New Era of Spiritual Decline - The "Unprotestantizing of Protestantism"

Christianity Today posted an article yesterday reporting on meeting between Pope Francis and the general secretary of the World Evangelical Alliance, Dr. Geoff Tunnicliffe. Dr. Tunnicliffe is quoted in the article as saying, 

"Evangelicals are a very diverse group that includes peoples and churches from Pentecostal traditions, Reformed, Baptist and independents. We share a common faith in our Lord Jesus Christ and a desire to serve God's kingdom, we have a heart to encourage personal spiritual renewal and transformation and a passion to make Jesus known around the world. As we seek to obey Christ, we see this time as a new era in Evangelical-Roman Catholic relations."

The "we" Dr. Tunnicliffe is referring to is listed on his website: Converge Worldwide, Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches in America, Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Evangeliska Frikyrkan, Fellowship of Evangelical Churches, Korea Evangelical Fellowship, Presbyterian Church in America, Talitha Koumi Evangelical Churches, The Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada, The Convention of Evangelical Churches in Israel, The Salvation Army, The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC)The Wesleyan Church, and The World Reformed Fellowship. 

There are other affiliations and alliances within this group. The statement of faith these groups have agreed to is as follows:

We believe

...in the Holy Scriptures as originally given by God, divinely inspired, infallible, entirely trustworthy; and the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct...One God , eternally existent in three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit...Our Lord Jesus Christ , God manifest in the flesh, His virgin birth, His sinless human life, His divine miracles, His vicarious and atoning death, His bodily resurrection, His ascension, His mediatorial work, and His Personal return in power and glory...The Salvation of lost and sinful man through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ by faith apart from works, and regeneration by the Holy Spirit...The Holy Spirit , by whose indwelling the believer is enabled to live a holy life, to witness and work for the Lord Jesus Christ...The Unity of the Spirit of all true believers, the Church, the Body of Christ...The Resurrection of both the saved and the lost; they that are saved unto the resurrection of life, they that are lost unto the resurrection of damnation.

The reason for including this statement of faith is to show that sometimes what isn't said is as important is what is said. There are few of us who hold fast to the true faith of the Bible that would deny anything contained in the above statement of faith. It is agreeable to many. But I think this is the purpose of such statements of belief. They are bereft of enough biblical truth as to be agreeable to the orthodox and heterodox alike. Both the heretic and faithful can shout a hearty Amen! But hold up a standard such as the Westminster Confession, The London Baptist Confessions, or the three forms of unity (Belgic Confession, Canons of Dort, Heidelberg Catechism) and you will find much less "unity" among these groups. The main divergence and dissent will be between the Protestant/Reformed Churches and the Roman Catholic Church.

But someone may say, 'But look! The Presbyterian Church in America is there! And look, there is the World Reformed Fellowship! How can you say such things?' I can say them because I have read their confessions and catechisms. There are strong statements in them regarding the papacy. One can only conclude that these groups are moving away from their own creeds for those still holding the ancient confessions. Sadly, most have departed from them. 

The Pope's full address to world evangelicals is found online. I am a bit of a "Johnny-come-lately" to this dialogue learning from the Vatican's website that discussions have been going on for the last five years. The Christianity Today article summarizes the gist of the desire, I think, on behalf of the Vatican and WEA as well as other groups that are working toward this ecumenical alliance with the Papacy: 

"The effectiveness of the Christian message would no doubt be greater were Christians to overcome their divisions, and together celebrate the sacraments, spread the word of God, and bear witness to charity."

The appeal to unity has been a desire of many believers throughout the centuries. Divisions in the Christian church have existed from its inception being brought upon it by false teachers and the antichrist spirit. It is expected by Bible-believers that these things will continue until the Lord Jesus returns. The Pope, I think, would like to see all these groups celebrating the sacraments together. I do not think many evangelicals today understand what the papacy means by sacraments. There is a lengthy article on New Advent (Roman Catholic Encyclopedia online) but this statement is helpful in highlighting the difference: 

"Protestants generally hold that the sacraments are signs of something sacred (grace and faith), but deny that they really cause Divine grace. Episcopalians, however, and Anglicans, especially the Ritualists, hold with Catholics that the sacraments are "effectual signs" of grace."

This seems to me to highlight the important distinction between papal and "popish" views on the "sacraments," I have been reading a most wonderful book by the late J.C. Ryle entitled "Light from Old Times." The beginning chapters recount succinctly the Marion Persecutions and highs the martyrdom of nine eminent protestants of that day. This work by Ryle was first published in 1890 and still speaks to us today. I wonder if it were not an act of Providence itself that I should be studying the Papal burning of our Protestant forbears and then happen upon this great call from the Papal throne to join with them in a "common faith" and to celebrate sacraments with them. 

