"My Mirage"....the musings of my mind w/ Al Stewart

"Are We Really Thinking It Through?" (Part 1)

2011-08-15T09:59:00.000-07:00

If you’ve been surfing the net for Christian articles lately you’ll see that the Calvinist/Arminian debate has flared up again. I also recently read a post from a friend where he didn’t understand why all this “fuss” has to be made about predestination or Grace, etc., etc. “What difference does it make” is what he ended up saying, let’s just concentrate on the Gospel & sharing Jesus! Now while I wholeheartedly agree with that latter statement, I wanted to take this opportunity to state exactly why it is important to clarify our understanding here based on this most important fact: For within this argument lies our view of who God is at the core! And that understanding/view will then dictate how we live that out! However, I think really what this person had a problem with was not so much the subject, but rather HOW we talk, or in this case do NOT talk civilly about it. In fact, I share his dislike for the serious lack of civilized dialogue between us in discussing such important Theological views which as I already stated, carry a lot of important repercussions which is exactly why we cannot & should not dismiss them.

On the bright side, there has been good dialogue coming out as well. Recently John Piper, a man who has fathered such radical articles as “why Calvinists should not date Arminians” and who last year preached a sermon entitled “Why Jesus doesn’t love everyone the same” (if you understand his neo-Calvinistic view, you’ll understand that sermon regardless of whether you agree) sat down with Rick Warren, the object along with John MacArthur of many of his attacks. And I must confess I was surprised to see him “morph” into this likeable guy who was very respectful of Warren’s Theology. Likewise Rick has been gracious all along to those who have opposed him & he was the same here in this interview. If you have not seen it, you can find a portion of it on utube here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYYyG_X8-ek

Now I use the heading “are we thinking it through?”. And the reason I did is because one of the questions we must always ask ourselves in regards to what we believe is: “what are the ramifications of what I believe & how will that apply?”

For instance, when you agree with a statement like the Westminster’s Confession of 1646 in Chapter 3 “Of God’s Decree’s” and articles 5-7 as follows:

V. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, has chosen, in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith, or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace.
VI. As God has appointed the elect unto glory, so has He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power, through faith, unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extends or withholds mercy, as He pleases, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praised of His glorious justice.

The ramifications of those statements are as follows I believe:
1) That at some point in the beginning of things, God said yes to me, no to someone else, yes to another, no to someone else, etc. etc. (you get the picture) This means that God left most of humanity out of His salvation plan! And He did so with full purpose to do such! Think that through friends! And the above statements also say He did so “for His own Glory!”
I recently had a student I am close to tell me he “cringed” when we heard this statement come out of a Pastor’s mouth:
“God would sacrifice all of humanity for the sake of His glory” Needless to say Scriptures such as, but by no means limited to: John 3:16-17, 2 Tim. 2:4 & Rom. 5:5 make it crystal clear that God never had any intention of sending people to eternal damnation according to HIS will! In fact in Matt. 25:41 which is the time of the separation of the righteous & unrighteous. Now when the unrighteous are turned over to destruction, Jesus says to them this:
'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
Friends, notice for whom the eternal fire was prepared…….not mankind, but rather satan & his cohorts! And why? Is it not because God never intended from day ONE that “any should perish?” So as you can see, we have a real dilemma here….. Did God intend to leave humans out of His plan or didn’t He? And if He did & you believe that, how would it effect your view of God? And would it not effect that view mightily?
Now I can hear the yells of those who believe the above statements & they would say I am jumping to what they have coined “double predestination”. In other words, because it would be difficult to say the least to believe that God did leave people out for His glory, they will say that He just “passed over” them, in other words God did not pass them by with purpose or malice, but just as part of His overall plan, so they will argue that point about God leaving people out, but from a logical & practical standpoint, you simply cannot have it both ways! To say out of one side of your face that God only picked an “elect” & then out of the other side say He didn’t leave people out is frankly “double speak” in my humble opinion. I Coached softball for many years & had many people who wanted to play, but I couldn’t accommodate them all, so the hard truth is that I had to “cut” players or just didn’t pick them with full purpose, the purpose of building a better team in this case. There is no other way for me to be honest about that! So what I am saying here is you can’t have one, without the other, cut & dry. If God didn’t elect everyone & only some, then He left out others……….

So this leads me to my next point which is “Election vs. Foreknowledge”. This is what I will discuss in my next post. Arminians believe strongly in the foreknowledge of God, that God knew all things as the Scripture tells us “from the foundations of the World” I submit that when you grasp a hold of understanding God’s intervention from the standpoint of foreknowledge, then things makes much more Biblical sense.
You get a steady & balanced view that God, from the beginning has been trying to reconcile Man & not cast him off! That God intervenes on our behalf for our betterment & not for our damnation. Foreknowledge is the key….at least for this person it is.

Until Next Time,
Al

Arminian Confession of 1621

2011-08-01T06:59:00.000-07:00

Arminianism Calling Election Faith
On the benefits and promises of God, and principally of election to grace, or calling to faith.

"1. But that man may not just perform the commandments of God thus far explained, but also willingly want to perform them from the mind, God willed for his part to do everything necessary for effecting both in man(a), that is, he determined to confer such grace to sinful man by which he might be suitable and apt to render everything which is required of him in the gospel, and even more, to promise such good things to him, whose excellence and beauty might far exceed the capacity of human understanding, and that the desire and certain hope of this might kindle and inflame the will of man to render obedience in acts to him.

"Indeed, God habitually both makes known and bestows all these benefits to us by his Holy Spirit(b) (about which we have declared more fully above).

(a) Jer. 31:32-34, Heb. 8:8ff, Ez. 11:19 & 36:22, 2Cor. 7:1, 2Pet. 1:3-4, 1John 3, Col. 1:4-5, 1Pet. 1:3-4. (b) 1Cor. 2:10, 12:3ff, 1John 2:20, 27, Rom. 5:5, 8-9.

"2. Therefore, in the first place, when God calls sinners to himself through the gospel and seriously commands faith and obedience either under the promise of eternal life, or to the contrary, under the threat of eternal death, he not only bestows necessary but also sufficient grace for sinners to render faith and obedience(a).
"This calling is sometimes called election in Scriptures, namely, to grace as the means of salvation, very different from election to glory or to salvation itself(b); more on this below.

"This calling, however, is effected and executed by the preaching of the gospel(c), together with the power of the Spirit, and that certainly with a gracious and serious intention to save and so to bring to faith all those who are called(d), whether they really believe and are saved or not, and so obstinately refuse to believe and be saved.

