Evangelical Psalms of David

Part One

In an earlier post, I pointed to psalms that served the cause of evangelism from the Old Testament.  Even as I wrote that piece, I knew there were more.  Two circumstances coincide in my life:  one, my reading through the Bible twice this year, so that I’m in the psalms now, and two, we sing through the psalms from our psalter in church and we’ve been singing in the last few months on Sunday in Psalms 32, 33, and 34.  It’s been obvious that David writes about salvation in these.

The Apostle Paul refers to Psalm 32 in his argument for salvation by faith in Romans 4:6-8:

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

This quotes Psalm 32:1-2:

1 Blessed is he whose transgression is] forgiven, whose sin is covered. 2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.

The New Testament teaching of salvation does not contradict the Old Testament teaching of salvation.  One could and should argue that the gospel of the New Testament proceeds from the Old Testament.  “New Testament” doesn’t mean “new” as in, never seen before, of very recent origination.When Jesus describes salvation in His Sermon on the Mount, He describes the ultimate fulfillment as “blessed” in what we call the beatitudes.  These correspond to the blessings promised in the Old Testament, including in the psalms, and David starts Psalms 32 with “Blessed.”  For man to be saved, which is to be blessed, he needs atonement for or removal of his sin.  He might try to do good and David already wrote in Psalm 14, that is hopeless.Later Paul argues in Romans 4 from Psalm 32 that David was trusting the Lord for his salvation, not in his own works.  I always like to say, works can’t get rid of your sin, even if you did them.  If you really determined to be good from now on, to be saved, you still need the cleansing of the past sins.  While you’re attempting to do good works, you are still failing, so you also need those sins taken away.  Salvation by necessity requires what David describes in Psalm 32.Psalm 32 is most known as David’s confession of his sin, adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah.  The first two verses though are not a confession.  They are, however, a prerequisite for confession.  First comes conversion, then comes confession.  In 1 John 1 and 2, the Apostle John communicates that we don’t hide our sin because we do have cleansing and propitiation.  The sins aren’t forgiven because of confession. They are forgiven because of the salvation that is the basis of the confession.The experience of blessing doesn’t come from confessing sin.  It comes from a believer confessing sin.  An unbeliever could confess sin, but he will not receive forgiveness, covering, or imputation of righteousness for mere confession.  Confession is a lifestyle or a habit of a believer, because he receives forgiveness of sin by grace through faith as a prerequisite for confession.Three terms designate the dimensions of human evil:  transgression—acts reflecting rebellion against God, sin—the most general term, designating an offense, or turning away from the true path, and iniquity—indicating distortion, criminality, or the absence of respect for the divine will.  In the context, the three terms should not be viewed per se as pointing out just three specific kind of sins, but taking all three as a whole to specify the full dimensions of human evil from which someone requires deliverance.  It’s too overwhelming to dig himself out of it through confession.The person’s spirit has no guile, because he is truly repentant.  This is not a game that he’s playing, showing up to his confessional booth week after week.  He can’t confess as a means of experiencing the blessing and forgiveness without a spirit that has already been changed.  He doesn’t like his sin.  He doesn’t mean to keep sinning.When one arrives at the end of the psalm in verse 10-11, David writes:

10 Many sorrows shall be to the wicked: but he that trusteth in the LORD, mercy shall compass him about. 11 Be glad in the LORD, and rejoice, ye righteous: and shout for joy, all ye that are upright in heart.

David contrasts the wicked with “he that trusteth in the LORD.”  Mercy compasses him.  From this mercy proceeds gladness, rejoicing, and shouts of joy, not because of what he has done, but because of what God has.Psalm 33 begins like Paul in Philippians 3, when he describes his own salvation:  “Rejoice in the Lord.”  Paul may have been quoting Psalm 33.  Habbakuk later writes (3:18):  “Yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will joy in the God of my salvation.”  He relates joy to the salvation of God.  With the Apostle Paul, rejoicing in the Lord meant not boasting in himself and putting confidence in his flesh, counting as dung and loss all things that he might win Christ.The psalm ends with these verses:

16 There is no king saved by the multitude of an host: a mighty man is not delivered by much strength. 17 An horse is a vain thing for safety: neither shall he deliver any by his great strength. 18 Behold, the eye of the LORD is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his mercy; 19 To deliver their soul from death, and to keep them alive in famine. 20 Our soul waiteth for the LORD: he is our help and our shield. 21 For our heart shall rejoice in him, because we have trusted in his holy name. 22 Let thy mercy, O LORD, be upon us, according as we hope in thee.

The king is not saved by his own strength of that of a horse, but through the fear of the LORD and hope in his mercy.  He waits on the LORD for his help, rejoices in Him, trusting in His holy name.Similar to Psalm 32:1-2, David writes in Psalm 34:8, “blessed is the man that trusteth in [the LORD].”  In the end of that psalm, he says in vv. 18 and 22:

18 The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.  22 The LORD redeemeth the soul of his servants: and none of them that trust in him shall be desolate.

Here are the components of a salvific response to God.  God does the saving, and He saves those of a broken heart, a contrite spirit.  He redeems their souls and when they trust in Him, they will not be desolate.Trusting God means not trusting one’s own self.  The Lord redeeming means his not redeeming himself.  The offering that God accepts is not his own works, but as David writes in Psalm 51:17:

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

This is the soul that God will redeem, the one offered to Him, broken and contrite.  He can though depend on God for salvation.  “O taste and see that the LORD is good” (Psalm 34:8).