Listen to the goodly Ryle comment from the Church of England some 124 years ago when the Ritualists referred to from New Advent were rising: 

"I simply give it as my opinion that no plain main in his senses can read the writings of extreme Ritualists about the Lord's Supper and see any real distinction between the doctrine they hold and downright Popery. It is a distinction without a difference, and one that any jury of twelve honest men would say at once could not be proved." p.50

It seems that New Advent would heartily agree with the old Dr. Ryle. In Ryles book, "Light from Old Times" he clearly shows that the sacrament that the Papacy in that day burnt our Protestant brothers and sisters over was the Lord's Supper. To my knowledge this Pope nor any other have changed their position on transubstantiation. In the Pope's address he spoke of the sacrament of baptism. It is no wonder that this one might have preeminence by the papacy as they hold it first among the seven sacraments and without which one cannot be saved, is properly administered to infants to remove original sin, and is only recognized if done by the Roman Catholic Church or by her principles. 

The minister of this sacrament is the priest, to whom it belongs to baptize, by reason of his office. In case of necessity, however, not only a priest or deacon, but even a layman or woman, nay, even a pagan orheretic can baptize, provided he observes the form used by the Church, and intends to perform what the Church performs. - The Decree for the Armenians", in the Bull "Exultate Deo" of Pope Eugene IV

Yet, while the recent commentary from the Pope references baptism, it references the sacraments and certainly intends all that the Papacy holds. Brethren, the Papacy does not wish mutual respect with Protestants or Evangelicals. It intends submission to itself. It sees itself as the Universal Bishop still. It sees itself as still Head of the Church. I will close this exhortation to not be deceived by this Papal pageantry with the words of Ryle which though he be dead, still speaks. (but not to in any way diminish the blood of the martyrs which suffered under the Papal teachings still promoted by them to which I think cries out from the ground against he Papacy even to this day): 

"But what are we going to do? The danger is very great, far greater, I fear, than most people suppose. A conspiracy has been long at work for unprotestantizing the Church of England, and all the energies of Rome are concentrated on this little island. A sapping and mining process has been long going on under our feet, of which we are beginning at last to see a little. We shall see a good more by and by. At the rate we are going, it would never surprise me if within fifty years the crown of England were no longer on a Protestant head, and High Mass were once more celebrated in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul's. The danger, in plain words, is neither more nor less than that of our Church being unprotestantized and going back to Babylon and Egypt. We are in imminent peril of re-union with Rome." p.52

While Ryle certainly had his nation in mind in these things, he was not too far off. The Papacy was working on "unprotestantizing" Protestants 125 years ago and continue her labor to this day. 

The Four Pillars: Are they in Sacred Scripture? A review and Critique of Chapter 3

The Four Pillars: Are they in Sacred Scripture?

A review and Critique of Chapter 3

Stu Weber in his book “Four Pillars of a Man’s Heart” makes the bold claim that these four pillars, King, Warrior, Mentor, and Friend, “..appear both in Sacred Scripture and in the secular history of man..” There is no question that such four archetypes of masculinity are taught by secularism. This is evidenced by the works of Robert Moore and Douglas Gillette that Weber references in his book. The question that we must ask ourselves is whether or not these archetypes, or pillars as Weber refers to them, “appear in Sacred Scripture.” Let us be clear as to what Weber means. Weber brings these four pillars into view with reference to the image of God. “To the degree the pillars are balanced, God’s image is clear, and the man and those around him flourish. To the degree they are abased and abused, the image is distorted, the man withers, and those around him experience imbalance, insecurity, and pain.” Ch. 3, p.49

These four pillars are called four fundamentals and likened to the four points on a compass saying that “God has equipped every man with an internal gyroscope which gives his life purpose, direction, balance, and impact. Providing that it is calibrated to the “Truth North” of God’s Word, a man may consult his internal compass for direction at any point in any situation on any given day.” Ch. 3, p50

We are then exhorted to orientate every situation by this metaphorical compass, “Does this particular situation confronting me right now require the King, the Warrior, the Mentor, or the Friend?

The exhortation continues that tell the reader that if their four pillars are balanced, the dreams of every man, woman, son, daughter, marriage, and family will be upheld. If the four pillars lean or are out of balance, we are told to ‘look out!’ that there will be havoc and pain. We are also told that these pillars stood strong long ago (once upon a time) in the heart of our mutual father, Adam, the original, “the first four-pillared man.”

Weber continues to tell that the four pillars did not evolve, but were created by God. Weber believes and teaches that these four pillars of masculinity were created by God and are echoed in secular psychology. For his grounds in this belief he turns to Genesis 2:7-8; 15-18, 22; and 3:9. In these citations he quotes in the book and italicizes for his emphasis the words “the man.” For this next part of the summary, I will recount Weber’s principles he draws from the text. Afterwards, I will examine his principles in light of the Scriptures themselves.

Principle #1. God created the man first. Citing 1 Tim 2:8-15 he notes the order of creation that the man was formed first, then the woman to establish a unique leadership role “in God’s economy for the masculine gender.” We are then told that there were many communications that took place between God and the man but we do not know how many or what the content of them were. We are told we cannot escape the fact that this communication took place and that specific responsibilities were at the center of those conversations.

