Matthew R. Perry

Archive for April, 2006

Do you have sensuality or Spirituality?

In Church Life, Devotional on April 30, 2006 at 11:27 am

He that has not received the Spirit is said to be sensual. Oh, what a gulf there is between the least Christian and the greatest moralist! What a wide distinction there is between the greatest professor destitute of grace, and the least of God's believers who has grace in his heart. As great a difference as there is between light and darkness between death and life, between heaven and hell, is there between a saint and a sinner; for mark, my text says, in no very polite phrase, that if we have not the Spirit we are sensual. " Sensual!" says one; "well, I am not converted man—I don t pretend to be; but I am not sensual." Well, friend, and it is very likely that you are not—not in the common acceptation of the term sensual; but understand that this word, in the Greek, really means what an English word like this would mean, if we had such a one—soulish. We have not such a word—we want such a one.

There is a great distinction between mere animals and men, because man hath a soul, and the mere animal hath none. There is another distinction between mere men and a converted man. The converted man hath the Spirit—the unconverted man hath none; he is a soulish man—not a spiritual man; he has got no further than mere nature and has no inheritance in the spiritual kingdom of grace. Strange it is that soulish and sensual should after all mean the same! Friend, thou hast not the Spirit. Then thou art nothing better—be thou what thou art, or whatsoever thou mayest be—than the fall of Adam left thee. That is to say, thou art a fallen creature, having only capacities to live here in sin, and to live for ever in torment; but thou hast not the capacity to live in heaven at all, for thou hast no Spirit; and therefore thou art unable to know or enjoy spiritual things.

And mark you, a man may be in this state, and be a sensual man, and yet he may have all the virtues that could grace a Christian; but with all these, if he has not the Spirit, he has got not an inch further than where Adam's fall left him—that is, condemned and under the curse. Ay, and he may attend to religion with all his might—he may take the sacrament, and be baptized, and may be the most devout professor; but if he hath not the Spirit he hath not started a solitary inch from where he was, for he is still in "the bonds of iniquity," a lost soul. Nay, further, he may pick up religious phrases till he may talk very fast about religion; he may read biographies till he seems to be a deep taught child of God; he may be able to write an article upon the deep experience of a believer; but if this experience be not his own, if he hath not received it by the Spirit of the living God, he is still nothing more than a carnal man, and heaven is to him a place to which there is no entrance. Nay, further, he might go so far as to become a minister of the gospel, and a successful minister too, and God may bless the word that he preaches to the salvation of sinners, but unless he has received the Spirit, be he as eloquent as Apollos, and as earnest as Paul, he is nothing more than a mere soulish man, without capacity for spiritual things.

Nay, to crown all, he might even have the power of working miracles, as Judas had—he might even be received into the church as a believer, as was Simon Magus, and after all that, though he had cast out devils, though he had healed the sick, though he had worked miracles, he might have the gates of heaven shut in his teeth, if he had not received the Spirit. For this is the essential thing, without which all others are in vain—the reception of the Spirit of the living God. It is a searching truth, is it not, my friends? Do not run away from it. If I am preaching to you falsehood, reject it; but if this be a truth which I can substantiate by Scripture, I beseech you, rest not till you have answered this question: Hast thou the Spirit, living, dwelling, working in thy heart?

(An excerpt from a sermon by Charles H. Spurgeon, The Holy Spirit and the One Church.  Delivered on Sabbath Morning, December 13, 1857, at the Music Hall, Royal Surrey Gardens.  To read the entire sermon, click here.)

A truly blessed time at T4G!

In T4G 2006 on April 29, 2006 at 3:18 pm

I am so thankful to Boone's Creek Baptist Church for allowing me these opportunities of refreshment and renewal. The Together For the Gospel Conference was an absolute treasure. Hearing the hearts of Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, Al Mohler, R.C. Sproul, John Piper, CJ Mahaney and John MacArthur encouraged and inspired me no end.

A few words about the speakers:

Mark Dever. Dr. Dever serves as the pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. and is the Founder of Nine Marks Ministries which seeks to help the church reform to the pattern of the Scriptures. He spoke on "The Pastor's Understanding of His Own Role" based on 1 Corinthians 4. The three marks were that we must have a cross-centered message (1-7), a cross-centered life (8-14), and cross-centered followers (14 to the end). What struck me was that a pastor must be one to forsake his own comfort for the sake of others. This is something that many in the Corinthian church would not do (and note the sarcasm of the Apostle Paul in verses 8 and following — but he makes his point, doesn't he?).

Ligon Duncan. Dr. Duncan serves as the Pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Jackson, MS, and is the Moderator of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. He spoke passionately and persuasively on preaching Christ from the Old Testament. The comprehensive nature of this type of preaching must not be neglected — such as preaching Christ from the OT, preaching it as a Christian book, preach about the Christian experience (especially from the Psalms), and so much more. We have found this out to be true as I have spent the last 2+ years going through the Psalms on Wednesday night. Christ is there! Grace is there! Dr. Duncan reminded us of that.

Albert Mohler. Dr. Mohler serves as President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville. He preached on "Preaching With the Culture in View." He noted that expository preaching is ""That mode of Christian preaching which takes as its central purpose the presentation and application of a portion of Scripture." I loved the part where he noted that we should never think there was a "golden age in America." So many want to go back to the 1950s where marriage was defined properly and abortion and other ills were considered societal sins. Yet even during that time, whites and blacks had different water fountains, bathrooms, and seating arrangements in restaurants and city buses. That's no golden age! We much see the treasure of the Scriptures and be ready to apply it to the culture without harming the message.

R.C. Sproul. As the head of Ligonier Ministries, Sproul preached on "The Center of Christian Preaching: Justification by Faith Alone." He said he could do this in his sleep, and probably would since he was assigned the slot right after lunch. This doctrine is the "atlas" on which the Church and our individual faith stands or falls. He noted that the Reformation is not over, contrary to what so many think, and that we need to continue to demonstrate this crucial doctrine in our pulpits at ever opportunity.

John Piper. Dr. Piper serves as the Pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and the director of Desiring God Ministries. He preached on "Why Expositional Preaching is Particularly Glorifying to God." What struck me was that we preachers often preach without passion. We speak on the glory of God, but our faces do not reflect this wonder! We must preach with zeal and conviction so that it will translate into the hearer's heart. Otherwise, we undermine His glory by not presenting it rightly.

C.J. Mahaney. Bro. Mahaney leads Sovereign Grace Ministries after serving for 27 years as pastor of Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, MD. After a few moments of self-deprecation (since he felt so unqualified to be among the T4G panel), he gave a wonderful sermon on the ministers self-watch based on 1 Timothy 4:16.  Tremendous.
 
John MacArthur.  Bringing over 40 years of experience as Pastor of the Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, CA, Dr. MacArthur refreshed me most of all.  A commitment to the Word and longevity in one place along with a desire for expositional preaching have mark his wonderful faith-filled career as pastor, Bible teacher, and author. 
 
I recommend going to Tim Challies website for a more in-depth review as he live-blogged the conference as it happened.  If would would like to buy the CDs or mp3s, go to http://www.togetherforthegospel.org and click on resources. 

This summer, you can register for T4G 2008, so I hope you'll take great advantage of it. 

Where is Your Denomination Located?

In Church Life, Missions on April 29, 2006 at 12:07 am

Al Mohler has such a helpful blog entry on this issue.  The Glenmary Research Center has put together a map showing where our various denominations are represented across the country. 

Speaking for Southern Baptists, why are we clustered so much in the South and Southeast?  I mean, I know we are Southern Baptists, but shouldn't we have moved out a little more by now?  Mohler makes a point that the Pacific Northwest has the fewest church represented there — and it shows by how liberal they are politically and socially!

Sounds like a part of Samaria that we need to reach, eh?

Attending the Together for the Gospel Conference in Louisville

In Uncategorized on April 26, 2006 at 3:17 pm

I  will be attending the Together for the Gospel conference in Louisville over the next few days and am looking forward to this time of refreshment and renewal.

The lineup consists of some of my favorite preachers and theologians:

R. Albert Mohler, Jr. (President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY)
Mark Dever (Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington DC)
J. Ligon Duncan, III (Pastor of First Presbyterian Church, Jackson, MS)
C.J. Mahaney (Leader of Sovereign Grace Ministries)
R.C. Sproul (Founder and Chairman of Ligonier Ministries)
John MacArthur (Bible Teacher of Grace to You Ministries)
John Piper (Desiring God Ministries)

I'm also looking forward to getting together with old friends and bloggers that I haven't seen in some time such as Mark Combs, Josh Martin, Kevin Whitt, Bob Aubuchon, Derick Dickens, John Divito and many others.

Blessings! I'll blog more about this tomorrow.

No Matter Who You Are (Did the United Church of Christ Get It Right?)

In Church Life, Culture, Worship on April 24, 2006 at 1:51 pm

Last night on TBS, my wife and I saw a commercial that caught our attention.  It opened in a cathedral sanctuary where people were coming in to sit for a worship service.  Suddenly, a mom is pictured holding a crying baby, followed a someone pushing a button that triggered an ejection seat in the pew that sent them flying out of there. 

Next, a gay couple sits down.  Ejection seat.  Then a homeless person, a man with a walker, and the list went on. 

Then it stated:  no matter who you are or where you are on life's journey, you're welcome here:  The United Church of Christ.

So let me get this straight:  a homosexual couple is now classified in the same arena as a single mom, an old man in a walker, a homeless person, etc.  I guess all of these now are classified as outcasts and oppressed in a 'traditional' type of church, yes? 

Friends, I agree that Jesus Christ always talked with the outcasts of society.  He spoke with the blind, the lame, the sick — and even healed such!  These people did not choose their situation.  But there are those who have lifestyles they have chosen who want to be lumped in with these other who are in situations they have not.

But in John 7:53-8:11 with the woman caught in a situation she chose — adultery — He told the Pharisees, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her" (John 8:7, ESV).  They quote this along with Matthew 7:1, "Judge not, lest you be judged." 

But yet they seem to miss what else Jesus said.  He told the woman, "Woman, where are they?  Has no one condemned you?"  She said, No one, Lord."  And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you.  Go, from now on and sin no more."

Again, where's the focus for many?  That Jesus didn't condemn her.  The reason, I believe, is that the Pharisees did not offer the opportunity to repent.  They just took her with the intent of pronouncing a sentence and then punishing her.  No repentence!  No offer of God's mercy and forgiveness!  Just sheer condemnation.

But Jesus grants us that opportunity to repent — and that must be the message of the church.  "Go, from now on and sin no more."  From this point on, live for Me!  Love Me by obeying Me.

With the blind, the lame, and the sick, there was no sin to turn from!  But with other lifestyles that the Bible does speak of as sin, there is something to turn from and Someone to turn to! 

What kind of love would we be displaying as a true church if we did not tell folks of God's will and way and purpose?  If we did not preach, "Strive for holiness, without which no one will see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14), then we would have as Cole Porter said a society where "anything goes."

Love your people — preach as Jesus preached in Mark 1:14-15:

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."

This is preaching as Jesus preached.  Turn!  Trust!

What Are We Looking For in the Bible (Michael Horton)

In Church Life, For Preachers/Pastors, For Seminary Students on April 22, 2006 at 9:18 pm

Calvin Theological Seminary professor Sidney Greidanus has provided a masterful overview of the Dutch debates of the 1930's and while the historical details may not be relevant for most readers, the issues raised cannot be dismissed in our own situation.3

While the liberal Protestants on the Continent were already busily engaged in downplaying the historical dimension of revelation, emphasizing the ethical, psychological and spiritual applications provided by the various biblical writers, a number of prominent Reformed theologians saw similar, if less overt, problems within conservative congregations. According to Greidanus, biblical interpretation during the early part of the century was often marked by the following three tendencies:

(Click here to read the rest of the article by Michael Horton.)

Bad and Getting Worse (Gary Bauer)

In Uncategorized on April 21, 2006 at 9:08 pm

Every conservative (read: Republican) in town has been losing sleep over President Bush’s falling poll numbers. Today’s Fox News poll will provide them no rest. The president’s approval rating hit a record low of 33 percent this week, down from 36 percent two weeks ago and 39 percent in mid-March. Is the country becoming more liberal? Not at all! The president’s decline, which appears to be picking up momentum on the down-side, is largely explained by falling support among self-described Republicans. For the first time, his approval rating from Republicans has dropped below 70 percent to 66 percent.

