Archives for : Christianity

Talk, trust, and truth – Polarization of American society

Posted by :webmaster On : January 27, 2017
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Culture Wars, Humanism

Mark Brewin is an associate professor and chairperson of the Department of Communications at the University of Tulsa. Mr. Brewin’s guest editorial for the Tulsa World’s Sunday Opinion section titled “Can we talk?” states that there are remarkably high levels of distrust in America which is creating an unhealthy nation. He says that, “We owe it to ourselves, and to each other to make a more conscious effort to listen to different voices, to forcibly and consciously move ourselves out of our networks.[1]

Brewin believes that the opposing ideological sides evident in 2016 presidential election have created this unhealthy situation. Brewin described the opponents.

At times over the course of the fall election period, it seemed as though half the country existed of mean-spirited racist and misogynistic troglodytes, who lacked either the ability or the inclination to use their reason; whereas the other half was composed of entitled elitists who drank craft beer, traveled to places like Paris or Ulan Bator for their summer vacations, and looked with utter contempt on God-fearing folk who fixed their plugged-up toilets and bagged their groceries.[2]

What Brewin is really describing is the centuries-long clash between conservatism and liberalism. With this understanding we can restate his caricatures of the two groups: The first group identified is the hateful, bigoted, women-hating, caveman conservatives who won’t use their reasoning ability (assuming they had the brains to do so which is doubtful). In the second group we have the snobbish liberals. Their great sin is not who they are or what they believe but merely looking down their noses and failing to appreciate the lower classes of society.

Brewin says that the inability of well-meaning people of all political and cultural persuasions is of recent origin. He states that only twenty years ago Americans could disagree without resorting to charges of moral corruption for merely supporting the other side. However, Brewin’s claim is clearly bogus with regard to the political spectrum. Even a cursory examination of American history (dating back to the Adams-Jefferson presidential campaign of 1800) will prove the fallacy of his statement. With regard to the cultural spectrum, the drift apart began occurring mid-way through the first half of the twentieth century beginning with Franklin Roosevelt’s administration when he successfully purged the Democratic Party of its conservative voices. Thus, the cultural and political divide is not of recent origin and will not be bridged by conciliatory dialog and understanding of the other side’s point of view.

Brewin suggests that the path to a mutual disdain between the two sides of the culture wars is long and complicated. In that he is correct. This complexity arises because the nation’s problems flow from non-negotiable issues that have risen as a result of the liberal-conservative split and a consequent loss of a cohesive central cultural vision once held by Americans for over 150 years. Talk alone will not heal this loss of cohesion in the nation’s central cultural vision.

The networked society

Brewin says that we can begin to gain an understanding of the development of this divide by looking at the concept of “network.” Social scientists have theorized that modern culture has evolved into a “networked” society and that these changes came about because of the way Americans get their information. The “mass” media in the twentieth century tended to be large and centralized. Social scientists feared that it was possible for the mass media to dominate society by controlling what they saw and heard thereby create a “mass” society of apathetic clones that were easily manipulated.[3]

In the latter part of the twentieth century the power and domination of the mainstream media was supposedly replaced by the Internet and other alternative media sources which collectively became known as the “networked” media. Mass media’s so-called passive audience had become an active group of information seekers that turned to the networked media which was supposed to bring them freedom and variety. However, Brewin is concerned that information networks may only “provide a vision of the world that flatters our opinions rather than challenging them. We do not hear arguments from opposing sides that might work to change our minds, or at least modify our opinions into something less radical.” Put another way, he sees the new networked media as appealing to our worst instincts because we listen to only those things with which we agree.[4]

But who decides what is radical? Although Brewin admits that the mainstream media produced a lot of “bad cultural product,” it sounds like he longs for a return to the good old days when the secular mass media controlled content and presented its humanistic vision of society. Thus, the liberal elitists could once again protect the masses from their “worst instincts.”[5] He provides an example.

But some of the things [delivered by mass media] that we didn’t like and didn’t want to listen to were good for us anyhow. It was good for pro-lifers and pro-choicers to be forced to listen to spokespeople for the other side every night on the evening news.[6]

Given the mainstream media’s decades-long support of abortion, when in the last forty-four years since Roe v. Wade have pro-choicers been forced to listen to spokespersons from the pro-life side every night in the mainstream media? Such would be a rare and brief occurrence comparable to an eclipse of the sun. Here Brewin reveals either his naiveté or duplicity. It is no secret that Christianity and its beliefs have been substantially evicted from the public square for decades.

In summary, Brewin believes that networked media makes it possible for information consumers to “bypass challenging but important views” which leads to ideological cocoons that foster distrust among the citizenry and produces an unhealthy nation. Brewin would have us break out of these cocoons by making a conscious effort to listen to different voices, to forcibly and consciously move ourselves out of our networks so that our radical ideas caused by our worst instincts can be moderated.

Clash of Worldviews

Here we arrive at the crux of the problem that Brewin misses. Brewin and the social scientists’ assume that people were weaned away from the mass media and now have developed an ideological cocoon in their brains because they have spent too much time imbibing their chosen narcotic provided by the networked media. But the mass media continues to have much greater power to manipulate and indoctrinate the populace than the networked media. Television was by far the dominate segment of mass media since the early 1950s and continues to do so today. In 1981, Richard Adler described the power of television in forming the worldviews of the nation’s citizenry.

The TV set has become the primary source of news and entertainment for most Americans and a major force in the acculturation of children…Television is not simply a medium of transmission, it is an active, pervasive force…a mediator between our individual lives and the larger life of the nation and the world; between fantasy and fact; between old values and new ideas; between our desire to seek escape and our need to confront reality.[7]

In his article “Television Shapes the Soul,” Michael Novak called television a

…molder of the soul’s geography. It builds up incrementally a psychic structure of expectations. It does so in much the same way that school lessons slowly, over the years, tutor the unformed mind and teach it “how to think.”[8]

To Novak, television is a “homogenizing medium” with an ideological tendency that is a “vague and misty liberalism” designed “however gently to undercut traditional institutions and to promote a restless, questioning attitude.”[9]

Therefore, we must ask the question with regard to Brewin’s conclusions. Have Americans in this polarized age retreated into information cocoons fed by like-minded media sources? This is the question asked by Brendan Nyhan when writing for The New York Times website in 2014. Nyhan’s answer was spelled out in the title of his article: “Americans Don’t Live in Informational Cocoons.”

In short, while it’s still possible to live in a political bubble [Brewin’s ideological cocoon] of your own choosing, the best evidence suggests that very few people are getting their news only from like-minded outlets. Why, then, do so many Americans seem to live in different political realities?

The problem isn’t the news we consume, it seems, but the values and identities that shape how we interpret that information — most notably, our partisan beliefs. In other words, Democrats and Republicans don’t see the world so differently because they see different news; rather, they see the news differently because they’re Democrats and Republicans in the first place.[10] [emphasis added]

If Nylan’s conclusions are correct, then Brewin’s contention that Americans have retreated into information cocoons fed by like-minded media sources appears to be erroneous. Additionally, the origins of this distrust and ideological differences are far older than suggested by Brewin and his social scientist theorists. This raises a second question. If the theory that the networked media causes an ideological cocoon is a fiction, then what is the source for the polarization of American life? It occurs because of the way the two sides see the world, that is, their worldviews are fundamentally different.

One’s worldview is built throughout life and reflects the picture of one’s understanding of reality (truth). From this understanding of truth we form our values, beliefs, and identities from which we attempt to answer the basic questions of life: who are and where did we come from, how did we get in the mess we are in, and how do we get out of it.

In a free society, the worldviews most commonly held generally form the central cultural vision that brings order to that society or nation. In a humanistic society order is achieved through socialism, and in a socialistic society it is the worldviews and philosophies of the state, as crafted and dictated by its ruling elites, which flow downward to the citizenry and are imposed on each sphere of society. As Western civilization moved away from the Judeo-Christian to a humanistic worldview over the last three hundred years, the pathologies in these societies have exploded because of the tyrannical demands of relativistic humanism contradicts the God-given innate nature of man that seeks objective truth and freedom.

Requirements for cultures to survive: Unity and Truth

The two essentials that any culture must have and without which it disintegrates over time are unity and truth. A society’s central cultural vision must command unity, and such unity must filter up from individuals, not be coerced or forced down on society by its elites. Also, a culture’s central cultural vision must be based on truth with regard to the nature of God, creation, and man. Without a central cultural vision that commands unity and is based on truth, there can be no order to the soul or society, and without order in both, society deteriorates over time and eventually disintegrates.

In America there are two worldviews competing for dominance in the nation’s central cultural vision—the Judeo-Christian worldview and the humanistic worldview (defined by its various components – liberalism, progressivism, relativism, and naturalism among others). For most of the nation’s history its central cultural vision has been built on the foundation of the Judeo-Christian worldviews of its citizens.

This central cultural vision has been under attack since the late nineteenth century. Beginning in the 1960s, the humanistic worldview gained momentum and by the end of the century the predominate leadership in the spheres of American life held a humanistic worldview (in politics, government, the sciences, economy, education, law, media, entertainment, popular culture, and much of the church). As these leaders consolidated their power, they began to fashion and impose a network of humanistic laws, policies, rules, and regulations on a society that is still predominately of a Judeo-Christian worldview. Each side holds diametrically opposed views of reality (truth) with regard to God, nature, the origins and purpose of man, and a host of other flashpoints in the culture wars. These differences are immutable and irreconcilable which no amount of discussion and negotiation will bridge. This is the reason for America’s polarization.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Mark Brewin, “Can we talk?” Tulsa World, January 22, 2017, G1.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Richard P. Adler, Understanding Television – Essays on Television as a Social and Cultural Force, ed. Richard P. Adler (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1981), p. xi-xii.
[8] Michael Novak, “Television Shapes the Soul,” Understanding Television – Essays on Television as a Social and Cultural Force, ed. Richard P. Adler, pp. 20.
[9] Ibid., pp. 26-27.
[10]Brendan Nyhan, “Americans Don’t Live in Informational Cocoons,” New York Times.com, October 24, 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/25/upshot/americans-dont-live-in-information-cocoons.html (accessed January 25, 2017).

The Church triumphant – Part II

Posted by :webmaster On : November 11, 2016
0

Category: America, Archives, Christianity, Humanism

[Part II was intentionally written before the results of the November 8, 2016 elections were known. It was released for posting on November 11, 2016.]

Will the church of Jesus Christ survive in Western civilization? If Christianity does not survive, then the church must also die, and there have been many predictions of the imminent death of both over the last three centuries.

The skeptics

Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn’t argue about that; I’m right and I’ll be proved right. We’re more popular than Jesus now; I don’t know which will go first—rock n’ roll or Christianity.[1]

These are the words of John Lennon of Beatles fame who made these statements during an interview for a magazine article fifty years ago (1966). But Lennon won’t be the last and he certainly wasn’t the first to predict the demise of Christianity and the Church.

However mild and reasoned their protestations against God and His church are in the beginning, skeptics invariably end with the creature murdering his Creator. The anti-God philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) thought this the most promising and glorious event in human history. He continued his vitriolic harangue about the death of God to the end of his life from a padded cell in a Venetian insane asylum.[2]

What if our modern skeptics could be transported back in time and allowed to stand at the back of the crowds and listen to and observe Jesus during His earthly ministry, eavesdrop on His private conversations as He taught His disciples, and follow Him as He trod down dusty paths and ministered to people along the way such as the Samaritan woman at the well. Would a seeing-is-believing moment change their opinion as to the longevity of the church of Jesus? No, they would have been like the pagan rulers and religious elite of Jesus’ day who most certainly believed that the itinerant preacher who claimed to be the Son of God and his little congregation of twelve were undoubtedly destined for failure, and sooner rather than later. They would call this little church anything except “The Church triumphant.”