Principle #2. God created the garden of Eden and directed man to cultivate it and keep prior to making the woman. Weber goes on to say that before the woman was made when Adam was still alone, that he was given charge over the garden to cultivate and keep it. Weber believes here is where God made man a king. “In this charge, I believe, God was saying to the man, “There is something of a king inside your chest. I have placed it there I have made you a leader and a provider.” Here Weber says is the King Pillar.

Principle #3. God gave man instructions regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, again, prior to making the woman. Weber sees this as God given man a stewardship concerning information about the very nature of life itself. God intended man to be a steward not just of the Garden, but of this information as well. Weber also believes by implication that man’s stewardship was to pass along the information to others and to teach them. Here Weber says is the Mentor Pillar.

Principle #4. Weber teaches that when God said that the man “shall surely die” that God was warning the man of danger and that the man should be alert, on guard, and watch. Here Weber says is the Warrior Pillar.

Principle #5. Here Weber states that from the beginning God clearly states that “It is not good for the man to be alone.” Weber believes that in the Genesis context this meant Adam’s wife, but is applicable as a life sweeping statement. “There is a Friend in every man’s chest.” Weber here says is the Friend Pillar.

Principle #6. Under this principle Weber teaches that after sin had “destroyed the peace of the realm” that “God came looking for the man.” He notes that while it was the woman who first sinned, God came looking for the man. Weber states that “Adam had failed his Lord, his wife, and himself. He had failed to steward his masculinity.” And, “God was demanding to know just what Adam had done with his masculine stewardship.” Following the four pillars, Weber goes on to pose the questions that God was basically saying to Adam, “Where was the King in you? Where was the Warrior in you? Where was the Mentor in you? Where was the Friend in you?”

Weber also teaches here that Adam was held accountable in a way the woman was not. Weber starts that “The entire human race suffers because the head of the race fell short.” He cites Romans 5:12,15,18; 1 Corinthians 15:22 as biblical support. Form this point, Weber makes the following point: “There are serious and humbling implications here for every man. "Don’t miss this principle, my friend: The entire family suffers when the head of the family falls short.”

The rest of the exhortations here put the ills of society, the family, et. on the shoulders of fallen masculinity and the recovery on heels of manliness. “And the whole family rises to a level of health, fulfillment, and happiness when the King-Warrior-Mentor-Friend is doing his job and living out God’s intentions for his masculine soul. When ‘the man’ is at home, doing his job, living out the four pillars of his masculinity, and wrapping his arms around God’s intentions for him, everyone wins.”

This summarizes chapter 3 and I believe represents what Stu Weber is trying to teach. The question now to answer is if these teachings and principles that Weber has presented are biblical and true to Holy Scripture. First, it must be demonstrated that the four pillars actually appear in Scripture. Second, it must be demonstrated that the four pillars are what is meant by the image of God.

Critique

First, do the four pillars actually appear in Scripture? Weber contended that the four pillars were created by God when He made man and reckons them to be a part of the image of God upon the man. The Scriptures cited and quoted in his book are Genesis 2:7-8; 15-18, 22; and 3:9.

 Weber begins in Genesis 2 which is a more detailed description of the creation accounted in Genesis 1. The foundation for the biblical teaching that man is created in image of God is Genesis 1:26-28, “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, ever the birds of the air, and over the every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Note. 1. God’s image applies to both the man and the woman. They are both in the image of God. There is nothing in this text to suggest the four pillars are what God’s image is. Ecclesiastes 7:29 sheds light upon this subject, “Truly, this only I have found: That God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.” This most certainly does not mean that man simply was created to be able to walk physically upright, but rather in character in righteousness and holiness. The light of Ephesians 4:24 can be brought regarding the new creation of man in Christ Jesus, our second Adam, “And that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.”

For the man to be in the image of God is the same as the woman being in the image of God. To then limit this to man alone and bring in the masculine archetypes/pillars and put that forth as the image of God is to eisigetically read the psychology into the Word of God. If Weber wants the first man, Adam, to be a four-pillared man, then to point our compasses by the truth north of Scripture a woman must also be a four-pillared man for both are created in God’s image. Upon this point Weber falls short of the teaching of Holy Scripture in order to maintain his masculine psychology.

Note 2. The creation account in Genesis 2 must not be put forth or used to teach contrary to Genesis 1. Genesis 2 is a more detailed account of what is written in Genesis 1. In Genesis 1 both the man and the woman are created in God’s image, given dominion over all creation, and spoken to. Therefore Weber’s principle #2 does not stand up to the light of Holy Scripture that the man alone was given dominion first. Therefore if Weber’s King Pillar is to be maintained, it cannot be maintained for the man only, but also for the woman.

Note 3. Weber references 1 Tim 2:8-15 to make the point that a man’s unique authority is based on the order of creation. While this is mentioned in 1 Timothy it is not the actual teaching of this passage. The passage is instructing Timothy how the saints of God ought to conduct themselves in the public assembly. To keep a woman from teaching or having authority over a man was because she was deceived by the serpent, the devil. This teaching and order within the Church assembly recognizes the schemes of the devil in how he tempted both to sin against God. While there is an authority order within the church post-fall, the authority and dominion over the whole creation in the state of mankind’s innocence was to both the man and the woman. Some light can be taken from 1 Peter 3:7 which says, “Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.”

