The Pursuit

A Modern Example

Friday, October 10th, 2008 | church, ministry, pastor, prayer, preaching, questions, salvation, sermon, service, teaching, testimony, tithe, tithing, tradition, worship | 2 Comments

I recently had a wonderful conversation with one of my co-workers. She came into my office to give me something and noticed my digital picture frame displaying on my desk. Then I showed her a picture of my wife and we spent a few minutes looking on Facebook and MySpace to see if my wife had any pictures up of the kittens. While browsing through the pictures she saw one that Kati had of me at my graduation. My co-worker asked where I graduated from and I told her, “Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.”

She said, “WOW! I’ve gotta stop cussing in front of you…”

I explained to her that I didn’t want her to censor herself in front of me. Then we started talking about “church” life. She and her husband aren’t really church people. They both went to Methodist churches from time-to-time growing up though. Recently her husband expressed interest in going to a local Methodist church. He wants to go somewhere that he can hear the word preached without feeling pressured into anything weird. She said that she wasn’t really into the idea, but wanted to go with her husband anyway.

Up to this point in our conversation, I had already explained that I am a heretic and defined the word for her, as “a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.” I explained a little bit about my history, what I believe, what I don’t believe, etc. Basically just enough to let her know what I am all about.

Knowing this, and having her recent church experience, she had some questions/concerns for me. This is what they were (in her words).

1) During one songs, they sang about Immanuel… who is Immanuel? I thought they were suppose to worship God?

2) When it was time for prayer, everyone bowed really low with their heads down. Why did they do that?

3) After the community prayer, instead of everyone saying “Amen” they all started to say their own little personal prayers - is that normal?

4) After the service a couple cornered us and asked if we were saved, it was really ackward.

5) The husband of the other couple convinced her husband to fill out a vistor’s card. Then they received a call that afternoon asking if they were going to visit that night.

6) They had “children’s church” during which they took up an offering/tithe. Our little girl felt bad because they were trying to build a new church building and gave 10.00$ to the offering. I feel like that’s wrong, that should be up to the parents, not pressured little kids.

Hearing some of these questions and concerns, I had the feeling that I knew exactly what Paul was saying in 1 Corinthins 14, “Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?” Granted, this is about “tongues” not about Christian Music, Childrens Church, Prayer Stance, etc. I think it still relates though.

Testimony of Gulshan Esther…

Tuesday, June 26th, 2007 | salvation, testimony | 3 Comments

This past semester, Dr. Greenham shared with his Christian Missions class a testimony from The Torn Veil: The Story of Sister Gulshan Esther as told to Thelma Sangster with Noble Din Interpreter. This quote is actually taken from Dr. Greenham’s disertation Muslim conversions to Christ: an investigation of Palestinian converts living in the Holy land - Page 58-59.

I hope you enjoy it, I did.

Perhaps the most striking testimony of all is that of another Pakistani woman, Gulshan Esther. She was crippled from infancy and for years sought healing in vain. Following her father’s death, she desperately called out to God, beginning truly to “talk to Him, not as a Muslim does, using set prayers, approaching Him across a great gulf. Driven by a vast emptiness inside I prayed as if talking to One who knew my circumstances and my need.” Her prayer led to a number of remarkable encounters. She heard a low voice saying he was Jesus son of Mary, and that she should read about him in the Qur’an. She did so, and “began to believe that what was written about Jesus was true — that he did miracles, was alive — and that he could heal [her].” She felt more and more drawn to Jesus and prayed to him repeatedly.

Very early one morning, after desperately asking Jesus to heal her or tell her if he could not, a light filled the darkened room and she became aware ofthe presence of twelve figures, led by another, brighter and larger than the rest. She relates the encounter as follows:

“Oh God,” I cried, and the perspiration broke out on my forehead. I bowed my head and I prayed. “Oh God, who are these people, and how have they come here when all the windows and doors are shut?”

Suddenly a voice said, “Get up. This is the path you have been seeking. I am Jesus Son of Mary, to whom you have been praying, and now I am standing in front of you. You get up and come to me.”

I started to weep. “Oh Jesus, I’m crippled. I can’t get up.”

