Free Psalm Singing Resources
In the section on ecclesiology on my website, I have a number of resources discussing psalm-singing. I hope you are in a church that obeys the command to “sing psalms” (James 5:13; Ephesians 5:18ff.) and that you also obey this command in your personal life and in your family worship. If you are in a position of church leadership, and you are not obeying God’s command to sing to Him the inspired psalms, why not start–now?
Crown and Covenant publishes conservative psalm-singing recordings. The large majority (but not all) of them are Biblically acceptable in their musical style. You can now stream the large majority of their music for free–for example, you can listen to them on YouTube here. It is a blessing to have these high-quality audio productions available for free.
Being glad for their psalm-singing is not an endorsement of their unscriptural Presbyterian theology.
–TR
The Generation Clash Symbolized by Meghan and Harry Versus Queen Elizabeth II
Less than a hundred years ago, one fraction of the world set itself to defend against an entirely different culture that wished to impose itself, and wipe the other out. This wasn’t the first time. Almost the entire globe participated in either attempting to change the world order, the dominant view, or keeping the older one. The world rejoiced when the emerging order was defeated. They continue to rejoice over this victory. Many hundreds of thousands died to keep the status quo.
Today you reader, myself, and the rest of the world are in another cultural battle, a clash of civilizations, which represent again two separate views of the world. One would like to do away with the other as much as the one in the middle of the twentieth century. This is not a military battle, more of a civil cold war, between two factions characterized by two generations. The consequences could be, however, as or even more serious.
The older generation itself is not pure in its representation of the source of the way of life, which it represents, but still stands in sharp contrast to the youthful one that pursues to replace it. This brings me to the comparison of Meghan and Harry to Queen Elizabeth II as a helpful illustration.
I don’t care about Oprah’s interview with Meghan and Harry. I didn’t watch it. I read chunks of the script though in various articles. I read that these two victims of great note were paid seven million dollars to help them in their new state of welfare minus their government support. I think you can be sure that, ala President Obama, they didn’t build this though. Everything they’re getting is based on a celebrity proceeding from their connection to what they’re attempting to crush.
Victimization sells to this generation. It’s even a marketing strategy. You know the power of victimhood when the privileged see it as a step up for them. Yet, as the world falls apart under its type of influence, people will be looking to complain to someone about why they’ve got obvious problems, but there won’t be enough non-victims to listen. Everyone will have to rush as far to the bottom as they can, but will anybody be left to care? It will just be a victim competition. The worst victims are those who must proceed from this ooze, the children of the victims. Maybe we can find out that evolution is true and an advanced new species will climb out. You all know that won’t be true.
What’s happening does remind me of the trajectory of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel. I’ve just been reading them at high speed as part of getting through the Bible twice this year. It’s a very sad story as the generations erode into near oblivion. The only way the Southern kingdom, Judah, survives in a mutated form is by the grace of God, and it only survives. It doesn’t come close to thriving. The enemies of the nation don’t care that it’s inhabitants are victims. They welcome it. Their final note of victimhood is captivity. They are captives to a foreign power.
It seems pathetic and embarrassing, a shame, to admit instability and frailty to the world. The practice of past generations is to keep those revelations of personal doubt and mental anguish to one’s self. It is not appropriate to attempt to engender sympathy by complaining in public about undesirable treatment.
The British traditionally speak of a “stiff upper lip” and “keep calm and carry on and all that.” Their island has survived through many trials, yet Meghan and Harry present a combination of victimhood and identity politics set in contrast to and a threat to the self-sacrifice, duty, and a serious fortitude of Her Royal Highness. Someone called it a clash between old Britain and post-Diana new Britain. The loss of old Britain is obviously also self-inflicted as it has divorced itself from the basis of its former toughness and endurance. At one time, Britain was a Christian nation.
In the last century at least, Winston Churchill to me stands for old Britain and consider some of his statements:
Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm. If you’re looking for a secret ingredient for success, then stop looking. The only thing you need is perseverance, i.e. the ability to keep going no matter what.
A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
There is no time for ease and comfort. It is time to dare and endure.
The only guide to a man is his conscience; the only shield to his memory is the rectitude and sincerity of his actions. It is very imprudent to walk through life without this shield, because we are so often mocked with the failure of our hopes and the upsetting of our calculations; but with this shield, however the fates may play, we march always in the ranks of honor.