(a) Matt. 11:20, John 5:34, 40 & 6:44-45, 2Pet. 1:2-3. (b) 1Cor. 1:26, 2Tim. 1:9, 1Pet. 2:9. (c) Matt. 28:18, John 5:34, Rom. 10:14-15, 2Cor. 3:5-6. (d) 1Tim. 2:4ff., Tit. 2:11, 1Pet. 1:23, 25.

"3. For there is one calling that is effective(a), so called because it attains its saving effect from the event rather than from the sole intention of God. Indeed, it [is] not administered by some special and hidden wisdom of God from an absolute intention of saving, so as to fruitfully unite with the will of the one who is called, nor so that by it the will of the one who is called is so efficaciously determined to believe through an irresistible power or some omnipotent force(b) (which is nothing less than creation, or raising from the dead) that he could not but believe and obey, but because it is not resisted by the one who is now called and sufficiently prepared by God, nor is a barrier placed against divine grace which otherwise was able to be placed by him.

"Indeed there is another which is sufficient, but nevertheless ineffective(c), namely, which on man's part is without saving effect and through the will and avoidable fault of man alone it is unfruitful, or does not attain its desired and due effect.

(a) Rom. 8:28-29, 1Cor. 1:24, 26. (b) Acts 2:4, 13, 48, Rom. 6:17, 1Thess. 2:13. (c) Prov. 1:24-25, Ez. 12:1, Is. 5:1ff., Matt. 23:37, Luke 7:30, John 5:40, Acts 7:5 & 13:46, 2Thess. 3:1-2, contrary to the Canons of the Synod of Dort, chs. 3 & 4.

"4. The former, when either joined with its saving effect or already constituted by its exercised act, is sometimes called in Scripture conversion(a), regeneration(b), a spiritual rising from the dead(c) and a new creation(d), clearly because by it we are efficaciously turned from a corrupt style of living(e) to live justly, soberly and godly(f), and are raised on a heavenly account from a death of sin or a deadly custom of sinning to a spiritual life or holy way of living.

"And finally, being reformed by the spiritual effectiveness of the Word according to the image first of the teaching and then of the life of Christ, it is as if we were born again(g) and made new creatures through repentance and true faith(h).

(a) Acts 3:19, 26, 1Thess. 1:9. (b) John 3:5ff., Ja. 1:18. (c) Eph. 2:6. (d) Gal. 4:19, 2Cor. 5:17, Eph. 2:10. (e) Tit. 2:11-12. (f) Rom. 6:2ff. (g) Rom. 6:17. (h) Eph. 2:24, Col. 3:10.

"5. Man therefore does not have saving faith from himself(a), nor is he regenerated or converted by the powers of his own free will, seeing that in the state of sin he cannot of himself or by himself either think or will or do anything that is good enough to be saved(b) (of which first of all is conversion and saving faith), but it is necessary that he be regenerated and totally renewed by God, in Christ, through the word of the gospel joined with the power of the Holy Spirit(c), namely, in his understanding, affections, will and all his strengths, that he may be able to understand, meditate on, will and finish correctly these things that are savingly good.

(a) Matt. 11:17, 13:11, & 16:17ff. (b) Matt. 7:17 & 12:34, John 6:44-45, 65 & 3:5. (c) Phil. 1:5-6 & 2:13, Eph. 2:1ff., Ja. 1:17-18, 1Pet. 1:23.

"6. We think therefore that the grace of God is the beginning(a), progress(b) and completion of all good(c), so that not even a regenerate man himself can, without this preceding or preventing [prevenient], exciting, following and cooperating grace, think, will, or finish any good thing to be saved(d), much less resist any attractions and temptations to evil.

"Thus faith, conversion, and all good works, and all godly and saving actions which are able to be thought, are to be ascribed solidly to the grace of God in Christ as their principal and primary cause.

(a) Eph. 2:5, 18, Titus 2:11-13 & 3:4-5, Phil. 1:6. (b) John 15:5, 1Cor. 1:4ff. (c) 1Thess. 5:23-24, Eph. 6:13. (d) Matt. 26:41, 1Cor. 10:13, 2:4ff.

"7. Yet a man may despise and reject the grace of God(a) and resist its operation, so that when he is divinely called to faith and obedience, he is able to render himself unfit to believe and obey the divine will, and that by his own true and conquerable fault, either by secure carelessness(b), or blind prejudice(c), or thoughtless zeal(d), or an inordinate love of the world(e) or of himself(f), or other inciting causes of that kind.

"For such an irresistible grace or force, which, as to its effectiveness, is no less than creation, nor generation properly called, nor raising from the dead (and causes the very act of faith and obedience in such a way that, being granted, a man cannot not believe or obey) certainly cannot be but ineptly and foolishly applied where free obedience is seriously commanded, and that under the promise of vast reward if performed and the threat of the gravest punishment if neglected.

"For in vain he commands this obedience and requires it of another, and without cause promises to reward the obedience, who himself alone both ought and wills to cause the very act of obedience by such a force as cannot be resisted. And it is silly and irrational to reward someone as truly obedient in whom this very obedience was caused through such an alien power.

"And finally, punishment, especially eternal, is unjustly and cruelly inflicted on him as disobedient by whom this obedience was not performed solely through the absence of that irresistible and truly necessary grace, who really is not disobedient.
"We cannot here state how everywhere in the Scriptures it is affirmed of some, that they resisted the Holy Spirit(g), that they judged, or rather made themselves unworthy of eternal life(h), that they made void the counsel of God concerning themselves(i); that they would not hear(k), come(l), obey(m), that they closed their ears(n) and hardened their hearts(o), etc.

"And of others, that they promptly and freely believed(p), that they obeyed the truth and the faith, that they showed themselves attentive and teachable, that were attentive to the evangelical doctrine(q), that received the Word of God with cheerfulness, and that they were more generous in this than those who rejected the same, and finally, lastly, that obeyed the truth, or the Gospel, from the heart, etc.

"To attribute all this to those who in no way can either believe or obey, or cannot believe and obey when they are called, is very certainly foolish, and plainly ridiculous.

(a) Ez. 12:2, Prov. 1:24-25, Matt. 13:19 & 23:27, Acts 7:51 & 13:46. (b) Matt. 13:19. (c) John 7:3-5, 51. (d) 2Cor. 3:13, Rom. 10:2-3. (e) Luke 14:18. (f) John 5:44. (g) 2Cor. 4:4, 2Thess. 3:2, 2Tim. 3:2ff, 1John 5:4ff. (h) Acts 7:51 (i) Acts 13:46. (k) Luke 7:30. (l) Prov. 1:24-25. (m) John 5:40. (n) Acts 7:39. (o) Zech. 7:11-13, Jer. 5:3. (p) Acts 28:24, Heb. 3:12-13 & 4:2, Ps. 95:7-8. (q) Acts 2:41, 13:47, 6:7 & 17:11, Rom. 6:17, 1Pet. 1:22.

