THE MOOD IS NOT THE PROBLEM IN MOSCOW, IDAHO (part two)
Over a decade ago I read a book by Douglas Wilson, that described a philosophy for his writing, represented in the title: A Serrated Edge. His and the Moscow, Idaho mood is portrayed by a serrated edge and the use of satire. Let me again announce that I accept Wilsonian written serration. It’s more interesting at least and sometimes more effective writing. Someone else once said, “The pen is mightier than the sword.” Maybe for Wilson, “His pen is equally mighty to a serrated knife.” Many of the targets of Wilson’s writings deserve their serration from his satirical analysis.
Strict Adherence to the Westminster Confession of Faith on Baptism
Douglas Wilson and his posse in Moscow, Idaho get attention with the style or mood of their writing and other operations. A focus on mood neglects serious problems, most notably their confusion on the gospel. Wilson and Moscow are strong adherents to the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), which says this (Article 28):
Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ . . . . to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.
Furthermore, the WCF says (Article 28) that “by the right use of this ordinance the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited and conferred by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants).” That is all salvific language applied to baptism. Wilson takes this very seriously in his view and preaching of salvation.
John Calvin, the Protestant and Reformed Forefather
Calvin’s Institutes
From what I read of Wilson, he does not believe that baptism guarantees future salvation for the one baptized. Neither does any Roman Catholic. Roman Catholics would say faith is necessary for salvation. They would reject “faith alone.” To clarify his position, Wilson wrote: “Baptism is an effectual means of salvation to worthy receivers.” John Calvin, whose theology Wilson follows, wrote (Institutes, 4:17:1, 4:15:3, 4):
God, regenerating us in baptism, ingrafts us into the fellowship of his Church, and makes us his by adoption . . . whatever time we are baptized, we are washed and purified . . . forgiveness, which at our first regeneration we receive by baptism alone . . . forgiveness has reference to baptism.
Calvin’s “Antidote” to the Council of Trent
Calvin also published (1547 Antidote to the Council of Trent, Reply to the 1st Decree of the 5th Session):
We assert that the whole guilt of sin is taken away in baptism, so that the remains of sin still existing are not imputed. That this may be more clear, let my readers call to mind that there is a twofold grace in baptism, for therein both remission of sins and regeneration are offered to us. We teach that full remission is made . . . by baptism . . . the guilt is effaced [and] it is null in regard to imputation. Nothing is plainer than this doctrine.
In the same publication Calvin continued:
We, too [as do the Catholics], acknowledge that the use of baptism is necessary—that no one may omit it from either neglect or contempt. In this way we by no means make it free (optional). And not only do we strictly bind the faithful to the observance of it, but we also maintain that it is the ordinary instrument of God in washing and renewing us; in short, in communicating to us salvation. The only exception we make is, that the hand of God must not be tied down to the instrument. He may of himself accomplish salvation. For when an opportunity for baptism is wanting, the promise of God alone is amply sufficient.
Wilson doesn’t distinguish himself from the teaching of his spiritual father, Calvin.
Thomas Ross’s Statement
Thomas Ross wrote in his book, Heaven Only for the Baptized?:
Those who think that infant baptism was the instrument of their receiving forgiveness, those who think that they received the sacrament as confirmation and evidence that they were already regenerated in the womb, and those who think they had water applied to them in infancy as evidence that they were certain to be regenerated in the future unless they consciously rejected the “sacrament” and its efficacy are underneath a terrible spiritual delusion. They will certainly be damned unless they recognize that their unbiblical religious ceremony did nothing beneficial for them, admit they are still lost, and then repent and believe the gospel.
With the Protestant or Reformed Catholics, this very serious problem relates to what Paul writes about adding circumcision to grace in Galatians 5:1-6. The Protestant or Reformed Catholics see infant sprinkling as New Testament circumcision. This does not proceed from the Bible, but from allegorization of scripture and tradition.
Galatians
The Galatians added circumcision to grace, which was enough for Paul to say in Galatians 5:2-4:
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
No one should come close to what the Galatians did. Paul uses very strong language, saying, “Christ shall profit you nothing” and more. This is how they perverted the gospel to the degree that Paul wrote in 1:6-9 that it was “another gospel.” Those who preached it, he said, “let them be accursed.”
Infant Sprinkling and John Gill
Wilson wrote a defense on infant sprinkling, To a Thousand Generations: Infant Baptism – Covenant Mercy For the People of God. He wrote: “we must be content with nothing less than a clear biblical case requiring infant baptism” (p. 9). And yet, not one verse in scripture mentions infant baptism or sprinkling. Consider what 17th century English Baptist preacher or pastor John Gill wrote about infant sprinkling:
The Paedobaptists are ever restless and uneasy, endeavoring to maintain and support, if possible, their unscriptural practice of infant-baptism; though it is no other than a pillar of popery; that by which Antichrist has spread his baneful influence over many nations; is the basis of national churches and worldly establishments; that which unites the church and world, and keeps them together; nor can there be a full separation of the one from the other, nor a thorough reformation in religion; until it is wholly removed: and though it has so long and largely obtained, and still does obtain;
I believe with a firm and unshaken faith, that the time is hastening on, when infant-baptism will be no more practiced in the world; when churches will be formed on the same plan they were in the times of the apostles; when gospel-doctrine and discipline will be restored to their primitive luster and purity; when the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper will be administered as they were first delivered, clear of all present corruption and superstition.
Cultural Stands Don’t Undo These Problems
Wilson may take a position closer to the Protestant or Reformed Catholics than his contemporary Reformed fellows do. He could argue that he is more consistent than them with the doctrine and practice. I respect the teaching of Wilson on many cultural issues. He helps on cultural and social ones. These are attractive to many evangelicals and even professing Baptists, their not hearing this in their own churches. Those, however, cannot undo the problems with the unscriptural doctrine I’m addressing. However, the Moscow troubles don’t end with infant sprinkling.