We shall draw from the heart of suffering itself the means of inspiration and survival.
Sure I am of this, that you have only to endure to conquer. You have only to persevere to save yourselves, and to save all those who rely upon you. You have only the right to go on, and at the end of the road, be it short or long, victory and honor will be found.
We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.
It was a generation in a sense that didn’t have time for whining. They would never take such feelings public. They would “carry on” in silence with a “stiff upper lip.” This is the generation from which the queen comes. Meghan and Harry call this being “trapped.”
Victimhood for the new generation is apparently a narrative that expresses authenticity. No one can question the pain that someone feels any more, so as long one has been sufficiently abused, he can say almost anything without question. It is his or her truth. It is a very cheap replacement for true accomplishment. Any challenge to that narrative is just further abuse. Others identify with the story, not to their betterment or to their strengthening, but unto their further self-pity. From this springs even more victims, who think they see in the embrace an opportunity.
Before coming back on the scene again as a leader, Winston Churchill experienced his so-called “Wilderness Years.” During that time, Churchill wrote his four volume history, Marlborough: His Life and Times. This wasn’t a ghost write. Churchill among other things wrote a monumental history and became then the best selling author in all of Britain. It was an intellectual and industrious task far beyond any modern politician. The thinking within that massive work prepared Churchill for what was to come. The danger for Britain from which John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, delivered the nation was akin to what it later faced from Germany.
What is left of Western Civilization no longer can swat away something so patently deceitful as seen in the testimonies of Meghan and Harry. In previous times, anyone would recognize these were not two victims, signing mega-million dollar deals with tech titans while ensconced behind the walls of a California mansion and wearing a $4,500 dress. They cry for privacy while they selectively reveal intimate secrets. The former generation would now recognize the shots fired by Meghan and Harry at the bow of old Britain, most likely preceded by hours of coaching and rehearsing to deliver the greatest possible harm, sinking it and sending it to complete oblivion.
Aspiring victims should pause to consider what winning this war will bring. It will leave a landscape so devastated that it will never return to its former self. It will only hope to pick at the flesh from the carcass it defeated to see if it might gain the sustenance necessary to escape from a world inhabited by a majority of victims.
A False Kind of “Unity” Sought by a Typical Evangelical
In the area in which I am evangelizing and starting a church, there are several congregations from the Calvary Chapel movement, which started around here in 1977 in the Rogue Valley. The first and biggest of these has its own radio station, which I listen to very often when I get in the car to go somewhere or do something. Listening the past few weeks, based on what I’m hearing, there’s at least a concern for unity in the church, because it is a constant theme from the two main teachers, a father and his son.
The son was talking about unity in the church and the trouble seemed to focus on a political divide in the church between Democrats and Republicans. I imagine it. There are two factions in the church, the young and Woke and then the older and conservative, which right now would be clashing more than ever. There is a wide chasm between these two and probably some anger. This ravine is so wide that the two can’t come together. A question should arise: how are they in the same church in the first place with such diversity of belief and practice? But they are. Now there’s the attempt to procure this unity with teaching. What would that teaching be?
Unity in scripture is the same belief and practice. Unity isn’t putting up with differences in doctrine. Some evangelical churches today have redefined biblical diversity. Diversity is when you have different genders, ethnicities, gifts, abilities, and socio-economic levels. They work together, but the togetherness is the doctrine and practice based on the truth of scripture. The new and counterfeit diversity is a diversity in doctrine and practice, so the unity is something also different. Evangelicals often celebrate the diversity of doctrine in a church and conflate it to a welcome diversity taught in scripture. In fact it’s just disunity being tolerated.
The unity of the Bible is what Jesus prayed for in John 17, which is the same unity as Jesus had with God the Father. This is perfect unity based on the truth. They don’t agree to disagree. That’s also reflected in every single passage on unity in the Bible, which are many. None of those passages differ and none of them teach what evangelicals say unity is. They are disunified with the unity passages.
If I were to offer one verse that provides the biblical teaching, I would provide 1 Corinthians 1:10:
Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment.
I’m not going to break it down. It’s self-explanatory. It’s almost redundant in its emphasis on what unity really is and in contradiction to how it is being perverted.
Why is unity defined so much in scripture? One, God wants it. Two, it’s going to be attacked and perverted. And it is.
So what is the perverted view that I heard on the radio, an attempt to conform two such divergent groups into one? He said that the one faction needed to see the other faction as its enemy. The Bible commands, love thy enemies. He said that when you treat an enemy with love, then the next thing you know, he won’t be an enemy any more. Then that person will be your neighbor. Then you just love your neighbor. He didn’t prove any of this assertion, but is it right? Or what’s wrong with it?
How does someone love his enemy? He doesn’t murder him, steal from him, and bear false witness against him. As much as possible he lives peaceably with him. He preaches the gospel to him.
Loving your enemies is not overlooking their false beliefs and practices. It is confronting them and rebuking them and finally separating from them. You can’t fellowship with false beliefs and practices. You can only reprove them (Ephesians 5:11). You don’t become friends or neighbors of an enemy by accepting his false belief and practice. You can’t keep enemies in a church. They have to become friends and that comes by alignment with the truth. If they are enemies because of doctrine and practice, which is what this evangelical leader is talking about, the false doctrine and belief must change.
What is being taught is that the false doctrine and practice must be tolerated. This is loving the enemy. “It’s okay fellow church member that you hold to false doctrine and practice.” This is disobedience to scripture, it isn’t unity, and it isn’t love. Toleration of sin isn’t unity. For much of evangelicalism, keeping together a coalition is more important than pleasing God.
“Q,” the Son of Man, and Christ’s Deity
The alleged document “Q,” according to critical or anti-supernaturalist scholars, underlies the New Testament Gospels. As explained in my study on the New Testament and archaeology, there is no reason to believe that “Q” ever existed. However, even if one granted, for the sake of argument, that “Q” did exist, it still provides evidence that Christ is Divine, for the Lord Jesus clearly identifies Himself as the Son of Man.In Daniel 7:13-14; the “service” the Son of Man receives is that which pertains only to Jehovah [see the other Biblical references to the Aramaic word pᵉlaḥ in: Daniel 3:12, 14, 17–18, 28; 6:16, 20; 7:14, 27; Ezra 7:24; the word means to “pay reverence to, serve (deity),” (Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977]) and is translated in the LXX as latreuo, the word for the service/worship of God]). Thus, when Christ claims to be the Son of Man, He is claiming a Divine title.According to the skeptical, anti-supernaturalist criteria for evaluating the authenticity of Christ’s sayings about Himself known as the principle of dissimilarity, sayings of Jesus are recognized by skeptical scholars as authentic when they disagree with what early Christianity taught and what the Judaism of the time taught. In other words, the Christians were not making up sayings of Jesus and putting them into His mouth if they themselves did not employ them. This is a foolish skeptical criterion, for the likelihood that the Christians would teach what Christ had taught them and so there would be tremendous overlap is only natural. However, if one accepts this criterion as true for the sake of argument, the “Son of Man” sayings by the Lord Jesus pass it. Skeptical scholars recognize that Jesus’ “Son of Man” sayings are attested to by multiple sources. As Gary Habermas points out, even though “Son of Man” is Jesus’ favorite self‐designation in the Gospels, none of the New Testament epistles attribute this title to Jesus even a single time. So skeptical scholars, using their own critera, should accept the legitimacy of the Son of Man sayings in the Gospels.The real Jesus of history is a supernatural one who claims He is God in the flesh, the Divine-human Son of Man predicted by Daniel the prophet. A “Jesus” who was just a good teacher is entirely absent from the pages of history. Thus, my question in my debate with Shabir Ally on the accuracy of the New Testament picture of Jesus (on YouTube here):If, for the sake of argument, I granted that “Q” existed, does not the fact that “Q” still specifies a Jesus who has the attributes of God (Q 10:22 cf. Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22), gives the Holy Spirit Divine status (Q 12:10; cf. Matthew 12:31; Mark 3:28-29; Luke 12:10), and who is the Divine Son of Man who shares Jehovah’s throne, glory, and worship[1] (Q 6:22-23; 7:34; 9:58; 11:30; 12:8-10; 17:22-23; cf. Matthew 8:20; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27–28; 17:9, 12, 22; 18:11; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37, 39, 44; 25:13, 31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10, 28; 8:31, 38; 9:9, 12, 31; 10:33, 45; 13:26, 34; 14:21, 41, 62; Luke 5:24; 6:5; 7:34; 9:22, 26, 44, 56, 58; 11:30; 12:8, 10, 40; 17:22, 24, 26, 30; 18:8, 31; 19:10; 21:27, 36; 22:22, 48, 69; 24:7; John 1:51; 3:13–14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Hebrews 2:6; Revelation 1:13; 14:14) show how impossible it is to reduce the Lord Jesus to the mere prophet or teacher affirmed in Islam and secular humanism, since even in the anti-supernaturalist myth “Q” Christ still is the God-Man?–TR
Four Thousand Praised the LORD with the Instruments Which I Made
In the midst of a variated list, 1 Chronicles 23:5 reads:
Moreover four thousand were porters; and four thousand praised the LORD with the instruments which I made, said David, to praise therewith.
