Tag Archives: doctrine

Monergism.com: A Quick and Dirty Guide

Did you know that there’s a massive archive of all things reformed in a single place on the web? Discover it here.

Monergism is the name for the doctrine that the Holy Spirit acts independently of the human will in the work of new birth.

It’s also the name for one of the best online resources for all things reformed: .

In many ways, it’s the reformed communities best kept secret.

But it’s not likely to stay that way for long.

The Birth of Monergism

Around the year 2000, web developer by the growth of heretical information on the web.

At the same time he also noticed that there wasn’t anywhere online you could go to find sound doctrine in a single place. Naturally, he felt like he should use his God-given creativity to spread the gospel.

So, in his spare time, he built Monergism.com to help recover the true biblical doctrines of the historic faith by collecting and centralizing reformed resources across the web on one site.

And what began ten years ago as a small website with a handful of links has grown into a mammoth directory of all things reformed.

Five Things You Can Do at Monergism.com

Monergism.com amounts to a vast archive of online articles, PDFs, books and mp3s. So if you’re new to monergism–whether the doctrine or the website–…

1. With over 80 links to topics on regeneration, the will of God, justification and biblical devotion you’re likely to be busy for awhile–especially if you settle into the 26-part .

2. The second great way to use Monergism.com involves the exposition of Scripture. Simply pop in any Bible verse into the search box, press submit and voila: a stout list of written and audio commentaries on that verse.

3. The third great feature at Monergism.com is it’s biography pages. Take , for example. On his bio page you get a professional summary then a long list of resources.

4. Then there’s the –a massive archive of sermons and lectures on just about any topic under the reformed sun. Name a living theologian or pastor–like or –and you are likely to find all their available sermons.

5. Lastly, Monergism.com has developed into a where you can find classic Puritan works by Flavel, Edwards and Newton to current works by Francis Chan, Kevin DeYoung or Adrian Warnock–often at reduced prices.

Keep This in Mind

Monergism.com is a non-profit organization. That means Hendyx and Co. work off of donations and book sales…

Anyone who’s worked in non-profit knows that this often amounts to dirt, which should give you an indication when you consider the size and quality and longevity of Monergism.com that this venture has a lot to do with one man’s unrelenting vision to see the historic confession of Jesus Christ dominate the theological landscape…

Something I can wholeheartedly get behind. What about you?

Purgatory: How Catholics Prove It Exists

2 Replies

The history of purgatory in ab0ut 805 words.

Ever wonder how Roman Catholics prove the doctrine of purgatory?

Yeah, me too.

That’s why I did a little digging recently.

Here’s what I found.

Purgatory: The Essentials

First, let’s define purgatory.

In a nutshell, purgatory is a place where redeemed souls go to purge their load of venial [forgivable] sins.

It’s a process of purification before they enter heaven.

Here’s what the :

All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

How long does a redeemed soul spend in purgatory? From what I can find, as long as it takes to purge those sins.

Two days. Two millions years. Just depends.

See, your success in purgatory depends on you. That means you can fail purgatory. No one guarantees you’ll persevere.

Not even God.

However, the good news is that the living can affect your duration. They can pray for you. [See point below.]

So how does one get purged? Fire. It’s a good guess this is a metaphorical fire, but the point is purification–and pain.

Much of what we understand about purgatory originates from Dante’s –depicted as a mountain in the southern hemisphere with Jerusalem at the top, for instance [image above]–is sheer imagination.

Beautiful, but make believe. Which brings us back to our original question.

Purgatory: The Catholic Proofs

So, how do Catholics prove purgatory exists?

Well, for starters, it’s good to know that purgatory is inextricably wedded to the doctrine of . That means you can’t talk about one without talking about the other.

This is how it works.

Both doctrines have their seeds far back in certain pagan religions.

After that, a prayer for the dead can be found in the Old Testament. The catholic Old Testament. The to be exact. In the context of Maccabeus leaders praying for the dead.

Then, early Christian church catacomb inscriptions bear witness to prayers for the dead.

Next, Catholics find proof in the New Testament. The two main texts used occur in and .