So, what explains the horrendous numbers? Two issues have been in the headlines in the last week or so: rising gasoline prices and illegal immigration amnesty. On the gas prices, the media has been relentless with a new story every night. Meanwhile, the Republican Party and the White House have been largely silent, even though there is a strong case that can be made to explain the increase. By the way, this will get worse. Spot shortages are now showing up here in the East because of environmental requirements mandating that an additive be taken out of the gasoline and ethanol added.

On immigration, the problem is more severe, and the Republican Party is in danger of self-destructing. The Fox poll shows that only 26 percent of the country thinks that recent demonstrations are appropriate, but there has not been one word from the administration questioning how illegal immigrants can freely march demanding – not requesting – that we change our laws. Do we want to reach out to the center? Then deal with illegal immigration. The Fox poll shows that Independents, in a backlash against the demonstrations, now say they are less likely to support easing immigration requirements by a 54-to-14 percent margin.

Thoughts on Jesus’ Demand to Repent (John Piper)

In Theology on April 19, 2006 at 9:35 am

Letters From Cambridge #2

As part of my sabbatical here in Cambridge, England, I am working on a book with the tentative title What Jesus Demands From the World. The demand to repent is as basic as it gets in Jesus’ message. It is equally basic to, and almost synonymous with, the command, “You must be born again” (John 3:7). One of my concerns is to show that repentance in Jesus’ message is not behavior but the inner change that gives rise to new God-centered, Christ-exalting behavior. Here are some thoughts to help make the meaning of repentance more plain.

From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17)

I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. (Luke 5:32)

The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. (Matthew 12:41)

Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. (Luke 13:3, 5)

The first demand of Jesus’ public ministry was, “Repent.” He spoke this command indiscriminately to all who would listen. It was a call for radical inward change toward God and man.

Two things show us that repentance is an internal change of mind and heart rather than mere sorrow for sin or mere improvement of behavior. First, the meaning of the Greek word behind the English “repent” (metanoeo) points in this direction. It has two parts: meta and noeo. The second part (noeo) refers to the mind and its thoughts and perceptions and dispositions and purposes. The first part (meta) is a prefix that regularly means movement or change.1 So the basic meaning of repent is to experience a change of the mind’s perceptions and dispositions and purposes.

The other factor that points to this meaning of repent is the way Luke 3:8 describes the relationship between repentance and new behavior. It says, “Bear fruits in keeping with repentance.” Then it gives examples of the fruits: “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise” (Luke 3:11). This means that repenting is what happens inside of us that leads to the fruits of new behavior. Repentance is not the new deeds, but the inward change that bears the fruit of new deeds. Jesus is demanding that we experience this inward change.

Why? His answer is that we are sinners. “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32). What was Jesus’ view of sin? In the parable of the prodigal son, Jesus describes the son’s sin like this: “He squandered his property in reckless living . . . [and] devoured [it] with prostitutes” (Luke 15:13, 30). But when the prodigal repents he says, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.” Therefore, throwing your life away on reckless living and prostitutes is not just humanly hurtful; it is an offense against heaven—that is, against God. That’s the essential nature of sin. It’s an assault on God.

We see this again in the way Jesus taught his disciples to pray. He said that they should pray, “Forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us” (Luke 11:4). In other words, sins that God forgives are compared to the ones people commit against us, and those are called debts. Therefore, Jesus’ view of sin was that it dishonored God and put us in debt to restore the divine honor we had defamed by our God-belittling behavior or attitudes. That debt is paid by Jesus himself. “The Son of man came . . . to give his life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). But for us to enjoy that gift he says we must repent.

Repenting means experiencing a change of mind that now sees God as true and beautiful and worthy of all our praise and all our obedience. This change of mind also embraces Jesus in the same way. We know this because Jesus said, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God.” Seeing God with a new mind includes seeing Jesus with a new mind.

No one is excluded from Jesus’ demand to repent. He made this clear when a group of people came to him with news of two calamities. Innocent people had been killed by Pilate’s massacre and by the fall of the tower of Siloam (Luke 13:1-4). Jesus took the occasion to warn even the bearers of the news: “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:5). In other words, don’t think calamities mean that some people are sinners in need of repentance and others aren’t. All need repentance. Just as all need to be born anew because “that which is born of the flesh is [merely] flesh” (John 3:6), so all must repent because all are sinners.

When Jesus said, “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32), he did not mean that some persons are good enough not to need repentance. He meant some think they are (Luke 18:9), and others have already repented and have been set right with God. For example, the rich young ruler desired “to justify himself” (Luke 10:29) while “the tax collector . . . beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ [and] went down to his house justified [by God!]” (Luke 18:13-14).

Therefore, none is excluded. All need repentance. And the need is urgent. Jesus said, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” What did he mean by perish? He meant that the final judgment of God would fall on those who don’t repent. “The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here” (Matthew 12:41). Jesus, the Son of God, is warning people of the judgment to come, and offering escape if we will repent. If we will not repent, Jesus has one word for us, “Woe, to you” (Matthew 11:21).

This is why his demand for repentance is part of his central message that the kingdom of God is at hand. “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15). The gospel—the good news—is that the rule of God has arrived in Jesus to save sinners before it arrives at his second coming in judgment. So the demand to repent is based on the gracious offer that is present to forgive, and on the gracious warning that someday those who refuse the offer will perish in God’s judgment.

After he had risen from the dead Jesus made sure that his apostles would continue the call for repentance throughout the world. He said, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46-47). So the demand of Jesus to repent goes to all the nations. It comes to us, whoever we are and wherever we are, and lays claim on us. This is the demand of Jesus to every soul: Repent. Be changed deep within. Replace all God-dishonoring, Christ-belittling perceptions and dispositions and purposes with God-treasuring, Christ-exalting ones.

For Christ and his kingdom,

Pastor John

1 For example meta is used as a prefix in the word metabaino (transfer or change from one place to another), metaballo (change one’s way of thinking), metago (lead or move from one place to another), metatithemi (convey from one place to another, put in another place, transfer), metamorphoo (change in a manner visible to others, be transfigured), metastrepho (cause a change in state or condition, change, alter), metaschematizo (change the form of something, transform, change), etc.

Thoughts on Jesus’ Demand to Repent (John Piper)

In Theology on April 19, 2006 at 9:35 am

Letters From Cambridge #2

As part of my sabbatical here in Cambridge, England, I am working on a book with the tentative title What Jesus Demands From the World. The demand to repent is as basic as it gets in Jesus’ message. It is equally basic to, and almost synonymous with, the command, “You must be born again” (John 3:7). One of my concerns is to show that repentance in Jesus’ message is not behavior but the inner change that gives rise to new God-centered, Christ-exalting behavior. Here are some thoughts to help make the meaning of repentance more plain.

From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17)

I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. (Luke 5:32)

The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. (Matthew 12:41)

Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. (Luke 13:3, 5)

The first demand of Jesus’ public ministry was, “Repent.” He spoke this command indiscriminately to all who would listen. It was a call for radical inward change toward God and man.

Two things show us that repentance is an internal change of mind and heart rather than mere sorrow for sin or mere improvement of behavior. First, the meaning of the Greek word behind the English “repent” (metanoeo) points in this direction. It has two parts: meta and noeo. The second part (noeo) refers to the mind and its thoughts and perceptions and dispositions and purposes. The first part (meta) is a prefix that regularly means movement or change.1 So the basic meaning of repent is to experience a change of the mind’s perceptions and dispositions and purposes.

The other factor that points to this meaning of repent is the way Luke 3:8 describes the relationship between repentance and new behavior. It says, “Bear fruits in keeping with repentance.” Then it gives examples of the fruits: “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise” (Luke 3:11). This means that repenting is what happens inside of us that leads to the fruits of new behavior. Repentance is not the new deeds, but the inward change that bears the fruit of new deeds. Jesus is demanding that we experience this inward change.

Why? His answer is that we are sinners. “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32). What was Jesus’ view of sin? In the parable of the prodigal son, Jesus describes the son’s sin like this: “He squandered his property in reckless living . . . [and] devoured [it] with prostitutes” (Luke 15:13, 30). But when the prodigal repents he says, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.” Therefore, throwing your life away on reckless living and prostitutes is not just humanly hurtful; it is an offense against heaven—that is, against God. That’s the essential nature of sin. It’s an assault on God.

We see this again in the way Jesus taught his disciples to pray. He said that they should pray, “Forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us” (Luke 11:4). In other words, sins that God forgives are compared to the ones people commit against us, and those are called debts. Therefore, Jesus’ view of sin was that it dishonored God and put us in debt to restore the divine honor we had defamed by our God-belittling behavior or attitudes. That debt is paid by Jesus himself. “The Son of man came . . . to give his life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). But for us to enjoy that gift he says we must repent.

Repenting means experiencing a change of mind that now sees God as true and beautiful and worthy of all our praise and all our obedience. This change of mind also embraces Jesus in the same way. We know this because Jesus said, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God.” Seeing God with a new mind includes seeing Jesus with a new mind.

No one is excluded from Jesus’ demand to repent. He made this clear when a group of people came to him with news of two calamities. Innocent people had been killed by Pilate’s massacre and by the fall of the tower of Siloam (Luke 13:1-4). Jesus took the occasion to warn even the bearers of the news: “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:5). In other words, don’t think calamities mean that some people are sinners in need of repentance and others aren’t. All need repentance. Just as all need to be born anew because “that which is born of the flesh is [merely] flesh” (John 3:6), so all must repent because all are sinners.

When Jesus said, “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32), he did not mean that some persons are good enough not to need repentance. He meant some think they are (Luke 18:9), and others have already repented and have been set right with God. For example, the rich young ruler desired “to justify himself” (Luke 10:29) while “the tax collector . . . beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ [and] went down to his house justified [by God!]” (Luke 18:13-14).

Therefore, none is excluded. All need repentance. And the need is urgent. Jesus said, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” What did he mean by perish? He meant that the final judgment of God would fall on those who don’t repent. “The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here” (Matthew 12:41). Jesus, the Son of God, is warning people of the judgment to come, and offering escape if we will repent. If we will not repent, Jesus has one word for us, “Woe, to you” (Matthew 11:21).

This is why his demand for repentance is part of his central message that the kingdom of God is at hand. “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15). The gospel—the good news—is that the rule of God has arrived in Jesus to save sinners before it arrives at his second coming in judgment. So the demand to repent is based on the gracious offer that is present to forgive, and on the gracious warning that someday those who refuse the offer will perish in God’s judgment.

After he had risen from the dead Jesus made sure that his apostles would continue the call for repentance throughout the world. He said, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46-47). So the demand of Jesus to repent goes to all the nations. It comes to us, whoever we are and wherever we are, and lays claim on us. This is the demand of Jesus to every soul: Repent. Be changed deep within. Replace all God-dishonoring, Christ-belittling perceptions and dispositions and purposes with God-treasuring, Christ-exalting ones.

For Christ and his kingdom,

Pastor John

1 For example meta is used as a prefix in the word metabaino (transfer or change from one place to another), metaballo (change one’s way of thinking), metago (lead or move from one place to another), metatithemi (convey from one place to another, put in another place, transfer), metamorphoo (change in a manner visible to others, be transfigured), metastrepho (cause a change in state or condition, change, alter), metaschematizo (change the form of something, transform, change), etc.

Lessons on effective leadership from Harry Truman (PreachingNow.com)

In Leadership on April 18, 2006 at 1:15 am

In a recent edition of his TIPS newsletter, Philip Humbert writes, "Harry Truman didn't find a career until late in life. He didn't marry until well into his thirties, and before that he tried a variety of jobs and ventures, including farming and selling men's clothing. His clothing store went bankrupt and he referred to himself as a 'failed haberdasher' for the rest of his life. Because of poor eyesight, he barely made it into the Army, but served with distinction and courage in World War I. In his 40's and 50's he drifted into politics and served as a county commissioner, mainly dealing with road repair.

"He never had money and he and his wife spend most of their married life living upstairs in his mother-in-law's home. When he was elected to the U.S. Senate, he was seen as a party hack and given little respect. In 1944, Franklin Roosevelt selected him to run for Vice President after the 'better' candidates were all rejected. FDR thought so little of him, they never had a serious conversation and Truman was told nothing about the atomic bomb until several days after he was sworn in as the new President.

"And yet this 'common man' is often viewed as one of the greatest Presidents of the 20th century. How can this be? Truman himself often said that there 'are probably a million people more qualified than me to be President, but I'm the one with the job, and I'll do my best.' Throughout his life, he was always known for doing his best, and often astonished people by exceeding their expectations. Here are some of my observations about how he did it.