Jesus is the mighty god, but not the Almighty God, says the Watchtower Society or Jehovah’s Witnesses

According to the Watchtower Society or “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” “Jesus is the mighty god, but not the Almighty God!” This is their explanation for Isaiah 9:6:

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

There is a severe problem with their explanation of this passage–namely, that every other text with the Hebrew translated as “mighty God” (Hebrew ‘el gibbor) says that Jehovah is the Mighty God.  The complete list of texts in Hebrew where “the mighty God” is found are as follows:

Deut. 10:17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:
Is. 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Is. 10:21 The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.
Jer. 32:18 Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD of hosts, is his name,
Neh. 9:32 Now therefore, our God, the great, the mighty, and the terrible God, who keepest covenant and mercy, let not all the trouble seem little before thee, that hath come upon us, on our kings, on our princes, and on our priests, and on our prophets, and on our fathers, and on all thy people, since the time of the kings of Assyria unto this day.

So in Deuteronomy Jehovah is ‘el gibbor, “the mighty God.” In Isaiah 10:21–just one chapter after Isaiah 9:6–Jehovah is the Mighty God. In Jeremiah 32:18 Jehovah of hosts is the mighty God. In Nehemiah 9:32 Jehovah is the mighty God.

So is the mighty God in Isaiah 9:6 some sort of quasi-deity, a less-than Jehovah true god, as the Watchtower teaches, advocating a hierarchical form of polytheism? Or is ‘el gibbor a title for Jehovah–the Mighty God? The answer is obvious, but people in the Watchtower do not know it, because they do not know how to study the Bible. Even their leaders who give “talks” can have never done a word study in their lives. “Bible study” for them is reading the Bible in light of the Watchtower magazine and their website, not actually studying the Bible on its own terms.

Should we be surprised that the Watchtower admits that people who start studying the Bible on their own reject their cult and become Trinitarians?

“From time to time, there have arisen from among the ranks of Jehovah’s people those, who, like the original Satan, have adopted an independent, faultfinding attitude. … They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,’ they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom’s clergy were teaching 100 years ago[.]” (The Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1981, pgs. 28-29)

Learn more by reading Are You Worshipping Jehovah? here.

TR

How Is Alcohol Related to Worship?

Maybe the question of the title got your attention.  It sounds like that’s what I was trying to do, but I wasn’t.  Instead I jumped into the car and turned it to the 24/7 radio station of the biggest Calvary Chapel in our area of Oregon.  The son, who is now the senior pastor, was preaching on worship, a subject that is near and dear to me, as you readers know.  In the midst of his talk, he had his crowd turn to Ephesians 5:18-19, which read:

18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; 19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

He didn’t break down verse 18 very far, but he related being “sloshed,” a word he used twice to refer to being drunk.  He said that alcohol itself was fine, just not being drunk.  To start, that belies the grammar of the verse.  Look at it.  Speaking of the “wine,” Paul said, “wherein is excess.”  In other words, in the wine is excess, which is riotousness.  The “wine” itself isn’t innocent.  This is also how the Bible reads about alcohol or “wine” that can get someone drunk.  It must be alcoholic, so in it is excess or riotousness, which are both sinful.

The Calvary Chapel senior pastor then said that there is a kind of singing when someone is sloshed.  He compared to drunken revelry, and he said that was a contrast here.  One can imagine the pub where a group of men are staggering home off pitch and slurring a popular song, what today is called a drinking song.  I know this happens, but is this what Ephesians 5:18 is talking about?  No.  It really misses the point.

Being drunk is contrasted with being filled with the Spirit.  There are at least two points that Paul is making with this contrast and it does relate to worship.  One, drunkenness puts alcohol in control of someone.  He’s controlled by the alcohol.  The Greek words for “filled with” mean “be controlled by.”  The believer is commanded to be controlled by the Holy Spirit and not alcohol.  The alcohol is related to worship, but someone is never to be controlled by anyone or anything but the Holy Spirit.  That means in every area of life, which the next twenty something verses reveal.

The control of alcohol brings excess and riotousness.  The control of the Holy Spirit results in something else, what follows in the proceeding verses.  Alcohol really does control.  Someone can understand that.  With that understanding, come to the Holy Spirit and imagine His controlling instead.  Alcohol almost totally takes over with limited human control.  Holy Spirit control is almost total control with a background of human control.  A person is still doing something, but he’s controlled by Someone else as a whole, the Holy Spirit.

The second point of Paul is to relate to the false worship of Ephesus at the temple of Diana that the audience of the church at Ephesus would know.  In the base of the pillars were ornately carved grapes.  Drunkenness was part of the worship.  It would bring a state of ecstasy, which was confused with a kind of divine control.  This out of body type of experience of drunkenness gives the impression that someone is out of control, which he is, but that he is under the control of divine power.   He isn’t. It’s the alcohol.  Paul contrasts the false worship of Ephesus with the true worship of the true God.  It isn’t ecstatic, which unfortunately and ironically is the worship of these Calvary Chapels.

