Thursday, January 31, 2013

The Blessing of a Blessed Wife

He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the LORD. [Proverbs 18:22]
My church has been going through the book of Proverbs, and last Sunday touched on many of the verses dealing with marriage and finding the "perfect" spouse. This verse was cited, and while the sermon was, for the most part, aimed at those who were single or in the state of courtship, I was still able to do some meditating on this verse and my recent marriage.

In this verse, it is said that he who finds a wife finds a good thing, and obtains favor from the Lord. In the first section, two "finds" are stated: he who finds a wife (obviously in the context, a good one) will find a good thing. The "good thing" (the familiar Hebrew word tov) refers to something that is good, pleasurable, and fortunate, especially in the eyes of God. The parallel line then states that one who does such "receives what is pleasant" (in the original Hebrew) from the Lord - the noun for pleasant (ratson) refers here, contextually, to the pleasure one finds in all aspects of marriage. The verse is stating that the good wife, and all that is pleasant in the marriage with her, is a gift from God to the man.

Compare this verse with a "contrast" verse: "The mouth of a forbidden woman is a deep pit; he with whom the LORD is angry will fall into it" (Pr 22:14). The NASB reads "he who is cursed," which is a more literal translation. The ESV is attempting to capture the passive participle associated with God, hence the NET's rendering of "the one against whom the LORD is angry." The point is that men who are inclined towards spiritual wickedness will be judged by God with the arrival of wicked women in their lives. Keep in mind that this proverb is not saying all women are evil or inherently evil, nor that the men are off the hook for their own sin. Both parties are guilty: the forbidden woman for her lifestyle, and the man with whom the Lord is angry for his love of such a lifestyle.

As I wrote in a previous post, I had, in the past, often pursued such "forbidden women." The blame for these endeavors is, of course, placed squarely on myself, and it was only by the intervention of God through His providence that I did not fall into the snare which was laid for me. Instead, God had a very different kind of woman in mind for me - He had a godly woman, who could support me emotionally as well as spiritually, and care for me with the heart of a caregiver. She was someone I could not only go to church with, but could grow with together and edify with what little skill the Lord has given me in being able to do so.

And now, as we are fast approaching two months of married life, I look back and realize that God's care and providence has truly shown His sanctifying love for me as His child, and I see that every time I see the love my wife has for me. God bless you, dear.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

And Can It Be...?

After being exposed for a prolonged time to some shallow modern Christian rock, I felt the desire to get some real Christian music in my system...


Ahhhh there we go.

Sunday, January 20, 2013

A "personal promise" Bible?

Recently someone sent me a link to this: the Personal Promise Bible! As it says on the front page, it offers to print a customized Bible that "inserts YOUR name in more than 7000 key scriptures throughout the bible." I decided to test it out, so I just chose any random ol' name and tried the demo verse they offer:
By which He has granted to Judas Iscariot His precious and exceedingly great promises; that through these Judas Iscariot may become a partaker of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world by lust.
2 Peter 1:4
Hmm...I sense a glitch in the Matrix...

Friday, January 18, 2013

Lawrence O'Donnell and the Bible

Chris Rosebrough over at Fighting for the Faith reviews some erroneous comments made by MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell regarding the Bible, homosexuality, and "burning prostitutes at the stake."

Thursday, January 17, 2013

The "That's Your Interpretation" Fallacy

Oftentimes when someone quotes scripture to demonstrate their point, someone will contend it with the counterargument: "That's your interpretation." There are other versions of this, including "That's just your opinion" and similar wording. The problem is that if this is said simply as a blanket statement rather as the introduction to an argument which will demonstrate the point, then it is simply a fallacious response.

In my experience, the people who make such argumentation have one thing in common: they can never follow it up. They will tell you "That's just your interpretation" or "That's just how you see the verse," but when you ask them to demonstrate how you might be misrepresenting the verse, or you ask them to examine the verse, they almost always will refuse to do so.

Brothers and sisters, if anyone pulls this fallacy with you, do not permit it to them. If one wishes to suggest you have misused God's word, ask them to answer for it. Explain it. Demonstrate it. If they cannot, or they simply repeat themselves, or they present a very shallow response, then they will have shown themselves to be full of nothing but hot air. Stick to the word of God, show that the truth is there in the plain wording, and they will have nowhere else to go.