"8. And even if there truly is the greatest disparity of grace(a), clearly according to the most free dispensation of the divine will, still the Holy Spirit confers such grace to all(b), both in general and in particular, to whom the Word of faith is ordinarily preached, as is sufficient for begetting faith in them, and for gradually carrying on their saving conversion.

"And therefore sufficient grace for faith and conversion not only comes to those who actually believe and are converted, but also to those who do not believe and are not really converted(c). For whoever God calls to faith and salvation, he calls them seriously(d), that is, not only by an external show, or in words alone (that is, when his serious commandments and promises are declared to those that are called in general) but also with a sincere and unfeigned intention of saving them and the will of converting them.

"Thus he never willed any prior decree of absolute reprobation or undeserved blinding or hardening concerning them.

(a) Rom. 12:6ff, 1Pet. 4:10. (b) Matt. 11:21, Tit. 3:4ff., 1Pet. 1:23 & 2:9, Ja. 1:18, 2Cor. 3:6, Heb. 4:12. (c) Is. 62:2, Ez. 18:11, Prov. 1:24ff., Matt. 23:37, Luke 8:12. (d) Tit. 2:11-12, 2Tim. 1:9, 2Cor. 5:20 & 6:1ff., Is. 5:2ff., Ps. 85:13-14, John 5:34 & 10:10."

Until Next Time,
Al

A Thought Experiment about "Cooperative Effort"

2011-01-19T12:55:00.000-08:00

A Book was written recently by a Michael Horton entitled "Christless Christianity".

Mr. Horton said some things in the book that in no way represent Arminian Theology. Something I have been talking about off & on for awhile is that many of those who attack this Theological view seem to have little or no "serious" knowledge, which then spreads like wild fire due to the internet!

Anyhow, Roger Olson's response to "cooperative effort" I thought was excellent & hope you appreciate it below too.

Until next time,
Blessings, Al

Posted on January 19, 2011 by Roger
This is a follow up to my earlier response to Michael Horton’s comment about Arminianism in Christless Christianity and to his response here. If you haven’t read those, this post may not make a lot of sense.

Mike (we are on a first name basis) says in his book Christless Christianity that Arminianism holds that salvation is a cooperative effort of God and human beings (p. 44) I objected in my last post here. Arminianism does not hold that; no informed, self-respecting classical Arminian would say that. Those who think so simply don’t know Arminianism well enough.

My complaint is not about the word “cooperative.” Yes, Arminians do believe that God does not save anyone without their cooperation. The issue is whether that cooperation can fairly be called an “effort.” Arminians deny it.

Some here (and no doubt elsewhere) struggle with this. Isn’t every cooperation a joint effort? No; it’s not. There are cooperations that do not involve “effort” by both parties.

My appeal then and now is to ordinary language. (Interestingly, in his responsive comment here Mike did not address my analogy about ordinary language.) Who would ever call the following scenario a “cooperative effort” even though it involves a form of cooperation?

Imagine a man has fallen into the sea from a ship. He is helplessly drowning because he cannot swim and was injured in the fall. (Let’s not divert into a debate about total depravity; this analogy is not about that. It’s only about whether something can be cooperative without involving effort.)

A life saver is thrown down from the deck to the drowning man and the captain of the ship yells “Grab the life safer and hold on as we pull you up!” But the man is too weak to do it. So, the captain, a strong swimmer, jumps into the water and swims to the drowning man and says sternly and authoritatively “Don’t resist me or fight me or we’ll both drown! Just relax and let me rescue you. There’s no other way.” The man finally does relax and allow the strong captain to drag him to the side of the boat and into a life boat that has been lowered for them.

When the rescued man and the captain reach the deck of the ship the first mate slaps the captain on the back and says “Good work, sir! I’ve never seen a better cooperative effort in my life!” Then the first mate turns to the rescued man who is still lying on the deck gasping for air and just beginning to come around: “You, too! Good work! What a great cooperative effort you put forth with the captain! You, too, are to be praised!”

What do you think the captain’s response would be? What about those standing around who watched the rescue? What might they say to the first mate? What SHOULD the rescued man say?

Suppose the rescued man says “Thanks. I do take some of the credit for being rescued. After all, I obeyed the captain and didn’t resist his effort to save me.”

Now put yourself in the shoes of the captain (and onlookers). Wouldn’t you say to both the first mate and the rescued man something like “You’re both crazy! You [to the rescued man] did nothing. You deserve none of the credit. You only made the decision to relax and let me do all the work. All the effort was mine; none of it was yours. And you [to the first mate], you’re just as crazy. He doesn’t deserve any credit; I did all the work, all the effort was mine.”

Then the first mate says “But he did cooperate with you, sir.” Doesn’t that mean he deserves some of the credit?

If you were standing among the bystanding onlookers, wouldn’t you say to the first mate (and perhaps to the rescued man) “What are you talking about? Yes, there was cooperation, but the rescued man didn’t actually put forth any effort. He deserves none of the credit; all the credit goes to the heroic captain!”

I think ordinary language tells us that the captain and onlookers are right. We would all side with them and be profoundly perturbed by the attempt to give some credit to the rescued man. Everyone would agree that, although there was cooperation, there was no effort put forth by the drowning man that would in any way deserve some of the credit for the rescue.

Now, if anyone wants to argue otherwise, then I don’t even know what to say except “That’s just nuts.” I am absolutely confident that every right thinking person would agree that this was cooperation without dual effort or dual deserved credit. The rescued man is to be congratulated but not be praised.

Now, please stick to this with me: This is not meant to be an analogy to salvation as if every aspect of the story fits some aspect of salvation. (I have to say this because I know from experience someone would otherwise jump in and quibble about whether the man in the water should be dead and given mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, etc., etc.) The one and ONLY point of the story is this: There are realistic situations where a person cooperates with another person but in which only one of the parties is putting forth effort and deserves credit for the result.

This is the situation with classical Arminianism. Arminianism, contrary to what Mike wrote, does affirm that salvation involves cooperation between God and the human being saved, but it does not hold that salvation involves any “effort” on the part of the person being saved. Merely making a decision to allow oneself to be rescued is not normally considered “effort” and it does not draw praise.

"How To Get A Better Pastor"

2010-12-13T14:53:00.000-08:00

This is an article from a friend who writes a daily devotional. I found it to be quite an accurate account of a pastor's daily life & also I loved his last 4 points.

