INDIVISIBLE

I watched James Robinsons program this morning precisely because his guest was Glenn Beck. They said Glen's radio broadcast is the third largest in our country today. Beck makes no apologies for being Mormon. His program, though thematically a political one has taken on a heavily spiritual tone and Christians who are conservative in nature have embraced his conservative politics and in many cases have even unwittingly embraced his brand of religion. Robinson said that Beck had recently spoken in his home church named Gateway and that he was sure Beck knew Jesus. I have spoken to enough Mormons myself to know these two things:
One, they will claim to have accepted Christ as Saviour
Two, they do not mean the same person as the Bible describes as Jesus.

Robinson and apparently this Gateway Church and scores and thousands of professing believers have invited a different doctrine concerning Christ into their home.

Shame!
The were lots of playful jabs between Robinson and Beck today. Beck also made some playful jabs at the Bible that were laughed at by Robinson and his audience. Beck said he had been reading First John A lot this week. Then he backed up and corrected himself. He said he had been reading chapters one through four because the author gets off on chapter five. Everyone laughed.

• Is not First John inspired? 
• Is John's epistle just his opinion about Christ? 

Chapter five is then nothing to laugh about. It says he that hath the son hath life but he that hath not the son of God hath not life. It says that there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one. That is nothing to laugh about.
 
Beck's politics may appeal to the conservative Christian today but his theology is damnable. Some careless Christians have endorsed his theology just because they like his politics.

Ones theology is so much more important than his politics we would be better off giving this country to the devil than giving one soul the false impression that Mormonism is a viable Christian faith.

--
Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Why Does The Lord Allow It?

Luke 14:10 KJV
But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.

I have been thinking that perhaps the reason that the Lord allows this world to so abuse the Christian faith and to mock spiritual principles is because if He were to make his will be done on earth as it is in heaven, so to speak, sinful man would pervert it into some sort of money making scheme or means of self advancement. We would take to our sinful heart those words in Luke 14:10, "then shalt thou have worship... "and we would fight for the lowest rooms, they would have to build more lowest rooms to accommodate the numbers making their way into them. Perhaps the Lord allows this world to get away with so much evil
• To prove those who will believe without immediate reward and
• To find out those who will do right even when no one acknowledges them for doing it.

Moses Wrote This Song

Deuteronomy 31:19 KJV
Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel.

Deuteronomy 31:22 KJV
Moses therefore wrote this song the same day, and taught it the children of Israel.

One of the things a person picks up from the Bible concerning songs and music is that God's people used them for either worship or for education and not for entertainment. Moses wrote this song (recorded in chapter thirty two) and sang it the same day he was "gathered to his people"; he died. The song was not celebratory in nature, though Moses had written one that was after the soldiers of Egypt died in the Red Sea. This song was meant to rehearse what God had said to Israel.

Moses was inspired in his writing I know. But songs that entertain aren't generally written and sung the same day. The writer has motives behind his music that necessitate his care when first releasing the song. He needs music to be scored and rehearsals to be done. Why, the couple who sang America the Beautiful at the 2012 Superbowl practiced it a week before the actual performance: and that is a song they have surely known since childhood. Entertainment requires careful preparation.

No, Moses did neither write nor sing for the sake of entertainment. And I conclude from that that far too much entertainment emphasis is placed upon even spiritual music in our day. The purpose of music among the believers must be an act of worship and an expression of a spiritual truth. If it is not that, it is not Christian.

Greater Than John The Baptist

I came across a short quip from Tim Keller concerning Jesus remark that the least in the kingdom are greater than John the Baptist. I found it interesting because I had just written on that very subject last week. My piece at http://mckenzie-visit-with-god.blogspot.com/ is based out of Luke's Gospel rather than Matthew's, which is where Keller bases his piece. I think it is interesting to compare and contrast the perspective of a Protestant and a Baptist (who approaches the Bible from a fundamentalist rather than an evangelical perspective) on the person, ministry and mark that John the Baptist makes. Keller's article may be found at http://kellerquotes.com/john-the-baptist/. I encourage you to read it. As for my piece, I will repeat it in its entirety here.