1 Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise him in the firmament of his power. 2 Praise him for his mighty acts: praise him according to his excellent greatness. 3 Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: praise him with the psaltery and harp. 4 Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs. 5 Praise him upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals. 6 Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD.
Psalm 33:2, Praise the LORD with harp: sing unto him with the psaltery and an instrument of ten strings.Psalm 92:3, Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery; upon the harp with a solemn sound.Psalm 98:6, With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the LORD, the King.Psalm 144:9, I will sing a new song unto thee, O God: upon a psaltery and an instrument of ten strings will I sing praises unto thee.
For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps.
Are We Living in the Last Days? The Right Approach to Biblical Prophecy
The Bible is a prophetic book. That alone is an amazing statement, because it is the only prophetic book in the world, because it is the only one written by God. Prophecy has a lot of purposes, a major one being a validation that that the Bible is in fact the Word of God. As you open the New Testament, it is easy to see the importance of prophecy all over it. God wants us to take it seriously.
The first page of the New Testament in Matthew, a genealogy, is related to prophecy, because the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants are prophetic. The genealogy proves that Jesus is a fulfillment of those predictions. Then you get the Isaiah 7:14 prophecy that says that Jesus is a fulfillment of that. Then you have the magi setting off looking for the Messiah based upon what? Prophecy. Then there are four wondrous prophecies in four different geographical locations in the second half of Matthew 2 that confirm who Jesus is. Matthew 3 talks about John the Baptist, himself another fulfillment of prophecy.
When Peter preaches on the Day of Pentecost, almost every point he makes relies on prophecy. When the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs, what is that? It is a fulfillment of the prophecy of John the Baptist, Acts 1:5, which is repeated by Jesus before He ascends into heaven. When the unbelievers mock what’s happening in Acts, Peter defends it with what? Prophecy. He refers to Joel 2:28-32 in Acts 2:17-21 to kick off his sermon there, explaining to the audience what’s going on. He starts:
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. 16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God
It is such an unusual, outlying event, outside of the norm for comprehension, Peter makes the connection to the Old Testament. This gigantic crowd wasn’t all drunken. This is what Joel was talking about, and Peter says that what was occurring there on the Day of Pentecost was “in the last days.” Generally, when people say, “We’re in the last days,” they mean something different than what Peter says, so that becomes confusing. Peter’s usage of the last days is the correct usage and it’s what we should imitate.
We’re not waiting for the last days. We’re already in them. Peter was saying that he and his audience were in them. 1 John 2:18 says,
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
“Last days” or “last time,” which is the same terminology, is ironically a terminology from Old Testament prophecy. That’s what is supposed to get us up to speed is the Old Testament usage. Here are some places:
Isaiah 2:2, And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
Jeremiah 23:20, The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly.
Ezekiel 38:8, After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
Daniel 10:14, Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days.
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Cancel Culture and Religious Persecution
Everyone should cancel something. I remember canceling my subscription to Sports Illustrated when it started publishing the swimsuit issue. I understand the marketing aspect of that issue. Sports Illustrated can make more money with the issue than without, so they’re willing to lose the lesser number of subscribers for the greater number. Sports Illustrated could stay in business. This isn’t canceling Sports Illustrated. They stay in business. I’ve canceled it, because it’s the right thing to do.
Giving Food and Money to the Homeless
I was talking to a man this week who said he wanted to be in a church that gave feet to the love of Jesus, something like that. His example was that this church, which he joined, even though he didn’t like its doctrine, helped the homeless. The homeless is a relatively new term in the history of our country. Why are there so many who are homeless? Who are the homeless? What should churches do? What responsibility should they take?
We live in a day when it is important to understand what is “good” and what is really a “help.” Just because a man might say it’s good does not mean that it is, and just because he says it is a help does not mean that it is a help. The key is that we must be discerning. We must determine our answer to this question by means of the Word of God, and not by a societal norm.
Man is by nature deceived. At least forty times in the Bible we are warned about being deceived. Eve was deceived by Satan, and Satan is the great deceiver. The ways of man are the ways of death, and God tells us not to lean on our own understanding.
Help is alright. Scripture calls God a Helper (Hebrews 13:6). Eve was a help to Adam (Genesis 2:18). One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit that edify the church is “helps” (1 Corinthians 12:28). Also, God wants us to do good. The terminology, “do good,” is found 26 times in the Bible. However, in Isaiah 5:20, people will call evil good, and good evil. Someone can be deceived about what good is. In Romans 7:21, Paul says, “when I would do good, evil is present with me.” Just because someone says something is a help and it is good doesn’t meant that it is.
Proverbs 3:27 says, “Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it.” At the same time, 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 say, “21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.” Things must be proven as to whether they are good and not evil.
God is the definition of good. Seven times scripture says, “the Lord is good.” Psalm 52:1 says, “the goodness of God endureth continually.” Whatever God’s Word says about anything is good: any person or any situation.
For instance, one might think it is always good to pray for someone. 1 John 5:16 says, “If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.” God doesn’t want everyone prayed for. It’s not always good. It doesn’t always help.
Is benevolence always good? 1 Corinthians 13:3 shows that not if done for selfish reasons. Proverbs 11:4 shows that benevolence is not good if intended to make one righteous, because riches do not profit in the day of wrath. Is suffering itself bad? Genesis 50:20 says that with Joseph, God meant it to me for good. Is sickness bad? John 11:4 says that this sickness is to the glory of God. We can’t assume that all suffering and all sickness is bad. God uses sickness and suffering. It’s not always right to alleviate either.
When it comes to helping people, it’s not always good or always a help to give someone something. The lazy should not be given anything. Laziness is self-imposed bondage (Proverbs 12:24). Giving the lazy person something is to reward laziness, so that you get more laziness. The lazy are neglectful (Ecclesiastes 10:18) and unproductive (Matthew 25:26-30). God won’t give to the lazy and we should follow God.
Scripture shows that God brings famine on the wicked (Deuteronomy 28:15, 33, 38, 42, 51; Ezekiel 5:17, 30:12; Jeremiah 8:13). God doesn’t keep giving good crops to a nation that is wicked. The wicked people don’t learn not to be wicked by being wicked without repentance. God gets the attention through the famine, through the hunger. Feeding takes away the motive to turn to God. This principle can and should be applied to the individual as well. Paul wrote in 2 Thessalonians 3:10, “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.” You can tell whether someone is lazy or if he won’t work if he’s in the church. In the church, this is a matter of church discipline. Outside the church, you don’t know.
Hunger is a motivation to turn to God. David wrote in Psalm 37:25, “I have been young, and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread.” The alternative is also true. The unrighteous are forsaken and begging for bread. Should they be given bread without being righteous?
The welfare system of Israel in the Old Testament didn’t just give to people. When you read Ruth, you can see that Boaz left the corners of the field for this widow to reap. Even the two widows, Naomi and Ruth. This fits Leviticus 23:22, “And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.” Just giving food for no work is not only not taught in the Bible, but taught against. How about this? “I’ll give you a job.” But it’s not just that. If this person is not a good worker, should he or she stay employed, and should we reward him for not providing righteous labor? This would be rewarding wickedness.
All of the reasons that I’ve given above about giving food or money to the homeless relates to the priorities seen in scripture. 1 John 3:17 says, “But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?” This is seeing a “brother” in need. This isn’t seeing just anyone in need. Within the church, where the brothers are, there is accountability to why there is this need. Someone can ask, is it the direct result of sin? Are we rewarding the sin? Is it because of laziness? We can know that through the accountability of a church.
Even in the church, not everyone is taken care of. Not every widow would be taken care of by a church. Read 1 Timothy 5. The priority is that a family takes care of their own family members. When we give money to someone, when the family should be doing that, then the family is shirking that responsibility. 1 Timothy 5:8, “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”
The problems in a society continue because people do not obey God in what He says about these things. Matthew 4:4 gives a clue. “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” The opposite is the expectation to live, to survive without the Word of God.