Blessings,
Al

How to Get a Better Pastor

November 29, 2010
Sometimes I feel a little like the Wizard of Oz, a man who lives behind a curtain of misperceptions. One little girl saw me in the grocery store and said, "Mommy, God left the church." That's not good! Yet, even many adults do not really understand the reality of the daily life of ministers. Many perceive that pastors enjoy a relaxed lifestyle. In fact, a pastor is always a pastor wherever he goes. It's not a job, it's a way of life. He (Could well be a 'she' too, but I'm writing from my point of view.) awakens in the middle of the night with people's hurts on his mind, and lifts them to God in prayer. He must negotiate rapid shifts from emotional highs to lows; visiting a nursery and a funeral home on the same day, congratulating someone's achievement and sharing another grief on the same Sunday morning. Pastors provide the equivalent of spiritual and emotional Emergency Room care for their congregants. He must remain a student of Scripture and his world throughout his lifetime so that when he stands before the congregation to preach he is able to provide spiritual nourishment that connects with the people of God. And, he must deliver a message every Sunday - regardless of his personal state of mind or circumstances. And, he loves every minute of this life to which God has called him!

Yet, he is susceptible to becoming ineffective for many and various reasons.
So, how can you help to make your Pastor's better in his work?

1. Pray for him, everyday. - Spiritual leaders are front-line targets in the battle with evil, as they encourage people to stand with God. If a pastor falls, there is devastating fall-out suffered in many lives. Some even lose faith. Others conclude that Christianity is a fraud. Many lose their trust in pastors because they think all preachers are like the one whose sin was exposed. And even where there is no moral compromise, pastors know the attack of the Enemy through discouragement. So, pray for your Pastor - not for an easy life, but rather that God will keep and protect him, that he will be disciplined and courageous, and that he will finish the race well.

2. Readily accept his ministry with the spiritual gifts God has given to him. - Pastors are not equally adept at all kinds of ministry service. You bless your pastor if you appreciate and encourage him in his unique strengths. Understand that God has equipped him to minister in a way that will not be exactly like the ministry of your favorite preacher or that father-figure pastor who introduced you to Christ. He knows the gaps in his skills and gifts better than you do, but it will be a waste of his strengths if he is constantly pressed to 'fix' his perceived deficits rather than being encouraged in what he does best in God's service.

3. If you must criticize him, and no pastor is above correction or criticism, do it honestly, directly, and person to person. - Every pastor deals with "Mr. They Say" in his church. This mystery man whom few know, but everyone quotes, is ubiquitous! A good pastor will never respond to anonymous criticism because he has no context for it. Still, he wonders, "Does it mean that a majority feels this way, or is this just the opinion of the same two people who are never satisfied with anything I attempt?"

If you have an issue with your pastor, be mature about it. Don't play games, hinting at the difficulty. Know what you really want and be courageous to state it. If you think he's missed the mark, tell him first; not after you have told a dozen of your best friends. If he's wise, he'll listen and evaluate. He may have an explanation for the decision with which you disagree or he may have a higher priority than making you happy due to his principles, convictions, or demands of leadership of Christ's church.

Many people get angry with the pastor and fail to understand that they are actually angry at God! If you're mad at the Lord and admit it, your pastor can help you with your doubt or confusion but it will be doubly difficult for you both, if you're misdirecting your anger at him.

4. Don't idolize or idealize him. - Pastors are disciples of Christ, who are human. They are raising kids who don't always do what they're taught, just like you. Their marriage hit rough spots, just like yours. They have real emotions and fight temptation - just like you. Yes, you should expect him to live what he teaches, but not flawlessly because, like you, he's a sinner who is working out the implications of God's grace each day. If you make him into idol, you sin because only God is worthy of your worship and devotion. If you idealize him, thinking he's more or better than he is really is, you set yourself up for disappointment. You may then mistakenly transfer your disappointment to Christ which would be doubly tragic. When you put a minister on a pedestal, remember that you make his ability to serve you faithfully all the more difficult. He teaches you best, not from some lofty place far removed from your life, but as he is allowed to demonstrate, in ordinary circumstances, a living faith in a loving Lord.

Here's a word from the Word. "Appreciate your pastoral leaders who gave you the Word of God. Take a good look at the way they live, and let their faithfulness instruct you, as well as their truthfulness. There should be a consistency that runs through us all.... Be responsive to your pastoral leaders. Listen to their counsel. They are alert to the condition of your lives and work under the strict supervision of God. Contribute to the joy of their leadership, not its drudgery. Why would you want to make things harder for them?" (Hebrews 13:7, 17 The Message) "Elders who do their work well should be paid well, especially those who work hard at both preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "Do not keep an ox from eating as it treads out the grain." And in another place, "Those who work deserve their pay!" Do not listen to complaints against an elder unless there are two or three witnesses to accuse him." (1 Timothy 5:17-19, NLT)

Until Next Time,
Al

For God so Loved the World…that He Couldn’t Stay away: A Brief Arminian Advent Meditation

2010-12-09T21:05:00.000-08:00

Article by:Roger E. Olsen

For God so loved the world…that He couldn’t stay away. Yes, to academics and scholars it sounds simplistic and even smacks of folk religion. But if you strip from it any connotation of God being “lonely” or absent it’s an apt statement of the gospel itself. And it nicely expresses the essence of Arminian theology: that God’s love for the whole world demonstrated in the incarnation and cross stands at the center of theology as its critical principle.

We are now in the midst of the annual Advent season of the church year. Many of us are too busy rushing around trying to find that “just right” gift for someone to stop and think about the “reason for the season” which is the incarnation which is because of God’s love.

What Advent is all about is God’s love–for the whole world–shown in the event in which the Creator God of the universe humbled himself and became vulnerable and even our servant. Some theologies like to dwell endlessly on God’s power and sovereign control and find God’s glory in those attributes. Arminianism sees God’s glory in his self-sacrificing love that drove him to enter into our human condition and suffer along with us and die for us.

What love is this? Well, if it’s possible to describe it must have some analogy with the very best of what we know as love. And the incarnation and cross demonstrate it best. God’s love is higher and better than ours but not absolutely and completely different. The Apostle Paul connects God’s love and ours in Philippians 2. We are to imitate that love by emptying ourselves for others.

Arminianism is first and foremost (above all other distinctions) a theology of God’s unbounded love for his creatures–especially those made in his image and likeness. It is the overflow of God’s own inner trinitarian love–unconditional and limitless.

John 3 tells us that God’s purpose in the incarnation and cross had nothing to do with condemning anyone. Rather they had to do with saving everyone (insofar as possible). Other theologies quibble about the precise meaning of “world” and some try to limit it to “people of every tribe and nation” in order to escape its universality. Others say God does love everyone but not in the same way. All of this is alien to the text and contrary to the simple and straightforward biblical message that “God is love” (1 John).

Arminian theology begins and ends and remains constantly centered on the good news that God is a God of universal, unconditional, self-sacrificing love shown in the incarnation and cross. Everything else in Scripture must be seen in that light and never elevated above it or pitted against it. To be sure God also has wrath, but that cannot be contrary to his love. It is God’s love spurned and rejected.