The rock music of the the CCM that even originated with the first Jesus’ movement of the first Calvary Chapel in Costa Mesa, California gave the impression of something spiritual occurring.  It wasn’t.  It was entirely fleshly, ecstatic, like the drunkenness of the worship of Diana.  Fleshly music brings a kind of ecstasy like that produced by alcohol that gives a counterfeit, false experience of spirituality.  It might be “a spirit,” but it isn’t the Holy Spirit.  It isn’t Holy and it isn’t Spiritual.  Spiritual worship does not arise from the flesh, from alcohol, or from rhythm.  These churches manipulate their listeners, giving them the wrong understanding of true spirituality.  It is a form of idolatry.

There is actually no contrast in the worship of the Calvary Chapels with the world’s temples.  They incorporate the ecstatic experience of the world into their so-called “worship.”  In so doing, their people develop a false imagination of God.  Their worship gives them a false god that does not have the same nature as the One and True God.

The local Calvary Chapel pastor compared drunken singing to the singing of Ephesians 5:19.  First, he approved of alcohol as long as someone isn’t “sloshed.”  He was saying this in a mocking tone, like he was embarrassed to be preaching about something bad related to alcohol.  He was approving of alcohol as long as it didn’t result in drunkenness.  In many people’s minds, being “sloshed” is a further level of drunkenness than the mere term drunken or legal drunkenness.  This is missing the teaching of the verse and is dangerous to his audience.

The worship of Ephesians 5:19 proceeds from the control of the Holy Spirit. This is not carnal or emotional.  It might result in emotions, but it is not emotional. Colossians 3:16 is a parallel passage and it compares Spirit filling to being controlled by the Words of Christ.  If someone is controlled by the Holy Spirit and the Word of God, the first way that will manifest itself is in true worship.

The participles of Ephesians 5:19 relate to being controlled by the Holy Spirit.  You can or will know if someone is saved and then filled with the Spirit, based upon your worship.  Worship comes first in this list of manifestations.  False worship is controlled by something other than the Holy Spirit.  It doesn’t have to be alcohol.  It could also be fleshly music that brings a closely related ecstasy to that occurring in the false worship in Ephesus.

What Is Illegal in Door-to-Door Evangelism in the United States?

Contrary to a typical criticism of door-to-door evangelism, I don’t believe that it’s the only way to evangelize.  There are many scriptural ways to preach the gospel besides door-to-door, and I would teach all of them.  However, I don’t believe a church can be obedient to the Bible without going door-to-door, because that’s the only way to preach the gospel to everyone, which God wants from us.  It is also seen in the example of Jesus and the Apostles.  Why would someone argue against that?

By my experience, which is a lot at this point, door-to-door specifically doesn’t see the most conversions.  That doesn’t mean don’t do it.  I can relate that many people can be saved through the contacts of a person who is saved through door-to-door, the contacts from one person being saved.  Those are still related to door-to-door.  But I digress from the point of my post.

The area of Oregon where we’re starting our church has many, many more “no soliciting” signs than the San Francisco Bay Area, where I started a church and then pastored it for thirty-three years.  I’m estimating at least five times more no soliciting signs here than there.  They are everywhere and they are also very inventive, long lists of things the person doesn’t want.

I’ve seen this sign at least five times:  “No Soliciting:  Seriously.  Don’t ring the bell.  Don’t make it awkward.”

I’ve been kicked out of two apartment complexes going door to door, and as I was leaving another neighborhood, someone told me I couldn’t do that and she would be taking it to the board.  Last week someone called me about a door-hanger, very insulting.  He said something like this:  “You obviously don’t read the Bible, so at least read my no-soliciting sign.”  And then he threatened me with physical harm if I came again.  I know it wasn’t me, but someone else in our new church, who had put the hanger on his door.

It’s a little worse in the coronavirus era, because people have the virus card that they carry very easily.  You’re there to preach the gospel, and they’re there to preach the dangers of the virus and the foolishness of not wearing the mask.  I don’t argue with them.  I let them spew forth their doctrine of physical safety, as I stand over ten feet away outdoors.  It is a message of self-righteousness, as they are preaching a message of physical salvation.

So I’ve had questions about the legality of door-to-door.  What is protected by the United Constitution?  People already don’t want to go door-to-door, so if there is the further layer of illegality, people will feel justified in not doing this thing that they don’t want to do.

In no necessary order, first, someone can legally kick us out of an apartment complex if it has a sign saying that they don’t allow evangelism or the like on their property.  That doesn’t mean you can’t evangelize there.  What it does mean is that the complex has the right to tell you to leave.  As long as they don’t tell you, you can keep doing it until they tell you.  When they tell you, understand that they have the right to kick you out.  It then becomes a trespassing situation.  Usually how it happens is that someone angrily calls management, complaining.  I’ve been told that it’s fine to visit someone who lives there, that you already know, but you can’t keep going cold turkey, once they tell you to stop.

Why go to an apartment complex when it might result in getting kicked out?  You already know the answer.  They need the gospel there, so keep trying until you get kicked out.  If you get kicked out, then you tried.  I would suggest put door hangers in apartment complexes where you’ve been kicked out.

Second, door hangers are not legally solicitation.  They are not.  If you see a no-solicitation sign on a door, put on a door hanger.  A door hanger has an official, legal title.  It is canvassing, and canvassing is protected by the Constitution.  It doesn’t say it in the Constitution, but rulings have been made by the Supreme Court that allow for canvassing.

