“I just dunno’”
What don’t you know?
“Is there such a thing as a ‘hopeless person?’”
Did you say “homeless” or “hopeless?”
“You mean that a person could go so far in denying Christ that there is no hope for him?”
Well, do you remember Jesus’ words about the unforgiveable sin?
“Oh. Yeah, I suppose such a person is without hope.”
Can’t read it any other way; can you?
People think that theology is dry and academic.
“I’ll admit that I’ve often thought so.”
Tell my why.
“All of those ‘–ologies’ at the end of long, abstract words, for one thing, you know . . . “
Hmmm. I guess some do think that way about theology—had enough of that sort of thing in school, and glad to get away from it, eh?
“Something like that.”
Do you think the same way about the Bible?
“No. It wasn’t written that way.”
Well, you’re certainly right about that. Let me ask you another question . . .
Here it is: When Luther remarked about Psalm 23: 1, “Thank God for personal pronouns!” does that strike you differently?
Miraculous signs that some today claim to be able to perform are false. There were only twelve apostles (Paul, not Matthias was God’s choice—but that’s a blog for another time). And there was a way of identifying them—see 2 Corinthians 12:12:
The signs of the true apostles were performed among you with great patience, by signs, by wonders and by supernatural works.
The miracles (literally, “powerful works”) created wonder in those who beheld them and, thereby became the signs (evidence) that the one doing them was an apostle.
Jonathan Edwards made many interesting comments, one of which was that
God puts a final and fatal end to the typical state of the Jews, and all things appertaining to it, blots out all of those types at once, and wipes them clean away, and poured the utmost contempt upon them, and covered them with the most dreadful darkness, and destroyed, as by one great fatal, and final blow that whole typical world . . .
That’s strong language!
But why would he say such things?
Because not only is it true, but it is the most powerful statement I know of the truth that Jesus and his spiritual church constitute the true reality to which the types and shadows pointed, and that to attempt to reconstruct any of them in any form today is not only to insult Him, but to hide the reality in the shadows.
Christian, do you know that God calls you a “Jew?”
Perhaps you’ve never thought much about it, but what does it mean to be a Jew? According to Romans 2:29, being a Jew is an inward thing, and all who have trusted Christ are the true Jews in God’s sight. Take a look at the passage sometime.
Perhaps as vividly as any other verse, this teaches that God looks at the inner person, when evaluating people, rather than the outer.
In the Bible, the distinction is that the word, “Jew” eventually became a religious term, it never was an ethnic one. Originally, the word “Jew” was a corruption of “Judah.” The ethnic term isn’t “Jew,” as many think, but the ethnic word is “Hebrew.” So a Jew is one who is a Jew inwardly, Paul (himself, a Hebrew) said.
What about transubstantiation? Were the bread and wine actually changed into the body and blood of Christ? Millions of people claim to believe they were. If it were true, it would be a continuous miracle—totally unlike any other in the Bible.
But consider the facts.
First, notice that Jesus said to eat and drink in remembrance of Him. What goes on at the supper has mnemonic value.
Secondly, He said that eating was a means of declaring (literally, “preaching”) His death until returns. There is not a whisper about the cannibalistic act of actually eating Him.
PREDICTION (non-inspired): By, or before, the year 2015 there will be a full-blown new liberalism growing out of the evangelicalism of today.
I don’t know what fancy flag it will sail under. But, doubtless, it will get one—possibly one that sounds intriguing so as to dupe unsuspecting conservative preachers into its ranks. That part I make no predictions about.
But, if I am anywhere near correct, the new liberalism will come. At the moment, it is growing rather impressively among many “scholars” who, it would seem, want to impress one another, and the liberals, with their wide range of thought—often so wide as to include many liberal tenets and exegetical processes within their ever-widening tent.
Paul was so upset that he didn’t bother to begin his letter to the Galatians with the usual salutation. Instead he jumped right into the fray with all four feet!
What could have upset him so greatly?
Simply this—people were leading the Galatian church(s) astray about the Gospel itself!
Now that’s enough to fire us all up when we see or hear of it happening. Right?
It’s windy today! You can hear the sound of the wind in the trees that are now leafing out.
Do you like to feel the wind in your hair, blowing it out of shape? Do you appreciate the chill that it adds to an already cold day, or the cooling effect on a hot one? Did you notice that bird trying to make headway against it? Or the one on a branch all puffed up?
The wind means so many different things. What it does depends upon too many variables to begin to mention. What I’m interested in today is whether or not the wind impresses you.
Every morning one of the guys down the hall in the dorm at the Reformed Episcopal Seminary which I attended would wake us up shouting, “Another day for work and play!” I can still hear him!
Well, he’s right! But I suspect today will be mostly work—and very little play (except as I write blogs).
At the WCF (Westminster Confession of Faith) training class last night we covered three sections, one of which was on Sanctification. During the discussion, we had the occasion to consider a modern unbiblical view in which the believer is said to have two natures—one all good; the other all bad, thus making the individual schizophrenic!