He said, “Stand up and come to me. I am Jesus.”

When I hesitated he said it a second time. Then as I still doubted he said for the third time, “Stand up.”

And I, Gulshan Fatima, who had been crippled on my bed for nineteen years, felt new strength flowing into my wasted limbs. I put my foot on the ground and stood up. Then I ran a few paces and fell at the feet of the vision. I was bathing in the purest light and it was burning as bright as the sun and moon together. The light shone into my heart and into my mind and many things became clear to me at that moment.

What seems very clear is she was miraculously healed and transformed. After the vision she began walking up and down in her room, reciting the Lord’s Prayer, which she had received shortly before in her illumination encounter.

The sound of her movement alarmed her aunt, who assumed someone had entered her room, as Esther couldn’t walk. Opening the door, the aunt had to come to terms with the reality of her healing. Although she and the other relatives were delighted with Esther’s physical transformation, they did not appreciate the credit she gave Jesus. Her relationship with her family deteriorated and at one point she had a gun put to her head. Nevertheless, after leaving home permanently, she engaged in a ministry of testifying “to the power of God to reach people who are behind the veil of Islam.”

The Kingdom of Heaven is like… - Part 10

Monday, February 12th, 2007 | Kingdom of Heaven, parable, salvation | No Comments

Then the kingdom of heaven will be comparable to ten virgins, who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish, and five were prudent. For when the foolish took their lamps, they took no oil with them, but the prudent took oil in flasks along with their lamps. Now while the bridegroom was delaying, they all got drowsy and began to sleep. But at midnight there was a shout, ‘Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him.’ Then all those virgins rose and trimmed their lamps. The foolish said to the prudent, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’ But the prudent answered, ‘No, there will not be enough for us and you too; go instead to the dealers and buy some for yourselves.’ And while they were going away to make the purchase, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding feast; and the door was shut. Later the other virgins also came, saying, ‘Lord, lord, open up for us.’ But he answered, ‘Truly I say to you, I do not know you.’ Be on the alert then, for you do not know the day nor the hour.”
- Matthew 25:1-13

This parable is a little different than the previous KoH parables. Jesus uses the future tense here to talk about what the Kingdom of Heaven is like (or will be like). Before we discuss the future tense, let’s look at the characters:

Bridegroom - Jesus.

5 prudent virgins - I believe these are the “sons of the kingdom” who are obviously prepared for Jesus’ return.

5 foolish virgins - Now this is interesting. This group of virgins are told that they are not know by the Bridegroom. This obviously implies that they are not saved, but it also shows that it is not the being a virgin that makes someone saved. It also shows that preparedness is a characteristic of those who will be saved.

Now here is a question: Which two groups do the prudent/foolish virgins represent? As far as I can tell there are three, and they depend on the future tense that Jesus uses.

Theory 1: Jesus is speaking of his immediate future - The Jews were not ready for Jesus (i.e. the foolish virgins). They claimed holiness and readiness, but where found lacking. The Gentiles on the other hand were ready for Jesus (i.e. the prudent virgins). However, they neither claimed holiness nor readiness. Also, it does not seem like it would be Jesus’ immediate hour because of the last verse - “You do not know the day nor the hour” which speaks of what we call his second coming. This would not affect the Jews of Jesus’ immediate future. So I think we can safely ignore this theory.

Theory 2: Jesus is speaking of the end of the age - when he comes back again. Then the two groups would be distinguished by those who are saved and those who think they are saved. The prudent (the actual saved Christians) will be prepared for Jesus’ coming - but those who think their saved will ignore the signs and thus be unprepared and unwelcomed.

Theory 3: Jesus is still speaking of the end of the age but the two groups are saved and lost. The prudent are again the saved Christians but the foolish is everyone else.

I think Theory 2 probably fits best. Either way, this parable teaches us one thing, Jesus is coming and he is coming at any moment. As Christians we need to be prepared for His coming.