Say this to a homeless person: “Come to our church, show that you love the Word of God, that you want God, that you want the grace of God, and the church will see that desire and will help you. God will help you.” See what the reaction is. James 4:6 says, “But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.” The humble get God’s grace. God resists the proud. God will send those who resist His grace to Hell. Will we make these homeless more comfortable in their pride? Is this is what God does?
The foolish have wasted opportunities (Proverbs 6:9,10) and brought poverty on themselves (Proverbs 10:4). This is the drug addict or the boozer. We first help them get saved. Jesus provided one meal in John 6, a very sensible, humble meal. Then He offered His audience the bread of life. They rejected. He didn’t keep feeding them. Matthew 28:19-20 says, “Teach all nations.” Make disciples. In the realm of help, making disciples is teaching someone to fish, so to speak, rather than just giving them fish. God wants followers. He wants people living for His kingdom. You don’t get to that goal by feeding them. You’ve got to expect them to follow first or you are not really helping them.
For the most part, this issue is living like God is right, trusting Him, believing what He says. It’s like when Saul offered the sacrifice and kept Agag and the animals alive in 1 Samuel 13. He had a better idea than God. There is a way that seems right to man (Proverbs 14:12). Someone may ask, “Don’t you want to feed the hungry?” The hungry will be fed forever in the kingdom and eternal state, and eternal satisfaction of hunger is more important than the temporal. Even on this earth, the real problem isn’t solved by giving food. It might not seem like it, but that is the easy way and the wrong way for reasons described already in this essay.
Most organizations that are about “feeding the hungry,” “giving to the poor,” and “housing the homeless” do not have scriptural quality control. They don’t care about the biblical principles. In most ways, they are proud that they are not scriptural or godly. They are not taking into consideration laziness, wickedness, what’s going on with the family, among other areas addressed above. They very often cannot because they are tied into a government that requires acceptance or toleration of the sin. Acceptance, association, and affiliation give accommodation. Sin is to be reproved and the institutions would not allow sin to be reproved (Ephesians 5:11). One of the ways they get more funds is through disobedience to what God said. The best someone can do for a society is do all he can do in a church without association with these organizations. Why do they not like the church? Why do they not like righteousness?
It’s good to become individually involved in the lives of other people in a biblical way, one-on-one. Do what Jesus did. Do what the apostles did. Help those people to help people in the same way, so that multiplication occurs.
Especially millennials want to be seen as “helping” the poor. They often promote themselves before others for doing so. I’m sure some, albeit few, are well-intentioned. It brings glory in this culture to be seen to care by giving money for temporal things. They know you won’t get credit for obeying God. That’s living by faith. They are walking by sight, not by faith. Many of them aren’t true believers themselves.
Everything I’m writing here is true. Someone isn’t doing good or helping by denying the truth. It’s also vanity. It’s a waste of time and energy and resources. God wants us to be good stewards, faithful and wise stewards (Luke 12:42).
How Does Natural Law Work in and for Evangelism of the Lost?
Romans 1:18-21 read:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
I’m assuming a lot of you readers know these verses. According to them though, based on what people know, they will be judged rightly by God, because what they know means that they are without excuse. At the same time, people are not going to experience the wrath of God’s judgment because of ignoring information, but because of ignoring law. When they knew God, they didn’t glorify Him as God and were not thankful unto Him. Glorifying God as God is represented by various prescriptions, which are laws. This knowledge isn’t a mere bunch of facts. Bare acknowledgement of God’s existence isn’t sufficient to avoid the wrath of God. The judgment and wrath of God is justice for disobeying natural law.
Natural law relates to the theological terminology, general revelation. “General” is general in audience, that is, everyone knows it, so everyone is responsible for these laws. Knowing God and glorifying Him as God in Romans 1 means knowing these laws to the extent that someone is responsible for obeying them. They relate to the revelation of God, so according to His nature. No one has an excuse for not knowing these. They’re natural to know. All men are responsible for them.
In my assessment, the natural laws are those most denied, and against which men are most rebellious. On the other hand, men like what they consider to be their natural rights, like what Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence mentions at the beginning:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
He uses the language, “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” “truths to be self-evident,” and “endowed by their Creator.” Natural laws are self-evident truths.