1. First, he out-worked everyone around him. FDR rarely got to work before 10:00 AM, but Truman was usually up by 5:30 and worked all day long. In his first days as President, the change caught the White House staff off-guard. From the butlers to members of the Cabinet, they had never seen anyone who worked so hard and demanded such from them. One key to his amazing success was simple hard work.

2. Second, he was decisive. Where FDR delayed and avoided decisions, Truman listened to advice, read the reports, made decisions promptly, and once they were made, he rarely changed his mind. He made bold decisions and once made, he knew how to hold a steady course.

3. Third, his personal integrity was beyond reproach. At the Potsdam Conference after the war, he went into Berlin and a staffer suggested they could go drinking or get some 'women of easy virtue,' to which Truman coldly responded that he loved his wife and didn't mess around on her. He kicked the staffer out of his car and never spoke to him again.

4. Fourth, he knew the value of loyalty. He was famous for his life-long friendships and personal warmth. He knew the names of staffers in the White House, and remembered their families. When members of his staff came under political fire, he ignored the newspapers and kept his team together.

5. Fifth and most important, he knew who he was. In the face of enormous pressures and criticism, Truman knew his goals and purposes, remained firm in his beliefs and seldom wavered. He had enormous personal courage and quiet confidence in his own judgment.

"Sooner or later, life confronts each of us with problems that seem beyond our abilities and asks us to meet them anyway. Whether from illness or business gone bad, or in some other form, eventually we must dig deep to see what we are made of. These 'impossible' challenges reveal our character and give us the opportunity to surprise ourselves. President Truman did it, and so can we." (Copyright © 2006, all rights reserved. Contact Humbert at www.philiphumbert.com or email to Coach@philiphumbert.com)

A Review of “Stupid in America” (Lee Duigon)

In Culture on April 15, 2006 at 7:50 pm

[http://www.chalcedon.edu/articles/article.php?ArticleID=285]

Stupid in America: How We Cheat Our Kids A Documentary by John Stossel, for ABC’s 20/20

Dressed like derelicts, teenagers in a public school classroom — with their teacher present — climb on top of their desks, crawl on the floor, turn their backs on the teacher and talk loudly with each other, play cards, or wander around the room. One boy even strips to the waist and “dances” during class.

Everyone who has ever cracked his head against the brick wall of the government school monopoly owes ABC’s John Stossel a vote of thanks for filming these goings-on and broadcasting the images over the nation’s airwaves.

Why? Because the American people don’t believe us when we say that public education is a failure. Even if they grant that “other schools” may be in trouble, they insist that “our schools” are all right.

Parents and taxpayers need to see these images, and Stossel has provided them. But in one 60-minute documentary (with time out for commercials), he is able to reveal only the tip of the iceberg. As bad as the schools fare under his examination, the truth is ever so much worse.

Are American Kids Stupid?

Making the film wasn’t easy. “State after state wouldn’t let us in,” Stossel said. “Washington, D.C., directed us to a few of their best schools, and New York City wouldn’t let us in at all.” In fact, the chaotic classroom described above was in “one of America’s best public schools!” Stossel said.

Why keep out the cameras? What do the schools have to hide? Plenty — but constrained by his time and format, Stossel focused sharply on the academics.

“The longer they stay in school,” he concluded, “the stupider they are.”

Stossel compared a “good” school district in suburban New Jersey to an “average” school in Belgium, administering to the students a general information test. The Belgian students answered 76% of the questions correctly; the New Jersey students, 46%.

“It has to be something with the school,” said a disappointed American child, “’cause I don’t think we’re stupider.”

A recent report by the National Center for Education Statistics reveals that only 31% of American college graduates can read a complex book with good comprehension.[1]

How can that be? Stossel zeroed in on an 18-year-old in South Carolina who could not read, period. School administrators and “education specialists” insisted he was making progress, “doing fine,” etc. — only he still couldn’t read. His mother finally sent him to the local Sylvan Learning Center, where he learned to read in 72 hours.

“South Carolina schools, in 12 years, spent $100,000 on [his] education,” Stossel said, “and left him behind.”

Compared to students in 24 other countries, American children at the age of 10 take a standardized test and place eighth out of 25. At the age of 15, when children from 40 countries take the test, the Americans slip to 25th place. “They do worse than kids from much poorer countries, like Korea and Poland,” Stossel said.

Why are America’s schools so bad?

It’s the Monopoly, Stupid

Ask an “educator,” and he’ll surely tell you that our schools would get better if only we spent more money on them.

“They tell us, ‘There’s nothing wrong that money can’t fix,’” Stossel said. He went on to examine a Kansas City school district where $2 billion was spent on gaudy “improvements” — indoor pool, indoor track, weight rooms, computer labs, and so on. “The kids’ scores got worse, and those schools lost their accreditation.”

“You could give the public schools all the money in America, and it wouldn’t be enough,” said a frustrated reformer.

“Where does the money go?” Stossel asked. To administrative salaries, additional administrative staff, new administration buildings, “consultants,” and “experts,” he answered. Asking a few teachers how much money ought to be spent per child, per year, the teachers replied: “Oh … $10,000 per pupil … maybe $25,000 … or $30,000. The more, the better.”

The money makes no difference, Stossel said, because public education is a government monopoly — immune to competition and under no pressure whatsoever to improve.

Competition and school choice, in the form of vouchers and charter schools, would force the public schools to improve, Stossel said. Stossel is well-known for his libertarian, free-market views. Returning to Belgium, he compared that country’s choice-based school system to America’s government monopoly.

“Belgium has school choice,” he said. “The money for education is attached to the kids, not the schools, and parents have full choice. So if the schools are not good, they’re gone.

“Why should we keep kids in a school that’s not working?”

Why No Reform?

Just before Stossel finished preparing his documentary, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the state’s experimental school choice program — which had already produced positive results — was unconstitutional. Earlier, school choice proposals in South Carolina, backed strongly by the governor, were killed by the state legislature.

In Florida, a public school teacher sued to abolish school choice. “Competition is not for human beings,” she said.

In South Carolina, the state teachers’ union spent millions of dollars on lobbying and television ads to keep school choice from seeing the light of day.

Reform efforts fail, Stossel said, because public school administrators and teachers’ unions do everything in their power to defeat it. To show the political face of the teachers’ unions, Stossel filmed a mass rally by the New York City teachers. “You are heroes!” the union president roared to the crowd; and the crowd roared back.

How strong are the unions? “The monopoly in my town [New York],” Stossel said, “can’t fire a teacher who sends sexual emails to a 16-year-old student.”

That teacher finally was fired, he said, but only after a five-year wrangle with the union.

In a rhetorical coup, Stossel displayed a chart showing the process that must be followed by a New York City principal seeking to fire a teacher for cause. The chart was six feet long and featured enough arrows, boxes, solid and dotted lines to make the schematic for a lunar probe look like a diagram for a balsa wood toy glider. And it’s backed up by a 200-page union contract!

What He Left Out

Unable to dissect a world-class mess in an hour-long documentary, Stossel omitted any reference to the teachers’ unions’ political and cultural agenda. The unions spend tens of millions of dollars a year to support left-wing political candidates and causes. And in most states, if you match up the names of your teachers’ union officers with those on the rosters of the leading homosexual activist groups, you’ll find many of them on both lists.

These are not the persons to whom Christian parents should entrust their children. The unions may not be doing a good job of teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic; but they are teaching promiscuity, abortion, and sodomy.

Stossel also neglected to mention the only real solution to the problem — remove your children from the public schools, and either send them to Christian schools or homeschool them. This has long been Chalcedon’s position.

An evil tree can bear only evil fruit, and public education is an evil tree. R.J. Rushdoony spent decades proving this: see his 1963 book, The Messianic Character of American Education.[2] American public schools rest on a non-Christian, aggressively secularist philosophy that rejects God’s laws and puts man and the state in His place. This is not fruit you want your children to be eating.

Stossel also found no time to explore the rising tide of violence, crime, drug use, and sexual activity in the public schools. Perhaps he will oblige us with a follow-up.

Meanwhile, if he has succeeded in jarring a few parents out of their false sense of educational security and inspiring them to seek an alternative to the public schools, he has done America a service.

——————————————————————————–

[1] See http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48309 .

[2] Ross House Books, Vallecito, CA: 1995 edition.

——————————————————————————–

Lee Duigon is a Christian free-lance writer and contributing editor for the Chalcedon Report. He has been a newspaper editor and reporter and a published novelist.

(Thanks to Bill Pershing, in Missouri for sending the article this way!)

A Review of “Stupid in America” (Lee Duigon)

In Culture on April 15, 2006 at 7:50 pm

[http://www.chalcedon.edu/articles/article.php?ArticleID=285]

Stupid in America: How We Cheat Our Kids A Documentary by John Stossel, for ABC’s 20/20

Dressed like derelicts, teenagers in a public school classroom — with their teacher present — climb on top of their desks, crawl on the floor, turn their backs on the teacher and talk loudly with each other, play cards, or wander around the room. One boy even strips to the waist and “dances” during class.

Everyone who has ever cracked his head against the brick wall of the government school monopoly owes ABC’s John Stossel a vote of thanks for filming these goings-on and broadcasting the images over the nation’s airwaves.

Why? Because the American people don’t believe us when we say that public education is a failure. Even if they grant that “other schools” may be in trouble, they insist that “our schools” are all right.

Parents and taxpayers need to see these images, and Stossel has provided them. But in one 60-minute documentary (with time out for commercials), he is able to reveal only the tip of the iceberg. As bad as the schools fare under his examination, the truth is ever so much worse.

Are American Kids Stupid?

Making the film wasn’t easy. “State after state wouldn’t let us in,” Stossel said. “Washington, D.C., directed us to a few of their best schools, and New York City wouldn’t let us in at all.” In fact, the chaotic classroom described above was in “one of America’s best public schools!” Stossel said.

Why keep out the cameras? What do the schools have to hide? Plenty — but constrained by his time and format, Stossel focused sharply on the academics.

“The longer they stay in school,” he concluded, “the stupider they are.”

Stossel compared a “good” school district in suburban New Jersey to an “average” school in Belgium, administering to the students a general information test. The Belgian students answered 76% of the questions correctly; the New Jersey students, 46%.

“It has to be something with the school,” said a disappointed American child, “’cause I don’t think we’re stupider.”

A recent report by the National Center for Education Statistics reveals that only 31% of American college graduates can read a complex book with good comprehension.[1]

How can that be? Stossel zeroed in on an 18-year-old in South Carolina who could not read, period. School administrators and “education specialists” insisted he was making progress, “doing fine,” etc. — only he still couldn’t read. His mother finally sent him to the local Sylvan Learning Center, where he learned to read in 72 hours.

“South Carolina schools, in 12 years, spent $100,000 on [his] education,” Stossel said, “and left him behind.”

Compared to students in 24 other countries, American children at the age of 10 take a standardized test and place eighth out of 25. At the age of 15, when children from 40 countries take the test, the Americans slip to 25th place. “They do worse than kids from much poorer countries, like Korea and Poland,” Stossel said.

Why are America’s schools so bad?

It’s the Monopoly, Stupid

Ask an “educator,” and he’ll surely tell you that our schools would get better if only we spent more money on them.

“They tell us, ‘There’s nothing wrong that money can’t fix,’” Stossel said. He went on to examine a Kansas City school district where $2 billion was spent on gaudy “improvements” — indoor pool, indoor track, weight rooms, computer labs, and so on. “The kids’ scores got worse, and those schools lost their accreditation.”

“You could give the public schools all the money in America, and it wouldn’t be enough,” said a frustrated reformer.

“Where does the money go?” Stossel asked. To administrative salaries, additional administrative staff, new administration buildings, “consultants,” and “experts,” he answered. Asking a few teachers how much money ought to be spent per child, per year, the teachers replied: “Oh … $10,000 per pupil … maybe $25,000 … or $30,000. The more, the better.”

The money makes no difference, Stossel said, because public education is a government monopoly — immune to competition and under no pressure whatsoever to improve.

Competition and school choice, in the form of vouchers and charter schools, would force the public schools to improve, Stossel said. Stossel is well-known for his libertarian, free-market views. Returning to Belgium, he compared that country’s choice-based school system to America’s government monopoly.

“Belgium has school choice,” he said. “The money for education is attached to the kids, not the schools, and parents have full choice. So if the schools are not good, they’re gone.

“Why should we keep kids in a school that’s not working?”

Why No Reform?