For canvassing, there is a limitation.  If someone posts a “no trespassing” sign, then you could be charged with trespassing.  That’s also a ruling by the Supreme Court.  I never saw a no trespassing sign in town or the city in the San Francisco Bay Area.  I’ve seen again about five of those at least in Oregon.  I don’t go to a door with a no trespassing sign.

Three, is door-to-door evangelism solicitation?  Legally, it isn’t.  This statement was made in the decision, United States v. Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720 (1990):

Solicitation requires action by those who would respond: The individual solicited must decide whether or not to contribute (which itself might involve reading the solicitor’s literature or hearing his pitch), and then, having decided to do so, reach for a wallet, search it for money, write a check, or produce a credit card.  As residents of metropolitan areas know from daily experience, confrontation by a person asking for money disrupts passage and is more intrusive and intimidating than an encounter with a person giving out information. One need not ponder the contents of a leaflet or pamphlet in order mechanically to take it out of someone’s hand, but one must listen, comprehend, decide and act in order to respond to a solicitation.

Solicitation relates to a “contribution” legally.  The Supreme Court differentiated between the two in this recent decision.  In so doing, the Supreme Court is saying this is protected speech.

You could stand and argue with someone about the meaning of solicitation, but it’s going to be fruitless.  You would win in court.  It’s not you.  They probably mean you though, when they put up the sign.  For that reason, I honor the “no soliciting” sign to mean “no evangelism,” if it’s on an individual door.  I leave a tract or door hanger on the door and move on.  At the same time, I’ve expressed that I don’t care if you go ahead and knock on that door or ring that doorbell for evangelism.  I’ve done it many times.

What I’ve written here leaves plenty of opportunity for door to door evangelism. It’s saying that you can canvass everywhere, which means leaving the gospel on someone’s door.  The man who threatened me for a door hanger, I take him with a grain of salt.  He doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  Evangelism is not solicitation, so for sure canvassing isn’t solicitation.

New Christian Mutual Fund

I am very thankful for the Eventide family of mutual funds, for the reasons explained in my “God-honoring and Bible-based Christian mutual funds” post. If you do not have strong confidence that whatever you are invested in is not funding abortion, tobacco, alcohol, sexual perversion, and other evils, use the link on this page to get a complementary moral audit of your funds.

Eventide has a new fund called the “Exponential Technologies” fund (ticker: ETNEX, ETIEX, ETAEX, ETCEX. Most people should get ETNEX, if you have a lot of money you can use ETIEX.).  It works as: “A concentrated mutual fund representing our ‘best ideas’ for long-term capital appreciation in the information technology and communication services sectors as well as healthcare technology and device industries.”

Consider adding this new Eventide fund to your portfolio, in conjunction with what your financial advisor says (you can get a free consult with an organization like Fidelity.)

TR

The Command to Worship the LORD in the Beauty of Holiness

Without doubt, scripture teaches that worship of God must be regulated by what God says.  The point of this post comes from Psalm 29:2

Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.

I’ve seen this verse many times.  Many.  Yet, something occurred to me when I read it in my Bible reading this year that really struck me.  Since true worship of God is regulated by scripture, then worship should be regulated especially by this verse.  There are not many verses as stark as this one on worship of the LORD.  The teaching is also repeated three times.  It’s not a stand alone.