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Do Jews, Christians, and Muslims worship the same God?

Some time ago, I had written a post regarding the Roman Catholic Catechism and Islam, dealing with the Catechism's statements on whether or not Muslims are fellow worshipers of the true God of Abraham. Since then, I've come across many people (mostly Roman Catholics) who continue to say that they, and Jews, do worship the same God as Christians. Mostly they will try to rationalize an argument in order to say this (and we will get to some momentarily) - however, the question ultimately boils down to this question: how do all three religions treat God the Son, aka Jesus Christ?

We must remember that Christians uphold God as a Trinitarian God. That is, God is one Being, made up of three co-equal, co-existent and co-eternal but distinct Persons in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity, it must be noted, is not Tritheistic with three separate gods, but rather each Person, while being distinct, represents the fullness of God. This is seen in scripture, where in Christ it is said "the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Col 2:9). God the Son, while being distinct from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, still represents the fullness of God. Christ was not one third of God (which is tritheism), but he was God the Son made flesh.

Jews and Muslims, on the other hand, believe in a Unitarian God. That is, God is not one Being found in three distinct but equal Persons, but rather one Being and one Person. On this basis alone, we can see that the Christians worship a God that is already very different than the Jewish and Islamic gods. To Jews and Muslim, God is not a Trinity, and therefore they would deny not only the Messianic status of Christ (for the Jews) and the deity of Christ (for the Jews and Muslims), but they would deny, and reject worship of, God the Son.

What does scripture say about those who deny God the Son? The overall teaching of scripture is that those who deny the Son are denied by the Father as well. Christ stated that those who denied him before men, he would deny them before his Father (Mt 10:33). He told the unbelieving Jews: "You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also" (Jn 8:19); and likewise, "If God were your Father, you would love me" (Jn 8:42). He told the disciples: "No one comes to the Father except through me" (Jn 14:6); and likewise, "Whoever hates me hates my Father also" (Jn 15:23). The apostle John put it in the most blunt manner when he wrote "no one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also" (1 Jn 2:23). According to the resounding testimony of scripture, those who deny God the Son and reject worship of him reject worship of the true God. Why is this? It is because, as God the Son represents the fullness of God, denial of one Person of the Trinity is denial of God in toto. Those who choose not to worship one Person of the Trinity refuse to worship God in toto.

Many will of course try to rationalize out of this. Some responses to such arguments:

Did the people in the Old Testament worship a Trinitarian God? The fullness of the Trinitarian revelation was not yet given to those under the old covenant, however God still existed as a Trinity, and the people under the old covenant therefore worshiped a Trinitarian God. There are moments in the Old Testament where a pre-incarnate God the Son was even encountered by believers.

Wasn't Jesus a Jew, and didn't he worship as a Jew? Didn't he pray to YHWH, just as the Jews today do? Such questioning, in fact, is ironically similar to arguments made by Muslims against the Trinity (ie., "If Jesus was God, who was he praying to?", etc.). That Jesus lived under the Mosaic Laws is, of course, clear to be seen in scripture, but this was out of the necessity that, as the perfect sacrifice before God, he live post-incarnation as the perfect man, and therefore had to fulfill the Mosaic Law and all it required. Yet if we ask then, whether or not he prayed to YHWH, we have to first realize we are heading down a dangerous road, theologically speaking. That is, we have to ask if we are suggesting that Jesus prayed outside his role in the Trinity? When Jesus prayed, it was the Son praying to the Father - Jews of today do not have this ability. We have to also remember that Jesus, as God the Son, was himself YHWH - those who have evangelized to Jehovah's Witnesses realize how important it is to prove that the holy name of God was attributed to Jesus Christ. To be certain, those who argue "Jesus was Jewish" are simply giving a non sequitor.

Don't Muslims claim to worship the God of Abraham? Let's first ask ourselves from where Islam came - to put it bluntly, it was from a false prophet in ancient Arabia who heard demonic lies in the desert. The god of Islam taught his people teachings so woefully different than the God of Christianity that, on this basis alone, one has to wonder how one can logically conclude the god of Islam and the God of Christianity are the same God, as God would not contradict himself in such a blatant manner. Simply claiming that you'd like to worship the God of Abraham does not automatically mean you are - I could claim my car was the God of Abraham and worship it, that wouldn't mean I was worshiping the same god as that of Christians.