Note 4. Weber believes that the man was to be a steward of information. In Genesis 3:3 we read of the woman saying, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’” This clearly shows that Eve also knew the information and was accountable for it before God.

Note 5. There is nothing in text of Scripture to suggest that God’s warning to the man and woman concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was to make them warriors or just the man a warrior. This is purely reading into the text the prior idea of the psychology of Moore and Gillette.

Note 6. In no place in the text of Scripture or otherwise does it say that God created for man a woman because he wished to establish a “Friend” pillar in the man. Rather, God established the institution of marriage and blessed the man with a woman that they might be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

Note 7. Weber makes a point to say that God came looking for the man. In verse 8 of Genesis 3 it is written, “And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.” Weber supposes by this question that God is asking about these pillars. Yet this seems only plausible if one begins with the four pillars in mind. If we simply stick with Scripture, we read on.. “So he said, ‘I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself. And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?” v.10-11

Here God is not asking the man if he has dropped the pillars of his masculinity. Here is God confronting him with his sin. It is sin to disobey God and now the shame of his nakedness is exposed. Disobedience is the error. He is no longer covered in the righteousness that had him in the image of God. “I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see.” Rev. 3:18

In verse 7 of Genesis 3 Adam and Eve tried to cover their own nakedness with fig leaves they sewed together. God both exposed their sin and did not accept their own deeds as a covering for their sin. In verse 20-21 we read, “And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.” Here the Lord covered the shame of their nakedness by His hand signifying the covering by the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, which would be by faith.

Note 8. Weber uses Romans 5:12,15,18; 1 Corinthians 15:22 to teach the following idea: “Don’t miss this principle, my friend: The entire family suffers when the head of the family falls short.”

In one of my previous critiques of this book on chapter 1 I noted that Weber seems to skirt around the doctrine of federal headship but seems to never quite land there. Here he restates the error in supposing that federal headship applies to each family and that each and every man represents federally his own household. The doctrine taught in Romans 5 is one I consider to be a “high doctrine” and one of the more difficult teachings of the Apostle Paul. Yet, it is clearly shown that through one man’s disobedience judgment came upon the entire human race. In verse 12 referenced by Weber it reads, “Therefore, just as though one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—“ The doctrine here is that all sinned in Adam. In verse 14 Adam is called a type of Him who was to come. So, as death reigned through the first Adam, so life reigns through the Second. Just as surely as we all have died in Adam, so just as certainly all who are in Christ Jesus will live. By one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. That is, the Man Jesus Christ. There is no principle here taught as Weber supposes. For Weber’s statement to be true to Scripture, he would have to be speaking about Jesus when he says “The entire family suffers when the head of the family falls short.” The family I am in is the one who has God as our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ as our Head. He is the Head of my family and He never has and shall never fall short.

In close I will quote again Mr. Weber and make a few final comments:

“And the whole family rises to a level of health, fulfillment, and happiness when the King-Warrior-Mentor-Friend is doing his job and living out God’s intentions for his masculine soul. When ‘the man’ is at home, doing his job, living out the four pillars of his masculinity, and wrapping his arms around God’s intentions for him, everyone wins.” –Stu Weber

I testify to everyone reading my words that the Head of my family is Jesus Christ. For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height – to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen. Ephesians 3: 14-21

Chapter 2 Review - Play the Man

This review will be brief. The chapter is a basic outcry against feminism and the current and past cultural war against masculinity in America. One can hardly find reason to disagree with this. The fact that there are differences between men and woman seem self-evident to most, but there has been a concerted effort by some fringe groups in the United States and in higher-education to make war on this fact.

Generally I think Weber touches on an important point as it relates to masculinity and makes a salient argument that is balanced and fair. The only critique I could see is his lauding of Chuck Colson and referring to him as a modern prophet. First, there is no such thing as a modern prophet. Secondly, Chuck Colson does not warrant such high praise who was a leading catalyst of bringing modern evangelicalism more in line with the Apostacy.

In an article posted on CBN they wrote, "Prison Fellowship Founder and President Chuck Colson praised Pope John Paul II as "one of the truly heroic figures of the 20th century. Colson, whom TIME magazine credited as the Washington power broker who helped cobble together an alliance of Evangelicals and Catholic Conservatives, said Pope John Paul II, "will be remembered not only as a great leader, but as one of the handful of people singularly responsible for the collapse of the Soviet empire."

http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/BibleStudyAndTheology/Perspectives/ans_popejohnpaul.aspx

Such a man may earn the praise of the world and popes, but I hardly think has praise before an All Holy God.

Review of Four Pillars of a Man's Heart by Stu Weber - Chapter 1

Chapter 1
I found the chapter inspiring and interesting generally speaking. The example or Mr. Weber's choice to pursue the ministry rather than a military career highlights an important truth to place God's Word and obedience to him above all things. Mr. Weber calls this chapter "crossroads" and speaks a lot about choices. After his own stories and quotes of Robert Frost and others, he leads the read to the first man Adam.