My favorite hymn was written in 1917 by a fellow Arminian Fred Lehman who founded the Nazaren Publishing House. It’s called simply “The Love of God”:

The love of God is greater far
Than tongue or pen can ever tell;
It goes beyond the highest star,
And reaches to the lowest hell;
The guilty pair, bowed down with care,
God gave His Son to win;
His erring child He reconciled,
And pardoned from his sin.

Refrain

O love of God, how rich and pure!
How measureless and strong!
It shall forevermore endure
The saints’ and angels’ song.

When years of time shall pass away,
And earthly thrones and kingdoms fall,
When men, who here refuse to pray,
On rocks and hills and mountains call,
God’s love so sure, shall still endure,
All measureless and strong;
Redeeming grace to Adam’s race—
The saints’ and angels’ song.

Refrain

Could we with ink the ocean fill,
And were the skies of parchment made,
Were every stalk on earth a quill,
And every man a scribe by trade,
To write the love of God above,
Would drain the ocean dry.
Nor could the scroll contain the whole,
Though stretched from sky to sky.

"My Mirage"

2010-10-20T13:06:00.000-07:00

Friends,

my all time favorite song is Iron Butterfly's 1968 "My Mirage". When I was only around 9 years old I heard this song & album for the 1st time. And throughout the years this song has stayed with me & as is the case with many songs, our interpretation may not be the writer's one, but this song spoke to me of taking our vision and spreading it around so that it touches the lives of others! So I am naming my blog now "My Mirage", for the musings of my mind can be found within. I don't think I'll ever hear another secular song that has 'spoken" to me quite like this one, yes even with it's keyboard drenched tone and Doug Ingle's quasi-falsetto voice. Here are the words for you to enjoy & spread around :)

In my mind I see a mirage on the wall,
But unfortunately it's not there at all.
So I guess I'll draw my mirage on the wall,
Then it can be here to see and enjoyed by all.

My mirage, I'll be drawing you soon.
Then all of the beautiful people that come to our home,
They'll be seeing you too.
My mirage,
I'll be drawing you soon,
My mirage, I'll be seeing you soon.

In my mind I see a mirage on the wall,
But unfortunately it's not there at all.
So I guess I'll draw my mirage on the wall,
Then it can be here to see and enjoyed by all.

My mirage, I'll be drawing you soon.
Then all of the beautiful people that come to our home,
They'll be seeing you too.
My mirage,
I'll be drawing you soon,
My mirage, They'll be seeing you soon.

Words and Music By Doug Ingle
© 1968 (unp) Cotillion Music, Inc., Ten East Music & Itasca Music
© 1969 Cotillion Music, Inc., Ten East Music & Itasca Music
All Rights Reserved Including Public Performance For Profit

Until Next Time,
Al

Red Sox Breakdown 2010

2010-09-07T09:15:00.000-07:00

“Our best Effort”

My beloved Boston Red Sox last week finally ran out of gas after what has been a disastrous injury plagued season. Almost from the outset though you could see that management had made a decision early on that this would be an “in between” season. The Sox made hardly any huge additions, signing Mike Cameron & Jeremy Hermeda (who is already gone) were minor signings & the only major addition was John Lackey. So it was clear that the owners were not willing to compete with our down the coast rivals the dreaded Yankees.
The fact that baseball needs badly a salary cap is for another post, along with I might add a REAL Commissioner, not a “rooster watching the hen house!”. But these Sox fought through a ton of injuries. Just about everyone has been on the dl this year: Veritek, Ellsbury, (for the year) Cameron, (also forever) Beckett, Wakefield, Buchholtz, Youk (out for the year) & Pedroia (also for the year) & more! It’s been a nitemare, but they stayed in contention way beyond my wildest dreams.
If Pap’s didn’t have 7 blown saves, like giving up 4 runs in the 9th vs. the White Sox, who knows where we would be? The Sox lost a lot of games in the last 2 innings this year & also gave up a lot of runs in the early innings having to play “catch up” way to many times. But I was deeply impressed with 2 players especially, 3b acquisition, Adrian Beltre & if/of utility man, Bill Hall. Hall has hit like 18 homers & has been playing maybe “over his head” as some have said, but this is a good ball player & I would be fine to see the Sox keep him around.
Beltre is a throwback from all I can see. He is a player form another time, he reminds me of the gritty give it all you got always type of player we rarely see anymore. He played through pain, is a great teammate they say & just gives it his all. He reminds me of the old Spoke Owens type, Pedroia is exactly the same way too! On a really sad note, it look like this will be Mike Lowell’s final season. What a class act this guy has been, he came in the Beckett deal & no one expected him to do much, especially coming off a .207 batting avg. w/ the marlins, but he rose to World Series Mvp in 2007 & I for one (and my wife who is crazy about him) will be sad to see him go, but it is time. We do have some good young players though as the Sox have gone to great pains to take care of their farm teams & we’ve seen some great moments from players like Kalish, Bowden, Reddick & others. So now it is time for me to root for my 2nd favorite team, the Minnesota Twins & I’ll also root for the Rays!

Here’s to hoping that one of these teams will topple that “evil empire” in 2010!

stay tuned,
Al

Random Thoughts about John Adams

2010-09-07T08:41:00.000-07:00

John Adams was our nation’s 2nd president & it seems in everything he get’s little to no credit. He was also our nation’s 1st Vice-President & he was, in my opinion the 1st president to steer us out of a war. (with the French) He is also considered to be perhaps the strongest voice in the Continental Congress for Independence & gave an impassioned speech & worked behind the scenes in those last hours before the vote to secure that Independence. In his keeping us out of war in 1799, he did so at his own peril, something we rarely if ever see today from our Politicians. A quick search reveals little in the way’s of memorials to this man who as I stated above was a “pillar” to our Revolution. Yes there is a Library of Congress building named after him, but not much else sadly….. On a website, someone recently wrote this about him:

“There would be no United States of America if not for the efforts and sacrifice of this great patriot! .. John Adams made two CRUCIAL decisions. It was he who nominated Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration of Independence and it was he who nominated George Washington to lead our new continental Army“.

So, it seems to me that we could be recognizing this great contributor to our Nation in more ways then we do now.

Oh well more to come,

stay tuned,
Al

Outstanding article from Theologian Roger E. Olson

2010-08-16T20:33:00.000-07:00

The problem with Calvinism is…
Posted on August 6, 2010 by Roger
People often ask me what is my single most serious problem with Calvinism. Why am I not a Calvinist? First, I like to point out that nobody is obligated to be one. Some evangelicals are under the mistaken impression that Calvinism is the norm for all evangelicalism and that if you’re not a Calvinist you’re somehow defectively evangelical. It is wrongly believed to be the default theology of authentic evangelicalism.