Scripture says rejection of the Son will lead to rejection by the Father, but it says nothing for those who simply don't know any better. Where, however, in all of scripture is this such a distinction made? Such a question demands we find a gray area where the word of God sees only black and white. I am aware there are many pet verses taken by people out of context to prove inclusivist beliefs, therefore I might direct the rest of this conversation to this post.

More importantly, all of these arguments ignore the clear teaching of scripture on this matter. Those who forsake the teaching of scripture for human reasoning in essence forsake God's authority for the authority of man. Especially with Roman Catholics, who are fond of opening up arguments on this subject with "The pope said..." or "My church says...", they seem to unwittingly desire to quote a pope or church over and against the words of scripture. I'm sorry, but scripture trumps any words of man.

It must be noted here, as we conclude this post, that we should still witness to and pray for our Jewish and Muslim friends. They must hear who the true God is, and be invited to worship Him, for only God the Son can purify them of their sins and be made righteous before God the Father, sanctified and sealed by God the Holy Spirit. God bless.

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Elder in God's House

The following is to the tune of "Master of the House" from Les Miserables.
Pastor
Welcome, brother, sit yourself down
And meet the best church leader around
Don't heed the news - I'm not a crook!
Come up and see, just come up and look
Seldom will you find
Fancy suits like mine
A smile on my face
With white teeth that shine

Elder in God's house, easing all your fears
Ready with some stories for your itching ears
Tells a dirty joke, says a racial slur
Congregants appreciate the bad humor
Glad to do the world a favor
Even God's name they'll despise
But gospel gets you nothing
For you see, our numbers gotta rise...

Elder in God's house, shepherd of the ewe
Ready to relieve them of a buck or two
Waterin' the truth, keepin' sermons terse
Makin' shallow lessons from a single verse
Everybody loves my CD's
My books go flyin' off the shelf
I'm workin' in the name of Jesus -
But I'm profitin' myself!

Congregants
Elder in God's house, feeding all his flock
Always wants to talk the talk and walk the walk
Poor man to the poor, low man to the low
Fine speaker, theosopher, and pure as snow!
A warrior to help the faithful
A warrior against all doubt

Pastor
But don't take any photos
Hey you! Security get him out!

Enter brother, sit in this chair
Take off your coat, breathe in some air
These days are hard, oh life's a curse!
Lighten your yoke - and maybe your purse!
Hear the band play on
It's our source of pride
Here you'll be entertained
But not edified

Mixing up doctrine, snatched from all around
Stir it all together and pretend it's sound
Use the word of God, strip the context bare
Takin' lots of scripture quotes from here and there
Smoke machine is up and running
Budget's paid by those who tithed
Reasonable pledges
Plus some little charges on the side!

Fifty for blind eyes, hundred for bad knees,
Triple more for healin' up your AIDS disease
Thousand for CP, double for your growth
Three thousand for children who are comatose
If you want some holy trinkets
You can bet I even got those
Hey, why should I fear it? Sell the Holy Spirit!
Simon Magus taught me how it goes!

Congregants
Elder in God's house, feeding all his flock
Always wants to talk the talk and walk the walk
Poor man to the poor, low man to the low
Fine speaker, theosopher, and pure as snow!
He knows how to keep attention
Catches your ear with his hook

Pastor
Can't afford that Corvette;
Better go and write another book!

Devil
I used to make heretics like a boss
But over time now, seems my silver's turned to dross

"Elder in God's house"? That just stings my tongue
"Fine speaker, theosopher" and pure as dung
Brings in quite a crowd, works his Midas touch,
Thinks he's Billy Graham, but that don't say much
Use to make wolves with stature, nowadays they're not so nice
Don't be too harsh, even I can make a mistake once or twice!

Pastor/Congregants
Elder in God's house!

Devil
Oh wait, is God here?

Pastor/Congregants
Fine speaker, theosopher...

Devil
When not on beer!

Pastor/Congregants
Poor man to the poor, low man to the low

Devil
'Til you criticize him, then he's a total shmo!

Pastor/Congregants
Everybody bless the Good Lord!
Everybody praise our God!

Pastor
Everybody lift your hand!