Just before Stossel finished preparing his documentary, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the state’s experimental school choice program — which had already produced positive results — was unconstitutional. Earlier, school choice proposals in South Carolina, backed strongly by the governor, were killed by the state legislature.

In Florida, a public school teacher sued to abolish school choice. “Competition is not for human beings,” she said.

In South Carolina, the state teachers’ union spent millions of dollars on lobbying and television ads to keep school choice from seeing the light of day.

Reform efforts fail, Stossel said, because public school administrators and teachers’ unions do everything in their power to defeat it. To show the political face of the teachers’ unions, Stossel filmed a mass rally by the New York City teachers. “You are heroes!” the union president roared to the crowd; and the crowd roared back.

How strong are the unions? “The monopoly in my town [New York],” Stossel said, “can’t fire a teacher who sends sexual emails to a 16-year-old student.”

That teacher finally was fired, he said, but only after a five-year wrangle with the union.

In a rhetorical coup, Stossel displayed a chart showing the process that must be followed by a New York City principal seeking to fire a teacher for cause. The chart was six feet long and featured enough arrows, boxes, solid and dotted lines to make the schematic for a lunar probe look like a diagram for a balsa wood toy glider. And it’s backed up by a 200-page union contract!

What He Left Out

Unable to dissect a world-class mess in an hour-long documentary, Stossel omitted any reference to the teachers’ unions’ political and cultural agenda. The unions spend tens of millions of dollars a year to support left-wing political candidates and causes. And in most states, if you match up the names of your teachers’ union officers with those on the rosters of the leading homosexual activist groups, you’ll find many of them on both lists.

These are not the persons to whom Christian parents should entrust their children. The unions may not be doing a good job of teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic; but they are teaching promiscuity, abortion, and sodomy.

Stossel also neglected to mention the only real solution to the problem — remove your children from the public schools, and either send them to Christian schools or homeschool them. This has long been Chalcedon’s position.

An evil tree can bear only evil fruit, and public education is an evil tree. R.J. Rushdoony spent decades proving this: see his 1963 book, The Messianic Character of American Education.[2] American public schools rest on a non-Christian, aggressively secularist philosophy that rejects God’s laws and puts man and the state in His place. This is not fruit you want your children to be eating.

Stossel also found no time to explore the rising tide of violence, crime, drug use, and sexual activity in the public schools. Perhaps he will oblige us with a follow-up.

Meanwhile, if he has succeeded in jarring a few parents out of their false sense of educational security and inspiring them to seek an alternative to the public schools, he has done America a service.

——————————————————————————–

[1] See http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48309 .

[2] Ross House Books, Vallecito, CA: 1995 edition.

——————————————————————————–

Lee Duigon is a Christian free-lance writer and contributing editor for the Chalcedon Report. He has been a newspaper editor and reporter and a published novelist.

(Thanks to Bill Pershing, in Missouri for sending the article this way!)

ESV Outreach Ministry to Trinidad

In ESV, Missions, Trinidad & Tobago on April 15, 2006 at 11:23 am

In some senses, I feel as if I am a missionary to Trinidad, having been there doing missions work three times in the last three years and currently having in the works to do a Marriage and Family Conference in the South early next year, Lord willing.

I also feel as if I am an ESV apologist. I went exclusively to the ESV in teaching and preaching back in 2004. And thanks to the folks at Crossway, they have donated over 60 pew Bibles that I have taken to Trinidad for a church in Point Fortin to distribute and use in their times of worship.

So imagine my surprise when I received the latest edition of “The Standard Bearer E-News” from The Standard Bible Society of the English Standard Version outlining an ESV Outreach Ministry Initiative. In this edition, they relate how they recently partnered with PastorServe to distribute ESV Bibles in … you guessed it … Trinidad. Words cannot express how this thrills my heart that the ESV is making in-roads to these incredible people.

Continue

Proclaim Liberty Throughout the Land (PatriotPost.US)

In Uncategorized on April 14, 2006 at 2:36 pm

The Federalist puts out a e-zine called "The Patriot Post."  Take time to read their current e-zine about the Resurrection. 

http://patriotpost.us/pub/06-15_Easter-print.htm

A Hymn for Preachers of the Word

In For Preachers/Pastors, For Seminary Students, Uncategorized on April 12, 2006 at 8:53 pm

Preach, O Preach the Word!
By Matthew R. Perry
Written November 1, 2005
Based on 2 Timothy 4:2-5

This is a charge we are to keep!
To tell it loud before His sheep
And rouse the lost out of their sleep!
O preach, O preach the Word of God!

Be ready, shepherds, to reprove
Exhort the church so it may move
To spread the truth, embraced with love!
O Preach, O preach the Word of God.

The world moves out with itching ears
That long to hear what they hold dear
And mute the Word that’s all too clear!
O preach, O preach the Word of God!

With sober minds and patient hearts
We persevere as from the start
"Fulfill your calling — do your part!"
O preach, O preach the Word of God!

L.M. 

Copyright (c) 2005 by Matthew Perry, Boone's Creek Baptist Church.  185 N. Cleveland Rd., Lexington, KY 40509 (859) 263-5466.  boonescreekchurch@gmail.comhttp://www.boonescreekchurch.com  

Deciphering The DaVinci Code (Mohler)

In Book Review, Culture, DaVinci Code, Religious Organizations, Theology on April 12, 2006 at 3:56 pm

Just an excellent article and review of this work and so-to-be-released movie.

Click here to read! 

Studying The Bible … Carnally?

In For Preachers/Pastors, For Seminary Students, Leadership on April 12, 2006 at 2:17 am

In the March 9 edition of his Turning Point Daily Devotional, David Jeremiah talks about a well-known Old Testament scholar who spent the summer in Jerusalem as part of a team of scholars working on a new translation of the Bible. When he returned to the classroom in September, he told his students it had been a carnal, spiritually dry summer. His students were shocked. Weren’t they studying God’s Word all day? He replied, “It became a project instead of a passion. We became so familiar with the intricacies of the text that we stopped seeing its grandeur.”

Jeremiah adds, “Is it possible to study the Bible in a carnal fashion? Apparently so. Maybe when you read the professor’s testimony, you said to yourself, ‘That’s happened to me.’ You don’t have to be a scholar or translator to lose sight of the inestimable privilege of reading God’s Word. It can happen when you become so faithful with your quiet time that it becomes a routine — something to check off your ‘to-do’ list for the day.”

This is a danger pastors and church leaders face on a constant basis. As we dig through God’s Word developing sermons, lessons and other presentations, it is all too easy to begin treating Scripture as a resource to use in our work, losing sight of the incredible treasure God has given us in His Word. As you pick up your copy of God’s Word today, take time to meditate on its power and its unique value. Take time to thank God for allowing you to handle His precious Word, and ask Him to help you discover new riches in those remarkable pages.

As A.W. Tozer said, “The sacred page is not meant to be the end, but only the means toward the end, which is knowing God Himself.”

Michael Duduit, Editor
michael@preaching.com
www.michaelduduit.com

(From MRP: “Oh God, forgive me when the Bible simply becomes fodder for my sermons rather than a way for me to know You more and proclaim you best! Revive me again, O Lord.”)

The Gospel of Judas: Is This Really the “Lost Gospel”?

In Culture, For Preachers/Pastors, Religious Organizations, Theology on April 11, 2006 at 1:39 am

(This was written at the request of one of my members asking for a "statement to be released."  May it be of help during these troubling times! — MRP) 

The USA Today.  20/20.  The National Geographic Channel.  Canadian Television (CTV).  The New York Times.  All over the newspapers, magazines, television, and Internet, headlines blared out all over:  Scholars find the Lost Gospel of Judas.  Many in the mainstream media have declared that this will cause a ‘revolution in Christianity.’  One headline blurted out, “Christianity Shaken!”    Sadly, this has caused many to be shaken.  Is there anything to this “Gospel?”  Let’s take a look at what this ‘Gospel of Judas’ is all about. 

Background 

Simply put, this work makes Judas to look like a hero rather than a traitor.  Although Judas Iscariot in every reference in the New Testament is called “the one who betrayed Christ,” the “Gospel of Judas” tells us that Jesus took Judas aside, imparted some secret knowledge to him and even ordered Judas to betray Him.  Why?  So that Jesus would be freed from His earthly body into a heavenly one.  The translators and editors of The Gospel of Judas even note, “The death of Jesus, with the assistance of Judas, is taken to be the liberation of the spiritual person within.”  Again, Judas is cast as the hero of the story, rather than the villain and the traitor that Scripture says He is.   

Are there problems with this?  Yes, yes … a hundred times YES in a hundred different ways.  Let’s outline just a few. 

When Was the Gospel of Judas written? 

Even the scholars putting forth this ‘lost gospel’ admit that this was written sometime in the 3rd century, almost 200 years after Judas died!  Normally, that would be seen as a gigantic problem and would quell any further attempt to validate this ‘lost gospel,’ but alas —- when you have an agenda to submarine and undermine the Scriptures, one little detail like falsifying authorship won’t keep you from pressing on. 

That’s why we hold to the Four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Each of these authors were eyewitnesses of Jesus’ ministry.  Notice in 2 Peter 1:16, where Peter noted, “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”  In First John, the Apostle John begins this letter by saying,  

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life — the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us — that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you so that you too may have fellowship with us;  and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:1-3, ESV).   

Luke testifies:  Luke 1:1-4  

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us,  [2] just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us,  [3] it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,  [4] that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.  

So Peter and John were eyewitnesses and Luke the master historian did his homework so that we would have an accurate account of Jesus’ ministry from those who were eyewitnesses themselves.  All Four Gospels are eyewitness accounts whose authors wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16) all that they saw and heard and touched.   

That cannot be said even remotely about “The Gospel of Judas.” 

What Is Contained in This Gospel? 

Clearly, if you read over the translation found on the National Geographic® website, you will notice that this ‘Gospel’ has an entirely different flavor to that of the Four Gospels.  What’s different? 

First, we see that Jesus’ calls the disciples’ deity “your god.”  In Scene 1 and verse 34, Jesus reacts to their act of praise during the Passover meal by saying, “You are not doing this of your own will, but so that the son of your god will be praised.”  The disciples respond, “Master, you are the son of our god.”  Jesus said to them, “How do you know me?  Truly I say to you that no generation of the people that are among you will know me.”[1] [1]  

To begin, Jesus always refers to the Creator as “my Father.”  Secondly, in John 14:9-10, Jesus Himself says, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father… I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (John 14:9-10).  “Father!”  Not, ‘your god.’   

Secondly, we see Jesus taking Judas aside to impart some secret knowledge.  This lost ‘gospel’ was a product of an ancient 2nd to 3rd century heresy known as Gnosticism.  The word ‘gnostic’ comes from the Greek word ‘gnosis’ which means ‘knowledge.’  Gnostics believed that the flesh was inherently evil and the spirit world was inherently good and that in order to leave the evil flesh and ascend to the spirit world, you needed to acquire more of this secret knowledge to obtain more freedom from this world.  An evil god, called the demiurge, actually created the universe.  The true God was actually too pure for us human creatures to truly know him.  Therefore, they say, God brought about lesser gods known as emanations to help express what could not be known.  But this demiurge came to keep those in the fleshly, material world in bondage to keep the spirit souls that were pure from going back up to God after their physical bodies had died.  Again, the secret knowledge of the spiritual realm would set their spirits free from this material world![2][2] 

Christ was sent from the spirit world to the fleshly world to impart special spiritual knowledge so that we might know it and be freed.  The problem is that Gnostics deny that Jesus Christ was God made flesh (the Incarnation).  If He was not, then He could not have atoned for our sins and therefore we are still lost in those sins.   

Thirdly, where’s God’s redeeming work in Christ for our sins?  Nowhere to be found!  By the language of “The Gospel of Judas,” we see the evidence of this Gnostic thought.  But did not Jesus come not simply to release the spiritual person from within, but to redeem us who are in spiritual sin by dying a real human death on the cross in our place?  Yes He did.  Albert Mohler of Southern Seminary states, “This redemptive action is completely missing from The Gospel of Judas. For that reason, the text was rejected by early Christian leaders.”[3]  In fact, Simon Gathercole, a New Testament professor at Aberdeen University, noted that the text was truly authentic, but unimportant in helping us understand first-century biblical thought:  "It contains themes which are alien to the first-century world of Jesus and Judas, but which became popular later." For The Gospel of Judas, the ‘good news’ is that our spirits may be released from this world to the next.  But doesn’t the Scriptures teach that our spirits are by nature dead but can only be made alive through God’s grace in the forgiveness of sins through the cross (Romans 3:23-26; Ephesians 2:1-8)?  Clearly, this is not a fifth ‘gospel,’ because the ‘good news’ it conveys is diametrically opposed to the ‘good news’ the other Four Gospels convey. 