"Luke 7:28 KJV
For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.

There is no doubt but that John the Baptist is a great character in the New Testament. Though his work was short lived, it introduced that which is eternal. John the Baptist, Jesus said, was the greatest of all prophets. But his ministry is much more than that, extending into the New Testament and introducing that ordinance which distinguishes the church of Jesus Christ from all others; baptism of
• A proper candidate (saved) for
• A proper reason (obedience, profession), using
• A proper method (immersion) and under
• A proper authority (a Baptist church)

Why would then Jesus say that the least in the kingdom would be greater than John? Does this mean, as many have preached, that John is not a New Testament preacher, that his message was in some way inferior? Not in the least. Consider the biblical lesson after this verse. John's baptism is the dividing line between glorifying God and rejecting God's counsel.

But what John began blossomed after his death. Like that grain of wheat that dies in the ground and then yields a hundred fold;
• After John the Baptist came the death burial and resurrection of Christ and
• After John the Baptist came the entirety of the New Testament
• After John the Baptist came not only the salvation and baptism of those in Israel but all around the world
• After John the Baptist has come two centuries of preaching that very message John preached.
True greatness inspires even greater greatness. It was his greatness that has led to greater things for Christ than he himself could have done. "

Now for a few thoughts between the two pieces:
First, I agree with Keller that these passages are overlooked. I think Protestants (even the ones who use the name Baptist) take a minimalist position concerning THE Baptist. Everything that can be done is done to make little of John the Baptist. Mostly he is just overlooked. Good on him for pointing that out.
Secondly, it seems enlightening to me that a Protestant took the Matthew eleven passage as his text rather than the Luke seven text. Luke seven places much greater emphasis on the importance of John's baptism.
Finally, I am happy with Mr. Keller's application to practicing the gospel ministry. We have got to get Christians engaged in our world. We have got to see the average believer make living his faith in the world his normal life.
Only then will our faith change our world.

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

The Older Generation?

I just finished an article at Reformation 21 A Forgotten Text? Why Is That, I Wonder?. The author, Carl Trueman, makes some claim to have roots in fundamentalism or at least to have stood with those who laugh at them, calling our standards "unsophisticated taboos" and claiming that those who held to them were "the older generation."

First I would like to point out that, while I am beginning to approach being "the older generation" there are plenty of men who hold these standards who are not older. There are some very fine young men who embrace separation from the sins of this world. Our numbers may not be swelling in the same sense as the young restless and reformed, but we are doing pretty well thank you very much, at reaching this generation with the gospel and with our message of separation from this world.

Secondly I would like to suggest that Mr. Trueman's own fears over the lack of separation in the reformed crowd betrays the idea the reformation practices of liberty are overboard. What he calls legalism we claim as honest separation from the error of this world. We, whose doctrines of separation he calls "taboos" are fully aware that doing faithful Christianity is not a requirement of salvation and that certain actions we encourage Christians to avoid are not "cardinal sins". Those who cry out for liberty, it seems to me, are blinded by their selfish desire to get their own way and call it godliness.

Thirdly, I take some umbrage to the term unsophisticated. It implies that those of the reformed crowd have some how grown passed these taboos. As if sin changes with culture. What was sin fifty years ago is still sin today. Nothing has changed but the modern reformed crowds willingness to wrest Scriptures in order to get their way and find a following.

• It's time we return to standards of separation.
• It's time we take a listen to that older generation
• It's time we stop excusing our thirst for worldliness

I applaud Mr. Trueman's brass in confronting the fleshly tendency of the reformed crowd to use sex speech as a means to draw a larger crowd into their churches. I would suggest that he take it further. I would suggest that he also challenge them to rethink their positions on alcohol, modesty and etc.