After that, the doctrine gets it traction in the early church fathers–think Augustine, Bede, Jerome. This is the argument from tradition.

Protestants Reject Purgatory

The doctrine wasn’t seriously challenged until 1,000 years later–early 1500s–when the Reformers rolled up on the scene.

What was at stake? Justification by faith alone–Luther’s pivotal beef with the Catholic church.

The Catholics defended that justification was a life long process as demonstrated by the long history–from pagan to early church to present–of the doctrine.

But the Reformers disagreed.

Fiercely.

Not to be rebuffed, the affirmed that purgatory is necessary to blot out the full debt of venial sins.

What Luther and Co. argued was purgatory amounted to justification mingled with sanctification. Basically justification equals prayer and fasting in this life…fire in the next.

Purgatory: The Protestant Objection

With a formidable case for purgatory, why would any Protestant in his right mind reject it? Several reasons.

First, sola scriptura.

Affirming purgatory–with it’s rich, deep roots in tradition– otherwise compromises the very as the Protestants rule of faith.

And what does that rule of faith teach? You guessed it: Justification by faith alone.

Take Paul’s defense in as an example:

Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.

Then there’s Jesus’ parable of the . Jesus states that the tax collector is “justified” before God.

Or what about the ? Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Instant justification by faith alone. There was no more work to be done. That’s why Jesus, on the cross, said, “It is finished.”

What was finished? The work of atonement and propitiation.

In essence, sanctification is a result of justification. Not a prerequisite. And justification is an event that occurs at the moment of faith:

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. Romans 8:1

Our justification is an accomplished fact. Not an unfinished project. That’s the Protestant stand. What’s your stand? And did I miss anything? Look forward to your thoughts.

This post was inspired by a reader question. Got a question? Email me.

TULIP: Where Did It Go Wrong?

2 Replies

Contemporary Calvinists suppose that the acronym TULIP is a time-honored, authentic distillation of what was achieved at the Synod of Dordt. They’re wrong.

TULIP.

The sacrosanct, historical formula understood to have been given to us by our Protestant fathers…

A formula that deserves consistent recasting to more effectively communicate the actual meaning of the five points that are often grossly misunderstood.

In the first case, you have what Covenant College professor calls the “sovereign grace” tendency.

The second, an “apologetic tendency” towards TULIP.

Both tendencies, though, are grounded in a mistaken premise.

The Tragedy of TULIP

At least that’s Stewart’s argument in a recent essay “” [warning: PDF] in the Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology.

Both tendencies–notable in the New Calvinists–suppose that the points of Calvinism (Total Depravity, Unconditional Grace, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints) are a time-honored, authentic distillation of what was achieved at the .

Stewart claims that’s a mistaken belief.

TULIP is NOT an accurate summary of the Dordt conference. And there are better ways to articulate it’s message than the contemporary, hardliner approach.

TULIP: A Brief History in the 19th Century

The most notable claim Stewart makes is that the acronym TULIP didn’t even appear in print until Loraine Boettner’s [warning: PDF].

And that was in 1932.

Before that, in the 19th Century, you are hard-pressed to find a clear, positive reference to the acronym.

You have advocates for Calvinism. Proponents for the theology of Dordt. But no defenders of TULIP.

In fact, what you do find is subtle stiff-arming of the acronym.

In a small sample of 19th Century Calvinism Stewart demonstrates that consistency nor aggressiveness in stating the doctrines was on their mind.

For instance, considered the five points of Calvinism “of little accuracy or worth; I use it to denote certain points of doctrine, because custom has made it familiar.”

TULIP: A Brief History in the 18th Century

Finding any sympathetic–let alone clear articulation of the modern TULIP–in the 18th Century is equally futile.

What most theologians of this time pushed was a presentation of “our common Christianity.” Things held in common with “Scriptural Christians.”

Most contended for Calvinist doctrine in a broad-brush approach, preferring “Particular Atonement” over “Limited” or “Original Sin and Incorrigible Depravity” over “Total Depravity.”

Even , fierce in his attacks on John Wesley’s Armenianism, did not use the formula.

What This Brief Historical Survey Means

This is what it boils down to: Stewart argues that contemporary advocates of the five points of Calvinism are wedded to a formula in a way quite unlike Calvinists of an earlier era….

A formula we’ve come to accept uncritically as a hallmark of Calvinist orthodoxy.

What does this say about us? Stewart contends:

“At very least, this use suggests that they have not understood their own past very well. At worst, it may mean that they have willingly consented to take a very loose rendering of the theology of Dordt in place of the actuality.”

What was once a gracious, sober minded egalitarianism has given way to a more slavish, unquestioning loyalty and use.

Not That We Weren’t Warned

To be fair, a few contemporary theologians have sounded the alarm.

Edwin H. Palmer–in his – stated in 1972, “Calvinism does not have five points and neither is Calvin the author of the five points.”

And in an essay written for a reprint of John Owen’s , J. I. Packer stated, ”It would not be correct to simply to equate Calvinism with the five point” and “the five points present Calvinistic soteriology in a negative and polemical form.”

In other words, the TULIP framework is deficient and the Calvinism of our age bears a belligerent, vehement streak in it…

This in spite of and contemporary cautions.

The Solution

The solution to this mess, Stewart rightly suggests, is engaging with the actual . At least quoting them. Even crafting a compressed summary of their actual content would do us a world of good.

One piece of advice in particular I’m going to follow is to read Richard Mouw’s , a book Stewart believes will help us recover the “big picture” that was more evident in the past than it is now.

Anybody read it? What did you think? Looking forward to your thoughts.

Seven Religious Movements with a Weakness for Prophecy

Leave a reply

Perhaps one of the most disturbing aspects of the Charismatic-Pentecostal movement is their claim to new revelation from God–the claim that God is still speaking to them.

The claim that “Jesus told me.” Or “The Lord told me.”

This thirst for supernatural experience with God and fresh word from God is not anything new.

It has quite a historical past.

In fact, it goes back to the very early stages of Christianity and continues until this day in movements that have a soft spot for the subjective.

Montanism

Montanus–a second century prophet–claimed he wrote the word of God. That he spoke the word of God. He claimed to have the final revelation of the Holy Spirit. This implied that something could be added to the teaching of Christ and the Apostle.

In other words, the Bible wasn’t sufficient.

Montanists also expected the imminent Second Coming of Christ. This belief, while not confined to Montanists, took a special form that gave their activities the character of a popular revival.

They also believed–via their prophets–that the heavenly Jerusalem was soon to descend on the Earth in a plain between the two villages of Pepuza and Tymion in Phrygia.

Roman Catholicism

Why do they believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary? Where do they find the immaculate conception? Where do they get praying for the dead? Purgatory? It doesn’t come out of Scripture. Comes out of their , a tradition equal in authority to Scripture.

It was decided by the church, the pope or the council. Not God’s word.

So, where does the Bible end? It doesn’t. Popes and councils can still bring in new doctrines. Individuals can have new revelation from the Holy Spirit. There is no end to it.

Neo Orthodoxy

This theology believes that the Bible is NOT the objective word of God, but the subjective. It’s like saying God is marching up and down Scripture waiting to make the words come to life when someone reads them.

Neo-orthodox theologian said that the spirit of God is imprisoned within the covers of the written Bible and he is released in your experience. Mystical. And God is giving new revelation.

Another neo-orthodox theologian, , said the Bible is not the last word. God has more to say. In other words, the inspiration of the Bible depends on subjective experience.

Mormons

A flesh and bones God. Universal resurrection. Jesus as the spirit brother of Lucifer. Where do you suppose they got these doctrines? Not from the Bible…

But from the Doctrine of Covenants. And The Pearl of Great Price. Where did these books come from? Joseph Smith said they were personally given to him by God.

Christian Science

Mary Baker Eddy–the founder of this cult–is considered the revelator of truth for this age. Her revelations come from God in addition to Scripture. This was written about Christian Science in the July 1975 : “Because it is not a human philosophy, but a divine revelation the divinity based reason and logic of Christan Science necessarily separates it from all other systems.”