I really want Mr. Weber to take this powerful storytelling ability straight to the true doctrines of Scripture, but he doesn't. He nearly reaches the great doctrine of federal headship and the total ruin of mankind in Adam and then could from there lead us to our Second Adam and the redemption and salvation in Him, but he doesn't. Mr. Weber leaves us in the cesspool of freewill, then mixes the bane of sociology into the teaching and places the root causes of America's ills upon fallen fatherhood.

For Mr. Weber its about choices and being a leader and a man's man. While certain aspects of masculinity are important, what Mr. Weber offers his reader will not actually do any good. His chapter certainly stirs the emotions and his message will most certainly appeal to the masses, but its at the bar of Holy Scripture that these things need to be judged.

Here are a few points the reader of this book should be aware of concerning the theology taught in chapter one. These points here are true to the teaching of Holy Scripture and are worthy of acceptance:

1. Man's Will. The best wording I have come across to describe the state of man's will post-fall comes from the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter IX. Mr. Weber is correct in describing man's will in his state of innocency but makes the mistake of not recognizing what was lost when Adam chose to sin. By making this mistake he applies the same condition of free-will to mankind today that Adam possessed before he fell. Consider the words of the Westminster:

II. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom and power to will and to do that which was good, and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it. (Ecc. 7:29; Gen: 1:26; Gen 2:16; Gen 3:6)

Notice how the statement here notes that while Adam and Eve has freedom and power to that which was good, God allowed the ability to change (mutability) so that he might fall. This recognizes the absolute sovereignty of God in the course and action of all things. This seems to be something Mr. Weber fails to recognize. And while he does recognize that the "head of the household" has an influence on those around him, he fails to understand the fundamental change in the freedom of will that took place after the fall. Consider the following:

III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto. (Rom 5:6; Rom. 8:7; John 15:5; Rom 3:10-12; Eph. 2:1,5; ; Col 2:13; John 6:44; Eph. 2:2, 4, 5; 1 Cor 2:14; Titus 3:3-5).

This statement by the old Westminster divines is the doctrine of total depravity which is not found (but should be) in Chapter 1 of Mr. Weber's book.

2. Man's Salvation. While Mr. Weber would like to present to us poems and sociologists to encourage us to a higher way, Holy Scripture gives us Jesus, the Second Adam.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinner:

(For until the law sin was in the world: but son is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses unto justification. For if by one man's offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." Romans 5:12-19

Why wouldn't Mr. Weber take us to the apostle's doctrine here? He leads us to Adam as the spring and cause of trouble (sin) in the world, but then takes us to Richard Foster's poem, Crossroads, to "make all the difference", to a "well-known" sociologist David Blankenhorn to define the problem, and then leads us to our own depraved and fallen wills to make a choice.

I am compelled to sound a warning by the words of Holy Scripture to my brethren who are in the Lord Jesus, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Col 2:8

Mr. Weber has perhaps gone "off page" by wanting to adhere to his topic rather than the plain teaching of Holy Scripture. My brethren, the problem in the world is sin. We all fell in Adam when he sinned in the garden and heeded the voice of his wife and inherited and nature from him that is completely corrupted through and through. There is nothing you or I can do to save ourselves from this helpless condition and unless we are rescued we shall utterly perish in our sins. If you hear His voice today, do not harden your heart against it or be dismayed. The Lord has not left us without hope but has sent a Savior, Jesus Christ the righteous, who took on flesh and bone as we have that He might be the Second Adam and lead a new race of mankind in Him out of our bondage in sin and death to have forgiveness of sins by His blood and everlasting life by His resurrection. If you hear His voice today, He commands every person to repent of their sins and believe on The Lord Jesus and they shall be saved.

Making a choice to be a better man will not save you from your helpless bondage to sin. Only The Lord Jesus can save you. Repent and believe on Him today before the time to do so is past.

With love,

Review of Four Pillars of a Man's Heart by Stu Weber

In beginning this review I want to acknowledge a weakness. I come to it already with an eye of skepticism and dismay. Long ago I read an article about how to read a book. It taught a few principles I remember such as scanning the table to contents to get an overview of the book. I also make it a practice to look through an index if there is one or any notes. In this book, there is a notes section containing a bibliography of referenced works used in the chapters. To my dismay I found Mohandus Ghandi referenced and Brennan Manning. Why Ghandi should make his inroads in the Church of the Living God is beyond me. For Brennan Manning to make his way into this book and thereby into evangelical churches is frightening.

This said, I have acknowledged this both here and before the Lord in prayer that I might also have a ready mind to set aside any pre-bias and love the truth above all things. Sadly, even beginning with the prologue it seems my concerns are not unwarranted.

There is no doubt Stu Weber is a great communicator. If his writing style is anything like is speaking presence, quite naturally he would have success at nearly anything he would seek to persuade man to. It is full of a human pathos coupled with a genuine heart. Stu Weber seems from the beginning of this book to be a master story teller. I hope to learn much from him in this regard.