More to Come
Agora to Areopagus: Paul on Mars Hill in Athens (Acts 17)
We are glad to be back! We were in Greece with Tutku Tours, seeing the Biblical sites there, such as the Areopagus (which I will say more about shortly), and are just catching up after getting back. (That is why I had not written any Friday blog posts recently.) We got to visit Biblically-related places including Athens, Philippi, Thessalonica, Corinth, Berea, and Cenchrea. We arrived in Greece a bit before the tour started and were able to visit some archaeologically and Biblically significant cities that the tour was not going to have time to see, such as Nicopolis, and places the tour was not able to get to, such as Acrocorinth, the ancient fortress overlooking the city of Corinth:
We were thankful for the opportunity, and recorded some videos that relate to the Bible and archaeology.
At this point we have one live on Rumble and on YouTube discussing the Apostle Paul’s visit to the Areopagus or Mars Hill, as recorded in Acts 17, where Dionysius the Areopagite (whom Eusebius identifies as the first pastor of the church at Athens) and others were converted:
Dionysius was an Areopagite because he was a significant official at the Areopagus, of course.
We went to Mars Hill when in Athens in the evening and recorded a video, but the hill was full of people and it was windy; the conditions were less than ideal. We returned the next day at sunrise and had the entire hill to ourselves (it seems most in Greece do not rise early, but stay up late). We also had good conditions to both record a Biblically related video and see a beautiful sunrise at the Areopagus. (You can see the Parthenon in this picture from Areopagus / Mars Hill.)
From Mars Hill you can see the agora or marketplace where Paul began his evangelistic preaching and disputation and the Parthenon, where Athena was worshipped, along with other pagan gods.
We have added the video to the YouTube playlist on Archaeological and Historical Evidences for the Bible. Lord willing, we will get some more of the videos posted. There are other posts here at What is Truth? that relate to archaeology, of course.
We were thankful that we were able to significantly reduce the cost of our trip by signing up for the Capital One Venture X Business and Capital One Venture X personal credit cards, using the opening bonuses to greatly reduce our out-of-pocket cost. The opening bonus of $1500 + $750 reduced the cost of the trip by $2,250 for opening one of each card (and there are two of us, and each can open cards). We took care of our own airfare by using points as well, and so were able to fly out to Europe in first class for almost free instead of in economy. Interestingly, it was much cheaper for us to fly to Greece from Mexico, instead of the USA, using points–we were on British Airways, which charges crazy fees on its miles-purchased flights if they originate in the USA, but is not allowed to do that for flights originating in Mexico. So we flew down to Cabo San Lucas for a few days and then took our flight across the pond to Greece from Cabo. The flight went back to San Francisco, and then from San Francisco over to Europe, but cost much less than if we had just started in San Francisco. We stayed at the absolutely beautiful Waldorf Astoria Los Cabos Pedregal using free night certificates from our Hilton Aspire cards and some Hilton points, a wonderful deal for an amazing hotel (cash prices were around $1,800 a night, so staying for free instead was very nice–our Aspire cards also got us free breakfast-and they have a great breakfast–and other nice benefits).
We could see whales playing in the Pacific Ocean from our room’s window when we were reading our Bibles in the morning. Also, the ocean currents make swimming unsafe on the hotel beach, so we didn’t have a problem there with immodest people. You could enjoy seeing God’s beautiful creation without having to constantly look the other way. We were thankful to be able to attend the Iglesia Bautista Monte de Sion in Los Cabos on the Lord’s Day. The pastor asked me to preach through a translator for the Sunday evening service, and I was able to preach on God’s holiness and Biblical sanctification. If you visit Cabo San Lucas, I would encourage you to worship God there, at least if you can speak at least some Spanish (this is a native Mexican church where everything is in Spanish).
So we thank the Lord that we were able to visit Biblically related sites in Greece and also spend a few days in Mexico, all for a minimal cost, thanks to miles, points, and free night certificates. (By the way, the credit card links are refer-a-friend links–if you are interested in the cards and open one, we get some points, so thank you if you want to use them. But do not open any credit cards unless you are aware of their dangers.)
–TDR
THE MOOD IS NOT THE PROBLEM IN MOSCOW, IDAHO
Several months ago now, popular reformed evangelical leader Kevin DeYoung wrote an article warning his proponents against Douglas Wilson and its “Moscow Mood.” Evangelicals in general would call “mood” a tertiary or secondary issue and let it slide. Apparently Wilson, his enterprise in Idaho, and supporters across the United States, don’t qualify for the same pass given for non-essentials. Evangelicals for certain have not historically punished the mood of institutions or figures.
Mood matters, but DeYoung and those agreeing with him are veering out of their normal belief and practice to punch at Wilson and his people. For that reason, it reads as a kind of “correctness” in the spirit of “political correctness” to modulate their norms in such a manner. Maybe it’s because Wilson strikes a popular note among a growing segment of evangelicals who are tired of leaning further left in capitulation to a declining culture.
Douglas Wilson takes stronger stands on cultural issues than popular evangelicalism, what some call, “Big Eva,” and lays down firm boundaries in ways that most evangelicals do not. He especially makes men feel more welcome in his orbit, speaking up on issues that rank-and-file evangelicals care about.
As DeYoung, I don’t want the influence of Wilson either, but for different and what should be obvious reasons that miss or avoid DeYoung and his constituency. I wouldn’t be writing this if Wilson wasn’t making headway. Folks like myself at least need to have an answer as we reach out to our areas for the Lord. Is Wilson style professing Christianity acceptable? Is it true? I contend in the main ways of discerning such questions, the answer is “No.” It isn’t. Why not though? Wilson and Moscow have a mood, but their mood is not the main issue.