So What Do We As Christians Do With All This? 

First, know that many secular scholars and the mainstream media will always look to undermine the authority of Scripture.  Ask yourselves this, when was the last time you saw anything positive being promoted in the media or in secular colleges about the truth of Scripture?  Sadly, even many Christian colleges cast doubt of the reliability of Scripture, much less uphold its authority.   

We have seen this with The Gospel of Judas, The DaVinci Code, even all the way back to The Last Temptation of Christ.  The media lauded the work of an artist named Andres Serrano who displayed a photograph a crucifix submerged in urine — and was even supported by the National Endowment of the Arts!   

Friends, this is where we are.  We are living in a Post-Christian America where all things outlined in Scripture from the roles and definition of family, to how the universe came into being, and all other Scriptural issues are being called into question and those who speak loudly about it are applauded!   

Secondly, we must truly praise God for the discernment and the faithfulness of the early church fathers who defended the faith in the early church.  The Early Fathers did not have Internet, nor did they have 1800 years of faithful scholarship of Scripture to help them.  They had the Word of God in their hearts and were able to discern heresy from orthodoxy!   They could discern right and wrong.  Their faithfulness paved the way for all the faithful ones who followed.  We certainly are in their debt. 

Thirdly,  trust the Word of God.  There is great unity to be found not just in the Four Gospels but in all of the Scriptures as redemptive history is unfolded, coming to completion in Christ Jesus.  The Gospel of Judas could not stay consistent within itself, but all 66 Books of our Bible are amazingly consistent.  W.A. Criswell preached a sermon called “The Scarlet Thread” that is found all through Scripture.  That scarlet thread is the blood of Jesus from Genesis to Revelation.  What is true in Genesis is true in the Psalms is true in Haggai is true in Luke is true in Galatians, 1 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.  It is a library of books that make up The Book!   

Conclusion 

I leave you with the Article 1 of our Declaration of Faith which outlines The Scriptures: 

We believe in the infallible, verbal inspiration of the whole Bible, that God is its author, that it has truth without any mixture of error for its matter; that it is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction with the salvation of sinners and the instruction of the saints unto all good works for its end; that it reveals the principles by which God will judge us; and therefore is, and shall remain to the end of the world, the only complete and final revelation of the will of God to man, the true center of Christian union; the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, doctrines and opinions should be tried. 

And also Psalm 119:89-90: 

Forever, O Lord, your word       
is firmly fixed in the heavens.
 

Let not your faith be shaken by supposed scholars and our mass mainstream media.  The God we serve, the God of the Bible, is God over all and His Word is fixed and cannot be shaken.  Someone said, “The Bible is an anvil with little hammers broken all around it.”  Of course!  Can any man break apart God’s inspired Word? 

I do not envy them the task! 

Copyright © 2006 by Matthew Perry.    

 



[1] [1] The Gospel of Judas.  Translated by Rodolphe Kasser, Marvin Meyer, and Gregor Wurst in collaboration with Francois Gaudard.  © 2006, National Geographic Society.  http://www9.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf:  Internet.  Downloaded 10 April 2006. 

[2] [2]  Thanks to Matt Slick of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministries for this helpful information.  http://www.carm.org/heresy/gnosticism.htm: Internet.  Downloaded 10 April 2006.   

[3]  [3]  From the Albert Mohler Commentary:  From Traitor to Hero? Responding to “The Gospel of Judas,” April 7, 2006.  http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2006-04-07:  Internet.  Downloaded 8 April 2006.   

The Gospel of Judas: Is This Really the “Lost Gospel”?

In Culture, For Preachers/Pastors, Religious Organizations, Theology on April 11, 2006 at 1:39 am

(This was written at the request of one of my members asking for a "statement to be released."  May it be of help during these troubling times! — MRP) 

The USA Today.  20/20.  The National Geographic Channel.  Canadian Television (CTV).  The New York Times.  All over the newspapers, magazines, television, and Internet, headlines blared out all over:  Scholars find the Lost Gospel of Judas.  Many in the mainstream media have declared that this will cause a ‘revolution in Christianity.’  One headline blurted out, “Christianity Shaken!”    Sadly, this has caused many to be shaken.  Is there anything to this “Gospel?”  Let’s take a look at what this ‘Gospel of Judas’ is all about. 

Background 

Simply put, this work makes Judas to look like a hero rather than a traitor.  Although Judas Iscariot in every reference in the New Testament is called “the one who betrayed Christ,” the “Gospel of Judas” tells us that Jesus took Judas aside, imparted some secret knowledge to him and even ordered Judas to betray Him.  Why?  So that Jesus would be freed from His earthly body into a heavenly one.  The translators and editors of The Gospel of Judas even note, “The death of Jesus, with the assistance of Judas, is taken to be the liberation of the spiritual person within.”  Again, Judas is cast as the hero of the story, rather than the villain and the traitor that Scripture says He is.   

Are there problems with this?  Yes, yes … a hundred times YES in a hundred different ways.  Let’s outline just a few. 

When Was the Gospel of Judas written? 

Even the scholars putting forth this ‘lost gospel’ admit that this was written sometime in the 3rd century, almost 200 years after Judas died!  Normally, that would be seen as a gigantic problem and would quell any further attempt to validate this ‘lost gospel,’ but alas —- when you have an agenda to submarine and undermine the Scriptures, one little detail like falsifying authorship won’t keep you from pressing on. 

That’s why we hold to the Four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Each of these authors were eyewitnesses of Jesus’ ministry.  Notice in 2 Peter 1:16, where Peter noted, “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”  In First John, the Apostle John begins this letter by saying,  

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life — the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us — that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you so that you too may have fellowship with us;  and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:1-3, ESV).   

Luke testifies:  Luke 1:1-4  

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us,  [2] just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us,  [3] it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,  [4] that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.  

So Peter and John were eyewitnesses and Luke the master historian did his homework so that we would have an accurate account of Jesus’ ministry from those who were eyewitnesses themselves.  All Four Gospels are eyewitness accounts whose authors wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16) all that they saw and heard and touched.   

That cannot be said even remotely about “The Gospel of Judas.” 

What Is Contained in This Gospel? 

Clearly, if you read over the translation found on the National Geographic® website, you will notice that this ‘Gospel’ has an entirely different flavor to that of the Four Gospels.  What’s different? 

First, we see that Jesus’ calls the disciples’ deity “your god.”  In Scene 1 and verse 34, Jesus reacts to their act of praise during the Passover meal by saying, “You are not doing this of your own will, but so that the son of your god will be praised.”  The disciples respond, “Master, you are the son of our god.”  Jesus said to them, “How do you know me?  Truly I say to you that no generation of the people that are among you will know me.”[1] [1]  

To begin, Jesus always refers to the Creator as “my Father.”  Secondly, in John 14:9-10, Jesus Himself says, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father… I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (John 14:9-10).  “Father!”  Not, ‘your god.’   

Secondly, we see Jesus taking Judas aside to impart some secret knowledge.  This lost ‘gospel’ was a product of an ancient 2nd to 3rd century heresy known as Gnosticism.  The word ‘gnostic’ comes from the Greek word ‘gnosis’ which means ‘knowledge.’  Gnostics believed that the flesh was inherently evil and the spirit world was inherently good and that in order to leave the evil flesh and ascend to the spirit world, you needed to acquire more of this secret knowledge to obtain more freedom from this world.  An evil god, called the demiurge, actually created the universe.  The true God was actually too pure for us human creatures to truly know him.  Therefore, they say, God brought about lesser gods known as emanations to help express what could not be known.  But this demiurge came to keep those in the fleshly, material world in bondage to keep the spirit souls that were pure from going back up to God after their physical bodies had died.  Again, the secret knowledge of the spiritual realm would set their spirits free from this material world![2][2] 

Christ was sent from the spirit world to the fleshly world to impart special spiritual knowledge so that we might know it and be freed.  The problem is that Gnostics deny that Jesus Christ was God made flesh (the Incarnation).  If He was not, then He could not have atoned for our sins and therefore we are still lost in those sins.   

Thirdly, where’s God’s redeeming work in Christ for our sins?  Nowhere to be found!  By the language of “The Gospel of Judas,” we see the evidence of this Gnostic thought.  But did not Jesus come not simply to release the spiritual person from within, but to redeem us who are in spiritual sin by dying a real human death on the cross in our place?  Yes He did.  Albert Mohler of Southern Seminary states, “This redemptive action is completely missing from The Gospel of Judas. For that reason, the text was rejected by early Christian leaders.”[3]  In fact, Simon Gathercole, a New Testament professor at Aberdeen University, noted that the text was truly authentic, but unimportant in helping us understand first-century biblical thought:  "It contains themes which are alien to the first-century world of Jesus and Judas, but which became popular later." For The Gospel of Judas, the ‘good news’ is that our spirits may be released from this world to the next.  But doesn’t the Scriptures teach that our spirits are by nature dead but can only be made alive through God’s grace in the forgiveness of sins through the cross (Romans 3:23-26; Ephesians 2:1-8)?  Clearly, this is not a fifth ‘gospel,’ because the ‘good news’ it conveys is diametrically opposed to the ‘good news’ the other Four Gospels convey. 

So What Do We As Christians Do With All This? 

First, know that many secular scholars and the mainstream media will always look to undermine the authority of Scripture.  Ask yourselves this, when was the last time you saw anything positive being promoted in the media or in secular colleges about the truth of Scripture?  Sadly, even many Christian colleges cast doubt of the reliability of Scripture, much less uphold its authority.   

We have seen this with The Gospel of Judas, The DaVinci Code, even all the way back to The Last Temptation of Christ.  The media lauded the work of an artist named Andres Serrano who displayed a photograph a crucifix submerged in urine — and was even supported by the National Endowment of the Arts!   

Friends, this is where we are.  We are living in a Post-Christian America where all things outlined in Scripture from the roles and definition of family, to how the universe came into being, and all other Scriptural issues are being called into question and those who speak loudly about it are applauded!   

Secondly, we must truly praise God for the discernment and the faithfulness of the early church fathers who defended the faith in the early church.  The Early Fathers did not have Internet, nor did they have 1800 years of faithful scholarship of Scripture to help them.  They had the Word of God in their hearts and were able to discern heresy from orthodoxy!   They could discern right and wrong.  Their faithfulness paved the way for all the faithful ones who followed.  We certainly are in their debt. 

Thirdly,  trust the Word of God.  There is great unity to be found not just in the Four Gospels but in all of the Scriptures as redemptive history is unfolded, coming to completion in Christ Jesus.  The Gospel of Judas could not stay consistent within itself, but all 66 Books of our Bible are amazingly consistent.  W.A. Criswell preached a sermon called “The Scarlet Thread” that is found all through Scripture.  That scarlet thread is the blood of Jesus from Genesis to Revelation.  What is true in Genesis is true in the Psalms is true in Haggai is true in Luke is true in Galatians, 1 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.  It is a library of books that make up The Book!   

Conclusion 

I leave you with the Article 1 of our Declaration of Faith which outlines The Scriptures: 

We believe in the infallible, verbal inspiration of the whole Bible, that God is its author, that it has truth without any mixture of error for its matter; that it is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction with the salvation of sinners and the instruction of the saints unto all good works for its end; that it reveals the principles by which God will judge us; and therefore is, and shall remain to the end of the world, the only complete and final revelation of the will of God to man, the true center of Christian union; the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, doctrines and opinions should be tried. 

And also Psalm 119:89-90: 

Forever, O Lord, your word       
is firmly fixed in the heavens.
 

Let not your faith be shaken by supposed scholars and our mass mainstream media.  The God we serve, the God of the Bible, is God over all and His Word is fixed and cannot be shaken.  Someone said, “The Bible is an anvil with little hammers broken all around it.”  Of course!  Can any man break apart God’s inspired Word? 

I do not envy them the task! 

Copyright © 2006 by Matthew Perry.    

 



[1] [1] The Gospel of Judas.  Translated by Rodolphe Kasser, Marvin Meyer, and Gregor Wurst in collaboration with Francois Gaudard.  © 2006, National Geographic Society.  http://www9.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf:  Internet.  Downloaded 10 April 2006. 

[2] [2]  Thanks to Matt Slick of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministries for this helpful information.  http://www.carm.org/heresy/gnosticism.htm: Internet.  Downloaded 10 April 2006.   