This said, a prologue when used is for the purpose of setting the stage for what is to follow in the book. It's designed, or should be, to wet the intellectual appetite of the reader and make the excited to continue. I think Stu Weber does this masterfully but to a very disappointing end. The Scripture giving for our considering is Psalm 103:15-16  which read:

As for man, his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth. For the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more. (Psalms 103:15-16 KJV)

This Scripture is given after a well-narrated story of Mr. Weber's home town and state in Oregon where he has seen many boarded up farms and homes. He draws a parallel between these two verses and the apparent fulfillment of them in the countryside of Oregon. He ponders this and wonders if his own life will turn out the same and leads to reader to that which will last and invites the reader to "walk the path together, and see what we might find"

The path Mr. Weber would like us to walk with him on and find is found in a paragraph here which I expect will be unfolded throughout the book. I quote:

"And I am reminded again that the only thing that lasts---that will, in fact, populate eternity--is people. Wooden walls may crumble and stone pillars may fall, but people are forever. And if life is to mean anything, building people must be what it is all about."

The remaining exhortations are about building people, civilization, et. and then introduces the four pillars of a man: a king, warrior, mentor, and friend.

I am really grateful for this prologue. It has clearly shown me that Stu Weber's focus is entirely man-centered rather than Christ-centered. I genuinely appreciate when men are clear about this. Like many modern books within evangelicalism there is Scripture sprinkled upon their thoughts and imaginations to lay weight to what is being said. Is this what Psalm 103 truly teaches? Let's look at the passage within its context and see:

Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases; Who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies; Who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is renewed like the eagle's. The Lord executeth righteousness and judgment for all that are oppressed. He made known his ways unto Moses, his acts unto the children of Israel. The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever. He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him. For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust. As for man, his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth. For the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more. But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children; To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them. The Lord hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all. Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word. Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure. Bless the Lord, all his works in all places of his dominion: bless the Lord, O my soul. (Psalms 103:1-22 KJV)

It is always important to see the Holy Scriptures in their context. Now that we have the fuller picture of the context of verse 14 and 15, we can see in the immediate context, verses 16 and 17, it teaches the opposite of what Mr. Weber would like to impress upon our minds. What does the Scripture say is everlasting?

But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children; (Psalms 103:17 KJV)

Mr. Weber would like to exalt man and place a great deal of importance upon him. However, this passage highlights the the smallness of man and his temporary nature. This Scripture exalts the Lord and diminishes man. This passage exalts the mercy of God and His compassion to forgive sins. What's really sad, is that this boo by Mr. Weber is geared towards men and fathers, and the shining example of God here in Psalm 103 gives us a pattern to truly follow, "Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him."

This pity on the grounds that He knows our frame..He remembers that we are but dust. From dust we are made and to dust we shall return. Man's days are but a handbreath and here today and gone tomorrow like a flower of the field after the wind has passed over it. Yet, the mercy the of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and His righteousness unto children's children; to such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them." v14-18

One cannot help but remember the words and application of this found in 1Peter:

For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:24-25 KJV)

What wonder and beauty could be preached and exhorted from Psalm 103 to the believer. What words of comfort and hope can be given to focus our thoughts and hearts upon the everlasting mercy of God and His Word. What exhortations could be given to fathers to pity their children as God pities His and to be faithful teachers and preachers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to our own children. To ourselves be faithful the keep the covenant and remember His commandments to do them, to fear the Lord, and take comfort that our Father in heaven will be gracious to us, our children, and our children's children.

I hope this does not set the tone for the rest of the book. I hope that Mr. Weber strays from his worldly path to return the highway of holiness. To Mr. Weber's initial plea to walk this path he lays out I must decline. As for me and my house, we will walk in the paths of Holy Scripture.

A Prodigal Returns - The Preservation of the Saints

I wanted to take a moment to share with you men what took place with me over the last 2-3 years.  I was angry and frustrated with God. I felt angry and frustrated with God because I wanted certain things from Him that I felt I was not getting. These things were certain freedoms from sins, relationships the way I wanted them, ministries I wanted, et. and it didn't seem the Lord was helping me.

As I battled these things I became angry with God blaming Him, began withdrawing from fellowship, and finally one day shook my fist at God and told Him to leave me alone. This is a request I wish He did not answer. For a few years God left me to myself. There were times if you saw me you would not have been able to put a difference between me and someone who was lost.

Then I receive a phone call from my brother asking me questions about the Bible and Jesus. The last I saw him was when he was in a state of such arrogance within his total depravity [unaware of it] that he was on the verge of losing everything in his life he held dear along with being near death due to his disregard for his very well being. I witnessed his own family in the wake of this dissipation, seemingly helpless to do anything. I remember walking away from that thinking to myself: Where is the Lord? Look what He has done. There is no salvation in the earth.  This made me more angry with God.

Then, by the providence of God, someone gave him a commentary on the Gospel of John by Barclay and God used that to open His eyes and by His grace and power translated him from the power of darkness into His marvelous light. My brother was calling me with the love of Jesus in his heart, the Word of God on his lips, and a heart yearning for the Word of God and fellowship with the saints. He did not know how far I had fallen away from the Lord Jesus. He looked to me for some information knowing that I had been in Christ for sometime. And it broke me.

I heard the sounds of true salvation. He declared that Jesus is God. He proclaimed to me that the Bible is the Word of God. He loved and desired the fellowship of the saints. His heart was hot and mine was cold.I was such a hypocrite. And worse...what if he knew how far I had fallen. I was terrified of the Lord's judgement if my rebellion against the Lord Jesus and His word would cause my own brother to stumble even a little bit.

The light of the glory of Jesus Christ shone so brightly through him that it began to melt me. In one glorious day the Lord Jesus granted to me repentance from all my sins and faith in Him to come back and find forgiveness. Satan had wreaked havoc upon me and my house because of rebellion against the Most High. Let no one be deceived brothers, God is not mocked. Whatever a man sows, that shall he also reap (Gal 6:7).

I came back to the Lord Jesus because of His infinite grace and mercy. And you know what? What He has done in calling me back to Him this time (He called me in His Son 20 years ago) is better than before I fell. What mercy!! I came back broken and empty. Before I thought I knew things. All this was lost. Even the things truly I did have were taken from me (Luke 8:18). I barely had a mustard seed of faith, but now the Lord has healed. And it is better than I have ever known. And not just me, but my whole house.

The call from Jesus was to wake up. Wake up! I was eating and drinking with the drunkards!! The cares and pleasures of this world had blinded my eyes. And had I been left in this state, my Lord would have come upon at an hour I did not expect him, and would have cut me asunder and appointed me my portion with the hypocrites. And there would have been weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 24:49-51). Why did I come back? Grace and grace alone.

An old statement of faith explains well the final perseverance of the saints of God. It reads this way:

This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father, upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and union with him, the oath of God, the abiding of his Spirit, and the seed of God within them, and the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof. And though they may, through the temptation of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins, and for a time continue therein, whereby they incur God's displeasure and grieve his Holy Spirit, come to have their graces and comforts impaired, have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded, hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves, yet shall they renew their repentance and be preserved through faith in Christ Jesus to the end. -1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith

That's it. That's the only reason I came back to Jesus. It is because of His greatness, His goodness, His Covenant, His Mercy, His blood, His Spirit. All glory to God alone though Jesus Christ by the power of His Holy Spirit. 

Please listen to me... The Lord Jesus is nearer than when we first believed. If you have fallen asleep somewhat or a lot, wake up...and Christ will shine on you. Let's remember the Lord and encourage each other weekly, daily. Let's lay aside the sin that so easily ensnares us and run the race that is set before us. Let's take up the Word of God in our hearts and mouths, holiness in all our ways, and set our eyes upon the Author and Finisher of our faith.

I love you all with all my heart in Jesus. Thank you so much for your faithful prayers for me while I was away. The Lord spared my life when He should have destroyed my flesh in my wickedness. I committed great sins but they were not sins unto death, so I thank you so much for your prayers for me (1 John 5:16-17).

May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.

Your brother and servant in Jesus.

A Response to a Candian Religious Pundit

http://www.vancouversun.com/columnists/douglas_todd.html

There are many blogs and opinion articles that constantly flow out of nations with a free press. But for me, one comes along every now and then that grabs my attention and serves as representative of popular sentiment. And so comes to the scene opinion columnist Douglas Todd of the Vancouver Sun.

The Vancouver Sun reports in his biographical sketch, “Although he was raised in a family of staunch atheists, Douglas Todd has gone on to become one of the most decorated spirituality and ethics writers in North America. He has received more than 50 journalism honours for his features, analyses, news stories and commentaries. Vancouver Magazine recently referred to him as "arguably Vancouver's most thoughtful journalist."

So, according to many, he is regarded as an honored and revered opinion writer. So who am I to be commenting and critiquing a blog of his? Well, because Mr. Todd is writing about me. He is opining on my friends and family. And while some may regard me as another bombastic American Christian and armchair theologian, something needs to be said in response to his October 29th blog entitled, “The State of North American evangelicalism.” By North American he means the United States and Canada.
And who is the subject of Mr. Todd’s article? Well, evangelicals. To those of us living in “North America” who may characterize ourselves or be regarded as evangelicals, we might be surprised at the attributions given about us in this opinion piece. Here are the highlights:

1. Evangelicals are often controversial
2. They are behind the “pugnacious”, anti-tax Tea Party.
3. They elected George W. Bush, which of course, led to wars against Iraq and Afghanistan.
4. Our “generals” in the culture wars are Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Benny Hinn, Sarah Palin, and Canada’s Charles McVety.
5. We have led the charge against homosexuality.
6. We are the main opponents to Darwin’s theory of evolution.
7. We are the most antagonistic toward Muslims.
8. We are intellectually weak.
9. We have a persecution complex…

As a North American evangelical/fundamentalist (fundamentalist meaning, in the main, that I hold the infallibility and perspicuity of the Bible) I am a bit surprised by Mr. Todd’s assessment. His call is clear:

“But it's time for non-evangelicals to take a deep breath. Away from the headlines, let's find out who these evangelical folks are, especially the ones in Canada. After all, they are among our neighbours, office colleagues and sports teammates.”
I chuckled at this comment as it reminded me of the scene from X-Men where Senator Kelly remarks to Dr. Jean Grey, “Ladies and gentleman, the truth is that mutants are very real, and that they are among us. We must know who they are, and above all, what they can do!”

Mr. Todd’s rhetoric leaves this evangelical wondering what his intentions are. What is the motivation for the inquiry? Why is it wrong for me to oppose homosexuality or regard it as a sin? Who appointed Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Sarah Palin, and Benny Hinn as my generals? Perhaps Mr. Todd will think that my questioning is just my persecution complex starting to kick in?

Mark A. Noll is hailed by Todd as the voice of reason and balance for the evangelical/fundamentalist. Yet, this voice is telling us to bring a balanced approach to issues in the arts, politics and science. Well, it seems to this “layman” that the balanced approach Noll is calling for and Todd applauds amounts to giving up biblical truth. Or should I say, fundamental biblical truth.
Mr. Todd isn’t all negative on evangelicals. He has some nice things to say about us. And just what does Todd praise evangelicals for? He names two: attendance and mega-churches. Evangelicals apparently have kept their position of 8-10% of the Canadian population while other groups have declined. Basically… numbers.
So, according to one of the leading Canadian religion pundits, evangelicals are a mixed breed of controversial, pugnacious, anti-intellectual war mongers who hate gays and Muslims. But hey, the good part is they are growing like weeds!
Methinks Mr. Todd needs to leave the office more often.

So Douglas, I have a few things to say on which you are critical of men like me.
I am indeed controversial. But if you will permit, it was not my doing. “As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and a rock of offence (skandalon): and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” Romans 9:33. So, the Apostle Paul tells us that Christ Himself is a scandal. “But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness.” Are you still with me Douglas, or is the Scripture part annoying you? Perhaps this is the problem you have with us? Because we echo the voice of Scripture in telling the Jews that their Messiah has come and the Greeks (shall we say, intellectuals?) that the wisdom of God is displayed in crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. And so we are counted as fools? This doesn’t surprise us. Are you offended at the notion that God Himself desired to set aside the wisdom of the world?

Have my evangelical brethren not read the Scriptures? That Christ was crucified, according to the Scriptures, was buried and raised from the dead, according to the Scriptures? The very foundation of Christianity being Christ and Him crucified rests on the integrity, preservation, and perspicuity of the Bible. And, on the controversial issues mentioned, the Bible is not unclear on those matters either. If Adam was not the first man, then who is the Second Adam? If mankind’s common ancestor was not Adam, and that the human race fell in him in the garden, so that by one man’s disobedience all sinned, then who is the Second Man by whose obedience many are made righteous? You see, the same Bible that is the foundation of the knowledge that Christ was crucified and raised from the dead, is the foundation for understanding the fall of humanity in Adam and the redemption that is in the Son of Man.

As for our political involvement or non-involvement I think if you spent some time with real evangelicals you will find political activism at a very low ebb. Yes, there are some groups heavily involved in politics. But their influence on evangelicals at large is rather small. Did I vote for George W. Bush? Well, yes I did. Sometimes one has to choose the lesser of two evils. While most evangelicals vote their conscience, we also vote on civil and economic issues. We look for men of integrity, honesty, courage, honor, righteous, and just. And such men are hard to find these days outside of true Christianity.

There are several political and social trends in North American society today that do not square with the plain teaching of Scripture. Homosexuality is one of them. It is without a doubt against the Law of God given by Moses and the teaching of the Apostles. The same may be said of Darwin’s theory of evolution. The Bible never hints at the idea of the human race sharing a common universal ancestor brought about by natural processes and selection. Darwin wrote in his book, Origin of the Species, “"Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed." Pp.490

Those of us with the most elementary education, basically those of us who can read or hear, can easily discern the difference between Darwin’s idea and the Genesis account in Scripture. They are not saying the same thing, now are they? Yet you want me to lay aside the law of non-contradiction to try and square Charles Darwin’s idea with the Bible?

As in many of such circumstances where the cultural norms and societal morals change with time, it sometimes occurs that such changes run against the plain teaching of Scripture. Some of us (evangelicals) will change with the culture and adopt new ideas and reinterpret old ideas. Those of us who remain with the old foundations and the plain teaching of Scripture might at times be thought of as odd, strange, or dangerous. This is not a persecution complex Mr. Todd, it is a fact of human history as it relates to true Christians.

If at this time in world history I am considered to be a dangerous ignorant nave, an intolerant bigot who is against all sound reason because I hold to the doctrines of Holy Scripture ahead of recent ideas, then so be it.

All I would request is that you actually connect with those to whom you criticize and negatively characterize. And if a no name guy like me doesn’t meet your standards, then give Dr. John MacArthur a call. There is one “general” you left out of your list. Oh, and call Albert Mohler too for a second opinion.