Jehovah’s Witnesses Salvation by works. Negating the grace of God though Christ. Claim Jesus was a created being–not God’s son. How did they get this? They . Directly.

World Wide Church of God

This organization got it’s start from a vision by Mrs. Armstrong. An angel laid out the whole system for Mrs. Armstrong. She told her husband–Herbet W. Armstrong–and a new cult was born.

Listen. I do believe that the . Empowers us.

However, he doesn’t speak to us in audible words. He doesn’t give us specific commands. He isn’t breathing out anymore revelation.

says:

Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.

Once for all. It was done. And the canon was closed.

Here’s the bottom line: You don’t need new revelation for directoin of your life. The Spirit will do that. And you don’t need new revelation for the virture of your life. The .

So, the only reason behind extra-biblical prophecy is so Satan can pollute the clear stream of Scripture and confound and confuse the otherwise discerning leading of the Holy Spirit in your life.

The Nasty Little Doctrine We Can’t Live Without

Leave a reply

“He chose us.”

Three little words tucked into that define a nasty little doctrine…

Nasty in that it draws a battle line straight through the middle of our theological camp.

But without this doctrine we have no blessing. No adoption. No inheritance. No security. No assurance. No celebration. No joy. No comfort.

Without this doctrine we have salvation dependent on human influence. Salvation merited by human effort.

Without this doctrine we have no sovereign–no supreme–being worthy of worship.

Fortunately, this doctrine doesn’t rest on Ephesians 1:4 alone. This doctrine is all over Scripture:

For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.

For the sake of my servant Jacob,

and Israel my chosen,

I call you by your name,

I name you, though you do not know me.

For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen, I call you by your name, I name you, though you do not know me.

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

Though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls.

For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you.

But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the first fruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.

Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

The doctrine I have in mind here is election, the concept that we are a mass of mankind distinguished and separated, united to spend eternity with Christ.

A concept that declares we are unworthy people declared worthy people. Unrighteous sinners declared righteous.

All because we are chosen in Christ.

I think most people would agree with this. It’s WHEN this election occurs that party lines form.

Where the Line of Division Is Drawn

The biblical concept of election states that God chose BEFORE the creation of the world those whom would be Christians.

Before man. Before creation. Before time. In the isolated, all-wise counsel of God–we we’re adopted into his family.

He chose us.

Now, Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world to be a sacrifice for sins. We have no problem with this.

Yet, suggest that Christians are foreknown for salvation in the same way and people cry foul.

What Election Does and Doesn’t Do

Understand, election doesn’t nullify man’s responsibility to believe in Jesus as Lord. It doesn’t eliminate accountability.

What it does do is reconstruct our nature from bent on corruption to pre-occupied with sanctification.

That’s the whole point behind election: that we should be holy. Not because he saw that we should be holy. But because he made us holy.

God takes delight in us. But not because of who we are. But because of who we are through Christ. We are changed through Christ into holy, blameless people so a holy, just God can delight in us.

Furthermore, our election causes us to find unquenchable delight in God. He becomes our perfect and supreme object which occupies our affections.

We are elected so we can adore God.

He may have angels. But his will is to have children. Children with whom he can be intimate.

Why We Celebrate

Christ is the peculiar object of God’s affections. Christ is his chief pleasure. And when we become Christians we inherit those affections. That is why we celebrate.

We participate in God’s presence only because Christ, in God’s sovereign will, redeemed us.

And that redemption is secured. Affirming our adoption into God’s family. Anxiety over our fate is soothed. And we receive comfort knowing that on our worst days we will still inherit eternal life.

What remains is bewilderment: Why did he choose me?

We will never know until the day we meet God when we will more than likely throw ourselves at the feet of our Savior in a reckless–but appropriate–act of worship.

The Unsurpassable Attribute: A Quick Guide to God’s Mercy

Leave a reply

Where the biblical meaning of mercy is shown to be exceedingly rich and complex.

There is perhaps no word in our language precisely synonymous with mercy.

Grace comes nearest it.

Mercy implies benevolence, tenderness, mildness, pity, compassion or clemency. And it’s only exercised toward offenders.

Mercy induces an injured person to forgive. Forbear punishment. Inflict less than justice warrants.

Mercy is a distinguishing attribute of God. That’s why A. W. Tozer said:

We who earned banishment shall enjoy communion. We who deserve the pains of hell shall know the bliss of heaven.

God’s mercy is eternal, unfailing, unconditional. And it flows from his unchanging goodness, so doesn’t need to be provoked like wrath, but comes naturally.

It’s exercised on all who want it. And like other moral attributes is rooted in God’s unchanging nature, justice and perfection.

What Is God’s Mercy?

The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex.

The Hebrew word kapporeth means a lid, used of the cover of the sacred Ark, which is the mercy seat–where the blood of atonement was offered to God. The connotation for kapporeth is one of ransom and propitiation.

The Greek word for mercy–eleemon–means to show mercy, pity or compassion to the wretched. Specifically, eleemon depicts a merciful, sympathetic attitude.

In God, mercy shows up as an infinite and inexhaustible energy that disposes God to be actively compassionate. He has always dealt in mercy with mankind and will always deal in justice when the mercy is despised.

Key Themes of God’s Mercy

God’s mercy is rooted in his goodness and love. Prominent in this concept are some key themes:

God’s Mercy Is Great Your servant has found favor in your eyes, and you have shown great kindness to me in sparing my life.

God’s Mercy Is Everlasting Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments.

God’s Mercy Is Unfailing In your unfailing love you will lead the people you have redeemed. In your strength you will guide them to your holy dwelling.

God’s Mercy Is Longsuffering The Lord is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.

God’s Mercy Is Received by the Repentant In accordance with your great love, forgive the sin of these people, just as you have pardoned them from the time they left Egypt until now.

Both the Old Testament and the New Testament proclaim the mercy of God, but the OT has more to say about it than the NT.

Old Testament Stance on God’s Mercy

as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people.

as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition.

And as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb.

At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God. In the Old Testament, it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy. And despite their constant disobedience, God continually sought out his wayward people, to draw them back to him.

New Testament Stance on God’s Mercy

In the New Testament there is a fuller development of God’s mercy. In fact, the word used for Jesus’ mercy expresses his pity and compassion by means of a very intense verb that means “to be moved in one’s bowel’s.”

Seeing the people, He felt compassion for them, because they were distressed and dispirited like sheep without a shepherd.

But the most obvious and important use of the word mercy in the New Testament is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ.

It is because he is so that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed in their sins. It is out of that one is forgiven and granted eternal life.

The Old Testament concept of propitiation shows up in the New Testament, too. Mercy was released by Christ’s atoning death for all humankind.

And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

Since mercy flows from God’s goodness, and since God is infinite, it follows that God is infinitely and unchangeably merciful.

Your Response to God’s Mercy

Your response to God’s mercy falls into two categories–repentant or unrepentant.

Somewhere was both master and father, so that “the divine law joins duties in respect of both these attributes: Thou shalt love God and Thou shalt fear God. It proposed one for the obedient man, the other for the transgressor.”

Your label determines how God shows his mercy–or if he does at all.

Don’t think you can rely on God’s love or to allow you to persist in your unrepentance. God’s unlimited mercy only shows God desires to save all. God cannot do what is impossible. And it’s impossible to force a free choice.

God will not withhold his mercy from anyone who wants it. But neither will he cram His love down the throats of those who do not want it.

What is the appropriate response to God’s mercy? Prayer.

Prayer is not a condition for God’s giving mercy. Rather prayer is a condition for our receiving the mercy He desires to freely give us. It’s a position of submission. It’s a means by which God takes advantage of our willingness to receive His mercy.

He looks for our obedience.

Personally, I have no idea why I deserve God’s mercy. Sometimes I fall off the rails and hate my life.

But what’s important to me is to yield to His excellent and glorious will. To implore His mercy and loving-kindness. And to forsake all fruitless labors, strife and envy.

It’s the least I can do to show thanks for a gift I never deserved.

**Part of The Nature of God series.**

4 Characteristics of the Impeccable Author of Justice

Leave a reply

Part of The Nature of God series.