I grew up in the thick of evangelicalism–spiritually nurtured by mentors and peers in Youth for Christ where I rubbed shoulders with evangelicals of many different denominations. We used to debate Calvinism versus Arminianism all the time and we generally agreed to disagree and nevertheless worship and witness together. I don’t remember anyone then telling me I had to be a Calvinist to be a faithful Christian or an evangelical. I grew up in a Pentecostal denomination that was thoroughly Arminian (although no doubt some folks were really semi-Pelagian because they didn’t know any better and took songs like “The Savior is Waiting [to Enter Your Heart]” too literally. My uncle was president of our little denomination for 25 years–including the years I was growing up and becoming a theologian-wannabe. He and I talked endlessly about these issues and he told me that in the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) of which he was a national officer Calvinists and Arminians got along wonderfully and nobody made anyone else feel second class for holding either view. Point of trivia: One of the first presidents of the NAE who held office for many years was Billy Melvin, a minister of the Free Will Baptist denomination.

Then, something new began to come onto my radar screen. I’ll never forget the day in about 1985 when a student came to my office and said “Professor Olson, I’m sorry to tell you, but you’re not a Christian.” When I asked him why he said “Because you’re not a Calvinist.” He claimed that his pastor, a well-known Calvinist speaker and author, taught him that only Calvinists can be authentically Christian.

Later I had opportunity to talk with that pastor and he denied ever teaching that, but he did say to me that “Arminianism is on the precipice of heresy.” Over the intervening years something called the “young, restless, Reformed” movement has grown and many people associated with it do talk and act as if Calvinism and evangelical Christianity, if not simply Christianity itself, are necessarily linked such that non-Calvinists cannot really be authentically evangelical.

I invite representatives of the Reformed University Fellowship (RUF) to speak to my classes every year. One leader of the local chapter told my class “Oh, Arminianism–that’s just Pelagianism.” Of course, I corrected him, but I suspect he and many others like him still think that.

Calvinist and Arminian evangelicals share much common ground as I wrote in my book Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities. But, there are also deep differences. And that brings me back to the question why I am not a Calvinist.

As I implied above, first, I never was one and have never seen compelling reason to become one. It’s the same reason I am not an amillennialist (in spite of the fact that many of my evangelical peers in the theological guild are)–I grew up premillennial and I’ve never seen sufficient biblical evidence or heard or read sufficient arguments to make me change my mind. My premillennialism has evolved; it’s no longer of the dispensational variety. But I cherish the belief in a future, earthly messianic reign of peace, justice and prosperity. The German theologian Juergen Moltmann has become my main guide in this area of eschatology. He is a premillennialist with a difference (from, say, dispensational premillennialism of the Tim LaHaye variety).

Second, I am not a Calvinist because (hold on!) IF I WERE A CALVINIST I would have trouble distinguishing between God and the devil. Some Calvinists have misinterpreted this saying. They think I’m accusing them of worshiping the devil. Nothing could be farther from the truth. All I am saying is, if I were a Calvinist, being of the bent of mind that I am (striving for logical consistency as much as possible), I would have trouble clearly distinguishing between God and the devil in my own mind.

To my Calvinist acquaintances who take umbrage at this, all I can say is–please just consider it my own intellectual failure if you wish. I am not aiming this saying at you. I am admitting my own failure (from your point of view, I’m sure). But it does hold me back from joining the ranks of the “young, restless, Reformed” (not all of who are young, by the way).

The point is–God’s character. IF God elects people to salvation unconditionally and IF God IS love (1 John) why doesn’t he save everybody? IF I could be a universalist, I could be a Calvinist. I don’t care about free will for its own sake or for any humanist reasons. Hell is the sticky issue. The Calvinist God could save everyone because his election to salvation is unconditional and his grace is irresistible. Apparently, he purposefully chooses to “pass over” some (which is in effect the same as foreordaining them to hell). Why? For his glory? Some Calvinists say hell is necessary for the full manifestation of God’s attribute of justice. I ask what that says about the cross-was it not a sufficient manifestation of God’s justice?

The devil wants everyone to go to hell. The God of Calvinism wants many to go to hell. Is that enough of a difference of character? Not to me. The God of Jesus Christ is absolutely, unconditionally good. The God of Calvinism, from my perspective, is not absolutely, uncondtionally good and, in fact, has a dark side that includes willing that people perish eternally (contrary to 2 Peter 3:9 and 1 Timothy 2:4).

Next year Zondervan will publish my book-length explanation of what I see wrong with Calvinism. This is just a hint at that. But let me say here and now that, in spite of my serious qualms about Calvinism, I do consider Calvinists my fellow evangelicals. I would never say or suggest that someone is defectively evangelical because he or she is a Calvinist. What I think is that Calvinists are confused insofar as they believe God is love (as Scripture clearly says) and yet hold onto their belief in unconditional election, limited atonement and irresistible grace.

What really bothers me at a personal as well as professional level is the present, on-going attitude of superiority and even exclusiveness being fostered among many of the young, restless, Reformed Christians. It reminds me of the attitude displayed by many of the followers of Bill Gothard in the 1970s–they believed they had found the magical key that unlocked the secrets of true spirituality to the exclusion of those poor, ignorant folks who had not yet attended a Basic Youth Conflicts seminar.

I do NOT claim that Arminianism is the be-all and end-all of biblical, evangelical faith. It is one way of interpreting Scripture and, for now at least, I believe it is the most accurate way among all the known options. (One reason I believe that is that it is the closest Protestant theology to the soteriology–doctrine of salvation–among the Christians of the first four to five centuries. I don’t find anything like Calvinism appearing until Augustine in the early 5th century.) But I suspect “When we all get to heaven” (the title of a good old gospel song) we will all find out that our “little systems” fell short of the fullness of truth. As Alfred, Lord Tennyson wrote: “Our little systems have their day; they have their day and cease to be. They are but broken lights of Thee, and Thou, o God, art more than they.” We would all do well to take that to heart.