WHAT’S THE PROBLEM IN MOSCOW AND THE WILSONIANS?
A biblical position will completely reject Roman Catholicism. Roman Catholicism represents total apostasy. Some Roman Catholics genuinely received Jesus Christ and have not left that ungodly institution. The institution though is absolutely apostate. Biblical Christianity does not trace itself through Roman Catholicism.
Neither is the Roman Catholic Church even a church. It has no authority. Whatever such authority it projects through its historical record also is faux authority. The trail of truth does not traverse through Roman Catholicism and yet for Douglas Wilson and the Moscowites, it does. Wilson takes his trajectory through Roman Catholicism.
Douglas Wilson calls himself a small “c” Catholic. He would distinguish himself from Roman Catholicism with his small “c.” What Wilson understands is that if you call yourself a Protestant, you are taking a line and trajectory through Roman Catholicism, so he embraces Roman Catholicism. That is easy to see. One Roman Catholic, who agrees with this assessment, calls him a “crypto-Catholic.”
Wilson wants to be consistent. He’s Catholic, but he’s reformed Catholic. He attempts to thread that needle as much as anyone out there. This depends then on a form of Roman Catholic and Protestant tradition, a unique hybrid of the two.
SACRAMENTS AND THE GOSPEL
Nothing illustrates Wilson’s Catholicism and its strain on the gospel and sola scriptura than his position on the sacraments. Moscow sprinkles infants and then welcomes children to the Lord’s Table. This bleeds over into the thinking on the gospel, because what’s the point of these sacraments for children? A recent trouble for Wilson was a decade or more controversy called “Federal Vision” and “Auburn Avenue” that looked very much like works salvation. Wilson since attempted to extricate himself from these theological movements he helped found and brought confusion on the gospel.
Wilson, since the federal vision fiasco, in public voiced a few times his loyalty to salvation by grace alone through faith alone. However, his own teaching had confused the gospel in a much greater way than Peter not eating meat with the Gentiles in Galatians 2:11-13. Wilson’s doctrine and practice continues to lead people astray on the gospel. He doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt on it. The gospel is far too important to obfuscate it. Many of his positions give strong association with Roman Catholicism and he considers himself a Catholic theologically and historically.
Don’t get me wrong, Wilson rejects many present components of Roman Catholicism and says so. However, his Roman Catholic-light takes a form of Catholicism before Roman Catholicism went even further off the rails. He doesn’t reject it wholesale. In that way, Moscow kowtows to Roman Catholicism.
VERSUS PERPETUITY OF TRUE CHURCHES
As part of the mood of Moscow, Wilson and his followers would mock Baptists in exactly what I’m addressing here. He would argue against a true line of separatist churches since the time of Christ, separate from the state church. He embraces the Roman Catholic Church as his mother church with a form of either evidentialism or historicism. Rome tells its own story of its own history that Rome preserved. The satire and mockery he uses very often becomes the substance of what he says.
Roman Catholics trace their lineage a long ways with a very visible history. They especially point to the “church fathers.” Those like myself, who see the true church through history in complete separation from the state church, possess less visible evidence for that line. Still, New Testament churches separate from the state church do have visible evidence, only less than Roman Catholicism. Those rejecting perpetuity of true churches point to examples of traceable error among those autonomous churches, separate from Roman Catholicism.
Christ’s Church Is Not a State Church
The primary basis for the true church, which is separate from the state church, is presuppositional. No one is neutral. Everyone has presuppositions from which he views history. The biblical presupposition is that, first, Christ’s church is not a state church. Wilson may deny that his church is a state church, but he takes his lineage through a state church. His eschatology and ecclesiology depend on state church doctrine.
The Gates of Hell Would Not Prevail Against True, New Testament Churches
Second, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His assembly [ekklesia means “assembly”] (Matthew 16:18). An assembly is not Catholic, but local. Jesus’ churches were and always would be local churches, not a Roman Catholic (universal) one. The truth was not preserved by the state church, but by Christ’s churches, which were always separate from the state church.
If the Roman Catholic Church was the true church, as Wilson believes, then where was the gospel for centuries? Jesus said He would build His church on the gospel profession or declaration: Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God. The “Christ” of Roman Catholicism does not save to the uttermost. He does not provide full forgiveness of sins throughout all eternity. It is not a true church.
The presupposition from scripture, from the promise of Jesus Christ of the perpetuity of the true church, is the evidence. That church is not Roman Catholic, which is a false church.
INFANT SPRINKLING, THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION, AND THE GOSPEL
Douglas Wilson wrote an entire book defending infant sprinkling, so he pushes that unbiblical doctrine on the world, treating it like it’s in the Bible. I know he would say he does not attribute salvation to infant sprinkling like Roman Catholicism, but where did he get infant sprinkling? He got it from Roman Catholicism. He didn’t get it from the Bible. It’s not in there.
More to Come
The Real Dovetailing of Future Antichrist Agenda and World Power Now
Part One Part Two Part Three Part Four
PART FIVE
The Antichrist could live on this earth right this moment. I’m not speculating. It’s just possible. If he is alive, he sees a world that dovetails nicely with his agenda. That’s not good. But how is it happening?
USEFULNESS OF DENIAL
One way it happens is by sheer denial. Men come here anonymously and take potshots with the language of “conspiracy theory.” Guess what? Satan has a conspiracy against God and it shows up on earth. Earth is where almost all of it occurs, say ninety plus percent. Humanity is the target, but even that ultimately opposes God as the target.