1 Chronicles 16:29, “Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come before him: worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.”
Psalm 96:9, “O worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness: fear before him, all the earth.”
I’ve written many times on the regulative principle of worship.  Scripture shows exclusively and through numerous examples that worship must be regulated by God’s Word.  Silence is not permission.  In this case, scripture says something.I’ve also written a lot about beauty.  It is among the topics or doctrines about which I’ve written the most (it is under “B” in my index).  I’ve also written about it recently in a three part series on the throne room of God (part onepart twopart three).  I’ve mainly written about beauty as one of the transcendentals, especially related to apostasy.  I don’t take any of that back, but in this case, I want to talk about how “beauty” relates to the regulation of worship according to this verse and the others like it.One point that caught my attention when reading Psalm 29 in my trip through psalms is the command.  It’s not just what scripture teaches on worship.  This is a commanded aspect of worship.  How many of those are there?  “Worship” as a verb is imperative.  It’s not that worship itself is imperative, which it is — “worship the LORD.”  Everyone knows that’s an imperative.  The imperative is that the LORD is worshiped in the beauty of holiness.  “The beauty of holiness” is a requirement in acceptable worship.I want to reiterate this point.  God does not accept worship that is not in the beauty of holiness.  He rejects it.  This is part of the regulative principle, but it’s more than that.  All worship must be in the beauty of holiness.  If not, it isn’t worship.  If what someone calls “worship” is not in the beauty of holiness, then it isn’t worship.Almost all evangelical and now even fundamentalist worship is not in the beauty of holiness.  Evangelicals and fundamentalists as a whole are not worshiping God.  I know that means that they are doing something else, worshiping themselves, and that sounds tough or seemingly impossible, but it is true.  They are disobeying this command and, therefore, offering God something that is against His nature.  It is more than this, which brings me to the second point that caught my attention.A second point is that beauty is assumed in the verse.  It is implied that the reader knows what beauty of holiness is.  It is obvious.  It cannot be obeyed if it cannot be understood.  A modern audience most of the time does not understand the beauty of holiness.  It is a completely foreign concept.  Yet, everyone is still required to worship God in the beauty of holiness.  This is an ignored requirement.  God commands it, and the apparent worshipers say, “Meh. Nope.  Gonna do what I want instead.”It’s not just what I’ve written so far. The so-called worshipers today don’t want to be critiqued for not worshiping God in the beauty of holiness.  They are angry if you do.  They want to treat it as not being able to be understood, a tertiary matter.  Even though beauty of holiness is non-optional, it is rejected by evangelicals and most fundamentalists.  One could say that the one thing required is the one thing the most offensive to evangelical and fundamentalist sensibility.  It must not be a part of their worship.  What is this all about?The main apostasy of the age in which we live is that the things of God are conformed to the world.  They must be accepted.  Evangelical and fundamentalists success, which amounts to getting bigger and having bigger budgets or at least translating into tangible results, even if they are fraudulent, requires elimination of beauty of holiness.  It has to at least be redefined and dumbed down until it isn’t even what it is.  This is all to be conformed to man, to his lust, which is what makes these churches popular.  Of course, it all leads to or just is false worship.  Their people don’t have the same God in their imaginations. That’s been ruined by their unwillingness to conform to what scripture says.There are many of these in scripture, but “beauty” is self-evident.  We already know it.  If we don’t know it, it’s not a knowledge problem, but a rebellion one.  The rebellion proceeds out of lust.  Beauty though is something that men can know like they can know what “corrupt communication” is and what “the attire of a harlot” is.  Ignorance is not a legitimate excuse.  It won’t be accepted by God.Since worship must be in the beauty of his holiness, then beauty is objective.  It can’t be subjective. That would be to command, worship the LORD in the whatever you want beauty of holiness to be.  People don’t want to be judged on beauty, because they want their own taste.You’re going to spend eternity somewhere, and that relates to what God knows about what you’re doing.  You should think seriously about whether He will be pleased.  Nothing that “you like” will be in God’s kingdom or in the eternal state, and that’s what you want to highlight in this life — what’s going to be in the next.  If you don’t care, then you should check whether you will be there or not, or whether the actual God of the Bible is your God.When readers see the title of this post, I suggest most just move on.  They don’t care.  They want something “practical.”  There is nothing more practical than God being worshiped.  If that is not your practice, you are not pleasing God, the whole purpose of your existence.  This is not a “controversial issue.”  People have already moved on.  They just smirk and say, “He’s one of those.”  Pause a moment.  If you don’t obey this command, you are not worshiping God.  That means you are not a “true worshiper of God” (John 4:23-24).Okay, so you may ask, “What is the beauty of holiness”?  “Holiness” is the perfections of God’s nature.  Beauty corresponds to or parallels with the manifestation or revelation of the character of God.  Much has been written on this through the centuries to the point where the church has agreed what this is.  Just because modernism and post-modernism has left it and even rejected it doesn’t mean that it isn’t still true.  Beauty is in accordance with the nature of God.  It cannot clash with who He is, and 90 to 100 percent of evangelical and fundamentalist worship does.Evangelical worship is ugly.  It is worldly.  It is carnal.  That’s what evangelicals like about their worship.  They disobey this command:  worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.  They are not worshiping the LORD.

Psalms 14 and 19 in Preaching the Gospel

How could someone read Psalm 14 and think that salvation is by works?  Read verses 1-4:

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. 2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. 3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. 4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

I ask you to consider how conclusive these verses are.  They are speaking about everyone, anyone who has ever lived.  The LORD is looking down from heaven, and He doesn’t miss anything.  He says that every person is corrupt, has done abominable works, does not good, does not seek God, has gone aside, and is filthy.   He does all these things and then he does not call upon the name of the Lord.  He is helpless to live a righteous life and yet he still does not call upon the name of the Lord, whom he needs so that he can be righteous.  He’s not depending on God, because he’s proud.

Men can’t save themselves.  It’s not just that they’re sinners, but they could never sustain a righteous life by doing good works.  They do not do good works.  This is reality for mankind.  God knows this better than anyone.  Whatever a man may say about himself, these verses are the truth.  A person is lying to himself if he thinks he can be saved by works.  He’ll never succeed, because this psalm is who he is.

The Apostle Paul refers to this psalm in Romans 3 with his treatise on sinfulness of man.  Many of you reading know that it says this in verses 10-12:

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Then you also know that he writes the following in verse 23:

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

And from that a man should conclude according to verse 28:

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

The point of that argument by Paul is so that men will submit to justification by faith alone and not by works.  If you can’t do good works and you aren’t righteous, then you can’t be saved by works.  You should conclude that salvation is by grace through faith and not by works.  You should believe in Jesus Christ to receive His righteousness by faith, which is to have His righteousness imputed to you and the forgiveness of your sins.

Psalm 14 is quite a psalm to be singing.  This is a song to be sung to God expressing the truth of man’s sinfulness.  God wants to hear that men agree.  He’s praised by this truth.  It assumes that men need God.

The Old Testament doesn’t teach salvation by works.  It teaches that men are sinners and they need God for forgiveness of sins and righteousness.

What about Psalm 19?  It says that from God’s creation alone men know God.  These are statements of reality.  God knows.  He says:

Verse 1a:  The heavens declare the glory of God.

Verse 1b:  The firmament showeth his handiwork.

Verse 2a:  Day unto day uttereth speech.

Verse 2b:  Night unto night sheweth knowledge.

Verse 3:  There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.

Verse 4:  Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.