During his New York gubernatorial campaign, –the square-jawed crusader and former prosecutor who chased corruption on Wall Street so ferociously that people nicknamed him –promised to bring ethics to Albany, New York, home of the state capital.

And because of his previous track record, many people believed he could.

But every ounce of credibility he acquired during his career evaporated the moment he was caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet with a high-priced prostitute at a Washington hotel.

As the :

The idea that Gov. Eliot Spitzer…was somehow involved in a prostitution scandal was too much. New Yorkers who thought they had heard everything were, for a change, dumbfounded.

For a man who cemented his reputation with aggressive prosecution of wrong doing…who once seemed to stand above the tawdry universe of politics…who drug a whole lot of people through the mud…the hypocrisy is incredible that he’d fallen from grace in such a low-rent kind of way.

“I feel betrayed” was a common sentiment among New Yorkers. And it did not take long for Spitzer’s opponents to call for his resignation.

God: Perfectly Positioned to Be Our Judge

God, on the other hand, will never be called to resign. Because, even as a human, he’s never fallen from grace. Indeed, he was perfectly sinless as Jesus.

Thus, perfectly positioned to be our judge.

The biblical judge is expected to love justice and fair play. He’s expected to loath all ill treatment of one person by another.

Think about it: A corrupt judge who has no interest in seeing right triumph over wrong is, by biblical standards, a monstrosity.

Moreover, a judge who is found to be living a double life–one condemning criminals and one condoning his own crimes–deserves no such respect, honor or admiration.

He SHOULD resign.

However, the judge of the Bible displays 4 characteristics that make Him an impeccable author of justice–and a being far above any charges of corruption or grounds of impeachment:

1. The judge is a person with authority.

He is both the Lawgiver and the Judge. That’s God’s nature.

2. The judge is a person identified with what is good and right.

The Bible leaves us in no doubt that God loves righteousness and hates iniquity and that the ideal of a judge wholly identified with what is good and right is perfectly fulfilled in Jesus.

3. The judge is a person of wisdom, to discern truth.

There is no jury: it his responsibility alone to question, and cross examine. When the Bible pictures God judging it pictures him as a searcher of men’s hearts and the finder of facts. Nothing can escape him. We may fool men, but we cannot fool God. He knows us, and judges us, as we are.

4. Finally, the judge is a person of power to execute sentence.

God is his own executioner. Always potent. Always mighty. As he legislates and sentences, so he punishes. All judicial functions pour into him.

But why even have a judge to begin with? Can’t God just overlook our sins? We’ll explore that next week in a post on retribution and grace.

Death Match: Mindbending Hymn v. Mindless Anthem

3 Replies

So here we are, folks. Ringside to the first ever brawl between worship songs.

In one corner we have a popular, contemporary song written by a handsome young Texan…

And in the other, a 300-year-old, rigid contender from a dead Englishman.

Know this: Both these songs are favorites of mine.

In fact, the contemporary tune is by far my favorite of this generation.

However, it’s problematic.

How? It’s symbolic of the sensual-seeking, emotion-raising trend of current worship songs.

In other words…it’s shallow in theology. Soft on Scripture.

Why Are We Pitting Worship Songs Against Each Other?

I’m not against engaging the emotions. I’m a card-carrying Methodist. The founder of my denomination–John Wesley–emphasized emotions.

But neither did he ignore the mind.

Paul didn’t ignore the mind either. In fact, he insisted you MUST engage it. , “So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.”

This is now, (A)beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am (B)stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder,

2that you should (C)remember the words spoken beforehand by (D)the holy prophets and (E)the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles.

This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder,

that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles.

From the very beginning, Christians asserted we understand our faith. Not just feel it. And Christians have always used hymns as mechanisms to carry forth the doctrines of their faith.

And finally, Tomlin’s song is problematic because, as :

We are the most educated Christians in history, and yet our lyrics are considerably stupider than our much less educated Christian forebears–the people who sang lyrics by Fanny Crosby or Charles Wesley or Isaac Watts.

In other words, we are amusing ourselves to death. Entertainment trumps intelligence. Repetition supersedes thoughtful rhyme. Emotions supplant reason.