Denying the Satanic and Antichrist agenda even occurs is part of the conspiracy. Satan wields his useful idiots to keep people in their lemming-like condition. It isn’t just naturalists following the pied piper. It’s also aggressive amillennialists and postmillennialists, who spiritualize the Antichrist and prophetic passages, and minimize globalism.
REMOVAL OF BARRIERS
The Lord Jesus, the Christ, the true Messiah, will rule the world some day and maybe soon. Outside of the future rule of Jesus Christ with His might and elimination of most of His enemies, the design of God is division and separation, not something “one world.” The Antichrist will rule a short one-world government until Jesus returns.
The plan of God to impede apostasy in this age requires boundaries. It observes the era before the worldwide flood where the imagination of mankind was evil continually. Post-flood, when the world began in the same trajectory, God confused languages and set boundaries between peoples as an impediment to a fast spread of wickedness. What are the boundaries that create the barriers against the proliferation of a one world government and religion? What are the indicators that world power now under the ruler of this world undoes these restraints?
Not necessarily in this order, but these are instruments of Satan by which he advances his goals through the world system that dovetail with the future agenda of the Antichrist. Genuine, biblical Christians shouldn’t support them. They contradict the plan of God.
OPEN BORDERS
God wants borders. He doesn’t say how many, but borders hold back the expansion of Satan’s plan. The federalist system of the United States creates more of these borders between states. Even within the states, counties and then towns allow more distinction and possible protection. Within the states, they model the national federalist system.
Only with borders and protecting those borders does a nation keep out corrupting influences. Maybe the invaders are in fact more pure than the country they invade. That doesn’t make sense, because it would say that they are leaving somewhere better for somewhere worse. Alternative categories of intruders might have other motives than melting into the melting pot. They come with the purpose of wreaking havoc.
If a nation does not consider its way of life worth preserving, maybe it isn’t worth preserving. Maybe it can’t keep itself well, because it doesn’t understand its own values and purposes. It doesn’t know what it stands for anymore. This makes it “easy pickins'” for predatory or parasitical people.
TRANSWORLD MEDIA
As much as states or nations keep their borders, the media gets into homes through the airwaves in many different capacities. You know this. A person could control the media.
Organizations propagate lies and moral filth easier than ever. Satellites and the internet are two inventions that make this far more effective. Everyone can have their receivers with them at all times, the cell phone. New technology already exists that could make it even easier for the whole world to hear and see the same sounds and image all at once.
DIGITAL ECONOMY
People more than ever don’t use cash. They use cards and their phones. Everyone could lose all their money all at once. With computers, perhaps artificial intelligence, someone using something could control the entire economy all at once.
Perhaps you’ve swiped a card and it doesn’t work. You call on your cell phone to reinstate your card. One person could shut it all down at once unless you cooperate with a certain agenda. I understand that now you have some recourse, but that could easily change.
All of this technology is very convenient. I love mobile banking. But I also know what it means for the future. I can’t tell you what to do, but the world went from gold to paper to digital currency. Each of these steps made it easier for a future Antichrist to control the whole world.
CORPORATE MEDICINE
The government controls the healthcare in many countries. It starts with incredible amounts of regulation that become much easier during Covid in 2020-21. Governments all over the world required little and short tested vaccines. Some might call this a dress rehearsal for future times. Can a centralized power make everyone wear a mask?
Doctors study long and at great sacrifice to get their license. Sometimes doctors pay with student loans. They need employment to pay them back. They have pressure not to lose their jobs. It’s easy to fit into a medical conglomerate that toes the line of correct medicine. If they resist, they lose their job and inherit a record that inhibits finding another job.
The establishment punished doctors who spoke up during Covid. They lost good jobs, high paying ones. This exerts top down control over medicine.
Corporate medicine effects the consumer. The customer of medical care many times needs it. Or someone in his family really needs it. When someone you love is dying, you might do things you would not ordinarily do.
More to Come
The Relationship of the 2024 Total Eclipse to the End Times
Eclipse and Path of Totality
My wife and I live in the path of totality. Yes, that’s right. We live in the path where for three or four minutes we will see a total eclipse. For that reason, this rural area with a relatively small population will grow in population over the next few days with people who want to be here too. For those coming into our parking lot, our church will offer eclipse glasses through which to look at the eclipse when it shows itself in the most significant fashion.
Many people think the eclipse is an eschatological sign. Even unbelievers around this area speak in a wary way about what’s happening in the sky and what it means for their future. I’m happy that it has them thinking about their lives.
Signs of the Times Are Everywhere?
I grew up in a small Baptist church in rural Indiana, and I’m not endorsing the song, but I have the words in my mind of one we sang then:
Signs of the times are everywhere,
There’s a brand new feeling in the air,
Keep your eyes upon the eastern sky,
Lift up your eyes, redemption draweth nigh.
For many, that sounds about right. Signs of the times are everywhere. Except they’re not. Signs won’t appear until after the Antichrist reveals himself (2 Thessalonians 2:3-10). On April 8, if you keep your eyes upon the eastern sky, you better at least be wearing your eclipse glasses.
I know people are writing and producing youtube presentations about the eclipse as a sign of the end times. I have not read any of these works but just have heard people asking and talking about it as such. So here goes. The total eclipse on April 8 is not a sign of the end times. It isn’t.
Seeking After Signs
What gets people’s attention, I believe, is the weird or earie astronomical nature of the eclipse. It’s obvious and odd. Jesus’ own birth provided a star, a sign in the sky for that event. People who followed Him around also wanted astronomical signs from Him, but He said He wouldn’t give them. He said in Matthew 16:4:
A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.
The sign of the prophet Jonas was Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. So He says, besides that, He would give no more signs to that generation. The message of Jesus was that scripture was sufficient. “But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it” (Luke 11:28). Blessing came to those who believe the word of God without having or seeing signs. Signs are not for them who believe, but believe not. Believers don’t need signs. They believe, and faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17), not from signs.
Era of Astronomical Signs
Jesus in Luke 21:25 says that during the Tribulation period on earth, Revelation chapters six through sixteen, God will give astronomical signs:
And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring.
Peter references these occurrences in Acts 2:20 on the Day of Pentecost:
The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:
This references Joel 2:31, which also also says this is when “the great and terrible day of the LORD come(s).” These signs mark the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ when He opens the seals of His judgment. People on earth will know they have little time for salvation at that point.
None of us need signs, because nothing needs to occur for the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18). Neither do unbelievers need signs for sufficiently knowing they’ll be left behind for God’s judgment. Not just that, but it is already appointed unto man once to die (Hebrews 9:27), and no man knows when that will occur (Proverbs 27:1, James 4:14). In the next second, eclipse or no eclipse coming, the Lord could descend through the clouds to meet true believers in the air.
Signifying Nothing
This total eclipse signifies nothing. Eclipses happen. The fact that we could predict this one indicates that God created astronomical bodies with mathematical precision. Ships navigate by the movements of celestial bodies. This testifies already to the glory of God, eclipse or no eclipse.
Eclipses testify to man’s helplessness and the immensity of God’s creation. The sun is just one star of many, not even the largest. It is a fiery, hot mass that God created just the right distance away for enough heat without burning up men. It’s not always going to be this way though. Everything in the future will burn with a fervent heat (2 Peter 3:10), annihilating everything, and God will create a new heaven and a new earth. Only those who believe in Jesus Christ will make it to the other side and a whole new and eternal and blessed era.
Reminder of Opportunities
Man does not have interminable opportunities for salvation. If the eclipse helps him remember this, the eclipse offers a great blessing to him. No doubt an eclipse gets people’s attention and makes them think. If men continue in their sin, never listening to God’s Word, then the eclipse serves very little purpose for them. Perhaps it just makes men more proud, because they saw it with their special glasses. Now they can say they’ve done another thing that makes them more special.
The total eclipse does provide an opportunity. It parallels with future astronomical events that will be signs. They provoke men to think about the last times. On April 8, 2024 and even before and after that day, let everyone consider what Jesus warned in Matthew 24:44:
Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
The eclipse is not a sign, but Jesus said always to be ready. Be ready for His return. Paul says that it will occur in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye (1 Corinthians 15:52-54). Behold now is the accepted time, behold now is the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:2).
Embracing An Unstoppable Advantage For Guaranteed Longstanding Victory (Part Four)
The War Waged Against the Soul
Storming the Gates or Something Clandestine
Fleshly lusts war against the soul of believers (1 Peter 2:11) by invading each soul as a conquering army would . The army storms the gates, enters in a more clandestine manner, or sieges its target of battle. It depends on whatever the most successful art of war.
As an example, consider the “evil communications” (homiloi krakai) of 1 Corinthians 15:33. These evil communications, Paul says, corrupt good manners. The corruption related to the doctrine of bodily resurrection, starting with the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. The evil communications invaded the souls of professing Corinthian believers. Paul starts that sentence with the command, “be not deceived.”
The deceit that fooled on the truth about bodily resurrection seemed to enter in a clandestine manner through corrupting good manners. The purveyors of evil Egyptian culture tried to deceive Moses with enjoyment of the pleasures of sin for a season (Hebrews 11:25). Someone need not assert a statement of doctrine to corrupt someone’s doctrine. Instead, he allures someone through the pleasures of sin.
Favoring Lasciviousness
The false doctrine of Corinth influenced through lasciviousness. It could be humor, music, enthusiastic acceptance, entertainment, or drink. These accompanied a perverted view of the body. Libertines denied bodily resurrection, which favored their licentious manner of conduct.
Also, to retain employment in Greek society, employers required Christian employees to ally with their Greek philosophies. Rather than start with your doctrine, they start with acceptability of lifestyle and then the false doctrine follows by conforming to the behavior.
The accompanying false doctrine might sound like the following: “You don’t have to believe in bodily resurrection. You could just believe in a spiritual resurrection, couldn’t you? Isn’t that just a divisive and unnecessary scruple?” By hanging on to this exactness in doctrine, someone could lose his job or the pleasures of Greek society.
The War Against the Entrepreneur’s Soul
People want what they want. This lust wars against the soul, but it doesn’t seem like it wars against success in a business. Someone entrepreneurial sees through his eyegate the success of capitulating to lust. People line up for something that makes them feel good. Using the attraction or allure of the lust is just good business. It must destroy people, because it wars against their souls, as God says, but it helps in the bottom line for business. God wants us to succeed, doesn’t He?
Longstanding victory is not the short term victory of keeping a job in Corinth or succeeding in business. The Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 9:25:
And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.
Everyone must struggle against the corruptible. This is Solomon saying in Ecclesiastes in essence, “Ditch the temporal for the eternal, because the former is vanity and vexation of spirit.” Struggling against the lusts of the flesh is good. Any person’s struggle does not justify lust. It’s a struggle. It’s a fight not to acquiesce to the lust of the flesh.
The crown or success for the short term is what Paul calls, “a corruptible crown.” Someone can succeed and receive the corruptible crown, if that’s what he’s shooting for. He can use fleshly lust to obtain it, which still wars against his soul and that of his adherents or audience. It brings failure and destruction, posing as an award or reward. It looks motivated and ambitious, but it promotes the worst ultimate failure.
The War Against Incorruptible Gain
Someone might call the spoils of fleshly lust a market. Like James says in chapter four of his epistle, he goes, buys, sells, and gets gain. He doesn’t say, “If the Lord wills, I will do this or that.” Does how you get the gain matter? Yes. And it also considers, “Is this really gain?” Is it gain if it is short-term gain that receives the corruptible short term gain? In fact, it’s not gain at all, because, again, it wars against the soul. When the soul takes a hit, everything is taking a hit.
Perhaps you’ve heard the terminology, “Gainfully employed.” Is a casino operator, “gainfully employed”? He’s bringing money home from work, putting it in the bank, and taking care of his family. The United States Mail in part because of the “success” of Amazon, sends drivers delivering packages all day Sunday. That is also “gainful employment” for delivery drivers. What crown would you receive, the temporal one or the eternal one?
It’s easy to confuse the distinctions between liberty and lust. Someone does not have liberty to war against the soul just because a verse doesn’t say, “Thou shalt not own a casino.” I’m just using that as an illustration.
College students and their coaches and staff travel all over the country on Sundays for basketball and their future bright shining moment. The bright shining moment is when the confetti falls in a basketball arena, not at the Bema seat of Jesus Christ (this might represent one shining moment as good as anything). One should consider the incongruity of these two crowns, just like Paul did, and judge whether the lust for short term earthly gain wars against the eternal value to the soul.
More to Come
A Useful Exploration of Truth about Christian Nationalism (Part Three)
Teach All Nations
Matthew 28:19-20 say:
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
I ask you to notice above, “teach all nations.” The Great Commission requires teaching all nations. We want entire nations to follow Christ. Will that always occur? No, but it is a goal. It is a holy ambition for true churches and believers in those churches following Christ. How does this relate to Christian nationalism?
In verse 20, part of teaching all nations is “teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” Christians should wish the nations in which they live would observe all things Christ commanded. God’s Word is still the standard for all of mankind. God will judge everyone based on His rules or laws.
True Christians and their true churches should repudiate all the ways that a nation does not follow the Lord. They should strive for a nation that follows the Lord. What Christian would not want a “Christian nation”? Would that not be a nation that follows Christ in all things? When Christians go to judge their nation, they should judge it based upon scripture. They should vote for representatives with the greatest opportunity or possibility of their nation following the standards of God.
Imagining a Christian Nation
What I’m writing so far in this essay is not a form of amillennialism or postmillennialism. I’m not talking about someone other than Jesus bringing in His kingdom. Romans 13 says there is “no power but of God” (verse one). It goes on to say that “rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil” (verse three). Good works are not arbitrary. They are only biblical good works. Evil is as God defines it. People have liberty only in the context of scriptural regulation or accurate interpretation and application of the Bible.
Rulers in a Christian United States would terrorize evil and elsewise “minister . . . for good” (verse four) only in a biblical or Christian fashion. Making disciples of the nation requires observing everything Christ wants observed. Right before His commission in Matthew 28, Jesus said that He possessed all authority for all of heaven and all of earth. Jesus will judge the world like He owns it and always has owned it. If we want His judgment to go well for everyone, we must let them know in no uncertain terms.
For sure, Christians of a nation start with the gospel. No one observes whatsoever Christ says without surrendering first to the gospel. A nation won’t be Christian without Christians, but when they are Christians, that means what some people have said, “All of Christ for all of life.” This means Christ rules in the home, at work, and in government. The words of Christ apply to every earthly institution if Christ will rule.
Jesus and the Christian Nation
Will Christ rule over this world? Yes, He will. He will begin a rule with a rod of iron (Psalm 2) when He returns to set up that kingdom on the earth for a thousand years. So is that it? Is that all anyone could hope for? Mainly, yes. Jesus said in Matthew 18:36, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight.”
When Jesus said what He did in Matthew 18:36, one could take it as the following:
Look around. Does this look like my kingdom? Of course, not. This is not anything like my kingdom. My kingdom is not of this world.
Jesus’ plan was not to force everyone into His kingdom. He does not coerce people into His kingdom. His subjects would subject themselves to Him voluntarily. That’s His plan for His kingdom.
Internal Rule First
External rule of Jesus proceeds from internal rule of Jesus. The spiritual precedes the physical. It isn’t mere conformity. It is transformation. If a nation skips this transformation step, it’ll probably get something like the seven demons possessing the swept out house (Luke 11).
Kingdoms of this present world, the one Jesus talked about in Matthew 18, as a whole would not come to Him. That’s why in Matthew 7:13-14, He said the broad road leads to destruction and the vast majority go down that road. Jesus did not since rescind that statement. He has not said: “At some point the broad road would be full of true believers on their way to heaven.” If Jesus said that, then it is true, no matter what your desires.
Yet, anyone following Christ will follow Him in every arena of life. A Christian nation can come, but it will come through faith in Christ. The way to a Christian nation is faith in Christ. Before nations behave in their governments as if He rules, they will receive Him to rule their own personal lives. One should expect that true Christians in a government would function like Christians.
Christians don’t want a pagan government. They don’t want an idolatrous government. True Christians as much as possible want a Christian government. To the degree that it is one, it can be a Christian nation.
How a Christian Nation Might Occur
If churches are barely Christian, and if all of Christ is not even all of the church, no one should expect that of the whole nation. This is a simple less than and greater than — not about what is most important, but sheer population size of the institution. Jesus should rule each Christian — one. Then He should rule each family — two to fifteen (let’s estimate), then each church — ten to five thousand, and then each government or nation — several thousands to a billion. The order matters. The latter won’t occur without the former. You can’t get to a Christian nation without getting to quite a few single Christians, who received a true gospel.
No Christian should hope to see a Christian nation without making one disciple. Yet, Jesus commanded, “Teach (make disciples) all nations.” In other words, “Make all nations disciples.” He didn’t command, “Make disciples of, as in part of, all nations.” The goal is whole nations. BDAG says concerning the Greek term translated “nations”: “a body of persons united by kinship, culture, and common traditions.”
What Christ Would Have It
The goal, all of Christ for all of life for all of the world, must envision whole nations. Scripture must get to every institution God instituted. Scott Aniol, who has written a book on this subject (that I have not yet read), it seems, would call this position, “Christian Faithfulness.” Scripture does envision a kingdom of Christ on earth to come and tells us what it will be. Anything that might call itself a Christian nation should not be something less than what Christ would have it.
Christians can’t skip steps to get to Christian nationalism. It starts with internal rule, spiritual transformation. Anything else would essentially say, “Christians fight.” Get armed and loaded and ready for when the pagans who saturate our government take our power away. Without true Christians, what would that nation or government look like on the other side of that fight? Christ has us here now as pilgrims and strangers. Anything beyond that, that might come before the kingdom Christ sets up, will come in an organic way. It will be obvious, which right now, it’s not even close to obvious.
More to Come
How Evangelicals Now Move the Goalposts on Bibliology (part three)
Somebody kicked a field goal from the fifty yard line. That’s a sixty yard field goal, except that someone moved the goalposts to the thirty. In the same manner, evangelicals say, “This is scriptural bibliology,” but it isn’t. The goalposts were moved. Evangelism has moved on bibliology, first on the doctrine of inspiration.
Ipsissima Verba and Ipsissima Vox
Precise Words
Ipsissima verba, Latin, means, “the precise words.” On the other hand, ipsissima vox is more Latin, meaning, “the very voice.” Ipsissima verba says that the words of Jesus in the gospels were recorded verbatim. Vox says that the gospels capture the concepts of what Jesus said.
Vox says that when the gospels say, “Jesus said,” these are not necessarily the words of Christ. He probably didn’t say them according to many evangelicals, just the essence or general content of what He said. The gospels say, “Jesus said,” 65 times. Many times, speaking of Jesus, in the gospels, “the Lord said.” Sometimes, literally the gospels say, “these words spake Jesus.”
Who dares say that Jesus did no speak the words that scripture says He spoke? The Holy Spirit would not inspire a “Jesus said” and not provide the very words of Jesus. Matthew 24:35 says:
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
That statement by Jesus about His own Words is false if the gospels do not record His Words. Several years ago now, a blogpost here said:
God’s people must hear the Words of the Son (John 12:47), receive His Words (John 12:48; 17:8), keep His Words (John 14:23), have His Words abiding in them (John 15:7) and remember His Words as from the Father (John 14:10).
Concepts
Daniel Wallace in his “An Apologia for a Broad View of Ipsissima Vox,” paper presented to the 51st Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Danvers, Mass., November 1999, wrote:
[T]he concepts go back to Jesus, but the words do not—at least, not exactly as recorded.
I wrote these lines on this blog in the not too distant past:
His colleague, Darrell Bock, wrote a chapter in Jesus Under Fire [ed. Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995):73-99], defending the vox position, entitled, “The Words of Jesus in the Gospels: Live, Jive, or Memorex.” Bock’s chapter tries to defend the historical reliability of the Gospel writing of Jesus’ Words from the destructive criticism of the Jesus Seminar. He writes, “The Gospels give us the true gist of his teaching and the central thrust of his message,” but “we do not have ‘his very words’ in the strictest sense of the term”. . . .
Wallace and Bock approach Jesus’ Words in the Gospels from a naturalistic viewpoint. The apostles forgot the Words like historians often do and so presented the Words the best they could, considering their shortcomings.
Verbal Inspiration
Donald Green in an essay on this subject, published in The Master’s Seminary Journal (Spring 2001), wrote:
Jesus’ promise of the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit placed the Gospel writers in a different realm in which different standards of memory would be operative. They would be supernaturally enabled to recall Jesus’ words in a manner that freed them from the human limitations of secular historians.
The great high priestly prayer of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 17, begins with the words: “These words spake Jesus.” Ipsissima verba, a high view of scripture, says that Jesus said these very words in His prayer to His Father. Later in the prayer itself, Jesus says in verse 8:
I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them.
This is what Jesus says, that He has given to the New Testament writers through inspiration very words, not just concepts or ideas.
Redaction Criticism
Is redaction criticism acceptable or accommodated by evangelicals? Timothy Berg, a member of an evangelical group called the textual confidence collective, says, “Yes.” Redaction criticism says that several biblical authors were very often if not most often mere editors of source material. This clashes with the doctrine of verbal, plenary inspiration. Berg in an article, “Matthew 5:17-20 and the KJV,” published on his kjbhistory.com website, writes:
It would be irresponsible to deal with any text in Matthew without at least briefly mentioning the synoptic problem and its relation to the exegesis of the text. While there are some recent dissenting voices, the majority of evangelical scholarship today holds to Marcan priority. That is, that Mark wrote first, and that Matthew and Luke independently used Mark. Further, because Matthew and Luke have a large amount of material that they share in common yet which is not present in Mark, it is likely that they had both had access to a source Mark was unaware of. This source is referred to as “Q.”
He writes then specifically about Matthew 5:18:
The passage at hand in verse 18 is clearly “Q” material, or material which Matthew and Luke draw from a common source unknown to Mark. It is worth noting how Matthew has uniquely shaped this material for his Jewish audience.
Redaction criticism says that biblical authors reworked an already written text, taking it and putting it somewhat in their own words. This is not either a biblical or historical view of the doctrine of inspiration. It acquiesces to modernism or theological liberalism in a denial of verbal inspiration.
More to Come
Grace Yields a Higher Standard Than Pharisees
The following recent articles and in this chronological order relate to this post. One Two Three Four Five
*************************
The Pharisees
“The Pharisees” are those historical and biblical characters with whom Jesus interacted in the Gospels. Pharisees are those taking up the mantel of “the Pharisees” since then. The Pharisees inundated the Israel into which Jesus came.
I like to say, “The inside of a barrel looks like the barrel.” If you live inside the barrel, your whole world looks like the barrel. The Pharisees so saturated the thinking of Israel during the life of Jesus that Israel looked like the Pharisees. The world of the audience to whom Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount also looked like or literally was the Pharisees.
The most common viewpoint of the Pharisees is that they added a whole bunch of strict standards to the preexisting rules of scripture. This popular notion says the Pharisees multiplied an immense number of added regulations that burdened down the Israelite people. This idea leaves the impression that Jesus came to relieve people of standards. He came to save them from the imposition of written rules. This is a deadly lie about Jesus and what He did and taught that generation.
Jesus and Matthew 5
I return to Matthew 5 to see what Jesus said at the beginning of His Sermon on the Mount. He said in verse 17:
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
The Pharisees and thus the people of that audience suspected Jesus would destroy the law or the prophets. He debunked that speculation and added, “I am come to fulfill the law or the prophets.” “The law or the prophets” in 5:17 is all of the Old Testament scripture.
“To fulfill” the Old Testament at least was keeping the Old Testament, but further transcending it. Jesus’ standard was not the minimized, reduced standard of the Pharisees. It went above theirs; it transcended theirs. His righteousness exceeded theirs. In no way, as He says in verse 19, was He teaching people not to keep everything in the Old Testament. No, just the opposite. Then Jesus illustrates that in six different sections between 5:21 and 5:48.
The purpose of Jesus was showing the sinfulness of the Pharisees and the audience they spawned. Their viewpoint was not God’s. They did not represent God. This would take someone back to the first thing He said in the sermon in verse 3: “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” His audience needed to understand their spiritual poverty to enter the kingdom of heaven.
Saving Grace
Saving grace as an outcome of conversion, which proceeds from God — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, does not lower the standard for righteousness of the Pharisees. It exceeds it. As a first illustration, Jesus uses one of the ten commandments, “Thou shalt not kill,” in verse 21. Pharisaical thinking justified itself by saying it had not physically killed anyone. That still occurs today. People still think they’re fine because of something they haven’t done. This indicates they lack spiritual poverty.
Using four different examples in verse 21 to verse 26, Jesus shows that His or God’s standard exceeds or transcends the letter of scripture. It is more than just physically killing someone. They’ve murdered someone in their hearts if they even showed contempt toward them. Jesus goes so far to say that they’ve murdered the person with whom they would not initiate reconciliation. Not reconciling is showing contempt. God would not accept their worship as long as they would not try to reconcile.
The Pharisees were not about strict standards. They were about diminishing God’s standards with their own, designed to be more easily kept. They tried to keep these on their own without the grace of God. Jesus was not following their example or trajectory. He taught a different way than theirs.
Evangelicals and Jesus and the Pharisees and Grace
Most evangelicals today take an opposite message from Jesus than the one He told in His sermon. They teach that Jesus came to relieve the people of standards. I use the word “standards,” but you could use laws, regulations, or the like. Jesus kept everything and in verse 19, He said that the greatest in His kingdom would teach others to do the same.
Jesus went further with adultery too. It wasn’t just the physical act, but looking at a woman to lust after her in your heart (verse 28). Jesus is explaining what He meant by fulfilling the law or the prophets. Keeping the standards was never the means of salvation. Yes, the addition of works was a burden on the people reckoned by the Pharisees. People could not escape whatever shortcomings they had with the Pharisee approach.
If salvation came by keeping the rules, no one could do that. This is why the Pharisees minimized or reduced the law or the prophets. They tried to concoct a way of salvation through works. The Pharisees developed their own handbook of sorts to accompany scripture to explain the procedures for keeping scripture. This was not internalizing what God said out of love and obeying it from the heart. Again, this is the burden they created.
The Pharisees made doing suitable good works impossible. This was an exhausting, never ceasing burden. Their system complicated the obedience to actual scripture. It put them, the Pharisees, ahead of God, while claiming credit for God.
The Repercussions of Botching the Pharisees
People like the idea of not having to keep moral standards. This is a very popular view of grace today. This mirrors the Pharisees in that it minimizes or reduces scripture. Pharisees did it to make a way for salvation by works. Evangelicals do it in a way to change the nature of the grace of God. I say that they treat grace as a garbage can, when scripture treats it as a cleansing agent. Grace instead enables the keeping of the standards, rules, or laws of scripture. Unlike the perversion of grace, grace saves from the violations of the law and the salvation changes the life.
You probably notice that churches have gone downhill. They have changed in nature. Part of it is this very interpretation of the Pharisees. Evangelicals use the Pharisees as a reason to reduce standards. They don’t get rid of all of them, which should send up a red flag. If the Pharisees were all about having standards, then why don’t we eliminate all of them? Quite commonly evangelical keep the ones still convenient, very much like the Pharisees did. With this system, you still get credit for doing good works without obedience to everything that God said.
Scripture shows God wants everything He said kept. It’s not grace not to keep what God said. That’s an impostor grace. It claims grace, but it’s a placebo or a poser of grace. God does not accept not believing and not doing what He said, even in the so-called non-essentials. Man’s adaptations, innovations, and modifications do not please God. They are not of faith.
In scripture, God killed people for changing the recipe for the incense at the altar of incense. He killed tens of thousands when David numbered the people against His will. Grace tends toward keeping what God said, not squirming out of it. Grace yields a higher standard than the Pharisees, not a lesser one.
Recent Comments