[3]  [3]  From the Albert Mohler Commentary:  From Traitor to Hero? Responding to “The Gospel of Judas,” April 7, 2006.  http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2006-04-07:  Internet.  Downloaded 8 April 2006.   

We must respond to The Gospel of Judas

In Uncategorized on April 10, 2006 at 2:30 pm

Yesterday, one of the senior adults at the church where I serve asked me to "release a statement" about issues around the Gospel of Judas.  Apparently, it is causing tremendous concern amongst the lay people of our churches. 

And they are looking to pastors to answer the bell and grapple with these issues.

This is a golden opportunity!

With the release of The DaVinci Code in theatres on Friday, May 19th, along with all the noise about The Gospel of Judas, it is time for us preachers and all Kingdom people to put forth the reasons why we believe and know that the Scriptures are truly God's perfect Word and are our authority in all matters of faith and life. 

Solomon was right — there is truly nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9).  What the DaVinci Code promotes as well as the Gnostic heresies surrounding the Gospel of Judas are centuries old.  The Early Fathers of the 3rd-6th centuries met these issues head on, and so must we. 

I plan on preaching about this issue on Sunday, April 23rd (can't next Sunday with it being Resurrection Sunday) and we will spend our Sunday nights in May going over a four-part series on "Discussing The DaVinci Code" by Lee Strobel and Garry Poole. 

In the meantime, here's some great resources on clearing up the controversy on "The Gospel of Judas."

We need not be afraid to stand up for the Word of God.  They may make fun of us and call us anti-intellectual, but so what?  The Word of God endures and is perfect, enlightening the soul (Psalm 19). 

I recommend reading through Psalm 119 this day.  Fall in love with God and His Word all over again.

Luther on pure grace

In Uncategorized on April 9, 2006 at 3:27 am

Although out of pure grace God does not impute our sins to us, He nonetheless did not want to do this until complete and ample satisfaction of His law and His righteousness had been made. Since this was impossible for us, God ordained for us, in our place, One who took upon Himself all the punishment we deserve. He fulfilled the law for us. He averted the judgment of God from us and appeased God’s wrath. Grace, therefore, costs us nothing, but is cost Another much to get it for us. Grace was purchased with an incalculable, infinite treasure, the Son of God Himself.”

From Traitor to Hero? Responding to “The Gospel of Judas” (Mohler)

In Culture, Theology on April 8, 2006 at 7:18 pm

Headlines around the world are announcing the publication of a "long lost" and "suppressed" ancient document, known as The Gospel of Judas. The National Geographic Society announced the publication at a major media event on Thursday, just in time to boost publicity for its Sunday night special on the National Geographic Channel.

The announcement led to a frenzy of media coverage, ranging from responsible reports to outrageous sensationalism. According to some commentators, the publication of this new document will force a complete reformulation of Christianity and our understanding of both Judas and Jesus. In reality, nothing of the sort is in view. The document is highly interesting, however, offering an ancient and authoritative source into the thinking of heretical groups who offered alternative understandings of Christianity.

Click here to read the rest.

Heaven: The Ultimate Family Reunion

In Theology on April 8, 2006 at 11:02 am

Family reunions were an important part of my life growing up. Because my immediate family lived in California while the rest of our relatives were in Kansas, we were only able to visit them once each year—usually around Christmas. Thankfully, both sets of grandparents lived within three miles of each other, so our annual trek only required one stop.

As you can imagine, our trips to Kansas were activity packed from the time we arrived until the time we left. There were two sets of cousins to visit, two family Christmases to celebrate, numerous presents to open, and countless meals to eat. Of course, my dad would sit in the living room with all of the uncles, catching up on everything that had happened in the previous months. And my mom would mingle with all of my aunts, usually in the kitchen, as they prepared more food than could possibly be consumed. As for me and my brother, we would go downstairs to the basement and play games with the cousins—laughing and joking as though we had been in Kansas the entire time.

At the end of our visit, we would pack up the car and mentally prepare ourselves for the twenty-three-hour journey back home. We would say our good-byes, exchange the appropriate hugs, and then we’d be off. And while we certainly loved the family we were leaving behind, the parting was never overly sad or sorrowful, because we knew we’d be back next Christmas—eager to see everyone again.

In a similar sense, God has also planned a future reunion for His family. Although death separates us from the earthly family and friends we love, the separation is only temporary. Not only that, but once we are reunited in heaven, we will never be separated again. Certainly, death is still painful, but as Christians we can rest confidently in the fact that the loneliness will not last forever. Heaven will reunite us as we worship God together in the presence of our Savior.

(Click here to read the rest of this article by Nathan Busenitz from the Pulpit Live Blog.

What Makes Music Christian?

In Church Life, Theology on April 6, 2006 at 5:50 pm

My good friend Mark Combs and I recently discussed our desire to help reform Christian worship in our churches.  This reform certainly does not entail anything drastic such as ripping out the piano and organ in lieu of a praise band or orchestra.  In fact, we avoided such triviality. 

Our desire is to help make all of our worship God-centered and Word-centered (these terms are synonymous, by the way).  Many of our songs that we sing are not God-centered.  Tim Challies in a recent article noted that we sing songs in a Christian context and accept them as such, but if they were sung in, say, a bar or nightclub they would fit in just as well.  Another called these types of songs "Jesus Is My Boyfriend" songs. 

I am not saying that all of our songs have to be singable systematic theologies.  I'm saying that they must not be devoid of theology at all — not devoid of declaring the attributes and the workings of God.  Sadly, many of our songs are simply telling others of what we are going to do in worship rather than extolling the One to be worshipped. 

This is surely not limited to choruses — hymns are just as able to proclaim God's glories and just as culpable in conveying trite and insipid sentimentality.   For example, In the Garden by C. Austin Miles goes as follows:

I come to the garden alone
While the dew is still on the roses
And the voice I hear falling on my ear
The Son of God discloses

And he walks with me
And he talks with me
And he tells me I am his own
And the joy we share as we tarry there
None other has ever known

He speaks and the sound of his voice
Is so sweet the birds hush their singing
And the melody that he gave to me
Within my heart is ringing

And he walks with me
And he talks with me
And he tells me I am his own
And the joy we share as we tarry there
None other has ever known

When Jesus speaks, it is soft on occasion, but on occasion it is not (Revelation 1:9-20).  And the joy that Christians have is shared — not simply exclusive to one particular Christian.  But this song is truly devoid of any Scriptural or biblical theology — yet is loved by millions. 

My desire as a leader and pastor in the church is to prayerfully consider what we do and why we do what we do in corporate worship.  Is it biblical?  Is it conveying truth? 

I also recommend the latest interview in the 9 Marks Interview Series with Dr. Philip Graham Ryken.  Priceless!  It deals with many of these issues we've discussed as well. 

Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer

In Culture, Devotional on April 6, 2006 at 1:15 pm

Don Whitney has written an excellent piece on the power of prayer in response to a recent article in the New York Times saying that prayer actually hindered recovery and escalated complications of surgery recipients.  Click here to read his response.  (This would be good for a bulletin insert as well.)

Books I’m Currently Reading

In Books I'm Reading on April 5, 2006 at 8:45 pm

"Living By the Book" by Howard Hendricks and William Hendricks

"The Cross of Christ" by John Stott

"Lectures to My Students" by Charles Spurgeon

"Give Praise to God:  A Vision of Reforming Worship — Celebrating the Legacy of James Montgomery Boice".  Philip Graham Ryken, editor.

What books are you reading?

Books I’m Currently Reading

In Books I'm Reading on April 5, 2006 at 8:45 pm

"Living By the Book" by Howard Hendricks and William Hendricks

"The Cross of Christ" by John Stott

"Lectures to My Students" by Charles Spurgeon

"Give Praise to God:  A Vision of Reforming Worship — Celebrating the Legacy of James Montgomery Boice".  Philip Graham Ryken, editor.

What books are you reading?

Something cool happened around 1:00 a.m.

In Uncategorized on April 5, 2006 at 1:48 pm

Did you know that something happened at 1:00 a.m. that won't happen again for another century?

At 1:02 and 3 seconds this morning, we had a chronological reading of (going from the time to the date) 01:02:03 04/05/06.  If you live for another 100 years, you'll see it happen on April 5, 2106!  Enjoy it while you can!

Now isn't your day completely made now?

Updated Report from NO LiMiT Team, Day Two

In Missions on April 5, 2006 at 1:45 pm

Our NO LiMiT (New Orleans, Louisiana, Missions Team) gang finished up their second day of work.  You can read about their Kingdom work at http://www.boonescreekchurch.com/NoLimit .  Please keep this team in prayer.

Peggy Noonan’s Take on the Immigration Issue — well worth reading

In Culture, Patriotic Days on April 4, 2006 at 2:53 pm

I know that seems a lurch, but there's a part of the debate that isn't sufficiently noted. There are a variety of things driving American anxiety about illegal immigration and we all know them–economic arguments, the danger of porous borders in the age of terrorism, with anyone able to come in. But there's another thing. And it's not fear about "them." It's anxiety about us.

It's the broad public knowledge, or intuition, in America, that we are not assimilating our immigrants patriotically. And if you don't do that, you'll lose it all.

We used to do it. We loved our country with full-throated love, we had no ambivalence. We had pride and appreciation. We were a free country. We communicated our pride and delight in this in a million ways–in our schools, our movies, our popular songs, our newspapers. It was just there, in the air. Immigrants breathed it in. That's how the last great wave of immigrants, the European wave of 1880-1920, was turned into a great wave of Americans.

We are not assimilating our immigrants patriotically now. We are assimilating them culturally. Within a generation their children speak Valley Girl on cell phones. "So I'm like 'no," and he's all 'yeah,' and I'm like, 'In your dreams.' " Whether their parents are from Trinidad, Bosnia, Lebanon or Chile, their children, once Americans, know the same music, the same references, watch the same shows. And to a degree and in a way it will hold them together. But not forever and not in a crunch.

So far we are assimilating our immigrants economically, too. They come here and work. Good.

But we are not communicating love of country. We are not giving them the great legend of our country. We are losing that great legend.

What is the legend, the myth? That God made this a special place. That they're joining something special. That the streets are paved with more than gold–they're paved with the greatest thoughts man ever had, the greatest decisions he ever made, about how to live. We have free thought, free speech, freedom of worship. Look at the literature of the Republic: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist papers. Look at the great rich history, the courage and sacrifice, the house-raisings, the stubbornness. The Puritans, the Indians, the City on a Hill.

The genius cluster–Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, Madison, Franklin, all the rest–that came along at the exact same moment to lead us. And then Washington, a great man in the greatest way, not in unearned gifts well used (i.e., a high IQ followed by high attainment) but in character, in moral nature effortfully developed. How did that happen? How did we get so lucky? (I once asked a great historian if he had thoughts on this, and he nodded. He said he had come to believe it was "providential.")

We fought a war to free slaves. We sent millions of white men to battle and destroyed a portion of our nation to free millions of black men. What kind of nation does this? We went to Europe, fought, died and won, and then taxed ourselves to save our enemies with the Marshall Plan. What kind of nation does this? Soviet communism stalked the world and we were the ones who steeled ourselves and taxed ourselves to stop it. Again: What kind of nation does this?

Only a very great one. Maybe the greatest of all.

Do we teach our immigrants that this is what they're joining? That this is the tradition they will now continue, and uphold?

Do we, today, act as if this is such a special place? No, not always, not even often. American exceptionalism is so yesterday. We don't want to be impolite. We don't want to offend. We don't want to seem narrow. In the age of globalism, honest patriotism seems like a faux pas.

And yet what is true of people is probably true of nations: if you don't have a well-grounded respect for yourself, you won't long sustain a well-grounded respect for others.

Because we do not communicate to our immigrants, legal and illegal, that they have joined something special, some of them, understandably, get the impression they've joined not a great enterprise but a big box store. A big box store on the highway where you can get anything cheap. It's a good place. But it has no legends, no meaning, and it imparts no spirit.Who is at fault? Those of us who let the myth die, or let it change, or refused to let it be told. The politically correct nitwit teaching the seventh-grade history class who decides the impressionable young minds before him need to be informed, as their first serious history lesson, that the Founders were hypocrites, the Bill of Rights nothing new and imperfect in any case, that the Indians were victims of genocide, that Lincoln was a clinically depressed homosexual who compensated for the storms within by creating storms without . . .

You can turn any history into mud. You can turn great men and women into mud too, if you want to.

And it's not just the nitwits, wherever they are, in the schools, the academy, the media, though they're all harmful enough. It's also the people who mean to be honestly and legitimately critical, to provide a new look at the old text. They're not noticing that the old text–the legend, the myth–isn't being taught anymore. Only the commentary is. But if all the commentary is doubting and critical, how will our kids know what to love and revere? How will they know how to balance criticism if they've never heard the positive side of the argument?

Those who teach, and who think for a living about American history, need to be told: Keep the text, teach the text, and only then, if you must, deconstruct the text.

When you don't love something you lose it. If we do not teach new Americans to love their country, and not for braying or nationalistic reasons but for reasons of honest and thoughtful appreciation, and gratitude, for a history that is something new in the long story of man, then we will begin to lose it. That Medal of Honor winner, Leo Thorsness, who couldn't quite find the words–he only found it hard to put everything into words because he knew the story, the legend, and knew it so well. Only then do you become "emotional about it." Only then are you truly American.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and a part of the Reagan Administration. 

Peggy Noonan’s Take on the Immigration Issue — well worth reading

In Culture, Patriotic Days on April 4, 2006 at 2:53 pm

I know that seems a lurch, but there's a part of the debate that isn't sufficiently noted. There are a variety of things driving American anxiety about illegal immigration and we all know them–economic arguments, the danger of porous borders in the age of terrorism, with anyone able to come in. But there's another thing. And it's not fear about "them." It's anxiety about us.

It's the broad public knowledge, or intuition, in America, that we are not assimilating our immigrants patriotically. And if you don't do that, you'll lose it all.

We used to do it. We loved our country with full-throated love, we had no ambivalence. We had pride and appreciation. We were a free country. We communicated our pride and delight in this in a million ways–in our schools, our movies, our popular songs, our newspapers. It was just there, in the air. Immigrants breathed it in. That's how the last great wave of immigrants, the European wave of 1880-1920, was turned into a great wave of Americans.

We are not assimilating our immigrants patriotically now. We are assimilating them culturally. Within a generation their children speak Valley Girl on cell phones. "So I'm like 'no," and he's all 'yeah,' and I'm like, 'In your dreams.' " Whether their parents are from Trinidad, Bosnia, Lebanon or Chile, their children, once Americans, know the same music, the same references, watch the same shows. And to a degree and in a way it will hold them together. But not forever and not in a crunch.

So far we are assimilating our immigrants economically, too. They come here and work. Good.

But we are not communicating love of country. We are not giving them the great legend of our country. We are losing that great legend.

What is the legend, the myth? That God made this a special place. That they're joining something special. That the streets are paved with more than gold–they're paved with the greatest thoughts man ever had, the greatest decisions he ever made, about how to live. We have free thought, free speech, freedom of worship. Look at the literature of the Republic: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist papers. Look at the great rich history, the courage and sacrifice, the house-raisings, the stubbornness. The Puritans, the Indians, the City on a Hill.

The genius cluster–Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, Madison, Franklin, all the rest–that came along at the exact same moment to lead us. And then Washington, a great man in the greatest way, not in unearned gifts well used (i.e., a high IQ followed by high attainment) but in character, in moral nature effortfully developed. How did that happen? How did we get so lucky? (I once asked a great historian if he had thoughts on this, and he nodded. He said he had come to believe it was "providential.")

We fought a war to free slaves. We sent millions of white men to battle and destroyed a portion of our nation to free millions of black men. What kind of nation does this? We went to Europe, fought, died and won, and then taxed ourselves to save our enemies with the Marshall Plan. What kind of nation does this? Soviet communism stalked the world and we were the ones who steeled ourselves and taxed ourselves to stop it. Again: What kind of nation does this?

Only a very great one. Maybe the greatest of all.

Do we teach our immigrants that this is what they're joining? That this is the tradition they will now continue, and uphold?

Do we, today, act as if this is such a special place? No, not always, not even often. American exceptionalism is so yesterday. We don't want to be impolite. We don't want to offend. We don't want to seem narrow. In the age of globalism, honest patriotism seems like a faux pas.

And yet what is true of people is probably true of nations: if you don't have a well-grounded respect for yourself, you won't long sustain a well-grounded respect for others.

Because we do not communicate to our immigrants, legal and illegal, that they have joined something special, some of them, understandably, get the impression they've joined not a great enterprise but a big box store. A big box store on the highway where you can get anything cheap. It's a good place. But it has no legends, no meaning, and it imparts no spirit.Who is at fault? Those of us who let the myth die, or let it change, or refused to let it be told. The politically correct nitwit teaching the seventh-grade history class who decides the impressionable young minds before him need to be informed, as their first serious history lesson, that the Founders were hypocrites, the Bill of Rights nothing new and imperfect in any case, that the Indians were victims of genocide, that Lincoln was a clinically depressed homosexual who compensated for the storms within by creating storms without . . .

You can turn any history into mud. You can turn great men and women into mud too, if you want to.

And it's not just the nitwits, wherever they are, in the schools, the academy, the media, though they're all harmful enough. It's also the people who mean to be honestly and legitimately critical, to provide a new look at the old text. They're not noticing that the old text–the legend, the myth–isn't being taught anymore. Only the commentary is. But if all the commentary is doubting and critical, how will our kids know what to love and revere? How will they know how to balance criticism if they've never heard the positive side of the argument?

Those who teach, and who think for a living about American history, need to be told: Keep the text, teach the text, and only then, if you must, deconstruct the text.

When you don't love something you lose it. If we do not teach new Americans to love their country, and not for braying or nationalistic reasons but for reasons of honest and thoughtful appreciation, and gratitude, for a history that is something new in the long story of man, then we will begin to lose it. That Medal of Honor winner, Leo Thorsness, who couldn't quite find the words–he only found it hard to put everything into words because he knew the story, the legend, and knew it so well. Only then do you become "emotional about it." Only then are you truly American.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and a part of the Reagan Administration. 

NO LiMiT Team Report, Day #1

In Missions on April 4, 2006 at 2:22 am

Crew with Homeowners NO LIMIT.jpg

Six members of our NO LiMiT Team (New Orleans, Louisiana, Missions Team) began their work with Hope Church in Waldheim, Louisiana.  Here's the report from the team on their first day:

We all got such a blessing today!

The guys fixed part of a roof for a family who's home was hit by a couple trees during Katrina. (Actually, it's hard to find a home that wasn't hit by a tree in Katrina. ) The family actually lived in New Orleans prior to the hurricane. They stayed through the storm, and were fine…. until the levees broke. It was the flooding that destroyed their home. They were lucky that they had an old piece of property with a house here in Waldheim. There were 3 people living in the house. A brother and sister and their elderly mother. The sister was actually swept away by the flood waters and grabbed hold of a stop sign until her brother could come and rescue her. They were a very nice family. Please pray for Arthur and his family.

So what did the girls do while the guys were on the roof? We stacked wood from a tree that had been cut up, raked the front yard, and cleaned up the shingles that came off of the roof. We were working hard too!

It is about 6pm at the time of the email. Us gals are back "home" fixing supper. They guys have gone to put up a new pump house for another family. It is such a blessing to be able to do things to help these people, and they appreciate it so much. Please pray that our strength holds out and everyone stays healthy! Praise God for this wonderful opportunity!

In Christ,

NO LiMiT Mission Team

—-

Won't you please pray for them.  They will return to Lexington on Friday, April 7. 

How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, "Your God reigns" (Isaiah 52:7, ESV). 

Is God Caught by Surprise?

In Theology on April 3, 2006 at 4:59 pm

A Perspective on Open Theism

 [I wrote this tract for our Boone's Creek Family in 2004.]

Many of you here at Boone’s Creek Baptist Church who are reading this particular devotional have a rather strong view and belief on who God is.  God is the Creator of all that is (Genesis 1:1) and that He is, as the Psalmist said, the owner of “the cattle on a thousand hills”  — meaning that He owns all there is (Psalm 50:10, see also Psalm 24:1).  We learn from the Scriptures that God knows all (1 John 3:20); sees all (Psalm 139:1-6); and that He will accomplish all that He sets out to accomplish (Isaiah 55:11). Unfortunately, there are some in evangelical circles who deny these attributes of God.  There is a strain of thought infiltrating our churches known as Open Theism.  Matt Slick of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministries (CARM) describes this movement as follows: 

    It is the teaching that God has granted to humanity free will and that in order for the free will to be truly free, the future free will choices of individuals cannot be known ahead of time by God.  They hold that if God knows what we are going to choose, then how can we be truly free when it is time to make those choices since a counter choice cannot then be made by us because it is already "known" what we are going to do.  In other words, we would not actually be able to make a contrary choice to what God "knows" we will choose thus implying that we would not then be free.

In fact, Gregory Boyd, one of the leading proponents of this movement, states in his recent book God of the Possible:

    Much of it [the future], open theists will concede, is settled ahead of time, either by God's predestining will or by existing earthly causes, but it is not exhaustively settled ahead of time.  To whatever degree the future is yet open to be decided by free agents, it is unsettled."

To bolster this view, Open Theists quote a number of verses that, at first glance, seem to show that God has not yet made up His mind as to how history will work out and that the future is … well … open.One verse is Genesis 6:6 where God was “sorry” that He made humanity.  Another is Genesis 22:12 when Abraham was ready to sacrifice his only son Isaac, God intervened and said, “Now I know that you fear God” and did not keep Isaac from Him.  And probably the most frequently quoted verse from Open Theists is Exodus 32:14.  Here, God hears Moses intervention concerning the wrath He was to inflict upon the rebellious Israelites and is seen as “changing his mind” (NASB), “relenting” (NIV, NKJV), or “repenting” (KJV) about the harm and punishment He would bring.

There are many verses where God is seen as regretting something He has done, where He is surprised (Isaiah 5:3-7), where He tests people to know whether they will walk in His ways (Exodus 16:4, Deuteronomy 13:1-3, Judges 2:22), and various others.  Open Theists claim that if God really knows all the events of the future, then He would never regret doing anything, never change His mind, and would never wonder if people were or were not going to walk in His ways.

A Lesson on How God Relates to His People

Open Theists take these verses and run with them, but what do they do with verses such as Isaiah 55:10-11, which read:For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bear forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes out of my mouth;  it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it (ESV).Or one such as John 6:37 which reads, “All that the Father gives to me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.”  Or Acts 4:27-28 which read:For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place (ESV).

Not to mention Romans 8:29-30, Romans 9, Ephesians 1:3-11, and many others which speak so strongly on the sovereignty of God and how all things are under His control and all things are not only known by Him but also all things are ordained and orchestrated by Him.How are these verses reconciled with what we have seem from Open Theists?

There is a device used by God called anthropomorphism.  It is a literary device used by the authors of Scripture to apply human characteristics and attribute them to God’s nature or actions.  For instance, we hear in Scripture the plea for God to “shine his face on us” (Numbers 6:24-26).  Well, we know that God is spirit (John 4:24) and does not have a ‘face.’  Same with the term such as the “right hand of God.”  God does not have a hand or an arm, but we use these terms to convey various attributes about God.  It makes it less abstract and more concrete!God is a God who is “high and lifted up” (Isaiah 6:1) and one whose ways are higher than our ways and thoughts higher than our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8).  Our finite minds cannot understand the greatness, grandeur and majesty of God Most High!  So words are used in Scripture to help us understand them.

The Issue at Stake

What is at stake is the nature of God!  If God is not one who is in control of every part of His creation, then that means He is a God who is not the “unmoved mover” of old, but as Clark Pinnock describes Him, He is the “Most Moved Mover.”  He is a God who makes mistakes, who moves to “Plan B and C” when “Plan A” may not work out as He intended.And if God is not in control of our situations, then guess who is?  We are — and that, my friends, is the ultimate issue.

We hold tightly to free will.  We want to be in control of our lives.  But friends, if you want free will — total and unabashed free will — then you are not ready to be a follower of Christ.  Why?

Our free will outside of the working of God will always lead us away from God.  Adam and Eve had one command in the garden:  “Don’t eat from that tree” (Genesis 2:15).  Sin had not entered the world or their hearts, but they were easily swayed by Satan (“Did God really say…?”) and self (“it was pleasing to their eyes”) and their free will took them away from God.

But Jesus says in John 6:44 that “No one can come to Me unless the Father draws him.”  We do not nor cannot seek after God in our own flesh (Romans 3:9-10), but God seeks after us and even has “chosen us from the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4).

See, God is not locked in to time and space.  He created time and space.  He is over time and space.  He was before time and space.  We are finite, He is infinite.  We have limited knowledge, but the Bible says over and over that He knows all things (see Psalm 139:1-6).  Nothing flies under His radar.God is not one who responds to creation in general and humanity specifically — He is the One who orchestrates it all.

So does God have a plan?  Yes.  Is God the true sovereign of the universe?  Yes.  Are there times when it seems to us as if God repents, changes His mind, is surprised, and stumped at our actions?  Yes, it seems that way in our eyes.  But God makes Himself understood by using our language and terms to communicate HIS truth and HIS nature.I recommend you looking at the CARM site and the section that deals with Open Theism at http://www.carm.org/open.htm .  If God is not in control of everything and does not have the entire plan already worked out, He is not a God worth serving.  But we know better …

… don’t we?


© 2004 by Rev. Matthew Perry. Boone’s Creek Baptist Church. 185 N. Cleveland Rd., Lexington, KY 40509. (859) 263-5466.Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.   

Conclusions arrived at by John Bunyan (1628-1688)

In Theology on April 3, 2006 at 2:57 pm

 John_Bunyan.jpg
1.  Of all the temptations that ever I met with in my life, to question the being of God, and the truth of His gospel, is the worst, and the worst to be borne; when this temptation comes, it takes away my girdle from me, and removeth the foundations from under me.  Oh, I have often thought of that word, 'Have your loins girt about with truth'; and of that, 'When the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?'

2.  Sometimes, when, after sin committed, I have looked for sore chastisement from the hand of God, the very next that I have had from Him hath been the discovery of His grace.  Sometimes, when I have been comforted, I have called myself a fool for my so sinking under trouble.  And then, again, when I have been cast down, I thought I was not wise to give such way to comfort.  With such strength and weight have both these
been upon me.

3.  I have wondered much at this one thing, that though God doth visit my soul with never so blessed a discovery of Himself, yet I have found again, that such hours have attended me afterwards, that I have been in my spirit so filled with darkness, that I could not so much as once conceive what that God and that comfort was with which I have been refreshed.

4.  I have sometimes seen more in a line of the Bible than I could well tell how to stand under, and yet at another time the whole Bible hath been to me as dry as a stick; or rather, my heart hath been so dead and dry unto it, that I could not conceive the least drachm of refreshment, though I have looked it all over.

5.  Of all tears, they are the best that are made by the blood of
Christ; and of all joy, that is the sweetest that is mixed with mourning over Christ.  Oh!  it is a goodly thing to be on our knees, with Christ in our arms, before God.  I hope I know something of these things.

 6.  I find to this day seven abominations in my heart: (1) Inclinings to unbelief.  (2) Suddenly to forget the love and mercy that Christ manifesteth.  (3) A leaning to the works of the law.  (4) Wanderings and coldness in prayer.  (5) To forget to watch for that I pray for.  (6) Apt to murmur because I have no more, and yet ready to abuse what I have.  (7) I can do none of those things which God commands me, but my corruptions will thrust in themselves, 'When I would do good, evil is present with me.'

7.  These things I continually see and feel, and am afflicted and
oppressed with; yet the wisdom of God doth order them for my good.  (1) They make me abhor myself.  (2) They keep me from trusting my heart. (3) They convince me of the insufficiency of all inherent righteousness. (4) They show me the necessity of flying to Jesus.  (5) They press me to pray unto God.  (6) They show me the need I have to watch and be sober.  (7) And provoke me to look to God, through Christ, to help me, and carry me through this world.  Amen.

(From, Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners)

The One Year Anniversary of the Death of Pope John Paul II

In Religious Organizations, Roman Catholicism on April 2, 2006 at 10:39 pm

Today marks the one year anniversary of Pope John Paul II’s death. His 26 year reign as pontiff is one of the longest in papal history. I am very disturbed by the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, specifically on the topics of the Virgin Mary, salvation, the nature of the church, purgatory, and the priesthood.

When people ask me, “Do you believe that the John Paul II is in heaven?” I have to answer no, I do not. The Bible speaks clearly that we are justified by grace alone (Romans 3:24) and that it is by grace you are saved through faith, not of yourselves but through the gift of God and not of works so that no one may boast (Ephesians 2:8-9). The Roman Catholic system entails a works-oriented salvation at its core. I’d like to steer you to some very solid and biblically sound articles on this.

As soon as I can, I will post a recent sermon of mine on the subject of Mary as well and how she is not just venerated, but indeed worshiped according to past Popes and even their own catechism. That will be forthcoming.

Let us be discerning and pursuing the truth and not simply take things for granted. God bless!

Opening Day — Who Do You Like, baseball fans?

In Sports on April 2, 2006 at 9:20 pm

flamarlins.jpg

Tomorrow is Opening Day in Major League Baseball.  I am a Florida Marlins fan, and know that my team will not do well this year.  In a payroll cutting move, the Marlins let go of most of their roster from 2005 (where they finished 3rd in the NL East with an 83-79 record) and now have 11 rookies on their roster for '06.  I predict a 65-97 season this year, but if they win 70 I'll be ecstatic.  I enjoy watching the passion and the talent of Dontrelle Willis and Miguel Cabrera.  And watch out for Hanley Ramirez at shortstop and Jeremy Hermida in right.  They will be some good young stars coming up.

Do you like Major League Baseball?  Who's your team?  Do you have some good memories attached to baseball (like going to a game, your team winning the World Series, a particular baseball hero)?  Do you have some bad memories (like the strike, steroids, etc.)? 

Let's talk baseball!

George Mason: More Than a Team in the Final Four (BP)

In Culture, Patriotic Days, Religious Liberties on April 2, 2006 at 3:31 am

As I write this, George Mason University just lost in the Final Four to the University of Florida 73-58, ending an improbable run in the NCAA Tournament.  One of the great contributions this made is helping us recall one of the great Founding Fathers and the author of our Bill of Rights.  His name?  Yup… George Mason.

Read this Baptist Press article about this titanic, but forgotten, figure in American history. 

The True April Fool — Hear the Word of the Lord

In Devotional on April 1, 2006 at 8:46 pm

 The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."
   They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds,
   there is none who does good. 

 The LORD looks down from heaven on the children of man,
   to see if there are any who understand,
   who seek after God.    

 They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt;
   there is none who does good,
   not even one.
(Psalm 14:1-3)

Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge;fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Proverbs 1:22
"How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple?How long will scoffers delight in their scoffingand fools hate knowledge?

Proverbs 3:35
The wise will inherit honor,but fools get disgrace.

Proverbs 8:5
O simple ones, learn prudence;O fools, learn sense.

Proverbs 10:1
The proverbs of Solomon. A wise son makes a glad father,but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother.

Proverbs 10:8
The wise of heart will receive commandments,but a babbling fool will come to ruin.

Proverbs 10:14
The wise lay up knowledge,but the mouth of a fool brings ruin near.

Proverbs 10:18
The one who conceals hatred has lying lips,and whoever utters slander is a fool
Proverbs 10:21
The lips of the righteous feed many,but fools die for lack of sense. 

Proverbs 10:23
Doing wrong is like a joke to a fool,but wisdom is pleasure to a man of understanding. 

Proverbs 11:29
Whoever troubles his own household will inherit the wind,and the fool will be servant to the wise of heart. 
Proverbs 12:15
The way of a fool is right in his own eyes,but a wise man listens to advice. 

Proverbs 12:16
The vexation of a fool is known at once,but the prudent ignores an insult. 

Proverbs 12:23
A prudent man conceals knowledge,but the heart of fools proclaims folly. 

Proverbs 13:16
In everything the prudent acts with knowledge,but a fool flaunts his folly. 

Proverbs 13:19
A desire fulfilled is sweet to the soul,but to turn away from evil is an abomination to fools. 

Proverbs 13:20
Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise,but the companion of fools will suffer harm. 

Proverbs 14:3
By the mouth of a fool comes a rod for his back, but the lips of the wise will preserve them. 

Proverbs 14:7
Leave the presence of a fool,for there you do not meet words of knowledge. 
 
Proverbs 14:8
The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way,but the folly of fools is deceiving.

Proverbs 14:9
Fools mock at the guilt offering,but the upright enjoy acceptance.

Proverbs 14:16
One who is wise is cautious and turns away from evil,but a fool is reckless and careless.

Proverbs 14:17
A man of quick temper acts foolishly,and a man of evil devices is hated.

Proverbs 14:24
The crown of the wise is their wealth,but the folly of fools brings folly.

Proverbs 14:33
Wisdom rests in the heart of a man of understanding,but it makes itself known even in the midst of fools.

Proverbs 15:2
The tongue of the wise commends knowledge,but the mouths of fools pour out folly.

Proverbs 15:5
A fool despises his father's instruction,but whoever heeds reproof is prudent.

Proverbs 15:7
The lips of the wise spread knowledge;not so the hearts of fools.

Proverbs 15:14
The heart of him who has understanding seeks knowledge,but the mouths of fools feed on folly.

Proverbs 15:20
A wise son makes a glad father,but a foolish man despises his mother.

Proverbs 16:22
Good sense is a fountain of life to him who has it,but the instruction of fools is folly.

Proverbs 17:7
Fine speech is not becoming to a fool;still less is false speech to a prince.

Proverbs 17:10

A rebuke goes deeper into a man of understandingthan a hundred blows into a fool.
Proverbs 17:12
Let a man meet a she-bear robbed of her cubsrather than a fool in his folly.

Proverbs 17:16
Why should a fool have money in his hand to buy wisdomwhen he has no sense?

Proverbs 17:21
He who sires a fool gets himself sorrow,and the father of a fool has no joy.

Proverbs 17:24
The discerning sets his face toward wisdom,but the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth.

Proverbs 17:25
A foolish son is a grief to his fatherand bitterness to her who bore him.

Proverbs 17:28
Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise;when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent.

Proverbs 18:2
A fool takes no pleasure in understanding,but only in expressing his opinion.

Proverbs 18:6
A fool's lips walk into a fight,and his mouth invites a beating.

Proverbs 18:7

A fool's mouth is his ruin,and his lips are a snare to his soul.

Proverbs 19:1
Better is a poor person who walks in his integritythan one who is crooked in speech and is a fool.

Proverbs 19:10
It is not fitting for a fool to live in luxury,much less for a slave to rule over princes.

Proverbs 19:13
A foolish son is ruin to his father,and a wife's quarreling is a continual dripping of rain.

Proverbs 19:29
Condemnation is ready for scoffers,and beating for the backs of fools. 

Proverbs 20:3
It is an honor for a man to keep aloof from strife,but every fool will be quarreling. 

Proverbs 21:20
Precious treasure and oil are in a wise man's dwelling,but a foolish man devours it. 

Proverbs 23:9
Do not speak in the hearing of a fool,for he will despise the good sense of your words. 

Proverbs 24:7
Wisdom is too high for a fool;in the gate he does not open his mouth. 

Proverbs 26:1
Like snow in summer or rain in harvest,so honor is not fitting for a fool

Proverbs 26:3
A whip for the horse, a bridle for the donkey,and a rod for the back of fools. 

Proverbs 26:4
Answer not a fool according to his folly,lest you be like him yourself. 

Proverbs 26:5
Answer a fool according to his folly,lest he be wise in his own eyes. 

Proverbs 26:6
Whoever sends a message by the hand of a foolcuts off his own feet and drinks violence. 

Proverbs 26:7
Like a lame man's legs, which hang useless,is a proverb in the mouth of fools. 

Proverbs 26:8
Like one who binds the stone in the slingis one who gives honor to a fool

Proverbs 26:9
Like a thorn that goes up into the hand of a drunkardis a proverb in the mouth of fools. 

Proverbs 26:10
Like an archer who wounds everyoneis one who hires a passing fool or drunkard. 

Proverbs 26:11
Like a dog that returns to his vomitis a fool who repeats his folly. 

Proverbs 26:12
Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes?There is more hope for a fool than for him. 

Proverbs 27:3
A stone is heavy, and sand is weighty,but a fool's provocation is heavier than both. 

Proverbs 27:22
Crush a fool in a mortar with a pestlealong with crushed grain,yet his folly will not depart from him. 

Proverbs 28:26
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool,but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered. 

Proverbs 29:9
If a wise man has an argument with a fool,the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet. 

Proverbs 29:11
A fool gives full vent to his spirit,but a wise man quietly holds it back. 

Proverbs 29:20
Do you see a man who is hasty in his words?There is more hope for a fool than for him. 

Proverbs 30:32
If you have been foolish, exalting yourself,or if you have been devising evil,put your hand on your mouth.