Devil
Everybody worship man!

All
Everybody start to worship the elder in God's house!

Friday, January 4, 2013

How do we know someone is speaking from or for God?

Introduction

Many people today claim to speak for God, or claim they have something to say from God. Many times, however, this claim is made with no real standard or with no real solid basis for people to believe it. I've written out six conditions and arguments many use to support people who make such claims, which we will now review. This isn't, of course, a complete list, only a list of possibilities I could think of and desire to talk about.

Possibility 1: They have dreams and visions.

Many leaders or ministers in the so-called "prophetic movement," or just in Hyper-Charismatic or Neo-Pentecostal circles in general, seem to rely heavily upon their dreams or visions. It is believed by many that these dreams and visions are being given by God and are meant to guide and direct the church in this modern day and age. People immediately uphold all these dreams and visions as coming from God and being meant to be followed.

Perhaps what disturbs me the most is that when I read about these men and women who talk of their dreams and visions, there seems to almost be little to no effort made either on their part or the part of their followers to discern whether or not this dream or vision really did come from God. When I bring this up, I'm usually charged with being a Pharisee, a divider of the church, etc., but I believe I have biblical grounds for doing so. For example, the Lord spoke through the prophet Jeremiah against those who relied upon their dreams to instruct the people when, in fact, their dreams were all but useless.
"I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in my name, saying 'I have dreamed, I have dreamed!' How long shall there be lies in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies, and who prophesy the deceit of their own heart?" [Jeremiah 23:25-26]
Many people might interject here with, "Ah, but the people in that verse are lying - they're blatant false prophets." They forget, however, the frightening words found in the prophecies of Ezekiel:
"They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'Declares the Lord,' when the LORD has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, 'Declares the LORD,' although I have not spoken?" [Ezekiel 13:6-7]
God says that the false prophets had literally seen false visions, and heard lying divinations, and believed them to be from God. This means the false prophets saw or discerned something which they perceived was from God, yet was not. They didn't make up a vision, they saw a legitimate vision...but it wasn't from God. We might look to Mohammad and Joseph Smith, two men who claimed to have seen and heard visions from God, as examples of this. These men had spiritual experiences and claimed to have spoken to divine entities, and yet most Christians would be quick to discredit their experiences as false.

People also forget another story, found in scripture's historical narrative:
And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; and the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ And the LORD said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has declared disaster for you.” [1 Kings 22:19-23]
Micaiah is here speaking to King Ahab concerning the idea of war with Syria. All of Ahab's personal prophets claimed that they had visions and prophetic input that the war with Syria would go well. Micaiah, on the other hand, preaches that the war would go horribly, and then states that God had intentionally permitted the sending of a "lying spirit" in the mouth of all the prophets, so that they would prophesy falsely and bring ruin to Ahab. The prophets claimed to be speaking for and from God, but they were in fact speaking falsely - what's more, God had willed this to happen as a form of judgment.

So what is the standard in regards to dreams and visions? Let's go back to the words God spoke through the prophet Jeremiah:
"Let the prophet who has a dream tell the dream, but let him who has my word speak my word faithfully. What has straw in common with wheat? declares the LORD." [Jeremiah 23:28]
These are beautiful words to ponder: "let the prophet who has a dream tell the dream, but let him who has my word speak my word faithfully." God even compares dreams and God's word with straw and wheat, signifying how different they are.

Many might interject here that God has used dreams for His purposes. For example, the dreams of Pharaoh and the king of Babylon were interpreted by godly men to explain God's intentions, while Joseph and the wise men were warned by God about King Herod through dreams. That God can use dreams for His purposes or to give some amount of guidance or warning is certainly possible. However, what is our basis of authority, as scripture itself says? Scripture never says dreams are our authority - in fact, they often tell us otherwise, such as those false teachers who relied heavily on their dreams over the teachings of scripture, as many in the Neo-Pentecostal movement do (Jude 1:8). That God used x or y to get His will done does not  automatically mean that we should likewise use or rely on x and y as our standard over and against scripture. Jonathan Edwards put it best when he said: "God has not given us his providence, but his word to be our governing rule" (Humble Inquiry).

Possibility 2: They perform miracles.

Many today uphold a belief that signs and wonders are necessary in order to evangelize (also known as "power evangelism"). Yet when the early followers of Christ asked for a sign that they "may see and believe" in Him, Christ merely identified Himself as the bread that came down from heaven to give life to the world (John 6:30-33). Certainly Christ performed signs and wonders during His ministry - as did the apostles - yet the hinge of belief was not on how many signs and wonders were performed, but on whether people truly had life in Christ granted them by the Holy Spirit.

In fact, Christ warns the disciples that signs and wonders can be made by false teachers and prophets.
"For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect." [Matthew 24:24]
Paul makes a similar warning concerning the man of lawlessness.
The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. [2 Thessalonians 2:9-10]
Scripture makes it clear that it is entirely possible for false teachers to perform signs and wonders for the people to see. Therefore, the mere ability to perform a sign or wonder cannot be a standard to know someone is speaking to or from God.

Possibility 3: They prophesy events that come true.

If someone predicts an event, natural occurrence, or the results of an election, is that enough to demonstrate that they are speaking from or for God? Many are familiar with what scripture teaches regarding false prophets and prophesies that don't come true:
"When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him." [Deuteronomy 18:22]
Yet many people forget what scripture likewise teaches regarding false prophets who prophesy things that do come to pass.
"If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and he says, 'Let us go after other gods,' which you have not known, 'and let us serve them,' you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him." [Deuteronomy 13:1-4]
If a prophesy given by someone does not come true, that's a good sign they are a false teacher (though some contest that). However, even if it does come true, that is not enough to verify that they are working for God. Rather, it is their doctrine and how well they keep to God's word. That is the ultimate decider as to whether or not the individual is, in fact, speaking for or from God in regards to miracles and wonders. A supposed prophet can split a hundred moons in half, and a supposed miracle worker can heal a hundred men of leprosy. If they are not speaking according to the word of God, they are not from God, and none of that will matter.

Possibility 4: They have a huge amount of followers.

We are essentially arguing here for spiritual pragmatism, wherein quantity is the defining quality - a kind of divine ad populum. As I've discussed in another post, scripture never says large numbers equals heavenly blessings. There are many examples in scripture where the believers were greatly outnumbered by the unbelievers or false believers (Gen 6:5-8; 1 Ki 19:18; Isa 1:9; Rom 11:5). There are some small churches out in the countryside who have far more Christians in them than some of the biggest mega churches in the major cities.

Possibility 5: They have a large number of people who claim to have been blessed.

Many people, in a spirit of emotionalism, will defend a teacher or ministry on the claim that "countless people have been blessed." The idea is that, since so many people have had changed lives or emotional experiences in this ministry, it must surely be sourced to God.

Of course, I once met a man who claimed to have been greatly blessed. He used to be a gang banger but was now a productive member of society. He followed God and assisted his community. He had found a complete turnaround. He had completely changed his lifestyle. This blessing he felt had come from God he claimed to have found in...

...Islam.

That a person has had a "changed life" is not enough to prove that someone or someone's ministry is from God. This is the problem with contemporary Christianity, which believes the faith to be nothing more than a catalyst for changing lives. This makes its followers no different than those who claim to have been blessed by turning to Sikhism, Mormonism, Buddhism, New Age alternatives or any other religion that claims to give you a better life now.

God certainly desires "changed lives" in the sense that we are to put away the old self and put on the new self, which abhors sin and wickedness. However, using a subjective argument like "my life is better, therefore this person is being helped by God" is, as said before, simply spiritual pragmatism. It should also be pointed out that if a person was indeed saved or bettered in their life, it was not because of that individual or their ministry, but by the work of the Holy Spirit.

Possibility 6: They believe in Jesus.

Oftentimes, when dilemmas are demonstrated in a person's theology or lifestyle, one of their followers will fall back on one simple fact. They will say: "Ah, but they believe in Jesus, don't they? Don't we all follow the same Messiah? That should be good enough!" Oftentimes this will be used to support superficial peace, saying: "I don't think we should continue arguing about this - after all, don't we all still believe in the same Jesus?"

It might sound ironic, as a follower of sola fide, for me to say that this is perhaps the weakest argument against such men. However, to say they believe in Christ and that is good enough is not sola fide but easy believism. Mere mental assent to Christ's existence is not a guarantee for salvation, nor does it demonstrate you are a true believer. During the Sermon on the Mount, Christ warned:
"On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, an do many mighty works in your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'" [Matthew 7:22-23]
Christ speaks of men who did wonders and signs in His name (directly relevant to Possibilities 2 and 3, listed above), and yet when they come before Him on the day of judgment, Christ will say to them "I never knew you." He does not say "Oh yeah, you went to church for a while" or "Yeah, and you were a real disappointment in the end," but rather "I never knew you." They claimed to be followers of Christ, and even showed off miracles they believed demonstrated such a claim, and yet it turns out they were nothing more than goats masquerading as sheep.

False teachers, in fact, will come under the guise of men who are after the heart of Christ. The apostle Paul warned the church:
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of Light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. [2 Corinthians 11:13-14]
It is not enough to simply decree a belief in Christ. Rather, we must present the fruits of such belief. Because I recognize that this opens up a whole other can of worms, I defer discussion on judging someone's faith, or whether or not we have the ability to discern it, to this post I made here.

Conclusion

Reviewing what we've gone over, what is the primary ground by which we know someone is speaking directly from or for God? The answer:

If they abide by His holy word.

That's disappointing to a lot of people, of course, but that is because they are not truly satisfied with the supremacy of God's word. They're not happy with just having God's word. They want the charismatic speaker who claims to have prophecies from God. They want the man rocking back and forth on stage talking about dreams he's had. They want the female preacher who gives good advice and has thousands of "saved" women attending her church. They want the pastor who has hundreds of stories of people who have been healed through miraculous or unique ways. They want the ministry led by people who claim the Holy Spirit is working through them for specific, specialized reasons. When people can't repeat the word of the Psalmist when he says "in the way of your testimonies I delight as much as in all riches" (Psa 119:14), they will seek something to fill in that spiritual gap. Such people we should work with and try to save to the best we can, while remaining strong in our convictions and preventing ourselves from falling into the same trap as did they. "Save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh" (Jude 1:23).

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

What have the Calvinists ever given us?

The following is meant for humor, and is based off the What have the Romans ever done for us? routine from the Monty Python film Life of Brian.
[The pastor of a Free Will Baptist church sits at a table flanked by his deacon, with many of his fellow church members (FCM) before him]

Pastor: "They criticize us and persecute us! And not just us, but our fathers! And our father's fathers!"

Deacon: "And our father's father's fathers!"

Pastor: "Yeah..."

Deacon: "And our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers!"

Pastor: "Yeah all right, don't belabor the point. And what have the Calvinists ever given us in return?"

[The room is silent for many seconds, then...]

FCM #1: [raising hand] "...the First Great Awakening?"

Pastor: "...what?"

FCM #1: "The First Great Awakening?"

Pastor: "...oh, yeah yeah, they did give us that, yeah that's true..."

FCM #2: "And the early Protestant missionary movements."

Deacon: "Oh yeah, like the Puritans in New England, John Eliot with the American Indians, David Brainerd and Jonathan Edwards with them as well, William Carey, George Whitefield, David Livingston and others. Remember the Roman Catholics were beating us at missionary work until they stepped in. Over half the early Protestant missionaries were Calvinist."

Pastor: "Yeah all right, I'll grant you the First Great Awakening and the early Protestant missionary movements are two things the Calvinists have done for us..."

FCM #3: "And Pilgrim's Progress!"

Pastor: "Well of course Pilgrim's Progress, I mean Pilgrim's Progress goes without saying! But apart from the First Great Awakening, early Protestant missionary movements, and Pilgrim's Progress..."

FCM #4: "The English Standard Version?"

FCM #5: "Early Protestant confessions?"

FCM #6: "The Pilgrims?"

FCM #7: "And the contemporary works of apologetics!"

Deacon: "Oh yeah, like John Owen, Francis Turretin and others. I mean let's face it, pastor, they're the only ones who could make any order out of messes like Socinianism!"

Pastor: [angrily] "All right, all right! But apart from the First Great Awakening, early Protestant missionary movements, Pilgrim's Progress, the English Standard Version, early Protestant confessions, the Pilgrims, and contemporary apologetics against heresy...what have the Calvinists ever given us?"

FCM #1: "...renewed orthodoxy?"

Pastor: "Oh, renewed orthodoxy...SHUT UP!!"