Men know natural laws. They’re natural to them, so to deny them, they are at their most rebellious. The Apostle Paul talks about some of them later in chapter 1. They rebel against God’s natural order, because it clashes with what they want. It’s natural that the woman is the weaker vessel, and women very often don’t want to hear that. The natural order of two parents and children obeying their parents is repulsive to children.
When people think of the Declaration, they especially think, “all men are created equal.” They focus on the word, “equal.” Most often, however, I’ve noticed that they ignore the first four words, “all men are created.” It is self-evident that “all men are created.” Equal, yes, but it is self-evident that man is created by God. To Jefferson, creation of man carried with it more than sheer existence. With God as Creator, He s also Lawgiver and then Judge.
I’ve found when evangelizing lost people that they will still act like they don’t know certain things. Since Romans 1 says they really do know, I assume they do. This is presuppositionalism. I presuppose people know what is natural to know. Many of those things people say they don’t know, they rely on for enjoying their lives, which is why Jefferson uses “Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.” People like those things and yet they act as though they’ve somehow received them by accident. This is the part in Romans 1:19, “who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” As many of you know, it means they suppress the truth. The way I put it is that the problem is not intellectual, but volitional.
Romans 1:18-22 assure what is already known by everyone. I’m saying, you know that everyone knows what Romans 1:18-22 say because those verses say they do. People can act like they don’t know, but you know that they do, so that you don’t believe that they don’t know. God says they do know, so they do know.
If someone is suppressing the truth, that means he knows and he is rebelling against what he knows. In evangelism, you expose the lost on his rebellion. How do you do that?
When I encounter someone who says he is a scientist, a professing atheist, too uncertain, or just not sure because he says he’s not gotten enough proof, I rely on natural law. I refer to a number of different examples. “When you look out there at the vast and intricate world, does that look like it all came about by accident?”
I haven’t found anyone who likes to be characterized as thinking or believing that everything came about by accident, but if this world isn’t an accident, then it is design. People know this is design. Scripture says, according to the way I like to put it, that they don’t want to have a boss. The Designer would be their Boss. They like having their own way, which you can read in the rest of Romans 1 and in 2 Peter. 2 Peter 3 says these scoffers are walking after their own lust.
I continue. “Everything out there is so complex. So many occurrences have to be going right at one time, that it is mathematically impossible to be an accident. It looks like design. Four or five hundred different circumstances need to be going right for us to even survive. If just one of those hundreds does not go exactly right, we couldn’t survive. This can’t be an accident. The human body itself is so complicated, the human eye, speech, the operation of the brain, the circulatory system, our heart beat, so many that have to be functioning in just a certain way at one time. And that’s just to survive.”
Romans 1:21 says, “Neither were thankful.” “So we breathe God’s air, eat the food that comes from a seed growing from the ground, enjoy all of the good things all around on this earth, use all of that, and then just ignore Him.” This is when you can turn to scripture to point rebellion out. “Romans 1 says that everyone already knows all this and rather than worship and serve the Creator, they serve the creature. It describes this as not being thankful, being unwilling to give the credit to God, because that acknowledgement would carry with it responsibility. Next chapter, Romans 2, says the goodness of God leads us to repentance.”
The statement of what people know, natural law, aligns with what is written by God in men’s hearts as a default position (Romans 2:15). Pointing out natural law strikes a cord in men’s hearts, their conscience then also bearing witness (v. 15). They feel guilty because of their ungratefulness.
Then I may say, “What we see occurring out in the world also aligns with the Bible. The history of the world reflects what we see there. There is a God, we are here because of Him, He has put us here for a particular purpose, we are responsible to Him, and we are going to meet Him someday. This is what the gospel is about. God is just, but He also loves us, and the good news is that He wants us to save us. However, we really do need to be saved.”
Since the problem is not an intellectual one, the solution is supernatural. The volition, the will of a person, must be dealt with scripture. The Bible is powerful (Hebrews 4:12) and a spiritual weapon to pull down the strongholds in people’s minds (2 Corinthians 10:4).
The approach I’m giving you is biblical. It’s what the Apostle Paul did in Acts 17. It doesn’t mean that it will result in your audience either listening or being converted, but it gives people an opportunity, which is what you want. It might be too late for most. You don’t know. More than ever, we’re living in an age in which natural law is a necessity in an evangelism approach.
Recent Comments