People are always looking for that "quick fix" for their lives: "All you have to do to find true happiness is steps 1, 2, and 3!" Unfortunately, the church has soaked up this harmful practice. Church attenders today, in America, are sadly drawn in by rhetoric that has little to do with the Bible in order to live "your best life now." What you really need is to know Jesus: who he is and what he did and why it's important.
I am so saddened when I talk to folks who show no interest in theology. Granted, theology has gotten a negative reputation as being something for academics and has little use outside the classroom. However, after reading John Stott's "The Cross of Christ," this couldn't be farther from the truth. Not understanding theology is what is keeping you suckling milk when the academics are chewing on hearty meat. Understanding theology helps us in our sanctification and strengthen and deepen our relationship with God.
It was surprising to me to find out most Christians do not know the real reason why Jesus died on the cross (I'm getting to the book soon, I just need to stand on this soapbox for a minute), and the answers we typically give are mostly erroneous. Yes, he loves us, but why the cross? If he simply had to die because he loves us, that seems shallow and superficial. No, God has a hatred for sin, seen in Romans 1:18: "For the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth." God's wrath is against sin. Therefore, to be justified, or declared not guilty, someone had to take the penalty for God's wrath. Therefore, the reason Jesus died on the cross was to satisfy (propitiation: see Romans 3:23) the Father's wrath against sin, the exchange being Jesus' righteousness for your sin.
How do we respond to this act of love? We fall down to our knees in worship! But we also consider the sin in our life. When we understand how much God hates sin, then we begin to hate sin. Our theology determines our methodology!
These are some of the truth's found in Stott's book. This is merely the surface however. This book is eye opening: it reveals what depth of love Jesus has for us, how much God hates sin, both of which are impossible to truly understand given a theology based on superficial presuppositions like "Christ died for YOU on the cross." This cheapens both Christ's death and Christianity. Stott's book has solidified in my mind the need to educate the layman in theology: it is not merely an academic exercise. Understanding the cross is crucial to a correct understanding of who Jesus is and without it, we perpetuate the Church's steady decline into irrelevance. This definitely deserves a second read because it is sometimes not easy to understand, but Stott presents such a sound argument with loads of evidence considering all the points (which can be confusing at times). I have learned much from Christ's experience on the cross and the subsequent response we as Christian should have when we discover such magnificent truths. I would recommend you pick up a copy to read for yourself!
“If we spoke less about God’s love and more about his holiness, more about his judgment, we should say much more when we did speak of his love.”
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Saturday, January 18, 2014
2 - George Washington, by Ron Chernow, 953 pages
Last Fall, I endeavored to read Ron Chernow's biography on one of the great father's of our nation, Alexander Hamilton. After enjoying learning about the formation of the United States (although I never finished the book), I quickly bought Chernow's "sequel," "Washington" based on none other than George Washington, General of the Continental Army and 1st President of the United States of America. It has taken me more than a year to get around reading it, and it took me more than a week to complete!
This was an equally thought-provoking and enjoyable book. Many mythologies about George Washington persist today, even though Chernow painstakingly (I can only imagine) researched over 130,000 correspondence letters, not to mention the plethora of works that been released since. No, Washington never did cut down a cherry tree and he never threw a silver dollar over the Potomac River. But what I did learn was more interesting than that anyway.
The book breaks down into 6 parts: The Frontiersman, The Planter, The General, The Statesman, The President, and The Legend. Among the most pertinent pieces of information I learned about Washington was in reference to his military escapades: tactically, he seems to be a flop, losing more battles than he won. However, his genius as General did not come from winning many battles, but from keeping the Continental Army together: with Congress broke and hardly any revenue coming in for the new Government (if you could call it that), paying the troops and keeping them became Washington's greatest threat. They were on 2 year contracts so as soon as he instilled the discipline needed to win campaigns with the British, they would be gone and Washington would have to start all over. One can only imagine the scene at the Valley Forge, where men with frostbitten and amputated limbs grew colder because there was an insufficient amount of coats and shoes to warm them from the elements. Later in the war, with the help of the French, Washington cornered General Cornwallis at Yorktown and "won" the Revolutionary War, one of the few battles he succeeded in the winning.
As a President, areas of Government that persist today found their genesis in Washington's 1st and 2nd term. Such ideologies that developed were: the growing discontent between the North and the South on all kinds of issues that included slavery, taxation, etc. (in addition, the South has traditionally voted vastly different than the North, an interesting tidbit that can trace itself back to colonial times), the rise of a predominantly 2 party system (the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist in Washington's time), the muckraking press that harassed Washington most brutally during his 2nd term, the development of Washington D.C. and relocating to Virginia from New York and Philadelphia (as Washington was the only President not to reside in the White House), among others.
But more than anything, the fact that through Washington's entire life, he was never power-hungry nor was he envious of rising to a higher position, but through humility and graciousness, passion but coolness, he relinquished control over the Continental Army at the end of the Revolution and he reluctantly became President after much coaxing. Such attributes are rare in the world and throughout history, but gave posterity to those after. The foundations that Washington set are numerous and cannot be recollected here, but I encourage you to read about him in this outstanding book, "Washington."