Unmasking the Tunes

If you haven’t guessed yet, the modern song I’m referring to is Chris Tomlin’s “.”

I like the song. Love it, in fact. It’s catchy. Arousing. Stimulating. But so is ““ by The Ramones.

You can’t get either song out of your head. But neither song engages the mind. Both lyrics manage to be fragmented thoughts and bad metaphors strung together.

Let me ask you a question: When we’re more likely to remember what we sing in church rather than the sermon, don’t you think it’s important that these songs bear meaningful, thought-provoking, Christ-exalting lyrics?

I do.

So, what song is it that I believe soundly trounces “God of Wonders”? I’ve pretty much given the answer away…

Got it? Yep, the song is none other than “” by Charles Wesley.

This is serious craft from a serious poet. Who’s bent on honoring Christ. Explaining doctrine. Putting content to our faith.

For example, Wesley explains the doctrine of atonement in stanza nine:

He breaks the power of canceled sin / He sets the prisoner free.
His blood can make the foulest clean / His blood availed for me.

I’d give an arm–maybe a leg–for songwriters to crank out concrete, functional lyrics rooted in Scripture like that.

What about you?

I know . But I’d love to hear do it. Anyone know how to make that happen?

Did they make it happen?

I look forward to your thoughts.

13 Quick Facts on 13 Christian Cults and Sects

Leave a reply

What’s the point behind this series? Intellectual pleasure? Satisfaction? An odd curiosity?Thought I forgot about this series, eh? Nope. Just let her simmer on the back burner.

Anyway, I still want to round her out with 13 posts.

So, I thought now would be a good time to pull all the articles out there into one tidy, little post…

And show you what’s on the horizon.

And just so you know, the point behind this series: Intellectual pleasure. Satisfaction. An odd curiosity?

See, until I started this series I knew very little about the differences between cults like Scientology or sects like Fundamentalism.

So, it’s good ground to cover.

Anyway, here’s where we’re at and where we’re going. Hope you’ll stay along for the ride.

Intro: Revising the American Religion Most of what you know as American Christianity is scarcely Christian in any traditional way.

Unitarians Secrets on Unitarianism–from what they think of the Trinity to famous Unitarians.

Rosicrucian File this under controversial. Conspiratorial. Bizarre. Trivial. Wherever you file it, know this: This is serious stuff some people lock-in on.

Fundamentalism Take a peek at this North American phenomenon.

Pentecostals Want to know who the 13 most famous Pentecostals of all time are? Read on.

Seventh-Day Adventists Why they observe Saturday as Sabbath and their connection to David Koresh.

Theosophy Their original purpose was to investigate, study and explain mediums and their claims. It’s changed a tad since 1875.

Scientology Quite likely the most ruthless, terroristic, litigious and lucrative cult the country has ever seen. [Good comments on this one.]

Spiritism 13 disturbing facts about this ancient religion.

Swedenborgians Founded in the 18th century after rationalist and mystic Emanuel Swedenborg, this cult enjoys a small, but exotic following.

World Wide Church of God Normally, cults crop up and just got creepier. The Worldwide Church of God, on the other hand, took a shocking turn for the better.

Mormons List of 13 must-read websites dedicated to exposing the differences between Mormonism and orthodox Christianity.

Jehovah’s Witnesses Thirteen key doctrines clothing store owner Charles Taze Russell taught through his religious society know as Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Does God Have a Body?

Leave a reply

Where you take the Name That Heresy quiz to learn more about the doctrine of God as spirit.

Let’s play a game. It’s called “Name That Heresy.”

Here are your clues:

1. God has flesh and bones as tangible as man’s.

2. He is limited in what he knows, can do and can be.

3. He is only one of many gods.

4. He at one time was not God.

5. And because of his flesh and bones, he can’t be everywhere at all time.

Got any guesses?

If you guessed Mormonism, you’re right. This is exactly what current Mormon doctrine teaches about God.

A Heretical View of God?

So, why is this heresy? Let me explain.

Mormons rely on three sources for their doctrine of God: inspired scripture, Joseph Smith’s words and Mormon leaders.

For instance, the taught there is more than one God. preached that Adam was the God of this world. And reasoned that man’s basic intelligence is as old as God himself.

Moreover, Mormons teach that all three sources carry equal weight when it comes to describing the existence and attributes of God.

So, Mormons believe God has a flesh-and-bones body. But this is wrong.

The Orthodox View of God as Spirit

So, what does the Bible say about God as spirit?

The orthodox description of God is that he is invisible, which implies God is without body. Just spirit.

No one has seen God at any time.

For since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

In addition to biblical authority, we also have historical proof that God is a spirit.

Three Historical Proofs God is Spirit

You and I should understand, said in his , that God is not walled off in heaven by a boundary.

said that “God is a Spirit, not pervading matter, but the Maker of material spirits and of the forms that are in matter; He is invisible, impalpable, being Himself the father of both sensible and invisible things.”

And argues that matter crowds out other matter from the space it occupies. So, “That which is impenetrable obviously is not ubiquitous.” Instead, because he is spirit, God penetrates and inhabits all material bodies.

Now, someone might argue, if you take Calvin, Tatian and Dabney at their word, you are falling into the same trap that Mormons fall into when they exalt the words of their leaders.

There’s one major difference: We don’t believe Calvin, Tatian and Dabney because they speak. We believe them because their words align with Scripture.

Philosophically, It Makes Sense That God Is a Spirit

You and I have potential to change. Just like dirt. Just like parents. Just like suns. God, on the other hand, can’t change.

He cant’ change because he is self-existent. Thus, he can’t be made of matter. Dirt, parents and suns are imperfect because they are made of matter.

In a lot of ways, you might think there isn’t any difference between an and a dead god.

But there is a difference.

For one, He’s personal. “God, therefore is not to be thought of as being either a body or as existing in a body, but as an uncompounded intellectual nature….” That intellectual nature is how he relates to us.

Furthermore, God is infinite and simple, without parts or units. Infinity and simplicity imply spirit.

Finally, God is beyond the universe, time and space. He is eternal. And if he is eternal–not limited by time–he is an invisible spirit.

The universe, on the other hand, is visible, bound by time, space. And dying.

Beyond the Laws of Thermodynamics

God created the universe in a perfect state. But after the Fall, the universe started to decay. The support this.

The first law of thermodynamics says that energy is not made. The second law of thermodynamics says we are running out of that energy.

Matter is subject to the second law of thermodynamics–pain, decay and death. God, because he is spirit, is not subject to pain, decay and death. But to say God is flesh and bones is to subject God to pain, decay and death.

Now, James says that man is . And Jesus Christ, who was flesh and bones, is the image of God. So how does the New Testament see man as in God’s likeness if God doesn’t know pain, decay or death? The following paragraphs explain.

The apostle Paul, when speaking about the resurrected body in , says:

The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

: “Paul is not contrasting a fallen body with a redeemed body, but a natural body with a spiritual body.”

Our flesh and bones will be buried so that our spiritual, incorruptible, bodies may blossom in the image of God–the heavenly spirit.

Why Should We Care That God Is a Spirit?

American Methodist theologian said we scorn this doctrine when we disobey the –do not worship idols. You you can hear the full meaning in Jesus’ words: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and truth.”

In other words, if flesh and bones is all there is, then we have nothing to compare ourselves to and rise above pain, decay and death. Man becomes the true measure of man, the idol that we worship.

Blatant sin.

To avoid this we have to look on God as Martin Luther did: “In a word, God is an inexpressible Being above and beyond everything that may be said or thought.”

Think about this: If God were flesh and bones, we must relate to him the only way two lovers relate…close proximity at all time.

But Aquinas said we are not excluded from his spirit because of our bodies.

The very fact that he is spirit means he can fill every place. Thus, he fills every being. So, while we may never taste, see, touch, smell or hear God, we see and feel him at work in his creation, especially our minds and spirits.

It’s safe to say that the doctrine of God as spirit explains how God can be the the God who is ever near. Which is perfect comfort in times of pain, decay and death. Wouldn’t you agree?

**Part of The Nature of God series.**