All of these are sheer statements of fact.  They also state the truth of what man knows.  From the standpoint of knowledge, he is without excuse.  Everyone living in this world knows God through the declaration of the heavens — the handiwork of the firmament, the speech uttered by the day, and the knowledge shown through the night.  The day speaks through the sun, as seen in verses 4-6:

4 In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 6 His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

“Them” in verse 4 refers to “heavens” in verse 1.  The word “their” all the way through (vv. 3, 4) refers to “heavens.”  Poetic language describes how the heavens talk, specifically through the sun.  The heavens during the day are a tabernacle for the sun, which shows itself in all the helpful, beautiful, and awesome ways explained.

A beauty of the revelation of the heavens is that it transcends a particular speech.  It can be heard in every speech, every language.  An Italian, Russian, Hispanic, or English person hears the voice of the heavens from God without exception of place.  This speech goes out to the whole earth and to the end of the world.

When we evangelize, we should learn to use and then use creation as a basis of introducing the God of the Bible to an unbeliever.  He already knows.  This revelation has reached him.  We should assume that.  People that haven’t even read the Bible, which are more than ever, still know God and through His creation, the heavens.

Furthermore, scripture, also the revelation of God, called “the law of the LORD,” “converts the soul” (verse 7).  For salvation, the soul needs to be converted.  It is stained and corrupted by sin.

James 1:25 calls the law, “the perfect law.”  The idea of “perfect” isn’t contrasting with “imperfect,” but with “incompletion.”  The law of the LORD is complete or sufficient.  It lacks nothing, it has everything in it that anyone would need.  Conversion of the soul is the total transformation of it.

The first designation of the Word of God in Psalm 19 is the law of the LORD.  The usage of that term refers to all of the Word of God, not just the first five books of the Bible or just the parts that are laws.  The Hebrew word for “law, torah, means instruction, direction, or doctrine.  It reminds me of 2 Timothy 3:15, which says that the “holy scriptures,” referring to the Old Testament, are able to make a child wise unto salvation.

The LORD’s law instructs man sufficiently for his soul to be converted, which is to be restored.  It has been ruined by sin and it can be restored to moral rightness before God.  It makes sense that the “law of the LORD” isn’t just the Mosaic law, which in itself wouldn’t convert the soul, even though it has an important part according to the Apostle Paul, who in Galatians (3:24-25) says it is a schoolmaster to bring someone to faith in Christ.  The instruction of the LORD, which is His Word, is powerful to save, specifically the Gospel (Romans 1:16).

Psalm 19 says that salvation is the conversion of the soul.  In the Old Testament, the soul is nephesh and in the New Testament, psuche.  Jesus said (Luke 9:24) that to save one’s life (psuche, soul), someone must lose his life (psuche, soul).  He’s got to give up his soul.  He gives it to God and God restores it using scripture.  This is the sanctification of the truth, the Word of God, that God uses in salvation.  The conversion of the soul is the transformation of a life, where the person becomes a “new creature” (2 Corinthians 5:17).  Peter calls this the knowledge of Jesus Christ through which someone becomes a partaker of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:2-4).  After the conversion of the soul, the sinner has a new nature, a divine nature, and is returned morally to the image in which God created him.  He now has the ability not to sin.

Someone might consider the teachings of Psalms 14 and 19 to be New Testament concepts.  No, they are biblical concepts of salvation, which is the same in the Old Testament as it is in the New.  They can be used in preaching the gospel.

KJV margin vs Ruckmanisim

The original edition of the King James Bible had marginal notes (see the replica of the original 1611 in the Bibliology section here). These marginal notes, which are still reprinted in the Trinitarian Bible Society and Cambridge printings of the KJV, as well as being available in electronic versions such as for Accordance Bible Software, reject the Ruckmanite ideas that the KJV is superior to the original language text, that study of Greek and Hebrew should not be undertaken, and similar foolishness. For example:

The note on Matthew 5:15 contains the phrase: “the word in the original signifieth.” Oops, I thought you weren’t supposed to look at the original. See also Mark 4:21, etc.

The note on Mark 7:4 reads: “in the Original, with the fist,” supplying information that one would not readily understand by just looking at the English text. This is a no-no with Ruckmanites.

The note on Mark 13:8 reads: “The word in the original, importeth, the pains of a woman in travail,” again supplying additional information not obvious from the English text alone.

There are numbers of other notes like this. If you are a real King James Bible 1611 person, then you need to be in favor of studying Greek and Hebrew and helping the saints understand God’s Word better by referring to the original languages. If you are against study and reference to the original languages, you are not a 1611 KJV person. You may be a Ruckman2000, but you are not a KJV1611.

TR

Worship Is God’s Priority for Men: The Case of 2 Chronicles 26

Part One

Man isn’t going to make his way through life without sinning, but he can as a habit or lifestyle come to God by faith in worship of Him through the means and in the way prescribed by God.  2 Chronicles reiterates this.  In the midst of annals of especially various battles and conflicts with other nations, worship of God surfaces again and again.

Uzziah became king of Judah.  2 Chronicles 26 says “he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord” (v. 4).  He “sought God” (v. 5).  Verse 15 says, “he was marvelously helped, till he was strong.”  The next verse (16) says:

But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up to his destruction: for he transgressed against the LORD his God, and went into the temple of the LORD to burn incense upon the altar of incense.