But wait. If he does that he will fit in with the old generation better than the young restless and reformed.

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Will You Pray for Unity Among Believers Online?

1 Corinthians 11:19
There must be heresies among you...

I am afraid I am going to disappoint Toni Birdsong at www.stickyjesus.com.

Citing Mother Teresa as an inspiration of unity she begs us to pray for unity among believers online. I want to challenge the concept that the type of unity she has in mind is really "Jesus' idea of unity." I challenge the idea that we ought to be unified online. I challenge the idea that as diverse as the Christian world is in any community, it ought to be unified in the sense I think Toni thinks, certainly in the sense Mother Teresa thought. I challenge the idea that this sort of unity would be healthy even within the community of believers called Baptists.

I am afraid the type of unity Toni seeks is built upon the principle not of agreement, but of indifference, this sort of unity ignores doctrine for the sake of peace.

And here is the problem with that, without grappling with doctrine, truth begins to slip. The fact that we contend for our faith provides for an environment where truth may rise to the surface rather than settling in the bottom of the unstirred jar. I am not advocating for physical battle. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal. Neither do I believe there is any room for hatred of among the contestants. If God loved man so much that "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" then there is reason for the child of God to love even those we have the most heated contest with.

But we must have the contest. We must prove out truth and expose the heresies among us. Only then will truth be manifest.

The online forum is the most liberating form of worldwide communication history has ever known. It has great potential for the spread of the gospel. But it has an equally great potential for the decimation of truth.

No, Toni, I won't pray my guts out for unity among online believers.
But I will pray that the gospel has free course and that the truth of God will rise to the top amidst all the biblical heresy that is disseminated online.


Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Deception?

Recently I read the blog post of the conversation between Fundamental Baptist Evangelist Arv Edgeworth and the self professed ex fundamental Baptist church member Steve. The site is www.baptistdeception.com/arv-edgeworth-deception.

Apparently Steve has made it his mission to blog about his traumatic experiences in church and thus, to encourage others in their exodus from church. In an attempt to befriend and perhaps turn Steve, Arv reached out through e-mail correspondence, believing those e-mails to be private. Steve published what he claims is the raw and unabridged and unedited trade of correspondence. Steve warns his readers that it is brutal and urges those who suffer from post traumatic stress resulting from their life in an independent fundamental Baptist Church not to read. He claims at the beginning that Arv verbal fists were swinging so wildly that he eventually had to cut the correspondence off.

I read the thing in its entirety.

First, I saw nothing near what could have been called verbal fists. Arv did, near the end, suggest seeking legal recourse if his correspondence was published on the site. Steve countered that with a refusal to be threatened and some pretty good verbal jabbing of his own. His closest actual argument against Arv is that Arv would write a post and then write another before Steve had time to respond to the first. This, Steve wanted to clearly point out, and it is obvious that it really bothered Steve.

I know neither man.

The correspondence reads pretty much like I would think two men who are locked in disagreement might communicate. Both become frustrated that the other has not accepted his views.

The thing that does become blatantly clear is that Steve does not accept any passage that Arv refers to as a valid authority in the communication. He constantly asks Arv to support the Scriptures he cites with other references and he wants to know who taught Arv to accept Arv's understanding of the passage. Steve also likes throwing out term used in debate, argument and philosophy. Steve wants Arv to know that Arv doesn't have an education and Steve implies he does.

Bottom line, I came away from the blog with the sense that Steve has swallowed Satan's bate to catch Eve in the garden "hook, line and sinker." Whether he in fact grew up in an abusive church I do not know. I do know that there are some. But Steve just doesn't like authority. He has bought into the idea that he can be, as god, knowing good and evil. And he has elevated the man made education above the Word of God. Steve claims to be a follower of Christ, but it is after the order of Cain, it's on his terms and not the Lord's. Though he titles his blog about the deception of Arv, the deceived is Steve.

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields