I ask for prayers. It would be inappropriate to say more in this public of a forum.
Thank You
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Issues Etc: Worship
Check out yesterdays Issues Etc. The second hour was particularily good, featuring an excellent discussion on eternal worship.
Highly reccomended.
Highly reccomended.
Relevance and Relativism
Churches today are obsessed with being "relevant." If looking through ad church advertisement in a phone book, it is almost guaranteed that one will see "relevant preaching." This begs the question of what makes preaching relevant, and what makes preaching irrelevant. The short answer is simple. Relevant preaching is that which speaks to us Law and Gospel, that which proclaims Jesus Christ as the one and only sacrifice for sins. Irrelevant preaching is anything else. After all, nothing can possibly be more relevant to a person than his eternal fate.
Of course, when a church advertises itself as having relevant preaching, they typically go the opposite route. They seem to think that the work of Jesus Christ and the eternal fate of man are irrelevant, and that nearly anything else is relevant, whether it be health, wealth, self esteem, or even sex. These things are all irrelevant in the scheme of eternity. Why then do churches that consider themselves to be relevant preach nothing but irrelevance? Are they lying? Do they truly believe their message to be relevant? Is there some other form of miscommunication going on here.
I don't think that those who call their irrelevant message "relevant" are lying. They in fact do truly believe their message to be relevant, but their idea of relevance is not a true universal relevance, but a cultural relevance. In most cases, the message of relevance is only relevant to a subset of humanity. In most cases a preacher may preach what is relevant to his or (unfortunately) her target audience. They want to draw a certain group of people to their church and they preach a message those people would like to hear. They are in fact tickling the itching ears of they target audience.
Yet, by definition of making their preaching relevant to some people, they are by definition making their preaching irrelevant to others. The preaching of Joel Osteen may be relevant to the middle class, but the upper class don't need it, and most people in the lower class have seen people with great faith, but still have miserable lives. The message of a black liberation theologian is completely irrelevant to those who happen to not feel like they are oppressed because of their race.
Not only does the entire idea of culturally relevant preaching cause irrelevance to be preached. But culturally relevant preaching allows the minds of sinful men to be in full control of what is preached in church. Sermons/messages are no longer based on the Bible, God's Holy and Perfect Word, but they are based on what people want to hear. Sure, the preacher may throw in a few passages to proof text their message, but the message itself did not come from scripture. The message of the Bible, Christ crucified for sinners will never seem relevant, and it does not appeal to a target audience. It is the Gospel and through it the Holy Spirit will bring people to faith.
It gets even worse. The concept of relevant preaching implies that what is relevant for me might not be relevant for you. As long as this message is being sent to church goers, it will not take too much of a jump for them to get to full blown relativism. As long as what is being preached is determined by what the church goer wants and not by the true Biblical message, the church goers ideas become more important in what they perceive to be truth. Instead of "What is relevant for you may not be relevant for me" they begin to say "what is true for you may not be true for me." All of the sudden, instead of learning who God is, church goers are "exploring who God is to me."
Clearly, it is a short, steep and slippery slope from relevance to relativism.
My hope and prayer is that when you go to church, you do not get a culturally relevant message. I hope you get a truly relevant message that Jesus Christ, true God and true man, bore your sins and suffered and died in your place.
SOLI DEO GLORIA
Of course, when a church advertises itself as having relevant preaching, they typically go the opposite route. They seem to think that the work of Jesus Christ and the eternal fate of man are irrelevant, and that nearly anything else is relevant, whether it be health, wealth, self esteem, or even sex. These things are all irrelevant in the scheme of eternity. Why then do churches that consider themselves to be relevant preach nothing but irrelevance? Are they lying? Do they truly believe their message to be relevant? Is there some other form of miscommunication going on here.