This was an equally thought-provoking and enjoyable book. Many mythologies about George Washington persist today, even though Chernow painstakingly (I can only imagine) researched over 130,000 correspondence letters, not to mention the plethora of works that been released since. No, Washington never did cut down a cherry tree and he never threw a silver dollar over the Potomac River. But what I did learn was more interesting than that anyway.
The book breaks down into 6 parts: The Frontiersman, The Planter, The General, The Statesman, The President, and The Legend. Among the most pertinent pieces of information I learned about Washington was in reference to his military escapades: tactically, he seems to be a flop, losing more battles than he won. However, his genius as General did not come from winning many battles, but from keeping the Continental Army together: with Congress broke and hardly any revenue coming in for the new Government (if you could call it that), paying the troops and keeping them became Washington's greatest threat. They were on 2 year contracts so as soon as he instilled the discipline needed to win campaigns with the British, they would be gone and Washington would have to start all over. One can only imagine the scene at the Valley Forge, where men with frostbitten and amputated limbs grew colder because there was an insufficient amount of coats and shoes to warm them from the elements. Later in the war, with the help of the French, Washington cornered General Cornwallis at Yorktown and "won" the Revolutionary War, one of the few battles he succeeded in the winning.
As a President, areas of Government that persist today found their genesis in Washington's 1st and 2nd term. Such ideologies that developed were: the growing discontent between the North and the South on all kinds of issues that included slavery, taxation, etc. (in addition, the South has traditionally voted vastly different than the North, an interesting tidbit that can trace itself back to colonial times), the rise of a predominantly 2 party system (the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist in Washington's time), the muckraking press that harassed Washington most brutally during his 2nd term, the development of Washington D.C. and relocating to Virginia from New York and Philadelphia (as Washington was the only President not to reside in the White House), among others.
But more than anything, the fact that through Washington's entire life, he was never power-hungry nor was he envious of rising to a higher position, but through humility and graciousness, passion but coolness, he relinquished control over the Continental Army at the end of the Revolution and he reluctantly became President after much coaxing. Such attributes are rare in the world and throughout history, but gave posterity to those after. The foundations that Washington set are numerous and cannot be recollected here, but I encourage you to read about him in this outstanding book, "Washington."
Monday, January 6, 2014
1 - "Strange Fire" by John MacArthur, 247 pages.
Famed Pentecostal and televangelist Benny Hinn seems innocent enough. He's a little coo-key in the way he approaches Christianity: namely by "slaying" people in the Spirit, speaking in tongues, and professing to perform miracles by way of healing's in his multi-million dollar ministry; but he's not doing any harm in Christianity is he? Dr. John MacArthur of Grace Church in his book, "Strange Fire," (released in October 2013) would disagree. Not only would he disagree, but he would argue that the entire Charismatic movement is the single greatest threat to Christianity in the 21st Century. He speaks about false prophets like Tod Bently, who, during the Lake-Land Revivals, was "told" by the Holy Spirit to physically injure his attendee's in order to heal them. He actually punched an elderly woman in the face; he punched a man with colon cancer so hard he nearly died from his ruptured colon. Some would say these are "fringe" Charismatics. However, Dr. MacArthur powerfully and expertly exposes the Charismatic movement for what it is: blatant blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
During the great awakening of Jonathan Edward's time, many were focused on the experiential phenomena of the Holy Spirit's workings. He therefore wrote a sermon entitled, "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God." In it, he explains that "the legitimacy of a revival could not be determined on the basis of emotional responses." He uses 1 John 1:4 to urge his listeners to "test the Spirits," to say that not all that seems to be Godly is from God. Dr. MacArthur uses this blueprint to ask the question, "Does the modern Charismatic movement represent a true work of the Holy Spirit?"
This represents Part I of his book: Part II is about the various doctrines Charismatics are clearly confused on, including: speaking in tongues, miracles and healings, the office of Apostle and Prophets, and prophecies. Part III then shows the true work of the Holy Spirit. Most interestingly, the appendix of the book has a series of quotes from highly regarded Church Fathers such as John Chrysostom, St. Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin and others that deny the continuation of the Apostolic gifts.
This book is fascinating and I highly recommend it: it contains a mini systematic theology course on pneumatology and soteriology, it exposes the fallacies in the Charismatic movement by using scripture, and it answers tough questions like the exposition of 1 Corinthians 13 (what is the perfect, teleion?). Most shockingly, Dr. MacArthur ends the book with a plea to the "Calvinist Charismatics" (Check out this sermon to see how Calvin denied the continuation of the Apostolic sign gifts and therefore it is rather hypocritical to be a "Charismatic Calvinist" http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/TM13-4/calvins-critique-of-charismatic-calvinists-steve-lawson) and influential Continuists like John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, and Wayne Grudem to stop giving theological backing to men like Benny Hinn and Tod Bently, but to use their blessed ministries and position to call out false prophets and teachers that are blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
This is a sobering book and if you have questions on the legitimacy of the sign gifts or are confused on the Continuist/Cessationist position, I urge you to read it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)