Associating God with Evil (Part 3)

2010-08-03T15:39:00.000-07:00

Hello Friends,

In this portion I would like to look at how God "turns the tide" if you will on evil & ends up using it for His glory as He does all things eventually. I am reminded right away of Joseph who was sold into slavery in Egypt by his brothers. It was truly a wicked and evil thing that they did to him, but when a famine had hit & his brothers showed up looking for goods & Joseph saw them, after awhile he made a remarkable statement to them about who our God is! In Gen.50:20 Joseph said to his brothers about what they had done: "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive. Wow! He really is the God who turns the tide friends! I also think of the women Dorcas in Joppa in the book of Acts who died & then God used Peter to raise her back to life (I firmly believe we are capable of doing these same things today & I point the finger at me why they don't happen as they did then!) and the Scripture states when she arose again, many believed so God used her death & resurrection to bring many to Him, so God used the circumstance of death! May we have the faith of Peter for this day to, as the Scriptures clearly state "perform signs & wonders for they will follow them (us!) that believe, amen! And of course the ultimate use of evil by satan for God's glory was the Cross! Satan surely thought he had defeated Christ on that sad afternoon when Jesus was put to death, but 3 days later God took the pain & torture that Christ endured & totally tuned the tide on all the host of hell when Christ arose! So friends the Bible shows us that God can indeed use the evil in our lives and the sad & bad circumstances that happen to accomplish some good thing in us which is why James is able to say in Chapter 1 & verse 2 right out of the box "count it all joy my brothers when you fall into various trials". James knew that God can work in us that which he desires even through such things! And James goes further to say this in verses 13-15 of Chapter 1: Jas 1:13 "Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. 15 Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death". This makes it pretty clear that it is WE and not God who fall into sin & who create problems in our lives. Let it be known loud and clear that God is a good God! That he always wants the best for us & always has our best at heart & should he allow evil to befall us, He will in some way ultimately "turn that tide" friends if we allow Him too.

Associating God with Evil (Part 2)

2010-08-03T12:13:00.001-07:00

Hi Friends,

Okay, in picking up where I left off, I would like to share with you why I believe that there is a "flow" throughout the Scriptures that tell us that God should not be associated with evil, or be blamed as the cause, etc." One passage that leaps out in this regard is John 10:10a where Jesus states this concerning satan...."for the thief comes only to steal, kill & destroy". This clearly tells us friends that it is the enemy (satan) & not God who comes to steal from us, who comes to destroy us & who intimately seeks to kill us! Yet, so many times we hear people say that God is the cause of their problems....perhaps the reason behind that is this...."well if God is really that powerful & loving, then why doesn't He put an end to my problems".
Well I believe that is a fair question from a person who knows little or nothing about the Bible, don't you? It makes a lot of sense that if God is who He said He is, that He can take care of anything that befalls us. So this leads me to another point in this discussion....."why then does God allow evil?" Now there is a question for the ages! After all, at the end of all this, this is really the "heavy" question isn't it? Because most people I think realize & understand that God is good & that He always wants the best for us, but the best doesn't always happen, so clearly God is allowing some bad things to happen & so there lies that deep question of simply "why". I promise we will come back to that friends, but let's continue to look at why I believe God should not be associated as the cause or source of evil.
If we now go back to John 10 & read Jesus words right after 10:10a, He states "but I have come that you might have life & have it to the full". We also read this in 1 John 1:5: "that God is light & in Him there is NO darkness!" Now that is a pretty clear statement from John friends. In God there is NO darkness, is it a stretch to also say that in Him he can not produce darkness & thus would not have produced the fall of Man in Genesis? I think not! We are further told this by James in chapter 1:16-17: "that every good & perfect gift comes down from the Father of LIGHTS in whom there is no shadow of turning! V.16 tells us not to be deceived, so we must ask, not to be deceived of what? The very next verse tells us, that all that is good is from God, not evil! James is making the point clear that God is a God of light, not of darkness! This goes hand in hand with what we have also read from John friends. Today, we often hear these 2 mutually exclusive words together "God - dam". How did that happen? How did God get blamed for all this, how does He still get blamed for the bad things in life that happen? Now we will visit soon that God can & does use evil for good, this is clear & true, but because He uses something, does not make Him the author of it friends! Here is a statement made by a popular Reformed writer: "If God's chief end is to bring glory to His name and God does whatsoever He desires to do, then the existence of evil must be allowed and decreed by God ultimately bringing glory to his name" This continued phrase by Reformers "God does nothing, but for His glory, or similar statements like "God is all about His glory" must leave some who are examining the claims of Christianity to ponder if God is egotistical no? Scriptures like John 3:16-17 & Phil. 2:5-8 teach us that God is all about us & that we are to bring glory to His name, not the other way around friends! yes, I do believe that God does indeed seek His glory in all circumstances, but not the way some of these Reformers make it sound. For instance a passage like Isa. 43:7 which states: "Everyone who is called by My name, And whom I have created for My glory, Whom I have formed, even whom I have made." is taken to mean that God is only about His glory and yes He created us to have fellowship with Him and for us to glorify His Holy name, but I think this idea of God ONLY being about His glory is a bit out of context.....Now it is also a Biblical truth that God doesn't "share space", just as Jesus doesn't (Isa. 42:8, 48:11, Jn. 14:6) but I think this phrase can be dangerous........and other similar statements like "God is most glorified when".....the fact of the matter is this: The Bible does not clearly state exactly when God is most glorified! That is an assumption, but it is being stated as a fact & that my friends is also dangerous! Just my thoughts here. Okay, we can pick up talking about how God has used evil for good & does, while keeping in mind that satan is the author of death & evil. Satan, not God tempted Eve in the garden & caused mankind to fall! Jesus stated this in His heated discourse with the Pharisee's in John 8:44a "but you are of your father the devil, for he was a murderer from the beginning" showing us that satan is indeed death's author by bringing sin into the world & we know that sin leads to death. (Rom. 6:23)
Until Next Time,
Al

Associating God with Evil (part 1)

2010-08-03T11:50:00.001-07:00

Hi Friends,

It has been awhile since I have written anything so I am glad to be back sharing here. My topic for the next few posts will be how for Centuries we have associated evil somehow with or to God. I am not sure how this all came about to be quite honest, but I think there is more than enough proof in God's Word to show us that God is not the author or purveyor of evil. Now that is not to say that God cannot or has not used evil to bring about some good in our lives, I think we'd all agree that He has & that He does! But the question I ask is this: "is God the cause of the evil, is He the source?" Some people I respectfully disagree with teach that God in some way "pre-ordained or set up" the Fall of Man in Genesis, but then in the same breath will state that God is also not the "author of sin", I say "how can both of those things be true?" You simply can't have it both ways! We know from the Genesis account that sin entered the world through the disobedience of BOTH Adam & Eve, so now we must ask, "what part if any, did God play in that?". When God created man, did He make us free moral agents, or are we able to exhibit choice, or maybe yet are we a sort of quasi-free moral agent having choice at certain times, etc? At least for me, this has never been a hard question based on the passages of Scripture we'll be looking at in my next post, but I would be interested in any thoughts anyone reading this may have? Last, I would also mention the tree in the midst of the garden of Eden, what did that tree represent? Could it of represented choice, was God giving mankind a freedom to choose by placing that tree there? Please give that some thought friends.