I don't think that those who call their irrelevant message "relevant" are lying. They in fact do truly believe their message to be relevant, but their idea of relevance is not a true universal relevance, but a cultural relevance. In most cases, the message of relevance is only relevant to a subset of humanity. In most cases a preacher may preach what is relevant to his or (unfortunately) her target audience. They want to draw a certain group of people to their church and they preach a message those people would like to hear. They are in fact tickling the itching ears of they target audience.
Yet, by definition of making their preaching relevant to some people, they are by definition making their preaching irrelevant to others. The preaching of Joel Osteen may be relevant to the middle class, but the upper class don't need it, and most people in the lower class have seen people with great faith, but still have miserable lives. The message of a black liberation theologian is completely irrelevant to those who happen to not feel like they are oppressed because of their race.
Not only does the entire idea of culturally relevant preaching cause irrelevance to be preached. But culturally relevant preaching allows the minds of sinful men to be in full control of what is preached in church. Sermons/messages are no longer based on the Bible, God's Holy and Perfect Word, but they are based on what people want to hear. Sure, the preacher may throw in a few passages to proof text their message, but the message itself did not come from scripture. The message of the Bible, Christ crucified for sinners will never seem relevant, and it does not appeal to a target audience. It is the Gospel and through it the Holy Spirit will bring people to faith.
It gets even worse. The concept of relevant preaching implies that what is relevant for me might not be relevant for you. As long as this message is being sent to church goers, it will not take too much of a jump for them to get to full blown relativism. As long as what is being preached is determined by what the church goer wants and not by the true Biblical message, the church goers ideas become more important in what they perceive to be truth. Instead of "What is relevant for you may not be relevant for me" they begin to say "what is true for you may not be true for me." All of the sudden, instead of learning who God is, church goers are "exploring who God is to me."
Clearly, it is a short, steep and slippery slope from relevance to relativism.
My hope and prayer is that when you go to church, you do not get a culturally relevant message. I hope you get a truly relevant message that Jesus Christ, true God and true man, bore your sins and suffered and died in your place.
SOLI DEO GLORIA
Monday, August 27, 2007
Of Abraham's Children and Stones
And do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. - Mat 3:9 ESV
What amazing words these must have been to the Jews hearing them. They were the descendants of Abraham, didn't that mean anything anymore? Why shouldn't we say to ourselves “We have Abraham as our Father”? Why would God raise up Children of Abraham from stones?
All these questions and more must have been going through the minds of those who first heard them, whether the Pharisees in Matthew, or the entire crowd in Luke (3:8). These words made no sense, and they certainly do not make sense to most who read them today. The problem is that the Jews didn't (and still don't) understand what it means to be a child of Abraham. Most Christians today are equally unaware of what makes a person Abraham's descendant. It is obviously not your bloodline, if it were so the Jews would certainly have been able to say to themselves “We have Abraham as our father.” They would have been correct.
Yet this sentence spoken by John the Baptist so many years ago implies that it is not bloodline that makes one a son of Abraham. In John 8, Jesus confirms this as well. When the Jews assert there that Abraham is their father, he tells them that if that were so “you would be doing what he did.” But what was it that Abraham did, how was Abraham made righteous? By faith, trusting in God was Abraham made righteous. By faith Abraham became God's son (Gen 15:6, Gal 3:6).
The Jews, especially the Pharisees and their followers, were not able to say Abraham is their father because they had no Faith. They looked to themselves, their physical ancestors and their works as their salvation and the way to please God. They trusted the law, not the promise.
If the Jews are no longer the children of Abraham, who in fact does that title belong to? It belongs to all those who have faith in Jesus Christ. Through faith, we have become the heirs of Abraham. (Rom 4). All who have faith are children of Abraham, and all of us were raised up to this status from stones, so to speak.
Twice in speaking to the faithless descendants of Abraham, Ezekiel tells them that God will remove their Heart of stone and replace it with a Heart of Flesh. (11:19, 36:26) Even now, anyone without faith has a hardened heart, a Heart of stone. (Rom 2:5, Eph 4:18) Even now, the only solution is for God to create in us a clean heart, a Heart of Flesh, not stone. Only through this new Heart, which is completely the gift of God, is there life, salvation, and peace.
God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. - Mat 3:9 ESV
God is not only able to raise up Children for Abraham from stones, but he does. Every conversion is a miraculous event in which a child of Abraham is raised from a spiritually dead stone. Every conversion is a heart transplant in which we receive a new heart of flesh, and our dead heart of stone with all of its sins and filth is given to Jesus Christ to bear. Jesus took it all on himself, and suffered the punishment we deserve. My old dead heart was crucified and buried with Him, a new man united with Christ arose.
SOLI DEO GLORIA
What amazing words these must have been to the Jews hearing them. They were the descendants of Abraham, didn't that mean anything anymore? Why shouldn't we say to ourselves “We have Abraham as our Father”? Why would God raise up Children of Abraham from stones?
All these questions and more must have been going through the minds of those who first heard them, whether the Pharisees in Matthew, or the entire crowd in Luke (3:8). These words made no sense, and they certainly do not make sense to most who read them today. The problem is that the Jews didn't (and still don't) understand what it means to be a child of Abraham. Most Christians today are equally unaware of what makes a person Abraham's descendant. It is obviously not your bloodline, if it were so the Jews would certainly have been able to say to themselves “We have Abraham as our father.” They would have been correct.
Yet this sentence spoken by John the Baptist so many years ago implies that it is not bloodline that makes one a son of Abraham. In John 8, Jesus confirms this as well. When the Jews assert there that Abraham is their father, he tells them that if that were so “you would be doing what he did.” But what was it that Abraham did, how was Abraham made righteous? By faith, trusting in God was Abraham made righteous. By faith Abraham became God's son (Gen 15:6, Gal 3:6).
The Jews, especially the Pharisees and their followers, were not able to say Abraham is their father because they had no Faith. They looked to themselves, their physical ancestors and their works as their salvation and the way to please God. They trusted the law, not the promise.
If the Jews are no longer the children of Abraham, who in fact does that title belong to? It belongs to all those who have faith in Jesus Christ. Through faith, we have become the heirs of Abraham. (Rom 4). All who have faith are children of Abraham, and all of us were raised up to this status from stones, so to speak.
Twice in speaking to the faithless descendants of Abraham, Ezekiel tells them that God will remove their Heart of stone and replace it with a Heart of Flesh. (11:19, 36:26) Even now, anyone without faith has a hardened heart, a Heart of stone. (Rom 2:5, Eph 4:18) Even now, the only solution is for God to create in us a clean heart, a Heart of Flesh, not stone. Only through this new Heart, which is completely the gift of God, is there life, salvation, and peace.
God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. - Mat 3:9 ESV
God is not only able to raise up Children for Abraham from stones, but he does. Every conversion is a miraculous event in which a child of Abraham is raised from a spiritually dead stone. Every conversion is a heart transplant in which we receive a new heart of flesh, and our dead heart of stone with all of its sins and filth is given to Jesus Christ to bear. Jesus took it all on himself, and suffered the punishment we deserve. My old dead heart was crucified and buried with Him, a new man united with Christ arose.
SOLI DEO GLORIA
Monday, August 20, 2007
Do Lutherans Teach a Prosperity Gospel
I believe that God has made me and all creatures; that He has given me my body and soul, eyes, ears, and all my limbs, my reason, and all my senses, and still preserves them; in addition thereto, clothing and shoes, meat and drink, house and homestead, wife and children, fields, cattle, and all my goods; that He provides me richly and daily with all that I need to support this body and life, protects me from all danger, and guards me and preserves me from all evil; and all this out of pure, fatherly, divine goodness and mercy, without any merit or worthiness in me; for all which I owe it to Him to thank, praise, serve,and obey Him. This is most certainly true.
Most of my readers recognize this as Luther's explanation of the First Article of the Apostle's creed. Although Lutheran's certainly neither preach nor teach a prosperity gospel, we certainly recognize that all of our needs are met by our Heavenly Father.
Most of my readers recognize this as Luther's explanation of the First Article of the Apostle's creed. Although Lutheran's certainly neither preach nor teach a prosperity gospel, we certainly recognize that all of our needs are met by our Heavenly Father.
Random Thoughts on Offering Placement
Does the position of the offering in the service make a difference? In Lutheran churches, we typically have the offering placed after the sermon. The offering is so placed because in its position there, because our offerings are given to God as an act of thanks. Our offerings are one of the ways in which we respond to the Gospel which was shared with us in the Sermon.
In most American churches, the offering is placed before the "message." Having been brought up in a liturgical church, this has always seemed backwards to me. Although one can respond to the Gospel before or after the sermon, it has always seemed to me to be best to respond to the Gospel in its fullest and most complete proclomation, the Sermon.
Of course, in many American "evangelical" churches, there is very little Gospel present in their messages, sometimes none at all. If there is no Gospel present in the sermon, the position of the offering becomes somewhat more fluid. It seems that the most common place of the offering in non-liturgical churches is after their 'Music Segment'. This actually makes some sense. It many modern churches the Praise Music and prayers are the only times Jesus as Savior is even mentioned. And it is after this sliver of Gospel that they put the Offering.
Perhaps it is only coincidence, but I find it it interesting that as much as many of today's "Pastors" are little more than motivational speakers, they seem to think that the Praise Music is more of an motivator than their own speaking.
Do evangelicals realize that they are preaching only law and that the law cannot provide a right motivation?
Do evangelicals simply view the Offering as a requirement and therefore do not worry about right motivation. (If they are only offering as a legal requirement, is there giving a truly good work? [motivated by the Gospel] Is it potentialy sinful? [done without faith, as faith is not of the law and the law is not of faith])
In most American churches, the offering is placed before the "message." Having been brought up in a liturgical church, this has always seemed backwards to me. Although one can respond to the Gospel before or after the sermon, it has always seemed to me to be best to respond to the Gospel in its fullest and most complete proclomation, the Sermon.
Of course, in many American "evangelical" churches, there is very little Gospel present in their messages, sometimes none at all. If there is no Gospel present in the sermon, the position of the offering becomes somewhat more fluid. It seems that the most common place of the offering in non-liturgical churches is after their 'Music Segment'. This actually makes some sense. It many modern churches the Praise Music and prayers are the only times Jesus as Savior is even mentioned. And it is after this sliver of Gospel that they put the Offering.
Perhaps it is only coincidence, but I find it it interesting that as much as many of today's "Pastors" are little more than motivational speakers, they seem to think that the Praise Music is more of an motivator than their own speaking.
Do evangelicals realize that they are preaching only law and that the law cannot provide a right motivation?
Do evangelicals simply view the Offering as a requirement and therefore do not worry about right motivation. (If they are only offering as a legal requirement, is there giving a truly good work? [motivated by the Gospel] Is it potentialy sinful? [done without faith, as faith is not of the law and the law is not of faith])
Saturday, August 11, 2007
KFUO
I have been listening to KFUO a lot lately, and just wanted to take another opportunity to recommend it to all of my readers. They have a number of great programs, but the two that stand out to me. The first is obviously their Flagship program, Issues Etc.
Issues Etc. is a great program which covers a multitude of theological topics (and occasionally non-theological topics). These can range from books of the Bible, to specific Theological ideas, to current events. They also feature interviews with current church leaders (Lutheran or not) and reviews of sermons (Lutheran or not). This is a program that every Christian should listen to on a regular basis. I guarantee that it is worth your time. Whenever I wonder about a particular issue of Christian Theology, Issues etc. is one of the first places I will search
The second program is “The Bible Study.” This is exactly what it sounds like. The program features the host, Chuck Rathert, and a guest Lutheran pastor. Usually they take a book, more or less, chapter by chapter and provide a very solid, Christ centered interpretation of each chapter. Through their archive, you can access a free Audio commentary on nearly the entire New Testament, as well as a good portion of the Old Testament. This program will make a great companion to your personal Bible Studies.
I do not know of any other resources like this for Christians, much less resources offered completely free of charge. I definitely suggest that you check them out at http://www.kfuoam.org/.
Issues Etc. is a great program which covers a multitude of theological topics (and occasionally non-theological topics). These can range from books of the Bible, to specific Theological ideas, to current events. They also feature interviews with current church leaders (Lutheran or not) and reviews of sermons (Lutheran or not). This is a program that every Christian should listen to on a regular basis. I guarantee that it is worth your time. Whenever I wonder about a particular issue of Christian Theology, Issues etc. is one of the first places I will search
The second program is “The Bible Study.” This is exactly what it sounds like. The program features the host, Chuck Rathert, and a guest Lutheran pastor. Usually they take a book, more or less, chapter by chapter and provide a very solid, Christ centered interpretation of each chapter. Through their archive, you can access a free Audio commentary on nearly the entire New Testament, as well as a good portion of the Old Testament. This program will make a great companion to your personal Bible Studies.
I do not know of any other resources like this for Christians, much less resources offered completely free of charge. I definitely suggest that you check them out at http://www.kfuoam.org/.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Bricks Without Straw
In the fifth chapter of Exodus, we have the account of the Hebrews in Egypt being forced to make Bricks, but no longer being provided straw with which to make them. Moses and Aaron had asked to take the Hebrews out into the wilderness to make a sacrifice, as was commanded by God. This act, which all today would recognize as completely impossible and inhumane. Pharaoh, in his wickedness, gave this impossible task as punishment to the Israelites for their apparent insubordination.
As callous and unreasonable as Pharaoh's demands sound to us, God has made an equally unreasonable demand of us. He has give us his law, which is as impossible to keep as it was for the Israelite slaves to produce bricks without straw. If the Israelites were unable to keep the command of Pharaoh, he would have them beaten. If we, or anyone in the world, fails to keep the Law of God, his punishment is much more severe: Eternity in Hell.
Of course, we do not consider God to be callous or unreasonable. Why is this? Some people believe that God will accept whatever amount of bricks we can create without straw. They think that if they do their best, God will do the rest. Of course, God does not work in this manner. God demands perfection of us (Matt 5:48). Anything less is worthy of nothing but hell.
Other believe that they can produce their own straw. They think that they have what is needed in themselves to produce all that God demands. They are the pharisees, those who make the law keepable. They do not realize that perfection actually means perfection. They believe that they can keep the law to God's standards and they will justify themselves because of it. Of course, the Bible tells us that “All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God” (Rom 3:23)
Finally, there are those who realize that they cannot keep God's command. They cannot make the bricks without straw. These come before their Master and plead for mercy. Unlike Pharaoh, God has had mercy on us. He does not have us beaten, or send us to Hell like we deserve. He instead sends His only begotten Son to bear our sins for us and to make atonement for them. This is why we cannot regard our God as callous or unreasonable. He is no such thing, he is Holy, but merciful as well. He has reconciled us to him out of Love. We no longer have to worry about making Bricks with or without straw, we are no longer slaves to the law.
SOLI DEO GLORIA
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Vacation
I haven't been posting much lately, been on vacation in California with my parents. They have had a ball with their only Grandchild. Although it is almost over, it has been a great time. We were able to go to the beach, and the Aquarium of the Pacific, as well as visiting with much of my family.
I do have a few ideas floating around in my head for posts and will hopefully get them flushed out before mid-August.
God Bless until then.
I do have a few ideas floating around in my head for posts and will hopefully get them flushed out before mid-August.
God Bless until then.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