They had multiple reasons for their skepticism. The church did not have the right venue to be successful. It was located in a troublesome little backwater country on the fringes of the Roman Empire. The preacher had little formal education and obviously was not born to wealth and privilege. He was the son of a carpenter and trained as a carpenter. Rumor was that the carpenter may not have been His real father. Even members of his own family thought him delusional. The members of His congregation were not found on the social registers of the day. Most of these men would be called blue-collar workers in today’s vernacular—fishermen and other low-ranking occupations and one hated tax collector. Above all, the preacher’s message was too demanding and short on benefits in this life. He called His followers to a life of surrender, sacrifice, and death to self. He told them that in this life they would be hated of men, persecuted, and that many would be killed for their faith. And He was always in trouble with the establishment—both political and religious.

After only three years of ministry, the preacher was executed on a Roman cross, and his little band of followers went into hiding. The skeptics must have felt assured that their original predictions of the demise of the little church had been justified. The skeptics stooped to etch an epitaph on the tombstone being prepared for the little church. It read, “The Church humiliated.” And the skeptics would have been correct except for one thing. The itinerant preacher really was the Son of God.

The Church triumphant

Why did Jesus’ followers believe He was the Son of God? Was it blind faith? Low intelligence? Lack of education? Hysteria? Wishful thinking? Delusion? Kevin Swanson gives us the correct answer. His followers knew Jesus had defeated death and that only God could do that.

It is an indisputable fact: the Lord Jesus Christ is risen from the dead, and He is reigning as sovereign Lord on the right hand of the Father, until all of His enemies are under His footstool. For the Christian this is the historical fact by which all other previous and future events are to be understood. It is the most important historical fact of all. Marx and Nietzsche hated this historical reality, and they fought it with all that they had within them…

However the future is viewed, there is no avoiding one stubborn, historical fact—Jesus Christ has risen from the dead, and His kingdom will never fail. Faithless men will put together eschatological scenarios that ignore this fact. Faithless men will minimize the antithesis or compromise with it. Faithless men will give too much credence to the antithesis and not enough to Christ. Contrary to John Lennon’s premature pronouncements, this is not the end of Christian influence in the world. It is only the beginning.[3] [emphasis in original]

The Church and the end of the age

In light of the seeming meltdown of Christianity in America and the Western world, many Christians are exceedingly distraught about the future. Although Christians should be greatly disturbed and dismayed at what is happening in America, they should never be fearful of the future and never believe that the church has been defeated. The words of Isaiah assure God’s people of His and their ultimate victory. “So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.” [Isiah 59:19. KJV] Even when the ungodly rule the land, Daniel reminds us that God is in charge of the times and seasons and that He removes kings and sets up kings (See: Daniel 2:21). Thus we know that God is sovereign and that He orders the affairs of men in all ages.

As the last scenes of history play out, proud, boastful, and seemingly independent man is oblivious to the reality that he is being drawn as though by a hook in his nose to the prophetic conclusion of the age. Mankind is on its last downward slide and nears the end of the last days. The Bible’s itinerary for a sin-filled world cannot be ignored or changed as it nears its final destination. There is no escaping it. The only questions that remain are the final dispositions of the lives of men and women living at this defining moment in history. Nations are also being sifted, tested, and tried to determine the final outworking of events within each before His soon return.

The circumstances and events in the political, economic, and social arenas that Christians see as disastrous for the church are only passing scenes in the unfolding drama that God is directing as the end of the age approaches. Nations that turn their back on God and His laws are paying a high price for their disobedience. Although Christians are aliens in a foreign and hostile land, they are also citizens of these earthly regimes and will also suffer because of their nation’s descent into wickedness. Even now the body of Christ (the Church) in many nations is experiencing a measure of this suffering before the rapture. But the church must never forget that its real home is in the wonderful and eternal presence of God. His purposes in allowing these momentary afflictions are often beyond our ability to comprehend, but He has assured His followers that, “…all things work together for the good to them that love God, to them who are called according to his purpose.” [Romans 8:28. KJV]

Becoming impossible people

Satan is attempting to destroy the church through the destruction of the Christian culture of America and all of Western civilization. He and his evil empire oppose righteousness, weaken the church through compromise, debauch the truth of God’s word in the minds of men, and pollute the land with a vile stream of wickedness that is flowing into every facet of life. Knowing this, Christians who in the world’s eyes are “impossible people” must have

…hearts that can melt with compassion, but with faces like flint and backbones of steel who are unmanipulable, unbribable, undeterrable and unclubbable (i.e., coercion through comfortable conformity), without ever losing the gentleness, the mercy, the grace and the compassion of our Lord.[4]

Perhaps the best advice for the church in this troublesome age comes from the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. First, he makes certain that we understand who the real enemy is that the church battles. Then, he tells it how to prepare for battle.

For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. [Ephesians 6:12-13. RSV]

In his commentary, Donald Stamps gives our modern minds insight into what Paul is saying.
Satan and a host of evil spirits are the spiritual rulers of the world. They empower ungodly men and women to oppose God’s will and attack believers. They form a “vast multitude and are organized into a highly systematized empire of evil…”[5]

The church must confront this empire of evil and does so by putting on the whole armor of God (see Ephesians 6:13-17). And when the battle is heated and defeat seems near at hand, having done all, the Church must continue to stand. It can do so because that itinerate preacher who trod the hills and valleys of ancient Palestine two thousand years ago really was the Son of God, and his kingdom will never fail.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Kevin Swanson, Apostate – The Men who Destroyed the Christian West, (Parker, Colorado: Generations with Vision, 2013), p. 277.
[2] Malcolm Muggeridge, The End of Christendom, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980), p. 11.
[3] Swanson, pp. 289-290.
[4] Os Guinness, Impossible People – Christian Courage and the Struggle for the Soul of Civilization, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books, 2016), pp. 31-32.
[5] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p.439.

The Church triumphant – Part I

Posted by :webmaster On : November 4, 2016
0

Category: America, Archives, Christianity, Humanism

Christians in the West are living in a grand clarifying moment. The gap between Christians and the wider culture is widening, and many formerly nominal Christians are becoming “religious nones”…

We face a solemn hour for humanity at large and a momentous showdown for the Western church. At stake is the attempted completion of the centuries-long assault on the Jewish and Christian faiths and their replacement by progressive secularism as the defining faith of the West and the ideology said to be the best suited to the conditions of advanced modernity. The gathering crisis is therefore about nothing less than a struggle for the soul of the West…[1]

So wrote Os Guinness wrote in Impossible People. One aspect of this grand clarifying moment for Christians will occur as Americans go to the polls in in the November elections. The results will be more than a minor historical footnote and promises to be a pivotal event in deciding the direction of the nation and ultimately Western civilization. Many Christians are shaking their heads in disbelief. They ponder how America could have arrived at such a low point. But the assault on Christianity is not of recent origin for Satan’s war against God predates the Garden. However, God’s special creation gave Satan a new target for striking at the Creator.

After two centuries of growth, anti-Christian progressive secularism in America has recently achieved critical mass and now boldly attacks Christians and Christianity in every sector of American society. We must ask how the church arrived at this sorry state of powerlessness in defending the faith and influencing American culture. When we speak of a powerful church, that does not mean the church should wield power to dominant the state but to change men’s lives who subsequently may exert a Godly influence on society and its institutions.

The large and momentous showdown between the Western church and humanistic progressive secularism is also occurring during the time of the great apostasy within the church—a confluence of events in which Christianity is caught in the perfect storm. Paul spoke of the end of the last days in which much of the church would become apostate, that is, falling away from or departure from the faith. “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition…” [2 Thessalonians 2:1-3. KJV] [emphasis added]

Is the Christian West in that day spoken of by Paul? Considering what has happened over the last two hundred years in Europe and America, Kevin Swanson called this period “the most significant Christian apostasy of all time. As measured by sheer numbers, there is no other apostasy so extensive in recorded history.” [2] Without doubt, the church is in the time of great apostasy.

An apostate church is a powerless church because it has fallen away from or rejected the truth of God’s word. Over time the adulterated message of these churches becomes unrecognizable when compared with the inerrant teachings of the Bible, and without a firm foundation of biblical truth, they become powerless.

The powerless condition of the church in America is not unlike the German church following World War I. The German church was weak in both the war and the peace that followed, but it had not yet allied itself with evil. The weakened German evangelical church was filled with terror as its political power and influence declined during the 1920s. Frail and fearful, the church became territorial and defensive, and some looked to a rising political leader as the savior of the church. This eventually led to an unholy alliance between the German church and one of history’s greatest incarnations of evil—Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. Whatever their private thoughts, both the Protestant and Catholic churches capitulated to Hitler’s demands and domination upon his rise to power. Hitler’s program for the church was deliberately ambiguous. He placated fearful church leaders with these words, “We demand freedom for all religious denominations in the state so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the customs and morality of the German race.”[3] Do we not hear similar words from our secular leaders today? They assure us that there is freedom for all religions so long as they do not stand at cross purposes with the state.

While the German Lutheran Church was a principal pillar of the Reformation during the sixteenth century and a subsequent forthright defender of the faith, the depths of apostasy to which the vast majority of German church leaders had sunk during the 1930s is incomprehensible. Some sought to obliterate the Jewish background of Christianity. Others proclaimed Hitler as “the redeemer in the history of the Germans…the window through which light fell on the history of Christianity.” Still others welcomed barbarous uniformed Nazi units into their churches and supplied them with chaplains. Both the German Protestant churches and the German Catholic Church gave huge support to the Nazi regime during its rise to power and throughout World War II.[4]

Hitler was not a Christian and most of the members of the Nazi elite were openly and vigorously anti-Christian. Hitler never officially left the church into which he was born, and for political reasons he occasionally attended church during his early years in power. But Hitler hated Christians and Christianity. Soon after assuming power he vowed that he would stamp out Christianity in Germany.[5]

One is either a Christian or a German. You can’t be both…Do you really believe the masses will ever be Christian again? Nonsense. Never again. The tale is finished…but we can hasten matters. The parsons will be made to dig their own graves. They will betray their God to us… [6]

The stated goal of Hitler with regard to Christianity aligns substantially with the goal of most of the humanistic-progressive-secularist ruling elites in all spheres of modern American society Many Christians unintentionally or unknowingly support that goal through their ignorance, apathy, or lethargy. That goal is to stamp out Christianity altogether or so constrain it that it will die of its own accord within a generation or two, and the church has been complicit in its own demise.

Satan subverts the church by injecting into it the very thing in which it is in a struggle to the death—a simpering humanistic worldview that caters to self. Guinness wrote that these church leaders are “courting spiritual and institutional suicide” for themselves and for those they are leading astray.

…[They] are reaping what others sowed with such fanfare a generation ago. For were we not solemnly sold a barrel of nonsense in the form of maxims that all good seeker-sensitive and audience-driven churches were to pursue? Here is one example from a well-known Christian marketing consultant: “It is also critical that we keep in mind a fundamental principle of Christian communication: the audience, not the message, is sovereign.”

The audience is sovereign? No! Let it be repeated a thousand times, no! When reaching out as the church of Jesus, the message of the gospel and Jesus the Lord of the message is alone sovereign—and never, never, never the audience…[7] [emphasis in original]

Audience-driven Church Growth leaders of seeker-sensitive churches justify their methods by pointing to Paul’s admonition to the Corinthians in winning the lost (See: 1 Corinthians 9-19-23). Here Paul renounces his rights in sympathetic consideration of the sinner. However, Paul does not mean that he was willing to compromise his Christian principles or sought to please others for the purpose of winning their esteem. Rather, Paul was willing to conform to the standards and convictions of the lost as long as it did not violate his Christian principles.”[8] Church Growth leaders cry foul and say that they are only changing their methods and not their doctrine. But their methods are in truth filled with the humanistic spirit of the age that undermines or ignores doctrinal truths and are leading millions to an eternity in hell.

Seeker-sensitive churches in their quest to please the seeker have compromised the gospel and allowed the world to change the church instead of the church changing the world. Over the course of the last fifty years, not only has the church failed to defend the faith in the public square and failed to transmit its values to its children, many modern church leaders have also drunk deeply from the well of doctrinal apostasy and have allowed the marginalization of Christianity in the larger culture. The evidence is abundant and undeniable. Many have embraced humanism’s themes of abortion, homosexuality, relativism, higher criticism of the Bible, evolution, progressivism, multiculturalism, diversity, religious universalism, promotion of socialist-Marxist concepts of organizing society, heretical concepts of salvation, and such like. They are digging their own graves and have betrayed their God.

Hosea’s description of Israel’s sinful state is a harbinger of what awaits the Western church without repentance and turning back to God.

For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind. The standing grain has no heads, it shall yield no meal; if it were to yield, aliens would devour it. [Hosea 8:7. RSV]

Much of the modern church has foolishly sown to the wind and is reaping a whirlwind. Hosea’s prophesy revealed sin and pronounced judgements on a people that would not be reformed and had become apostatized over several generations.[9] Our modern crisis of the soul in Western civilization has arisen because the majority of the Western Christian church is powerless to defend the faith let alone win the lost. There is little truth, little harvest, and what little harvest occurs is devoured by a cunning and rapacious humanistic secularism driven by Satanic forces.

Does this mean an end to Christianity? Never! Whirlwinds need not be followed by obituaries. God is ready to redeem returning sinners (both individuals and nations) and restore a right relationship with Him. The true Church lives and will always remain triumphant.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Os Guinness, Impossible People – Christian Courage and the Struggle for the Soul of Civilization, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books, 2016), p. 22.
[2] Kevin Swanson, Apostate – The Men who destroyed the Christian West, (Parker, Colorado: Generations with Vision, 2013), p. 19.
[3] Paul Johnson, A History of Christianity, (New York: Touchstone Book, 1976), pp. 479, 483, 485.
[4] Ibid., pp. 484, 488.
[5] Ibid., p. 485.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Guinness, pp. 72-73.
[8] Donald C. Stamps, Gen. Ed., Commentary, The Full Life Study Bible, The New Testament, King James Version, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 366.
[9] Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, ed. Rev. Leslie F. Church, Ph.D., (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), p. 1105.

Take heed that no man deceive you – Part V

Posted by :webmaster On : October 7, 2016
0

Category: Abortion, Archives, Christianity

The apostasy of the liberal Protestant churches in the early part of the twentieth century has now entered much of the evangelical church. The fundamentalist churches of that era that stayed true to the fundamentals of New Testament Christianity were demeaned and marginalized in a society that was becoming increasingly secular and humanistic. By the 1940s the fundamentalists emerged as neo-evangelicals and once again engaged the culture with the inerrant truth of God’s word. But as America progressed through the remainder of the century and into the twenty-first century, a large portion of the evangelical church had succumbed to the spirit of the age and slid into apostasy.

The apostasy of Pope Francis described in Parts II through IV of this series centered on the great flashpoints of conflict between the Christian and humanist worldviews. In Part II, the Pope presented salvation as a matter of works, something to be achieved by man on terms that are acceptable to him, be he a Christian or atheist. In Part III, the Pope stated that Christians and Muslims essentially worshipped the same God. In Part IV we saw that the Pope’s words contradict the Bible and the church’s traditional stance that homosexuality was a sin. The extent to which this escalating apostasy has grown is evident in many quarters of the modern evangelical church, and much of this apostasy centers on the teachings of the Church Growth movement and its evangelization through preaching a new cross.

The cross upon which the Son of God was crucified stands at the crossroads of history and the story of mankind. Its stark and demanding message is an irritant in the soul of sinful man. For many its message is too confrontational, an agitant, inconvenient, an offense, something to be mocked or shunned. In modern times the way in which the cross is perceived by many who profess allegiance to Christ has also changed. The message of the cross has been muted if not altogether silenced to minimize its offensiveness in churches filled with people trying to decide if Christianity is right for them. Others have rewritten its message to smooth its abrasiveness and soften its demands by making it a thing of comfort and beauty instead of and instrument of death to self and hope of life eternal. The old message, having been modernized and adapted, seamlessly blends with the world’s fascination with humanistic concepts of self-esteem instead of the reality of the fallen nature of man. The new cross at its core rests on ego and selfishness and is the great enemy of the old cross of Christ.[1]

But preaching a new cross and trying to fit into an increasingly hostile world can make for strange bedfellows. On August 11-12, 2016, the Global Leadership Summit was broadcast by live telecast around the world. Advertisements in print and on the Internet invited people to “join an expected 305,000 leaders from 126 countries who are committed to transforming their communities.” The Global Leadership Summit is an annual event sponsored by the Willow Creek Association (WCA) founded in 1992 by Bill Hybels and Willow Creek Church with the stated goal of serving “…pioneering pastors and leaders through world-class leadership experiences and resources” so that Christian leaders can be inspired, encouraged, and equipped [to] create thriving local churches that redeem their communities for Christ.[2] WCA’s website explains how this is to be accomplished.

WCA’s passion is to help leaders worldwide—men and women—realize God’s vision for their lives, churches and communities. We share ideas and build partnerships. Through The Global Leadership Summit (TGLS), Partners, and WCA Membership we deliver vision and inspiration to resourced regions; and we bring training and opportunity to under-resourced areas.[3]

In addition to the two-day live telecast, other Summit events are to take place throughout the fall at an additional 675+ sites in 125 countries and 59 languages.[4]

From these brief statements about the WCA’s mission and stated goals in conducting the Global Leadership Summit, there appears to be nothing of concern that would cause alarm among Christians. To the contrary, on the surface it appears to support training of Christians for the work of the Great Commission as commanded by Christ in Matthew 28:19-20. But as one digs a little deeper and learns who some of the headline speakers were at the summit, there is great cause for concern. The Global Leadership Summit for 2016 listed thirteen faculty speakers. The first four shown on the website were as follows:

Bill Hybels – Founder and Senior Pastor, Willow Creek Community Church
Melinda Gates – Co-Chair, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Alan Mulally – President and Chief Executive Officer, The Ford Motor Company (2006-2014)
Bishop T. D. Jakes – Founder and Senior Pastor, The Potter’s House

The remaining nine speakers included one other pastor and several authors, professors, business leaders, and consultants. Some of the speakers may be Christians while others may not profess Christ at all. This lineup of speakers was widely advertised on the Summit website and in hundreds of newspaper throughout America and around the world.[5]

But for Christians, the most disturbing member of the faculty was Melinda Gates whose photograph was in the number two position immediately to the right of Bill Hybels. The website biography of Gates reads as follows:

As co-chair of the foundation [the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation], Melinda Gates shapes and approves strategies, reviews results and sets the overall direction of the organization. Her work has led her to focus on empowering women and girls to bring transformational improvements in the health and prosperity of families, communities and societies. After joining Microsoft Corp. in 1987, she helped develop many of the company’s multimedia products. In 1996, Melinda left Microsoft to focus on her philanthropic work and family.[6]

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation endowment is $40.2 billion and provides grants for family planning throughout the United States and in over one hundred countries around the world. From prior to 2009 through 2013, the foundation gave $71 million in grants to the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and numerous other state and local Planned Parenthood organizations.[7] In December 2014, Gates attempted to distance her foundation from abortion by saying that it will now only fund the contraception element of Planned Parenthood. But this is the equivalent of filling the contraception pocket of the abortion provider while her friends fill the abortion pocket. This duplicity is exposed through her foundation’s relationship with Warren Buffett. Through the Sarah Thompson Buffett Foundation named after his late wife, Buffett funneled $231 million to Planned Parenthood between 2010 and 2013. Should it come as a surprise that Buffett is also a Gates Foundation trustee, and “helps ‘shape and develop strategies’ for the Foundation. Buffett is also a large contributor to the Gates Foundation.”[8]

Should Melinda Gates activities, friends, and associates have been of concern to Bill Hybels when he invited her to speak at his leadership conference conducted under the banner of his Christian organization? To say other than a resounding “yes” is to ignore his credulity and lack of common sense. “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” [1 John 2:15. KJV]

The “world” is a term that is a frequent reference to the vast system of the age. The term refers to many things. It is not limited to the evil, immoral, and sinful pleasures of the world. The “world” also refers to a rebellious spirit that wars against God and His Word. This spirit exists in all human enterprises and activities. Satan opposes God and His people by using the world’s ideas, morality, and philosophies in all spheres of life including government, culture, education, science, art, medicine, music, economic systems, entertainment, mass media, and religion.[9] The words from Donald Stamps’ Bible commentary leave the discerning Christian little doubt as to the meaning of the world system.

Believers must be aware that behind all human enterprises there is a spirit, force, or power that moves against God and His Word, some to a lesser degree, some to a greater degree. Finally, the “world” also includes all man-made religious systems and all unbiblical, worldly, or lukewarm “Christian” organizations and churches.

Satan has organized the world into political, cultural, economic, and religious systems that are innately hostile toward God and His people…

Loving the world defiles our fellowship with God and leads to spiritual destruction…To love the world means being in intimate fellowship with and devotion to its values, interest, ways, and pleasures…Believers must have no close or intimate fellowship with those who participate in the world’s evil system, must openly condemn their sin, must be salt and light to them, must love them, and must attempt to win them to Christ.[10]

A key phrase in Global Leadership Summit’s promotional materials is, “We share ideas and build partnerships.” The larger problem is that many in the church are looking to the world for ideas and answers which contain the spirit of the world. Why must many Christian leaders rely on the wisdom of the world when they have access to the wisdom of the ages through the Holy Spirit? The Apostle Paul warned about seeking wisdom from the unchurched.

Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their craftiness,” and again, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise are futile.” So let no one boast of men. For all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future, all are yours; and ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s. [1 Corinthians 3:18-23. RSV]

This does not mean that Christians are opposed to education and self-improvement. Rather, the opposite is true, but we should remember that the foundational source of our knowledge is not worldly wisdom. Rather, the world’s wisdom must always be sifted and judged in light of the biblical revelation, prayer, and the leading of the Holy Spirit. And the Christian’s quest for wisdom and accomplishment of the Great Commission certainly does not include partnering with the world. The Apostle Paul’s letter of instruction to the Corinthians is very clear on this matter.

Do not be mismatched with unbelievers. For what partnership have righteousness and iniquity? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God… [2 Corinthians 6:14-16a. RSV] [emphasis added]

One wonders how many Christians among the 305,000 participants at the various Global Leadership Summit locations around the world departed confused or dismayed at the absurdity of having a speaker attempt to teach leadership skills to Christians so they may better do the works commanded by Christ but who personally has funded the deaths of millions of unborn babies.
______

In this series we have looked at specific instances of religious compromisers and false prophets that have risen to leadership within the church during these last days at the end of the age. There are many other instances of apostasy in the modern evangelical church that could be discussed, but time, space, and the reader’s endurance will not permit such discussion. For readers who wish to examine other articles in this website that deal with apostasy, a few of those are listed at the end of this article.

One must ask the question as to why so many evangelical churches have lost their courageous, countercultural, prophetic voice and are no longer confronting a deteriorating culture. Writing almost three quarters of a century ago, the words of A. W. Tozer rightly diagnosed the reasons for the apostate condition of much of American evangelicalism then and now.

Christianity is so entangled with the spirit of the world that millions never guess how radically they have missed the New Testament pattern. Compromise is everywhere. The world is whitewashed just enough to pass inspection by blind men posing as believers, and those same believers are everlastingly seeking to gain acceptance with the world. By mutual concessions men who call themselves Christians manage to get on with men who have for the things of God nothing but contempt.[11]

Larry G. Johnson

Additional articles on apostasy at culturewarrior.net:

Seduction of the American church
Strange Fire – The church’s quest for cultural relevance – Part I,
Strange Fire – The church’s quest for cultural relevance – Part II
Strange Fire – The churches quest for cultural relevance – Part III
Strange Fire – The churches quest for cultural relevance – Part IV
The Separated Church – Part I
The Separated Church – Part II
The Separated Church – Part III
The Separated Church – Part IV
Growing apostasy in the last days – Part I
Growing apostasy in the last days – Part II
Growing Apostasy in the last days – Part III
Growing Apostasy in the last days – Part IV
Pacifist Christians in the culture wars – Part I
Pacifist Christians in the culture wars – Part II

Sources:

[1] Larry G. Johnson, Evangelical Winter – Restoring New Testament Christianity, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Publishers, 2016), p. 274.
[2] “About WCA,” Willow Creek Association, https://www.willowcreek.com/about/ (accessed September 16, 2016).
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] “Faculty,” The Global Leadership Summit, https://www.willowcreek.com/events/leadership/#about (accessed September 16, 2016).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Susan Berry, “Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations says it will no longer fund abortion,” Brietbart, June 12, 2014. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/06/12/bill-and-melinda-gates-foundation-says-it-will-no-longer-fund-abortion/ (accessed September 16, 2016).
[8]Alatheia Nielsen, “Planned Parenthood’s Biggest Donors Gave $374 Million in Four Years,” mrcNewsBusters, July 31, 2015. http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alatheia-larsen/2015/07/31/planned-parenthoods-biggest-donors-gave-374-million-four-years (accessed September 16, 2016).
[9] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 578.
[10] Ibid., pp. 578-579.
[11] A. W. Tozer, God’s Pursuit of Man, (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: WingSpread Publishers), p. 116.

Take heed that no man deceive you – Part IV

Posted by :webmaster On : September 30, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Homosexuality

This series of articles deals with the great apostasy in the church during the end of the last days as described by Christ in Matthew 24. Perhaps there is no man alive that has accelerated the church’s descent into apostasy more than Pope Francis. He is aggressively pursuing a progressive, liberal agenda in an attempt to fundamentally change the face of the Catholic Church and its doctrines and teachings, and two recent initiatives reflect his agenda. The first was dealt with in Part III and concerned heretical views of Islam and its relationship with Christianity. This article deals with the actions of the Pope which have dramatically accelerated the ascendancy of the homosexual agenda in both the culture and the church.

Homosexuality

On July 28, 2013, Pope Francis was on a return flight on the papal plane following the XXVII World Youth Day held in Rio de Janeiro. Accompanying the pope were members of the press who were allowed to ask questions during a lengthy press conference during the flight. The final question asked by one of the participants concerned the worldwide news coverage of Monsignor Batista Ricci who had been recently picked to head the troubled Vatican bank. Ricci had been widely accused of homosexual activity during his management of the Pope’s diplomatic office in Uruguay during 1999-2001.[1]

Ricci purportedly had been sexually involved with a man whom Ricci demanded be given a job and room at the Uruguayan papal diplomatic mission. Ricci’s alleged homosexual activities had been widely reported in both Uruguayan and Italian newspapers. The accusations appear to have been well supported by many credible sources (Uruguayan bishops, priests, and laymen) and exhaustive documentation which was made available to Vatican authorities.[2]

The Pope stated that a preliminary investigation had found no wrongdoing by Father Ricci.[3] The Pope attempted to downplay the importance and power of the gay lobby within the Vatican when he said, “There’s a lot of talk about the gay lobby, but I’ve never seen it on the Vatican ID card!”[4] However, the Pope took the opportunity to expand his comments to include his view of homosexuality.

When I meet a gay person, I have to distinguish between their being gay and being part of a lobby. If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn’t be marginalized. The tendency (to homosexuality) is not the problem … they’re our brothers.[5] [emphasis added]

The Pope’s now famous (for many, “infamous”) statement that he will not judge gays and lesbians including gay priests in the church appears to challenge the Catholic Church’s foundational doctrines and orthodoxy and stands in stark opposition to a document signed by Pope Benedict XVI in 2005 that said men with deep-rooted homosexual tendencies should not be priests.[6] Pope Francis’ position is also in opposition to the teachings of the Catholic Catechism which is a document of Catholic religious instruction that explains the beliefs of the church.

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.[7]

The Pope and the gay lobby within the Vatican conveniently fail to separate the sin of from the person. They also attempt to blur the lines between the tendency toward homosexuality and the sin of homosexual practices. Some Christians have a tendency toward homosexuality but valiantly fight that tendency and adhere to biblical standards of morality regarding sexual activity. The sin of practicing homosexuals separates them from God, and therefore they cannot be brothers or sisters in Christ except through repentance (not merely goodwill) and abstinence.

The meaning of “Judge not, that ye be not judged”

A thoughtful reading of Sermon on the Mount reveals that Jesus condemns the habit of criticizing others while ignoring one’s own faults and brings clarity to the meaning of His words, “judge not, that ye be not judged.”

Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. [Matthew 7:1-5. RSV]

Jesus is not saying that we are to ignore the sins of others as Pope Francis’ laconic “Who am I to judge?” suggests. In rendering judgement, we must first make a distinction between judging fellow believers and sinners.

Bringing correction to fellow Christians

A Christian is not prohibited from influencing the behavior of other Christians who are in error or sin (v.3: the speck in our brother’s eye). However, the Christian must first submit himself to God’s righteous standard (v. 3: consider the log that is in our own eye). Also, such hoped-for influence must always be done with the goal of seeing the offender return to God and His righteous pathways. However, the great majority of people (both in and out of the church) fail to see that these verses do not prohibit judgement and correction which is a matter of church discipline and necessary to protect God’s reputation, maintain moral purity, insure doctrinal integrity, and to make possible the restoration of the wayward Christian’s soul and Christlikeness.[8]

Christians and the judgment of sinners

When a Christian attempts to influence the behavior of sinners, the gospel must be lovingly and graciously presented. The Christian’s judgment of the sinner’s condition is not based on the Christian’s opinion or theories but on what the Bible says about man’s sinful condition. Christians are called upon to judge between right and wrong based on morality and truth as revealed in God’s word, but again such judgement must be done in a spirit of love, kindness, and concern for the sinner, not in a spirit of condemnation.

Much of the world and the church have adopted the humanistic definitions of love and tolerance in which God’s love is so vast that he will overlook sin if one will only acknowledge Him. God’s nonjudgmental love is presumed to be so great that sin will be tolerated. In other words, love and doing good is all that matters to a tolerant nonjudgmental God. But this is a false message that is causing millions to miss an eternity in heaven with Jesus and will result in an eternity in hell.

Pope Francis’ “Who am I to Judge?” effectively implies that the unrepentant, practicing homosexual can have communion and on-going fellowship as a member of the Catholic Church if they “accept the Lord and have goodwill.” But the Bible says that a person will receive forgiveness if they repent and accept Jesus as their Savior and Lord. This means that goodwill is not a substitute for turning from sin because anyone who perseveres in his sin receives judgment. Therefore, the church cannot teach that a penitent may find Jesus as their Savior but not the Lord of their lives. The presence of sin is ruinous of man’s relationship with God, and the only alternative requires repentance and turning from sin.

It is without a doubt that the Pope knew his comments on homosexuality would generate an avalanche of worldwide media attention and change the landscape with regard to the biblical understanding of homosexuality in both the church and culture at large. A recent example is Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine’s use of Pope Francis’ “Who am I to judge?” to support his view that practicing homosexuals were not in sinful relationships. He went on to say that the first chapter of Genesis supported his view of homosexuality.

I think it’s [the Catholic Church] going to change because my church also teaches me about a creator who, in the first chapter of Genesis, surveyed the entire world, including mankind and said, “It is very good.” Who am I to challenge God for the beautiful diversity of the human family? I think we’re supposed to celebrate it, not challenge it.[9]

The Pope’s “Who am I to judge?” was just another humanistic, progressivist brick tossed through the windows of the church to weaken the authority of the Bible in matters of truth, doctrine, and morality in order to make the church more inclusive and accommodating to the spirit of the world.
______

In Parts II, III, and IV we have shown the specifics of Pope Francis’ apostasy: promotion of socialistic-Marxist systems of economy and governance centered on humanism and branded as “a new humanity”; advancement of universalism in which all roads lead to heaven if paved with good works; promotion of heretical concepts of salvation devoid of repentance and acceptance of Jesus as one’s Lord and Savior; calls for merging Christianity with false religions in the name of peace and unity; and the acceptance and toleration of sin within the church such as legitimization of the sin of homosexuality.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] “The Pope says he will not judge priest for being gay,” The Guardian, July 29, 2013.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/29/pope-francis-gay-priests (accessed September 10, 2016).
[2] Matthew Hoffman, “Uruguayan newspaper confirms accusations of homosexual conduct by Vatican bank appointee,” LifeSiteNews.com, July 23, 2013. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/uruguayan-newspaper-confirms-accusations-of-homosexual-conduct-by-vatican-b (accessed September 15, 2016).
[3] “The Pope says he will not judge priest for being gay,” The Guardian, July 29, 2013.
[4] John L. Allen, Jr. and Hada Messia, “Pope Francis on gays: ‘Who am I to Judge?’” CNN, July 29, 2013. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/29/pope-francis-on-gays-who-am-i-to-judge/ (accessed September 20, 2016).
[5] Ibid.
[6] Steve Jalsevac, “Evidence of a trail of wreckage from Pope Francis’ “Who am I to judge?’” LifeSiteNews.com, June 23, 2016. https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/evidence-of-a-trail-of-wreckage-from-pope-francis-who-am-i-to-judge (accessed September 10, 2016).
[7] “Chastity and Homosexuality,” The Catechism of the Catholic Church. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM (accessed September 15, 2016).
[8] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), pp. 16, 43.
[9] Michael Brown, “Why Tim Kaine Is Wrong About Genesis Endorsing Homosexual Acts,” The Christian Post, September 12, 2016. http://www.christianpost.com/news/why-tim-kaine-is-wrong-about-genesis-endorsing-homosexual-acts-169462/ (accessed September 23, 2016).

Take heed that no man deceive you – Part III

Posted by :webmaster On : September 23, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Islam

The apostasy of Pope Francis has accelerated both in frequency and severity since the beginning of his papacy. This has caused a great turmoil within the Catholic Church between conservative dissidents and liberal supporters of the Francis papacy. His words and actions have caused growing alarm among many Catholics, and resistance to the Pope’s liberalization of the church is widespread among strict conservatives in the powerful Catholic hierarchy. This riff is being described by many as a culture war within the Catholic Church. American born Cardinal Raymond Burke is a staunch conservative and veteran Vatican bureaucrat who was recently demoted by Pope Francis. Burke has continued to openly warn the Pope that papal power “is not absolute…The pope does not have the power to change teaching doctrine.” In spite of the vast powers of the Pope, Burke has said that church doctrine serves as a kind of constitution from which a Pope may not depart.[1]

The culture war within the Catholic Church is being fought between the Pope’s progressive allies who see him as a revolutionary who is upending church tradition. Conservatives say the Pope is subtly and implicitly backing liberal church leaders who are pushing for radical changes. The conservative view was confirmed when at a 2014 meeting of senior bishops the Pope appeared to give special latitude to the liberals pressing his progressive agenda. At this meeting he challenged those defending church orthodoxy by saying, “Let no one say, ‘This you cannot say.’ ” The Pope’s tacit support of the liberal’s progressive agenda continues to be evident due to his failure to silence Catholic priests and bishops that are speaking and doing things that contradict church teachings about same-sex unions and granting communion to those who are living in adultery. As one official said, “So the inference is that this is what the pope wants.” Conservative opponents of the Pope’s agenda say they are being unfairly labeled as enemies of the Pope because they are defending “the real teachings of the church.”[2]

The extent to which the current conservative Catholic criticism has become public is highly unusual. One example is Providence Rhode Island Bishop Thomas Tobin’s open letter to the members of his diocese in which he said, “In trying to accommodate the needs of the age, as Pope Francis suggests, the Church risks the danger of losing its courageous, countercultural, prophetic voice, one that the world needs to hear.”[3] Bishop Tobin’s comments are very similar to the sentiments expressed by a growing number of American evangelical Protestants who are questioning the teachings and methods of church growth movement that stands in opposition to biblical Christianity and the long-held doctrines of the church.

For most of his papacy, the Pope’s support of the progressive agenda has been largely a behind-the-scenes effort. However, in recent times the Pope has taken the lead in utterly transforming the Catholic Church. Two recent initiatives reflect his desire to fundamentally change the face of the Catholic church and its doctrines. The first will be dealt with in this article and the second in Part IV of this series on the great apostasy in the last days.

Islam

In an address to Catholic followers on February 21, 2016, Pope Francis made the following statements:

Jesus Christ, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. [emphasis added]

This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith. Together, we can bring about an unprecedented age of peace, all we need to achieve such a state is respect each other’s beliefs, for we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by. We can accomplish miraculous things in the world by merging our faiths, and the time for such a movement is now. No longer shall we slaughter our neighbors over differences in reference to their God.[4]

There can be no mistake about the meaning and intent of Pope Francis’ words. He has said that Jesus, Jehovah, and Allah are the same and that the Qur’an and its teachings are just as valid as the Bible. But the entities of Jesus and Allah are not distinctly the same across the world. To claim Jesus and Allah are the same is equivalent to saying that Adolph Hitler and Winston Churchill were distinctly the same entities because they were leaders during World War II. But the beliefs and actions of Churchill and Hitler and the people they represented were vastly different and formed no basis for unity through a merger of beliefs. And the differences between Jesus of the Bible and Allah of the Qur’an are infinitely greater.

Trinitarian God v. Unipersonal Allah

The God of the Bible is one being and three in person. A being and a person are not the same. A being is a characteristic or quality that makes it what it is. The who has to do with the person. God’s characteristic (the what) is that he is the supreme God. The personhood of God (the who) can be found in His three persons or personalities. Notice that “persons” (plural) allow for relationships to exist. This is critical for man to understand himself, God, and their relationship. The Qur’an denies the Trinity (Surah 5:74, 172). Even in Muhammad’s denial, he was mistaken in what he believed comprised the Christian Trinity. Muhammad believed the Christian Trinity was God, Jesus, and Mary as opposed to the Bible’s teaching that the Trinity is God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Composite oneness v. Absolute Oneness

In Christianity, the central theme of the entire Bible focuses on relationship and confirms the importance of His Trinitarian nature. Expressed another way, it is a composite oneness, one heart beating within three persons. The Trinitarian relationship is about love and relationship which implies a dynamic movement or flowing of self-giving love between the three persons within God in which each exalts, communes with, and defers to the others.[5] These actions create and define loving relationships.

The Qur’an in Surah 112 commands, “Say: He is Allah, the One, the Only; The Eternal, the Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.” The verses weld together two fundamental doctrines of Islam: (1) Allah is an absolute, undifferentiated unity and (2) “in his unity, Allah is utterly independent of anything. He is self-subsisting and self-sufficient.”

Allah’s aloofness and independence makes it impossible for man to relate to him and impossible for the human heart and mind to understand anything about him apart from the superficial. Although Allah is personal in that he is described as a conscious being with a will, his personality is hidden and cannot be known to any meaningful degree by mankind. Therefore, it is not possible for his followers to have a personal, loving relationship with him.[6]

Because of this description of Allah as a self-subsisting and self-sufficient entity absolutely independent of anything, it is impossible for Allah to express or give love. His nature will not allow such. Therefore, Allah is unipersonal and his ultra-unified, self-contained, self-subsisting, self-sufficient, and self-centered being removes any hope of love flowing from his nature in spite of Mohammad’s claims in the Qur’an.

God’s love v. Allah’s love

God’s nature is love, and He commanded His followers to unconditionally reflect His love to others in this world. “But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.” [Luke 6:35-36, RSV]

Contrast the love of the God of the Bible with Allah’s love as described in the Qur’an.[7] Allah of the Qur’an does not love his enemies nor does he love the unlovable, and the Qur’an is very specific in its directives as to the harsh and violent treatment of infidels, the disobedient, and evil-doers. The Qur’an specifically states in numerous verses that Allah’s love is restricted to those that deserve it, a concept that mirrors the very human reaction to love only those who love us.[8] Listed below are just three examples of this dichotomy found in the Qur’an.

Allah will deprive usury of all blessing, but will give increase for deeds of charity: for He loveth not creatures ungrateful and wicked. [Surah 2:276. Qur’an]

Say: “obey Allah and His Apostle”: but if they turn back, Allah loveth not those who reject Faith. [Surah 3:32. Qur’an]

As to those who believe and work righteousness, Allah will pay them (in full) their reward; but Allah loveth not those who do wrong. [Surah 3:57. Qur’an]

______

The Qur’an states that Jesus is not the begotten Son of God but a prophet; Jesus did not die on the cross for man’s sin; and that the Muslim’s road to heaven is found in works and obedience to the Qur’an and Sharia law. It is a religion whose God is distant and impersonal. One must ask what kind of Islamic heaven it will be in the absence of an impersonal Allah.

Even our cursory examination of the differences between the natures and love of God and Allah reveal stark and irreconcilable differences between the two religions and prohibit a “merging of faiths” and cannot unite us as “people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith.” That is because Islam is a false religion whose unrepentant followers will end in hell. There is only one way to heaven, and the words of Jesus point to that direction, “…I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” [John 14:6. KJV] The Bishop of Rome has plainly identified God as being the same for both Islam and Christianity, and he has equated the lies of the Qur’an with the truth of the Bible. These are heresies of the highest magnitude.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Anthony Faiola, “Conservative dissent is brewing inside the Vatican,” Washington Post, September 7, 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/a-conservative-revolt-is-brewing-inside-the-vatican/2015/09/07/1d8e02ba-4b3d-11e5-80c2-106ea7fb80d4_story.html (accessed September 5, 2016).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Mellisa Ferrari, “Pope Francis to followers: The Bible and the Koran are the same,” USA Politics Today, February 23, 2016. http://www.usapoliticstoday.com/pope-francis-to-followers-koran-and-holy-bible-are-the-same/ (accessed September 6, 2016).
[5] Timothy Keller, The Reason for God, (New York: Dutton, 2008), pp. 214-215.
[6] Abdu H. Murray, Grand Central Question – Answering the Critical Concerns of Mayor Worldviews, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books, 2014), pp. 159-161.
[7] All quotations from the Qur’an are from the textless edition of the English translation of the Holy Qur-an: A. Yusuf Ali, The Meaning of the Illustrious Qur-an, Published by: Dar AHYA Us-Sunnah, Al Nabawiya.
[8] Murray, Grand Central Question – Answering the Critical Concerns of Mayor Worldviews, pp. 231-232.

Take heed that no man deceive you – Part II

Posted by :webmaster On : September 16, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Humanism

The leaders of the great apostasy are popular and well-respected by the majority of the church. Their defenders are legion, but as we examine the leaders of the great apostasy, it is well to remember the words of Christ. “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” [Matthew 24:11. KJV] Here Christ is speaking of the end of the last days before the rapture of the church. At that time a large portion of the Christian church will be in an apostate condition. Loyalty to God’s house, commitment to the truth of God’s word, and biblical righteousness (virtue, morality, justice, and decency) will be in a minority amongst those who profess to follow Christ. Apostate leaders will preach “new revelations” which will lead to distortion of the gospel message. These new revelations stand in opposition to biblical truth and will lead many Christians astray. Those leaders who preach the distorted gospel will achieve great power and influence over vast segments of Christianity because of their exalted positions of in denominations and universities.[1]

These apostate leaders in the church will seek common ground with the leaders of the world system and false religions. They will be acclaimed for their détente with the secular world and their unifying efforts through accommodation of the humanistic spirit of the world. There is no greater example of this apostasy than Pope Francis, the leader of 1.1 billion Roman Catholics throughout the world, and there is no man alive that has more sway over the direction of Christianity than does the Pope. His words and actions will be examined in Parts II through IV of this series.

Pope Francis’ call for “a new humanity”

Pope Francis recently spoke several times during the week which culminated with the annual World Youth Day in Krakow, Poland. Speaking to 1.5 million people at the closing Mass, Pope Francis said that God

…demands of us real courage, the courage to be more powerful than evil, by loving everyone, even our enemies…People may judge you to be dreamers, because you believe in a new humanity, one that rejects hatred between peoples, one that refuses to see borders as barriers and can cherish its own traditions without being self-centered or small-minded.[2]

One of the most effective of Satan’s weapons used to deceive man is to sprinkle truth with the lie, and Pope Francis has done a masterful job of linking the truth of Bible that one should love their enemies while at the same time proclaiming his new revelation that young people should believe “in a new humanity.” As individual Christians we are commanded by Christ to love our enemies, but Pope Francis is calling on individuals and nations to believe in a new humanity. Yet, the Bible does not promise a new humanity this side of heaven in which nations will reject hatred and achieve peace. Although Christians must reject hatred and love their enemies, achieving the dream of a new humanity through man’s efforts is not on the agenda for the Christian at the end of the last days. The Apostle Paul paints an altogether different picture of this period of time, the coming apostasy, and a Christian’s duty.

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of stress. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, inhuman, implacable, slanderers, profligates, fierce, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding the form of religion but denying the power of it. Avoid such people…Indeed all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil men and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. [2 Timothy 3:1-5, 12-15. RSV]

The second element of the Pope’s new humanity is refusing to see borders as barriers. This is a reference to the Pope’s dismay that many countries are not welcoming enough to refugees fleeing poverty in the countries from which they have escaped. These political sympathies arise from the Pope’s leftist university education and his early days as a priest in the South American Catholic Church which was strongly influenced by the Marxist-oriented liberation theology of the late 1960s and early 1970s. This rebellious sociology developed rapidly in Latin America and regarded the underdevelopment of the continent as a consequence of the capitalist market system. As a result, undeveloped countries were exhorted to reject the capitalist market system in favor of a socialist economy. As this new sociology was absorbed by the church, liberation theology emerged from its wake.

Although Pope Francis states that he does not adhere to nor promote the Marxist variant of liberation theology, nevertheless, his beliefs have been heavily influenced by and are a product of the highly socialistic orientation of most liberation theologies prevalent in South America. The extent of Pope Francis’ socialistic orientation becomes abundantly clear when reading his 224 page Evangelii Gadium (Joy of the Gospel) that attacked capitalism as a form of tyranny and called on church and political leaders to address the needs of the poor through demands for income equality (see particularly sections 53, 54, and 56).[3]

Pope Francis describes the third element of a new humanity that “can cherish its own traditions without being self-centered or small-minded.” Here Pope Francis flirts with universalism which teaches that all persons will ultimately be saved. But as we shall see later in this article the Pope does far more than flirt with universalism.

Pope Francis’ message that encourages young people to believe in a new humanity is not the message of Christ. To understand the extent to which Pope Francis has departed from the gospel message, we compare his hoped for new humanity with the goals and proclamations of humanism, the greatest enemy of Christianity in history.

The parallels between the outworking of Pope Francis’ new humanity and humanism as described in the Humanist Manifestos I and II are frightening to discerning Christians. The Pope’s “new humanity” becomes the humanists’ new world order in which man is not fallen but perfectible. “Elimination of borders and barriers” echoes humanists’ demands that “travel restrictions must cease”; the elimination of “the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds”; and “the building of a world community in which all men can participate”. This new borderless humanity is in effect a new world order built on socialism, the only means possible for governing mankind in a humanistic society. The Pope’s “Cherishing one’s own traditions without being self-centered or small-minded” borders on universalism and somewhat parallels the humanist call for rejection of “all religious, ideological, or moral codes that denigrate the individual, suppress freedom, dull intellect, [and] dehumanize personality.”[4] In other words, all roads lead to God whether it is humanism’s Nature, a host of pantheistic Gods, Allah of the Koran, or the Christian God of the Bible.

Pope Francis’ universalism

One of the most horrific heresies voiced by Pope Francis is the disastrous deception of people with regard to how a person attains salvation and an eternity with Christ. In May 2013, the Pope stated that all people who do good works, including atheists, are going to heaven.

The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.[5] [emphasis added]

When the Pope speaks of meeting one another “there,” he is not speaking of meeting in the culture of encounter. The context of his words makes it plain that he meant meeting atheists in heaven. The entry ticket for this meeting is to do good because Christ’s blood “makes us children of God of the first class!” In spite of the Vatican’s attempts to clarify the Pope’s statement, this is how the world understood the meaning of his remarks.

Pope Francis pronouncement is blatantly false because he ignores two foundations of Christianity: acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior and a turning from a life of sin. John 14:6 states, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh to the Father, but by me.” We come to Jesus by belief in Him as the Son of God, “…whosoever believeth in him (Jesus) should not perish, but have everlasting life.” [John 3:16b. KJV] John 3:18 portrays the course of those who do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God, “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten son of God.”

John’s words stand in stark contrast to Pope Francis words which state that the only requirement for all people to meet in heaven is good works: “But do good: we will meet one another there.” The Bible plainly addresses the issue of salvation through works. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” [Ephesians 2:8-9. KJV]

One additional clarification is needed regarding a distinction between a sinful life and the resulting separation from God and a Christian’s practice of righteousness. In his first book, John says, “Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. [1 Johns 3:7. KJV] Do John’s words not support Pope Francis’ contention that doing good will get one to heaven because one becomes righteous by doing righteous (good) things? They do not for we must read verse 7 in conjunction with verses 8 and 9.

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. [1 John 3:8-9. KJV]

Many may misinterpret verse 7 as dealing with good works without reading and understanding the meaning of verses 7 through 9 are really dealing with sin. When John says one who is born of God does not commit sin, he means that the person born of God does not “continue in sin, practices sin, or keeps on sinning.” As Donald Stamps wrote in his commentary, “John emphasizes that one truly born of God cannot make sin his way of life because the life of God cannot exist in one who practices sin.” Put another way, one cannot have a saving relationship with God and continually go on sinning. A believer may occasionally sin but he will repent and not continue in his sin.[6] It is the matter of sin that separates one from God and not a lack of good works. These verses from the Bible present an unquestionable rejection of Pope Francis’ heretical belief that through a person’s good works, whether a professed believer or an atheist, he will go to heaven.

In Part II we have dealt with Pope Francis’ apostasy with regard to his departure from biblical truth through his anti-biblical message of seeking a new humanity but which cannot be achieved without an accommodation of the humanistic spirit of the world within the church. The Pope has also preached a heretical message that has a significant kinship with universalism that is a stark departure from the biblical plan of salvation.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 54.
[2] Francis D’Emilio, Associated Press, “Pope to young on Poland trip: Believe ‘in a new humanity’.” Tulsa World, August 1, 2016. A-10.
[3] Pope Francis, Evangelii Gadium (Joy of the Gospel), November 24, 2013.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.html#Some_cultural_challenges (accessed February 5, 2014).
[4] Paul Kurtz, ed., Humanist Manifestos I and II, (Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1973), pp. 18, 21-22.
[5] “Pope at Mass: Culture of encounter is the foundation of peace,” Vatican Radio, May 22, 2013. http://en.radiovaticana.va/storico/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass_culture_of_encounter _is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445 (accessed September 14, 2016).
[6] Stamps, p. 581.

Take heed that no man deceive you – Part I

Posted by :webmaster On : September 9, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Truth, Worldview

The Apostle Paul’s second letter to Thessalonians speaks of the great falling away from the Christian faith in last days of the age just before the rapture of the church.

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition…[2 Thessalonians 2:1-3. KJV]

As the end of the last days nears, great numbers of the professing church will depart from biblical truth in both word and deed. This departure is called apostasy and means to “fall away” which is characterized by rebellion and abandonment of truth. Within the church, the apostasy will take two forms. The first is theological apostasy in which false leaders will depart from and reject part or all of the New Testament teachings of Christ and the apostles. Under these false leaders and teachers, a false salvation and cheap grace will replace salvation through Christ’s atoning sacrifice at Calvary, repentance, turning from sin, and adherence to God’s standards of living. The false leaders and teachers will offer a gospel centered on the self and its needs and desires. The second type is moral apostasy in which one severs his relationship with Christ and embraces sin and immorality. Although proclaiming right doctrine and New Testament Christianity’s teachings, they will abandon the moral standards as taught by the New Testament. These moral standards are exchanged for money, success, honor, and a large following.[1] Others ignore the Bible’s moral standards because they have been deceived into believing such compromise is necessary in the modern culture in order to accomplish Christ’s great commission of winning the lost.

The collective worldviews of the inhabitants of a civilization or a nation becomes the central cultural vision which informs and directs that civilization or nation with regard to ultimate questions of reality, truth, and right and wrong behavior. For fifteen hundred years the Christian worldview has been the foundation and central cultural vision of Western civilization. However, beginning about AD 1200, humanist ideologies began challenging the Christian worldview for supremacy in Western thought with regard to reality, truth, and concepts of right and wrong. America resisted the humanist onslaught far longer than Europe because of the biblical foundations for governance established by the early colonists and later Founders of the American republic. But by the latter part of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century, humanism had displaced the once dominant Christian leadership in all spheres of American life.

The erosion of Western civilization’s Christian roots had been a gradual process until the twentieth century when the forces of humanism had gained critical mass in the various spheres of culture. The once powerful and culturally dominant Christian Church was rapidly displaced and subsequently abandoned the culture—one segment by surrender (the liberals) and the other by retreat from the culture (the fundamentalists-evangelicals).

The liberal church had become fully apostate by the 1930s, and much of the leadership of many once conservative evangelical churches was well on the road to apostasy by the end of the twentieth century. Elements of the Catholic Church have been apostate for much of its history (certain popes, universities, certain congregations, and other elements of the church hierarchy). These apostate elements have recently been joined in their apostasy by Pope Francis, the current Pope of the Catholic Church. Considering what has happened over the last two hundred years in Europe and America, Kevin Swanson called this period “the most significant Christian apostasy of all time. As measured by sheer numbers, there is no other apostasy so extensive in recorded history.”[2]

Christians who know God’s word should not be surprised at this raging apostasy in the church in our time because the Bible records numerous prophesies in both the Old and New Testaments that these events would occur just before the end of the last days. In their respective ministries, both Jesus and John spent considerable time warning against apostasy and impending judgement.[3] In Matthew 24, after Jesus and His disciples left the temple, they went to the Mount of Olives where the disciples asked questions with regard to the sign of His coming and the end of the world. In verses 4 through 14, Jesus gave them general signs and events leading up to the rapture which will be followed by the seven-year tribulation period that will bring about the end of the age. The signs that Jesus gave in these verses characterize the events preceding the rapture, and these events will intensify as that time approaches. In verse 4, Jesus warned His disciples to “Take heed that no man deceive you.” One of the signs of the end of the last days is found in verse 11, “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” [Matthew 24:11. KJV] Because so many false prophets and religious compromisers have emerged in recent times, religious deception has become rampant throughout the planet.[4]

Apostasy may occur on a national scale where an entire nation may move away from the biblical foundations upon which their civilization was built. This has occurred in Europe and has substantially happened in America. Apostasy may also happen within segments of peoples within a nation, large denominations, local churches, and individuals. At whatever level apostasy occurs, it is the result of a shift in perspective and decrease in the commitment to a biblical understanding of reality, truth, and right and wrong. This ultimately causes large numbers of people to abandon their Christian faith entirely. Although they may retain some peripheral link with the church and Christian culture, the life sustaining connection with Christ has withered and died.[5]

The Bible has much to say about false prophets. Listed below is just a sampling of verses from both the Old and New Testaments that deal with false prophets and religious compromisers.

I have given heed and listened but they have not spoken aright; no man repents of his wickedness, saying, “What have I done?” Every one turns to his own course, like a horse plunging headlong into battle…How can you say, “We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us”? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. The wise men shall be put to shame, they shall be dismayed and taken; lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord and what wisdom is in them. [Jeremiah 8:5-6, 8-9. RSV]

Your prophets have seen for you false and deceptive visions; they have not exposed your iniquity to restore your fortunes, but have seen for you oracles false and misleading. [Lamentations 2:14. RSV]

Let no one deceive you with empty words, for it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore, do not associate with them. [Ephesians 5:6-7. RSV]

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves…Thus you will know them by their fruits. Not every one who says to me, “Lord, Lord,” shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, “Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many might works in your name?” And then will I declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.” [Matthew 7:15, 20-23. RSV]

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 not strange if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. [2 Corinthians 11:13-15. RSV]

For false Christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. [Matthew 24:24. RSV]

The Bible tells us that “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” [Hosea 4:6. KJV] One of the reasons for the ease with which false prophets and religious compromisers have gained great followings in the last days is a lack of knowledge of His people. Much of the modern church is being spiritually destroyed because of the deadly combination of a lack of knowledge of God’s word and a lack of knowledge of the humanistic spirit of the age that has infiltrated the church. Without a thorough knowledge of the word of God, people cannot have a worldview that gives a rightly-ordered understanding of reality, truth, and right and wrong. Apostasy arises and spreads within His church because of deception. Lack of knowledge becomes the breeding ground for deception and apostasy.

The principal conflict of worldviews is between humanism and Christianity. Where Christians, see God as the ultimate authority in truth, reality, law, man’s salvation, man’s life and worship, humanists see man himself as the ultimate authority. That is why there is a war of worldviews in which Christianity battles against humanism’s materialism, egalitarianism, utilitarianism, abortion advocacy, evolution, socialism, and deviant sexuality.[6]

In this series we will look at specific instances of religious compromisers and false prophets that have risen to leadership within the church during these last days at the end of the age. To varying degrees they have become theologically and morally apostate. Their words, works, associations, and worldviews will be examined and compared to the unchangeable words and meaning of the Bible, and by their fruits we shall know them for what they are—apostates!

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 478.
[2] Kevin Swanson, Apostate – The Men who destroyed the Christian West, (Parker, Colorado: Generations with Vision, 2013), p. 19.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Larry G. Johnson, “The Growing Apostasy in the Last Days– Part IV,” culturewarrior.net. June 3, 2016. http://www.culturewarrior.net/2016/06/03/growing-apostasy-in-the-last-days-part-iv/
[5] Swanson, p. 20.
[6] Ibid., p. 34-35.

The insidious nature of humanism

Posted by :webmaster On : September 2, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Homosexuality, Humanism

The great majority of people who understand humanism and embrace its philosophies and worldview are atheists or at best non-theistic agnostics. They must be so for the Humanist Manifestos I and II state that they “…can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species…the human species is an emergence from natural evolutionary forces.”[1] Yet, over the last several decades millions of people who believe in the Christian God and the biblical creation have quietly and unknowingly incorporated many of the tenets of humanism into their worldviews. This number includes a large number of evangelical leaders and church members in America who have accepted these tenants because of the insidious nature of humanism. It is a sinister, treacherous, and deceptive philosophy whose followers have risen to leadership levels in all spheres of American life. That is not to say that all leaders are humanistic in their worldviews. Also, many who have incorporated elements of the humanistic philosophy are not card-carrying advocates of the humanistic philosophy but have been deceived.

Humanism is the arch-enemy of Christianity, but few Christians understand humanism or its system of beliefs. Therefore, they blindly accept many cultural ideas, initiatives, and innovations because they have been saturated by decades of indoctrination in the humanistic philosophy. Many are ignorant of humanism’s ultimate goals and ignorant of their own Christian faith that stands in opposition to those goals.

Perhaps there is no greater issue that separates the two belief systems than their respective concepts of truth. Christians believe in objective, final, unchangeable truth as found in the Bible. The humanist conceptions of truth are as follows:

The humanistic worldview regarding truth is one of cultural relativism which requires a suspension of judgment since all belief systems contain some truth within while no one belief system has all truth. For humanists, all social constructions are culturally relative as they are shaped by class, gender, and ethnicity. Thus, there can be no universal truths because all viewpoints, lifestyles, and beliefs are equally valid. As a result, no man or group can claim to be infallible with regard to truth and virtue. Rather, truth is produced by the free give and take of competing claims and opinions, that is, truth can be manufactured.[2]

But how do Christians separate truth from the lie and respond accordingly when constantly bombarded by humanistic concepts and ideas that have saturated every sphere of American life for several decades (including many churches and denominations)?

Separating the Christian and Humanistic worldviews?

First, the Christian must understand that Christ does not call His followers to win the war against Satan and his forces but to be faithful in fighting the battles he or she encounters in the everyday business of living life. To be an effective soldier in this battle, the average Christian does not have to have a degree in theology, be an articulate orator, or occupy an exalted position in society to defend one’s faith, family, and culture.

A Christian must listen and understand the beliefs, proposals, and concepts put forth by the various spheres of life in America. Although it is helpful to have knowledge of the general concepts and goals of humanism, it is more important that the Christian know what he or she believes, that is, one must know what the Bible says and why he or she believes it. It is only then that the Christian can know truth and respond appropriately. In summary, (1) listen to the beliefs, concepts, arguments, arguments, and proposals put forth, (2) restate them so you understand what is really being said, (3) rely on the Bible for guidance and direction in finding the truth, and (4) seek the Holy Spirit’s help in responding with authority and in a loving manner. As an example, let’s use this procedure in responding to a recent editorial in the Tulsa World.

In the Tulsa World Sunday edition (July 17, 2016), Associate Editor Mike Jones wrote an editorial on homosexuality titled “Love and hate.”[3] Jones states that the phrase “Love the sinner, hate the sin” is of recent origin and now used almost exclusively by those who disapprove of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community. In this editorial Jones attempts to defend homosexuality by challenging the Christian’s interpretation of the meaning of the Bible as well as challenging the truth of the Bible itself with regard to homosexuality.

The complete truthfulness of the Bible is challenged

“Love the sinner, hate the sin” never appears in the New Testament. There are verses that can be applied or construed to prove that God or Jesus disapproved of homosexuality. Ignoring Leviticus, Romans 1:26-27 can be read to address men cavorting with men and women with women. But also, that chapter along with at least seven others, and arguably more, in the New Testament were written by Paul, and we can argue all day about whether Jesus told him what to write.[4] [emphasis added]

What is Jones really saying? He is saying that: (1) All scripture is not the inspired word of God. (2) Those portions of the scripture condemning homosexuality aren’t applicable because Jesus did not explicitly condemn homosexuality.

There is no question that the Apostle Paul condemned homosexuality in a very forthright and plain manner (Romans 1: 18, 24-27), and Jones does not dispute that Paul held this view of homosexuality. What Jones is challenging is the truthfulness or validity of portions of the Bible when he says that we can argue all day about whether Jesus told Paul what to write. By using Jones’ line of reasoning, we must ignore the divine inspiration of much if not all of scripture. Consequently, the Bible is not objective truth, contains errors, and is effectively reduced to a book of suggestions of mortal men except perhaps for the red letters depicting Christ’s words in the New Testament. However, Jones ignores the fact that the Bible itself speaks of its supreme authority in all matters of truth. Also, most Christians believe that Paul’s admonishment that homosexuality is a sin is part of the inspired word of God and is no less inspired than the writings of those who recorded the words of Christ in the gospels.

Homosexuality is not a sin

… many more passages can be found in the New Testament where Jesus was reported to have urged his followers to love everyone. Opting for the “sin” phrase is basically telling a gay man that he is a sinner. Of course, that also implies that their sexual preference is a chosen lifestyle. So, simply put, you are condemning to hell that person you say you really want to love.[5] [emphasis added]

What is Jones really saying? (1) He makes no distinction between the person and their sin. (2) We must love the homosexual and ignore their lifestyle.

Jones argues that there are many more passages in the New Testament where Jesus urges his followers to love everyone. He says that opting for the sin portion of “love the sinner, hate the sin” phrase is “basically telling a gay man that he is a sinner.” But that is exactly what Paul is saying. Homosexuality is a sin along with other sins such as evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, and foolishness.

Homosexuality is not destructive to marriages, families, and to society in general

I will never understand why people are so afraid. I’ve heard their reasons: “Homosexuality destroys families!” “Homosexuality destroys marriage!” “We have to save these sinners from AIDS!” “It’s an abomination unto God!”

No one has ever explained to me how families or marriages are destroyed. There are far too many happy, solid families comprised of gay couples. And I think the straight community is doing a good enough job on its own in the destroying marriage and families department.

The claim of saving them from AIDS is another smokescreen. Gay men know how to save themselves from AIDS. We’ve learned a lot about that disease — one being it’s not a curse from God.[6]

What is Jones really saying: There is no evidence of the damage done by homosexuality to families, marriages, and the larger society.

However, there is abundant evidence throughout history that homosexuality does destroy marriages, families, and nations. Many current studies and statistics support this contention. Even without scientific studies and a truthful examination of history, we can know that homosexuality is undeniably damaging to individuals, families, and society in general. How do we know this? God deems homosexuality as a sin, and “The wages of sin is death…” (Romans 6:23). Biblical truth is non-negotiable, and no amount of conversation, argument, debate, and reasoning among men, however sincere and well-meaning, will change this.

Homosexuals were born that way and therefore cannot be morally condemned

Telling a gay couple that they are committing a sin is like telling a blue-eyed kid that he needs to change the color of his eyes because God hates blue-eyed people and having blue eyes is a sin. Of course you wouldn’t say such an outrageous and hurtful thing to a child or anyone. After all, they were born with blue eyes. Either genetics put them there or God did. That can’t be changed.[7]

What is Jones really saying? Homosexuality cannot be morally condemned because homosexuals were born that way.

Defenders of homosexuality argue that moral distinctions between homosexuality and heterosexuality are invalid because homosexuals were born that way. Christians can point out that sound scientific studies have not proven that homosexuality has a genetic basis (either causal or predispositional). Recent support for the Christian position came from one of the most unlikely sources. The New Atlantis is a journal of technology and society dedicated to the LGBT community. It published a newly released report co-authored by two psychiatric experts affiliated with Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. The report is titled “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological and Social Sciences,” and states that “Born that way” is a myth.

The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biological fixed property of human beings—the idea that people are “born that “—is not supported by scientific evidence… Genes constitute only one of the many key influences on behavior in addition to environmental influences, personal choices, and interpersonal experiences.[8] [emphasis added]

However, the Christian must never accept or surrender his biblical beliefs about homosexuality based on the findings of scientists. But for the sake of argument, let’s assume that homosexuality was not a choice but a genetic predisposition or even genetically caused. The Christian can show that humans are born with many scientifically determined predispositions or genetic factors that result in culturally unacceptable behavior such as alcoholism. One study established a genetic link to criminal behavior. But such scientific evidence of genetic links does not justify immoral behavior whether it is alcoholism, criminal activity, or homosexual practices.

Condemning homosexuality as a sin is the same as hating the homosexual

Finding someone you love and wanting to spend the rest of your life (or at least a good portion of it) with them is certainly not sinful. They aren’t wrecking families, killing the institution of marriage and they are not ruining kids’ lives.

Adopting and defending the word “hate” certainly does not follow the teachings of Jesus.

You want to put someone’s life on your version of the straight and narrow, go find someone in your congregation and tell them to quit drinking so much or that dancing might place them on the road to degradation.

I think I know what the answer will be: Mind you own business.

Good advice.[9] [emphasis added]

What is Jones really saying? He is saying that hating the sin of homosexuality does not follow the teachings of Jesus. However, humanists who claim love is all that is necessary to merit the grace of God either ignore or dismiss the centrality of the cross in the great meta-narrative of the Bible with regard to creation, the fall, and man’s need for redemption. Christ died for the sins of the world to make possible God’s forgiveness of sinful man, and every man has a choice as to whether or not he will accept that forgiveness and follow Christ. To follow Christ is to follow the Bible’s commandments. But, if love is all that is necessary, then Christ’s death on the cross becomes irrelevant because God’s holiness must then coexist with sin. Therefore, how men live their lives has no bearing on their eternal destination.

Jones is also saying that Christians should continue to do good works, that condemnation of homosexuality as a sin is the same as hating the homosexual as a person, that the Bible is wrong where is says that homosexuality is a sin, and that Christians should ignore homosexuality and focus on “real” sins. In essence, Jones is saying to the Christian, “Shut up and mind your own business!” Thus, Christianity and Christian beliefs are banned from influence in the public square. That is the recurrent message of humanism.

How is the Christian to respond? This writer has often quoted the Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s words to his fellow pastors who were being arrested and sent to Nazi concentration camps in the late 1930s. As they faced persecution, imprisonment, and even death, he cautioned them to retain the biblical understanding of sin, repentance, and forgiveness.

Anyone who turns from his sinful way at the word of proclamation and repents, receives forgiveness. Anyone who perseveres in his sin receives judgment. The church cannot loose the penitent from sin without arresting and binding the impenitent in sin…Grace cannot be proclaimed to anyone who does not recognize or distinguish or desire it…The preaching of grace can only be protected by the preaching of repentance.”[10]

______

There are millions of people in America like Mike Jones who champion the humanist worldview, twist the words and meaning of the Bible, and in the end challenge the truth of the Bible in order to advance the humanist agenda. Many of them are unaware of what they are doing or the consequences thereof. Yet, Christians must be alert, faithful, and persistent in presenting the truth of God’s word and defending their Christian faith. Because America is no longer a Christian-friendly nation, Christians must expect that their opposition to the humanist philosophy and agenda will subject them and their families to marginalization, ridicule, harassment, loss of educational and job opportunities, financial loss, imprisonment, and possibly even more severe forms of persecution. However, the Christian’s consolation is found in the New Testament book of James.

Count it all joy, my brethren, when you meet various trials, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing. [James 1:2-4. RSV]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Paul Kurtz, ed., Humanist Manifestos I and II, (Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1973), pp. 16-17.
[2] Larry G. Johnson, Ye shall be as gods – Humanism and Christianity – The Battle for Supremacy in the American Cultural Vision, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Publishers, 2011), pp. 392-393.
[3] Mike Jones, “Love and hate,” Tulsa World, July 17, 2016, G1.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Mary Rice Hasson and Theresa Farnon, “Report Debunks ‘Born That Way’ Narrative And ‘Transgender’ Label For Kids,” The Federalist, August 23, 2016.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/08/23/report-debunks-born-that-way-narrative-and-transgender-label-for-kids/ (accessed September 1, 2016).
[9] Jones, “Love and hate,” G-1.
[10] Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 2010), pp. 292-293.

Pacifist Christians in the Culture Wars – Part II

Posted by :webmaster On : June 24, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Culture Wars

Two paradigms for cultural engagement: persuasion v. warfare

In his book Thriving in Babylon Larry Osborne describes two opposing paradigms of cultural engagement: persuasion and warfare. He has chosen Daniel of the Old Testament as the role-model for the persuasive, non-combative approach of Christians to a hostile culture. He describes those in the warfare paradigm as focusing on fighting the spread of sin on all fronts and who envision themselves as “frontline soldiers in a great spiritual battle between the forces of evil and those who uphold biblical values.”[1] Osborne believes that modern evangelicals who see the culture in terms of spiritual warfare have gotten it all wrong and should emulate Daniel.

When the biblical authors speak of spiritual warfare, it’s always framed in the context of our personal spirituality. The warfare model focuses on the wrong enemy. Non-Christians are not the enemy. They’re the victims of the Enemy. Victims need to be rescued, not wiped out.”[2] [emphasis added]

Here we find the great error of Osborne and like-minded culturally pacifist Christians in engaging the culture. Spiritual warfare is not always framed in the context of personal spirituality. The Bible has a great deal to say about spiritual warfare, and Donald Stamps in “The Christian’s Relationship to the World” describes the cultural battlefield where this war is fought.

The term “world’ often refers to the vast system of this age which Satan promotes and exists independent of God…In this age Satan uses the world’s ideas, morality, philosophies, psychology, desires, governments, culture, education, science, art, medicine, music, economic systems, entertainment, mass media, religions, sports, agriculture, etc., to oppose God, His people, His word and His righteous standards… Believers must be aware that behind all human enterprises there is a spirit, force, or power that moves against God and His Word, some to a lesser degree, some to a greater degree. Finally, the “world” also includes all man-made religious systems and all unbiblical, worldly, or lukewarm “Christian” organizations and churches…In the world believers are strangers and pilgrims.[3]

The individual Christian and the Church (body of Christ) must stand in opposition to the world system. When the biblical authors speak of spiritual warfare, they refer not only to personal spiritual preparation but also to being prepared to wage spiritual warfare in the larger culture as described by Paul’s letter to the Ephesians.

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. [Ephesians 6:10-14. KJV]

If not in the culture, where are Christian supposed to war against rulers, authorities, cosmic powers over the present darkness, against spiritual forces of evil in heavenly places? Christians are Christ’s voice and legs in the spiritual battle against a “world” system ruled by Satan. Christians must not see spiritual warfare only in the “context of our personal spirituality” as claimed by Osborne. It is in the culture that we must stand firm in the evil day. The Apostle Paul had much to say about spiritual warfare in the culture, and the following are just three of his admonitions.

For though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ. [2 Corinthians 10:3-5. RSV] [emphasis added]

Preach the word; be urgent in season and out of season; convince, rebuke and exhort, be unfailing in patience and teaching. [2 Timothy 4:2. RSV] [emphasis added]

Let no one deceive you with empty words, for it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not associate with them…Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is a shame to even speak of the things that they do in secret; but when anything is exposed by the light it becomes visible. [Ephesians 5: 6-7,11-13. RSV] [emphasis added]

The face of spiritual warfare in German culture of the 1930s

Martin Niemöller was a captain of a German U-boat during World War I and was awarded the Iron Cross for Bravery. Although a distinguished pastor in the German Lutheran Church, Niemöller supported the Nazis’ early efforts at restoring Germany’s dignity, ridding the country of communists, and restoring moral order. In a private meeting with Hitler in 1932, Hitler promised Niemöller that he would not interfere with the German churches and would not institute pogroms (persecutions and exterminations) against the Jews.[4]

But as the Nazi regime consolidated its power in early 1933, Niemöller saw the underlying agenda of Hitler. A small minority of pastors, churches, and individual Christians in Germany began opposing Hitler and the apostate German church that had capitulated to his ideas and agenda. The resistance centered within the new “Confessing Church” led by Niemöller, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and a few others. When Hitler heard of a potential church split because of objections to his policies, he summoned several dissenting church leaders including Niemöller to the Reich Chancellery. He lectured the assembled churchmen and said all he wanted was peace between Church and state and blamed them for obstructing his plans. Hitler warned them “…to confine yourself to the Church. I’ll take care of the German people.” Niemöller responded that the Church also had a responsibility toward the German people that was entrusted to them by God and that neither Hitler nor anyone else in the world had power to remove that responsibility. Hitler turned away without comment, but that same evening the Gestapo ransacked Niemöller’s rectory while searching for incriminating material. Within days a homemade bomb exploded in the hall of the rectory.[5]

As Nazi pressure was ratcheted up against the dissenting churchmen, Niemöller and Bonhoeffer were criticized by their fellow churchmen for opposing Hitler and his policies. Eventually over two thousand would choose the route of appeasement and safety and abandoned support of Bonhoeffer and Niemöller’s efforts in resisting the Nazis. “They believed that appeasement was the best strategy; they thought that if they remained silent they could live with Hitler’s intrusion into church affairs and his political policies.”[6] In the late summer of 1933, Niemöller wrote a letter to a friend about his opposition to Hitler.

Although I am working with all my might for the church opposition, it is perfectly clear to me that this opposition is only a very temporary transition to an opposition of a very different kind, and that very few of those engaged in this preliminary skirmish will be part of the next struggle. And I believe that the whole of Christendom should pray with us that it will be a “resistance unto death,” and that the people will be found to suffer it.[7]

In early 1934 from the pulpit of his church in the Berlin suburb of Dahlem, Niemöller spoke of the coming trials that faced the German church.

We have all of us—the whole Church and the whole community—we’ve been thrown into the Tempter’s sieve, and he is shaking and the wind is blowing, and it must now become manifest whether we are wheat or chaff! Verily, a time of sifting has come upon us, and even the most indolent and peaceful person among us must see that the calm of a meditative Christianity is at an end…

It is now springtime for the hopeful and expectant Christian Church—it is testing time, and God is giving Satan a free hand, so he may shake us up and so that it may be seen what manner of men we are!…

Satan swings his sieve and Christianity is thrown hither and thither; and he who is not ready to suffer, he who called himself a Christian only because he thereby hoped to gain something good for his race and his nations is blown away like chaff by the wind of time.[8]

In 1937, Niemöller and more than eight hundred other churchmen were arrested and imprisoned for their opposition to the Nazis. Following release from prison after eight months, Niemöller was immediately arrested again as a “personal prisoner” of the Führer himself and spent the next seven years in Dachau, one the Nazis’ most infamous concentration camps. He was freed by the Allies in 1945.[9]

After the war, in his sorrow for not recognizing and speaking out in the early days of the Nazi rise to power, Niemöller penned this sorrowful message.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.[10]

The face of spiritual warfare in American culture of the twenty-first century

The present course of American culture is much like that of Germany in the early 1930s. Although America’s Godly heritage and the protection of religious freedom built into the Constitution have been powerful deterrents to the agendas of humanism and pagan religions, those deterrents have been substantially weakened over the course of the last three generations as humanistic and pagan philosophies gained ascendance and critical mass in American society. But culturally pacifist Christians like Osborne tell us not to worry. We can thrive in Babylon if we will only have the right perspective and make friends with and serve the powers that be. However, that will require Christians to embrace new definitions of tolerance and perhaps compromise on some of the less important details of their faith.

But it is not a time for “chilling out” or attempting to “thrive” in an increasingly hostile culture. In his commentary on Ephesians 6:11, Donald Stamps paints a much different picture of the Christian’s calling and obligations of spiritual warfare in the culture.

In their warfare of faith, Christians are called upon to endure hardships as good soldiers of Christ, suffer for the gospel, fight the good fight of faith, wage war, be victorious, defend the gospel, strive for the faith, not be alarmed by opponents, put on the full armor of God, stand firm, destroy Satan’s strongholds, take captive every thought, become mighty in war, and contend for the faith.[11]

As it was in Germany of the early 1930s, the America church has been thrown into the Tempter’s sieve, and he is shaking and the wind is blowing, and it must now be revealed whether the church is wheat or chaff. As Niemöller admonished the German church to pray in the late summer of 1933, the American church should now pray that their resistance will also be a “resistance unto death,” and that the people will be found to suffer it.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Larry Osborne, Thriving in Babylon – Why Hope, Humility, and Wisdom matter in a godless culture,” (Colorado Springs, Colorado: David C. Cook, 2015), p. 161.
[2] Ibid., pp.162-163.
[3] “The Christian’s Relationship to the World,” The Full Life Study Bible – King James Version – New Testament, Gen. Ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990, pp. 578-579.
[4] Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 2010), p. 177.
[5] Erwin W. Lutzer, When a Nation Forgets God, (Chicago, Illinois: Moody Publishers, 2010), pp. 19-20.
[6] Ibid., p. 21.
[7] Metaxas, Bonhoeffer, p. 197.
[8] Lutzer, When a Nation Forgets God, p. 32-32.
[9] Metaxas, Bonhoeffer, pp. 293, 295.
[10] Ibid., p. 192.
[11]Stamps, Commentary on Ephesians 6:11, The Full Life Study Bible – King James Version – New Testament, p. 439.