The Kingdom of Heaven is like… - Part 9

Tuesday, January 23rd, 2007 | Kingdom of Heaven, parable, salvation | 6 Comments

The Parable of the Marriage Feast is the next KoH parable that Matthew records. It can be found in Matthew chapter 22 verses 1-14. This parable seems similar to the previous parable because it reflects the Jew/Gentile relationship to salvation.

Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. And he sent out his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding feast, and they were unwilling to come. Again he sent out other slaves saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited, “Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and my fattened livestock are all butchered and everything is ready; come to the wedding feast.”‘ But they paid no attention and went their way, one to his own farm, another to his business, and the rest seized his slaves and mistreated them and killed them. But the king was enraged, and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and set their city on fire. Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. Go therefore to the main highways, and as many as you find there, invite to the wedding feast.’ Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered together all they found, both evil and good; and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests. But when the king came in to look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed in wedding clothes, and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without wedding clothes?’ And the man was speechless. Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ For many are called, but few are chosen.” - Matthew 22:1-14

First I’ll take a look at the characters, and try to match them up with their prospective roles.
1. King - God
2. King’s Son - Jesus
3. Official Guests - Jews
4. Street Guests (both evil and good) - Gentiles

There are two interesting things in this parable that deserve mentioning. First, we see that this a wedding feast put on for the son. So we know that Jesus’ first coming was the wedding feast that God put on for him. We also learn that the Jews were unwilling to go to the wedding feast, even to the point of murder. I think this closely reflects what happened to Jesus.

God then sent his messengers to gather the Gentiles for the wedding feast. Now here is the most interesting part. One of the Gentiles who came to the feast was not properly dressed. The king throws him in the “outer darkness.” Obviously this corresponds to salvation, but what Jesus says next is very intriguing - “for many are called, but few are chosen.”

So, what does it mean to be called if not chosen? I think this is actually a misleading translation. The word used there for “called” is the same word used before for “invite.” If we understand the word as invited (and within the context it should be invited) it makes perfect sense that many are invited, but few are chosen. Or if we keep it the word as “called” we need to realize that this is not salvation, but a call to accept the free gift of salvation.

This parable, as well as some of the previous KoH parables, seems to indicate that there is a wide calling, but only the elect will be saved. Those who are not elect, obviously show up to the “feast” unprepared.

Any thoughts?

Going to Hell in a Handbasket - Part 2

Wednesday, January 17th, 2007 | free-will, hell, salvation | 14 Comments

BT

Thanks for the comment. I assume the “unpardonable sin” you are referring to comes from

“Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin” - Mark 3:28-29

and

“And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.” - Luke 12:10

I am not really convinced that these verses speak about the final rejection of Christ. The verse seems to be in the context of someone who attributes the power of God to the Devil and accusing them of it.

I agree that the lost (and the saved) will be judged according to their works. However, I am not sure that judgement is the reason for sending one to hell.

Revelation 20:12-15 - And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

v.12-13: the dead are judged from the works written in the book (of works)
v.14: Death and Hades are cast into the Lake of Fire (the second death).
v.15: anyone not found in the Book of Life is cast into the Lake of Fire.

As you know, Revelation is sometimes a hard book to interpret because of the symbols it uses. I could be wrong, but here, I think it is clear that the dead are cast into the Lake of Fire because they do not appear in the book of life (not because of their works).

2 Corinthians 5:10 - For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

This text does not really talk about our sins causing us to go to Hell. Again, I agree that the lost (and according to this text the saved) will be judged according to their works. I am not too sure how the whole recompense thing works out, but one question that we should pose is: “are temporal sins worth an eternal punishment?”

Matthew 16:27 - For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and WILL THEN REPAY EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS.

This is similar to the previous verse. One may also point to 1 Corinthians 3:12-15. When the works are tested by fire. Those whose works remain receive reward but those whose works are burned up suffers loss. Perhaps this is what the judgement is, and then those who are not found in the Book of Life suffere the second death.

1 Peter 1:17-19 - If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ.

This too is similar to the two previous verses. It really does not talk about the judgment being that which sends one to Hell.

Baptist Theologue, I am not trying to refute your position (or anyone’s position). It may appear that way because of how I handled the verses you gave me. I guess I am just trying to read what the text says without assuming things. Basically if the text says we are judged, then all I take from it is that we are judged (without assuming it is what sends us to Hell). I think this is a safer practice because of the dangers that come from assuming the rest of the text.

Gary

I will answer your questions inline:

Q1: “In order to be “fair,” shouldn’t we have the genuine choice or opportunity to accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior?”

Simply, I was say no, based on Romans Romans 9:20-24:
“On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, ‘Why did you make me like this,’ will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.”

I do not know why, but I think there is something different about being causally determined to sin and then being sent to Hell because of those sins. And being causally determined not to accept Christ and then being sent to Hell. I guess part of the reason is because the sins we commit have happened, are happening, and will happen (from our view point) and they are ultimatly by our own doing (even if they are causally determined). However, failure to acknowledge Christ is by God’s doing.

Q2: “Didn’t God create the sin problem?”

This is another issue I have to deal with. Like I said, I do not really like my position on free-will. The only possible explanation is what you have suggested, causal determinism began after Adam’s sin. However, I do not like doing that, because it seems like I’m pulling an answer our of my butt with absolutely no data to support it. It might be one of those “we see through a glass, darkly” things (I hate those too).

Q3: “Was Jesus governed by the law of cause and effect? Did he chose to die for us or was he compelled to do so? “

This is a little easier for me to answer than Q2 because of who Jesus was. One could easily say, yes, Jesus (on Earth) was governed by the law of cause and effect. Then could say, Yes, he chose to die for us. How are these two possible? Easy, Jesus’ choice happened before his conception - which I do not think is too far a stretch from what happened. Then everything that occured after Jesus’ conception happened according to cause and effect (just the way God intended).

Gary, thanks for the comment. I would love to hear what you have to say about the solution to your own Q2.

Drew

Thanks for the link, I will read it when I have some extra time. But first, let me take a poke at your questions:

“Isn’t rejecting Christ itself a sin? And if it is, why isn’t it universally provided for in His sacrifice?”

In a way I knew this question would arise. The easy answer is yes, rejecting Christ is a sin. Some may say it is not universally provided for in His sacrifice because it is an “eternal sin” versus a “temporal sin.” I am not sure that answer works.

You could change the system a little bit and say that going to Hell is a result of not having your name in the Book of Life. So then, anyone who rejects Christ is forgiven, however, because they fail to appear in the Book of Life, they go to Hell. I am not sure I like that answer either, unless you say that only those whose name appears in the Book of Life are those who accept Christ (and vice versa). Even still, the answer still scares me a little.

Again, thank you all for commenting. Let me reassure you again, that I am merely thinking over things. This new system I have written about is not dogma to me, just questions in my mind. Feel free to add more comments.

Going to Hell in a Handbasket - Part 1

Tuesday, January 16th, 2007 | free-will, hell, salvation | 3 Comments

Question: “Do we go to Hell because of our sins or because of our failure to acknowledge and accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour?”

To me this question has major implications for our free-will. I am one of those people who have a hard time believing that we have free-will. Based on how I know things work I seriously doubt any free-will. I think everything has a cause/effect relationship. Since any effect is caused, which causes another effect, so-on and so-forth, there cannot be free-will. I am fairly confident in my position for this reason and because if you take away the cause/effect relationships when making moral choices, you come up with randomness. You cannot very well make a decision without something effecting the decision and randomness does not make any sense.

Now that I have told you my position on free-will, let me explain that I am not sold on my position. I hold my position because it is the only position that makes sense (to me). However, I do not really like my position. Why? Well because of the question I posed at the beginning of this post.

It does not seem to be “fair” if we go to Hell because of our sins and our sins are an outcome of a cause/effect relationship. Although I think there may be a solution. What if we do not go to Hell because of our sins? What if, instead, we go to Hell because of our failure to acknowledge and accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour? If so, then our lack of free-will is not problematic. Here are a few texts to think about:

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned” - Romans 5:12 - We discover that Adam sinned, death resulted. Everyone sinned and so death results in everyone. *NOTE* This text does not talk about sin sending us to Hell, but sin causing us to die.

“He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.” - 1 John 2:2 - Jesus’ propitiation was not just for us but for the whole world. *NOTE* This text does not talk about Jesus’ propitiation saving people from Hell, just about the forgiveness of our sins.

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” - John 3:16 - Whoever believes in the Son will have eternal life.

Now here is my reasoning:

1. God wanted to fix the sin problem in his creation.
2. God sent his son, Jesus, to Earth to sacrifice himself on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins.
3. Jesus’ work applies to all men, everywhere.
4. Forgiveness of sin says nothing about the acceptance of Christ.
5. God elects some to Heaven and the rest to Hell - yes, I believe in double predestination.
   *NOTE* As far as I am concerned, if you believe in single predestination (God only elects those who are going to Heaven) then you must believe in double predestination. Even if God does not “actively” elect those who go to Hell, he is actively electing them by not choosing them for Heaven.
6. Those who he elects to Heaven are sent the Holy Spirit (the sufficient cause to accept Christ’s work).
7. Those who he elects to Hell are not sent the Holy Spirit (a sufficient cause to reject Christ’s work).

So, since we are not sent to Hell for our sins, we do not have to worry about the fairness of our lack of free-will in sinning. We do not need free-will if we are only sent to Hell for our failure to accept Christ’s work and we know that God is the one who chooses who will and who will not accept Christ’s work.

I realize that this is a dangerous topic and that I have pretty much rejected a major idea concerning our sins. I definitely lean towards this system of belief, but I am not sold on it. Which is why I have posted about it. So please, if you read my post, comment and tell me your thoughts.

The Kingdom of Heaven is like… - Part 7

Thursday, January 4th, 2007 | Kingdom of Heaven, parable, salvation | 2 Comments

We have finished up all of the KoH parables from Matthew 13. It is time to start our journey forward and look at the latter KoH parable found in Matthew. Our first stop is Matthew 18:21-35. I found this parable very interesting, hopefully you will agree.

Then Peter came and said to Him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.

“For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. When he had begun to settle them, one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. But since he did not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made. So the slave fell to the ground and prostrated himself before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me and I will repay you everything.’ And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt. But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay back what you owe.’ So his fellow slave fell to the ground and began to plead with him, saying, ‘Have patience with me and I will repay you.’ But he was unwilling and went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed. So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened. Then summoning him, his lord said to him, ‘You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?’ And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him. My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.” - Matthew 18:21-35

I may be wrong, but this parable is probably a well known one. Obviously the king represents God (the Father). The first verse reminds me of what might happen at the end of the age. He wants to settle accounts. Although this interpretation is probably not necessary and might not be correct given the fact that the slave goes and does something after settling accounts (but that might just be a limitation of a parable too).

We see that the King is merciful and forgives the slaves debt when he begs for it. Probably an example of what Jesus did for the world on the cross. Just as Jesus died for the whole world, so will the king forgive the debt of his slaves (when they ask him to).

Then the slave goes and does something interesting. He goes and chokes another slave, one of his peers, for what was owed him. He even goes so far as to through the other slave in prison until he is given his money back. I have often heard it preached that it was a mere impossibility to be payed back at this point, because he was in prison and had no way of making money. I will assume this is true for the moment because it parallels what happens next.

Later the King hears of what the slave has done and hands the wicked slave over to the torturers until he can repay the king back for what is owed. It is interesting that the Kings punishment closely parallels the slaves punishment of his peer. Surely this wicked slave too would never be able to pay back the king what was owed. Thus, he would be tortured forever.

I do not think it is a stretch of the imagination to see that this is what happens in Hell. Jesus ends this parable saying that His Father will do the same “if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.”

I do not believe the wicked slave was a son of the kingdom. Sure, he asked to be forgiven of his debt, but I think it was merely because he was face to face with the king. In a way, it was already too late for him. Later, when the slave showed his true nature, the king showed him the true punishment. My theology does not permit me to say that this slave was saved, because he is obviously being tortured.

Question: As far as salvation is concerned, what happened when the king forgave the slaves debts?

I have some ideas, but I want to hear from you all first.

Lew