I think we should assume that “being strong” in this sense means that he was so strong that it went to his head.  It’s the opposite of 2 Corinthians 12:10, the Apostle Paul, “for when I am weak, then am I strong.”  The strength comes from the acknowledgment of weakness.  Uzziah’s strength came from above and he didn’t recognize that, so he was really weak, the opposite of what Paul talked about.  I think you get it.

So.  “His heart was lifted up to his destruction.”  Destruction sounds serious.  That isn’t successful, being destroyed.  What caused that?  The strength that didn’t come from Uzziah, but he was considering it to be his strength, lifted up his heart, so that he did something that merited destruction.  Another layer is that Uzziah “transgressed against the LORD his God.”  Everyone transgresses against God, and it doesn’t result in destruction.  What did result in destruction?  This verse states it very plain.

He “went into the temple of the LORD to burn incense upon the altar of incense.”  Well, is it wrong to burn incense at the altar of incense?  No.  It wasn’t wrong.  So why did that result in destruction?  Just because something isn’t wrong doesn’t mean that it is right.  Worship is regulated by what God says, not by what He doesn’t say.  God designated the priests to burn incense on the altar of incense.  When Uzziah did it instead, this was according to God “to his destruction.”  God does not want innovation in worship.  He wants exactly what He said that He wants.

The next few verses read:

17 And Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him fourscore priests of the LORD, that were valiant men: 18 And they withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the LORD, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honour from the LORD God.

I guess you could call this an intervention.  When someone violates biblical worship, it must be stopped and other people should involve themselves in stopping it.  In this case, it’s someone in authority, but the worship of God is more important than his office.  They couldn’t just “agree to disagree.” They had to do something about it.

Uzziah thought he was participating in an honorable activity, something an honor for him to do, burn incense to God.  He might have felt good about it.  Azariah and 80 other priests brought that to his attention, probably risking their lives to do so even as verse 17 calls them “valiant men.”  It took guts for them to perform this intervention and to stop Uzziah from doing this.

People offered incense to God.  It was permissible for them to offer it, but it wasn’t permissible for just anyone to do this.  They had to be ordained and qualified people to do it.  They were consecrated to do so, or in other words, they were set apart to do so, fulfilling the scriptural requirements.  Others were not permitted to do it.

Silence wasn’t permission.  This is very often where worship goes off the rails.  If scripture doesn’t say it’s wrong, then someone is at liberty to do it.  God didn’t tell Cain he couldn’t bring fruits and vegetables.  That didn’t mean that bringing fruits and vegetables was right.

Today professing Christians, including leaders, say that a church shouldn’t stress over methods.  It’s not worth being strict, onerous, or intolerable over methods.  That’s not how scripture reads and especially when it comes to worship.  Believers through the centuries observed that all worship must be regulated by scripture, including in its methodology.  This is the regulative principle of worship.  This text in 2 Chronicles 26 is further evidence of this.

Why are so many men, 81 of them, needed to stop one man from practicing false worship?  I have noticed through the years, that when men are not functioning based on scripture, they are operating based on something else mostly related to their feelings.  What they are doing is closely related to their own personal opinions.  It’s pride.  When someone crosses someone in a personal way and against their emotions or feelings, they react in an emotional way and even a violent way.  It’s not an easy reaction.  It can be difficult to deal with.

Consider what occurs in the next two verses:

19 Then Uzziah was wroth, and had a censer in his hand to burn incense: and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the LORD, from beside the incense altar. 20 And Azariah the chief priest, and all the priests, looked upon him, and, behold, he was leprous in his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea, himself hasted also to go out, because the LORD had smitten him.

Uzziah is wroth.  Like I said, false worship is personal and emotional.  I’ve talked to many people about salvation and obedience to the Lord.  They are not surely saved and they are not living obedient lives.  They are interested though in the kind of music we have in our church.  They’ve got to have it.  If they don’t have it, that’s enough not to come to our church.  A lot of you reading know what I’m talking about.  The music is about them, their feelings, their entertainment.  It’s emotional and personal.Biblical worship is faithful worship.  It is true to scripture.  It wants what God wants regardless of feelings and personal opinions.  They key is to give God what He wants, which centers on the mind and the will, not the emotions.  The feelings are a byproduct, feeling good about giving God what He wants in worship, because He will be pleased.The punishment for Uzziah for false worship and then not repenting of false worship was immediate leprosy.   This was a slow death sentence.   God wants true worshipers.  The alternative is bad.

Worship Is God’s Priority for Men: The Case of 2 Chronicles 25

The impression from an overview of scripture is that worship is God’s priority for men.  Jesus said to the woman at the well, God is seeking for true worshipers (John 4:23).  Jesus said this.  David was a man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14).  What was David’s priority?  The worship of God.  1 Chronicles 25:14-16 provide another example:

14 Now it came to pass, after that Amaziah was come from the slaughter of the Edomites, that he brought the gods of the children of Seir, and set them up to be his gods, and bowed down himself before them, and burned incense unto them. 15 Wherefore the anger of the LORD was kindled against Amaziah, and he sent unto him a prophet, which said unto him, Why hast thou sought after the gods of the people, which could not deliver their own people out of thine hand? 16 And it came to pass, as he talked with him, that the king said unto him, Art thou made of the king’s counsel? forbear; why shouldest thou be smitten? Then the prophet forbare, and said, I know that God hath determined to destroy thee, because thou hast done this, and hast not hearkened unto my counsel

Amaziah, king of Judah, conquered the Edomites based on a prophecy from God.  God gave his mercenary army the victory over Edom, which had rebelled against his great-grandfather, Jehoram (verse 14).  He obeyed God in slaughtering the Edomites.  However, as you can read above, he brought Edom’s gods and bowed down to them and burned incense to them.  How did God react to that?

God’s anger was kindled against Amaziah, because of the false worship.  There’s more.  God was the one who delivered the Edomites, and these new gods could not deliver them.  So, God sent a prophet to confront Amaziah.

False worship doesn’t make any sense.  God gives every good thing and yet people worship another god and in numbers of different ways.  What is it?  It doesn’t explain the insanity of this, but we know it still occurs.  The true God is not worshiped in a true way.  He’s ignored.  He’s refused.  What causes men to choose a different god or worship the true God in a way He would never accept?  Why do they do it?

Maybe it doesn’t matter why.  Maybe all that matters is that they do it.  In the end, the judgment will come for what, but why still matters.  It doesn’t say, but I think we know.  We’re supposed to know.  God gives everyone every good thing, but God expects something from His worshipers.  False gods don’t have the same expectations as God.  It’s like doctor shopping.  You shop for the god of your choice and have him be your god, and then you get what you want.

Another avenue today is to keep the God of the Bible but conform Him so much to your own preferences and your own style, that He’s not even the same God.  He’s god, not God.  That’s all over “evangelicalism.”  People are important to evangelicalism, and evangelicalism’s god conforms to people.  That’s who he is.

The wrong worship and the wrong god merge into one another.  They become indistinguishable at some point.  Keeping the same “God” is just a masquerade.  And then people are so self-deceived, they just don’t know anymore.  God knows and He’s angry.

In many ways, people again in a self-deceived way are thinking they can fool God.  He won’t know.  Or He’ll understand and accept.  2 Peter describes apostasy and in the most rudimentary way, it is not wanting accountability or authority.  This does challenge the goodness of God and redefines goodness.  Goodness becomes the object of man’s lust, and man doesn’t want a God who doesn’t give him what he wants.  Reader, God knows.  You won’t get away with it.  His worship is His priority.

God is angry with false worship as described in the previous four paragraphs.  On the other hand, someone who prioritizes that worship, as flawed even as he may be personally, is a man after God’s own heart.  He prioritizes the true worship of God.  That doesn’t excuse His flaws, but it’s helpful to know God’s priority.

Amaziah’s worship story is an amazing one.  Do you agree?  But let’s move on.

God sends a prophet to warn about false worship.  True prophets warn against false worship, preach true worship.  Practical, successful living matters to God, but worship is the priority.  Today that would be to worship the right God the right way, which is in His church, regulated by scripture.  Church growth is not the priority, except for more true worshipers.  If there isn’t true worship at all, God doesn’t want church growth.  He wants church disappearance or elimination.

The message from God through the prophet is not to seek after other gods.  Don’t seek them in whatever way anyone may seek them.  On the other hand, seek the true God.  People don’t know Him, because they don’t seek Him.  He must be sought to be known.  This relates to a lot about believing the Lord.  He is available and can be known, but we must seek Him.  Sure, we can’t seek Him without His seeking us, but we must seek Him.  It’s crucial.

The first half of verse 16 accounts of the threat by Amaziah to the prophet.  That sounds serious, threatening someone who impedes your false worship.  I’ve stood at the door arguing about worship for hours.  A lot of people would say, let it go.  It’s not important, the gospel is important.  Except for the gospel is about worship (see John 4:23 again).

When doing spiritual warfare with someone about worship, it is emotional.  People don’t want their worship rejected.  If it is, something isn’t wrong with them, the false worshipers, it’s you the prophet.  It was so serious for Amaziah that he threatened the prophet in one of the most mafia like threats in scripture.   There were two components.  First, there was a veiled threat of his job as the king’s counsel, a job he would have lost anyway if, second, he was killed by Amaziah.

I want to emphasize that false worshipers want to defend their false worship.  I contend that it’s not about their god.  It’s about them.  They want what they want, and their god is allowing it.  God gave the victory.  He deserved to be worshiped, but whatever the gods of Edom offered Amaziah, he preferred it.

Not allowing the false worship is like taking food from an animal.  I’ve found this to be the reaction.  The false worshiper attacks the prophet to keep the worship.  I’ve experienced dozens of personal attacks in similar situations with people angry over the challenge of their worship.  Cain is an early example in scripture, challenging God and killing his brother over this same issue.

The prophet addressed both threats in an economy of words and in reverse order.  Getting straight to the point, God is going to destroy you, implying that you are not going to destroy me.  Second, you didn’t listen to my counsel anyway, so you really can’t threaten me with my job.  The prophet stood up to the false worshiper and his false worship.  He did not back off.  This is God’s will, to confront false worship.

Modern evangelicalism and fundamentalism attack those who confront false worship.  If you are reading this and you’re one of them, you’re probably defending your attacks with bad arguments.  They call it a tertiary issue.  You will be canceled by them for confronting false worship.  Love is love after all according to the leftish value list.  Love would accommodate false worship.  God will kill over it.  The prophet actually was saving Amaziah’s life.  That is actual love, not the toleration of the leftist values now foremost in evangelicalism and fundamentalism.  I face those values every week and almost every day.

2 Chronicles 25 is another case for worship as God’s priority for men.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives