful Plan for my life.

17. Q: What supplementary technique is given by which we may win souls?

A: The technique of giving our own Personal Testimony, in the which we must always be ready to give an answer concerning the years we spent in vanity and pride, and the wretched vices in which we wallowed all our lives until the day we got saved.

18. Q: I'm so happy, what's the reason why?

A: Jesus took my burden all away!

19. Q: What are the means given whereby we may large crowds of souls in a spectacular manner?

A: Such a spectacle is accomplished by means of well-publicized Crusades and Revivals which (in order that none may be loath to attend) are best conducted anywhere else but in a Church.

20. Q: Am I a soldier of the Cross?

A: I am a soldier of the Cross if I join Campus Crusade, Boys' Brigade, the Salvation Army, or the Wheaton Crusaders; or if I put on the helmet of Dispensationalism, the breastplate of Pietism, the shield of Tribulationism, and the sword of Zionism, having my feet shod with the gospel of Arminianism.

21. Q: Who is your boss?

A: My boss is a Jewish carpenter.

22. Q: Hath God predestined vessels of wrath to Hell?

A: God hath never performed such an omnipotent act, for any such thing would not reflect His primary attribute, which is NICENESS.

23. Q: What is sanctification?

A: Sanctification is the work of my free Will, whereby I am renewed by having my Daily Quiet Time.

24. Q: What rule hath God for our direction in prayer?

A: The rule that we must bow our hands, close our heads, and fold our eyes.

25. Q: What doth the Lord's Prayer teach us?

A: The Lord's Prayer teacheth us that we must never memorize a prayer, or use one that hath been written down.

26. Q: What's the book for thee?

A: The B-I-B-L-E.

27. Q: Which are among the first books which a Christian should read to his soul's health?

A: Among the first books which a Christian should read are the books of Daniel and Revelation, and The Late Great Planet Earth.

28. Q: Who is on the Lord's side?

A: He who doth support whatsoever is done by the nation of Israel, and who doth renounce the world, the flesh, and the Catholic Church.

29. Q: What are the seven deadly sins?

A: The seven deadly sins are smoking, drinking, dancing, card-playing, movie-going, baptizing babies, and having any creed but Christ.

30. Q: What is a sacrament?

A: A sacrament is an insidious invention devised by the Catholic Church whereby men are drawn into idolatry.

31. Q: What is the Lord's Supper?

A: The Lord's Supper is a dispensing of saltines and grape juice, in the which we remember Christ's command to pretend that they are His body and blood.

32. Q: What is baptism?

A: Baptism is the act whereby, by the performance of something that seems quite silly in front of everyone, I prove that I really, really mean it.

33. Q: What is the Church?

A: The Church is the tiny minority of individuals living at this time who have Jesus in their hearts, and who come together once a week for a sermon, fellowship and donuts.

34. Q: What is the office of the keys?

A: The office of the keys is that office held by the custodian.

35. Q: What meaneth "The Priesthood Of All Believers"?

A: The Priesthood Of All Believers meaneth that there exists no authority in the Church, as that falsely thought to be held by elders, presbyters, deacons, and bishops, but that each individual Christian acts as his own authority in all matters pertaining to the faith.

36. Q: Who is the Holy Spirit?

A: The Holy Spirit is a gentleman Who would never barge in.

37. Q: How long hath the Holy Spirit been at work?

A: The Holy Spirit hath been at work for more than a century: expressly, since the nineteenth-century Revitalization brought about by traveling Evangelists carrying tents across America.

38. Q: When will be the "Last Days" of which the Bible speaketh?

A: The "Last Days" are these days in which we are now living, in which the Antichrist, the Beast, and the Thief in the Night shall most certainly appear.

39. Q: What is the name of the event by which Christians will escape these dreadful entities?

A: The event commonly known as the Rapture, in the which it is our Blessed Hope that all cars driven by Christians will suddenly have no drivers.

40. Q: When is Jesus coming again?

A: Maybe morning, maybe noon, maybe evening, and maybe soon.

41. Q: When the roll, roll, roll, is called up yonder, where will you be?

A: There.

42. Q: Hallelu, hallelu, hallelu, hallelujah!

A: Praise ye the Lord!

43. Q: Praise ye the Lord!

A: Hallelujah!

44. Q: Where will we meet again?

A: Here, there, or in the air.

45. Q: Can I hear an Ay-men?

A: Ay-men.

I can finally tell this story!

Last year, after a scare that my undergrad school, William Tyndale College in Farmington Hills, Michigan, would close, I discovered that I could finish my degree with three classes that I needed. They were all on a Monday and they were all three-hour classes back to back to back. That would be nine hours straight of classes on a Monday. It was a tough order but I knew I could do it. At the time, I worked at a credit union Monday through Friday during the day. I approached them with my opportunity and, to make a long story short, they were unable to grant me a half a day off during the week for a few months in order for me to finish my degree. After much thought and prayer, I decided that my best bet would be to search for a job in retail since they would offer the most flexible schedule. After submitting my resume in several places, I got a call from Target. After several interviews, I was offered a position making $2 more on the hour with a schedule that would allow me to finish school and at a store that was only ten minutes from my home in comparison to a 45 minute drive with the credit union. I thought it was a no-brainer and I accepted the position readily.
My official title was “Housewares and Domestics Team Leader.” There was Lie #1. I never had a team and I never lead anything. I was told that I would be running the housewares and domestics department like a small store. I would be responsible for almost all aspects of the departments. Lie #2: Although I was “responsible” for those departments, I had very little control over anything that occurred . Most of the time, I worked in other areas of the store that were not even part of my job description, all under the guise of “teamwork.” When I finally questioned what was going on, I was chastised like a child. The ETL (Executive Team Leader) of Team Relations, which is a fancy term for a Human Resources Supervisor denied she ever told me that job description which was yet another lie. However, I hung in there and the job allowed me to finish my schooling and graduate this past January with my Bachelor of Arts degree in Christian Thought. It turns out that I had made a correct decision to do what I did because that semester was the last semester that Tyndale remained open and I was part of very last graduating class. At the time of my graduation, I had just made the decision for sure that I wanted to pursue a Masters Degree and it took a few months for me to settle on Ashland. During this time, I struggled in my position because it was not what I had signed for. Although I had very little control over what happened in the department, I was always given the blame for anything that went wrong.
My biggest pick with Target was always payroll. Target stores are categorized from A-D with A being the highest volume store and D being the lowest. The Monroe, Michigan store that I was employed at was categorized as a D store, ultra-low volume, and Target does not even open up D stores any more. Apparently, whatever formula that was used for payroll to tally up the number of hours needed always left us short-handed. So basically, I was given responsibilities to do in the store that were never part of my original job description, required to carry out those responsibilities and to be held accountable for them while also being held responsible and accountable to the departmental needs of my own departments. I was rarely given time to work on my own departments and I was never, and I do mean never, given team members to help me with those responsibilities. Even though I was a “Team Leader,” I never had one person that answered directly to me. In other words, I never had a team. Most days, particularly during the week, there were no sales floor team members on the sales floor, only team leaders. Many, many chiefs, but never enough Indians. And there was never, ever enough people to get the store where it needed to be.
Now, on March 12th, I was involved in a very serious car accident in which I broke my ankle and I had to take a six-week leave of absence. Just a couple of weeks before, I decided to quit fighting the system. If Target wanted me to be a “yes man” in order to keep my job then I would do just that. Everyday that I went in, I went straight to the LOD (Leader on Duty) and asked them what they wanted me to do. I was always given a list of things and I always did them all. Just two or three days before the accident, I was called into the office by the STL (Store Team Leader) and was praised for my new attitude and performance. As I left the meeting, I remember thinking how ironic and stupid this situation was. Three days later, I was in the accident and six weeks later, I was back to work. Three days after I returned, I was written up for poor job performance. My first question was, “How could I be written up for poor job performance when I wasn’t even here to perform?” The answer: “Well, this was going to happen before the accident, but we did not get to it in time.” My next question: “Why was I called into the office just three days before the accident and praised for my new attitude and performance?” The answer: “Well, those were dealing with certain issues that you had shown improvement in and not all of them.” In a nutshell, I had failed to meet Target’s expectations even though I was told that I was.
At that moment, I decided that I would not go quietly and I certainly did not. I stood up for myself and my performance every chance I could. I did my job the way that it should have been done and not always the way Target wanted me to. I did all of this while still trying to appease everyone that I could. But I was never silent on things I saw that should have improved and I beat that drum until I left.
Now, when I left the credit union, the team was very gracious and chipped in and bought a card and movie tickets for me and my wife. It was a small gesture, but certainly a very much appreciated one. But yesterday, I only had one Senior Team Leader wish me good luck. My own boss never even told me goodbye. And when I finished the project that I was on fifteen minutes before the end of my shift and asked the LOD what I was supposed to do, I was told, and I quote, “Well we’re sure as hell not going to pay for you sit around. Clock out and go home.” My response: “Well goodbye to you, too Melissa.” Yes, her name was Melissa and she is the only Senior Team Leader on the sales floor. She works over in softlines in the Monroe, Michigan store. If you’d like, be sure to look her up and tell her how I feel. Believe me, my response was much more reserved than what I wanted to say. My wife even commented that it surprised her that it didn’t say more. I clocked out and went home and nobody even noticed.
Needless to say, I won’t be shopping at Target unless I have to. From now on, I’m a Walmart man.

So I’m sitting here in a Holiday Inn Express playing the “if I were a wireless network, where would I be?” game. Well, I found a network. But I can’t get on it because it requires a code that I am assuming is only issued to guests. Oh well. The wireless revolution hasn’t quite hit us all the way yet. Someday soon though, a person will be able to log on anywhere in the country. Verizon is already trying it and it won’t be long before others jump on the bandwagon and let us in. Until now, and until I figure out the future for my ISP needs, I’m stuck at Panera Breads and coffee shops and maybe even libraries until I can sit once again in the comfort of my home and surf the internet.
Speaking of comfort, the reason that I’m here is because a local transmission shop is looking at my truck. I’m a little scared to hear the diagnosis, but it needs to be fixed and we actually have the money to fix it…hopefully. I’m pretty tired after waking up at 6:30 to make sure I was at the place when it opened so I can hopefully get it around lunchtime and get to Ashland. Then I walked half a mile to a Big Boy where I had breakfast and coffee. Now I’m sitting here hoping the place calls soon because I’m bored and tired and have no place to go until it’s fixed.
It’s been an interesting few weeks for me. Two weeks ago, my wife and I moved our belongings to our new apartment in Ashland, Ohio where I will be attending Ashland Theological Seminary to earn my Masters of Divinity Degree. We returned back to Carleton to stay with some friends so I can work out my work notice. Last week, we went back and unpacked boxes and made the place livable. My last day at Target was yesterday and as soon as my truck is fixed, I’m heading to Ashland. My wife will follow this evening. Tonight we will stay at the apartment and tomorrow we will travel to my in-laws in Massillon, where we will spend some time with my brother-in-law before he leaves Sunday for his first year at Ohio State. Kandice will travel back to Michigan on Sunday morning to be here for a baby shower and she will remain in Michigan during the week until she finds a new job in the Ashland/Mansfield, Ohio area. She will be back down next weekend to attend a seminary picnic on Saturday the 24th that will follow orientation. The next weekend is still undecided as to who will be going where but classes for me start on Monday October 3rd.
There’s an update for now. More to come later.

Here is a story that I recently shared with one of groups online that I belong to:

My parents used to own a cleaning business (They were not janitors, they were sanitation engineers, thank you very much). The side business blossomed and very shortly my parents landed a job cleaning a local Southern Baptist Church. Every Saturday morning, I would wake up at the crack of dawn and go with my parents to this church where they would start cleaning and I would catch up on my Saturday morning cartoons until I was old enough and awake enough to help out. Before we got to the church, we would always go to Hardees for breakfast. Every Saturday morning, and I do mean every Saturday morning, a man would also show up for breakfast. He went by the name "Happy." To this day, I don't know his real name. He would come in every Saturday morning and greet everyone. Those he knew, he would chat with a bit. To those he did not know, he would introduce himself and then quickly excuse himself. He never was overbearing or pretentious, just a genuinely nice guy. Here's the thing: Happy was a nickname given to him. The man was so happy that he actually got a nickname for it! Happy even began attending my home church for awhile, but he never joined. Even then, before he even walked down the aisle to take his seat in the pew, everyone knew him as Happy. If someone ever had the courage to ask Happy why he was so happy, Happy was always very quick to tell you the difference that Jesus had made in his life.

One sad day, my Dad picked up the newspaper and brought to our attention that Happy had passed away. Although none of my family knew him very well since he had just started attending our church, and I think that this was the first time that my parents actually knew his real name since it was printed next to his picture in the obituary, we decided to attend the funeral. I was very young, only seven-years old or so, but I will never forget this funeral. It was the closest thing to a party that I had ever witnessed at a funeral. I will never forget my Dad saying that this was not a funeral, this was a "home going."

To this day, if I ever eat at a Hardees (and that is rare since they are no longer in Michigan), I always think about Happy and his smile and his eagerness to tell others why he had got his nickname. To this day, I don't think I have ever met a man quite so happy.