Until Next Time,
Al

1st Year in Virginia

2009-10-30T08:09:00.001-07:00

Hi Friends,

Well we are just about at the one year mark since our arrival here in Forest, Va. just outside of Lynchburg. It's been an interesting year for sure! Many lessons learned in a short period of time I think? We have meet some really wonderful folks, people we will have a lifetime relationship with regardless of our future destinations... I think that for me, meeting different & unique people is maybe my favorite thing in life, not sure? I also realize I had a real naivety about people sadly. In short, they really are at heart pretty much the same wherever you go, are they not? After all my years in Sales Mgmt. and Ministry, you'd think I'd know that, but I guess I didn't....good lesson learned even at 50! The area is just beautiful, hard to describe, you kind of have to see it, those Peaks of Otter, especially when it snows & the tops are covered, the rolling hills, he peaceful pastures & so on, just a real beautiful place from a land perspective, as made by a New Englander! (lol) And what a historical place, if you love history, Virginia is certainly one of the places to go! Poplar Forest just down the road, Appomattox's Court House a short distance away & just so much history. In my next post I'll talk about the Spiritual sense I have gotten from this area. Lord knows it's is for sure a "Religious" area, but do people know truth? That cuts at the heart of it all, they have heard a lot, seen a lot, but do they really KNOW the truth? I'll save that for later friend!

Until Next Time,
Blessings, Al

Calvin / Arminian Viewpoints (Part IV - Final)

2009-01-12T19:11:00.000-08:00

Okay friends,
this is my last post in this series and so we’ll discuss both the “I & P” in this discourse on this interesting, to say the least topic. Below is a reminder of what the “High or 5 point” Calvinism acronym “TULIP” stands for:

T……….the total depravity of Man

U……….unconditional election

L………..limited atonement

I…………irresistible grace

P………..perseverance of the saints

The “I” stands for irresistible grace. Some of you if you have been a Christian for awhile have probably heard the term “hound of heaven”. If you have, this means that when God wants ya, no matter you do, He is going to get you, you have no choice! Well this type of grace is sort of like that! Now it’s easy to get into semantics here by saying that if a person “fall’s away” who was once a believer, the high Calvinist would say “well he was never saved to being with, etc” and so I want to stay away from that line of argumentation because at the core of this “I” is can a human being resist the grace of God in ANY form? Because if a human cannot, it would seem to me that there cannot be such a thing as a free or freed will! And then of course as we continue to see the “linkage” between these letters, we can see the connection in that it is ONLY those whom God has called (the elect) that cannot resist His grace, so His grace is also not (according to the high Calvinist) for everyone, but only for the “elect". This is something the Arminian does not and cannot accept! Rather the Arminian states that God has laid out a “prevenient or preceding” grace to “whosoever will”, and thus working in harmony with this preceding grace, man then accepts the call from God, thus he has a will of his own and is not a “robot or helpless slave”. For it is God who puts out this grace and the call, but it is man who accepts or receives this call. John 1:12-13 beautifully says it this way: But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. Notice the word received and the that it was the will of God whom the Scripture tells us in 1 Tim. 2:4 “desires that all men be saved” We simply need to only look around us to see the evidence that there are multiple millions of people who are resisting God’s grace (in whatever form you want to call it!) all around us, thus the evidence is clear! However the high Calvinist would state that the reason this is so is because all these people are not of the “elect”!

I submit such a statement makes this doctrine even worse in that the only answer can be that God predestined all these people for Hell, I know that sounds harsh but there is NO other truthful answer friends! This is also something the Arminian cannot and does not accept. John 3:16 and especially 17 make it perfectly clear what “God’s plan for man” was and continues to be:

"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. 17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. Amen and Amen, so be it!! Our God has laid out His plan and has done all that needed to be done in order for man to have salvation, all is in order except the forcing of man’s freed will. Now another topic that is weaved in here is the Sovereignty of God and what part that plays. In the future, I will address this in a separate post. Yes friends, there is an elect of God and I pray you are counted among them and in order to be among this elect, the answer is to open your heart to the Lord Jesus Christ today and let Him in! John chapter 3 also tells us what this can happen as well as Romans 10:9-10.

And now let us discuss the “P”, the perseverance of the Saints. This perseverance is also called “preservation” and I have already in a sense discussed in this my previous post entitled “Eternal Security” part 1. Here is a brief but succinct definition of what High Calvinism teaches here:

Perseverance (or preservation) of the saints is also known as "eternal security." The word saints is used in the Biblical sense to refer to all who are set apart by God, not in the technical sense of one who is exceptionally holy, canonized, or in heaven. The doctrine asserts that, since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end. Those who apparently fall away either never had true faith to begin with or will return. This doctrine is slightly different from the Free Grace or "once saved, always saved" view advocated by some evangelicals in which, despite apostasy or unrepentant and habitual sin, the individual is truly saved if he or she had truly accepted Christ at any point in the past; in traditional Calvinist teaching, apostasy by such a person may be proof that they never were saved.

One clear contradiction found in the above statement that a person who has fallen away, might return is when that is compared to Hebrews 6:4-6 which says:

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. God states here that for such a person it simply is NOT possible for them to return, thus the only way the Calvinist can make sense out of this is to say that they were never saved to begin with or that they somehow can return. There is certainly a lot of Scripture to show us that the Christian life is indeed one of perseverance, but to say that God, because a person is somehow “elected” directly by him, can automatically make it through to the end in this life with all it’s troubles and hardships, is just not in keeping with so many passages that I have quoted throughout this study concerning the fact that we need to treat each day like it may be our last and that as 1 Corth. 15:58 states so emphatically: Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord. So while I agree we need to persevere, I do not believe that we have a “free” pass going through this life based on some special or invisible call made by God as I believe the high Calvinist would have us think. I, especially in this particular issue can quote Calvin himself who stated the following:

"the hearts of the godly are so effectually governed by the Spirit of God, that through an inflexible disposition they follow his guidance." (John Calvin)

"the power of the Spirit is so effectual, that it necessarily retains us in continual obedience to righteousness." (John Calvin)

The idea of God assuring one’s salvation just does not hold up in the whole of Scripture. We are not pawns placed in the hand of God, if that was what God wanted, I submit the “Tree” would never of been placed in the Garden of Eden, for in that tree was founded the very roots of a freed will and of choice!

Until Next Time,
Al

"Pastoral Blogging"

2008-12-04T12:15:00.000-08:00

Can “Pastoral Blogging” be a good thing? I’d like to talk about it here for a bit. In this day of “politically correct speech” slowly taking over this Country, and please don't be fooled as we are slowly drowning in this sea of what is okay to say, seems to me that many Pastors have need for an “outlet” or place to share some of the things they may feel they for whatever reason, they cannot say on a Sunday morning in any of their sermons, or maybe have no place in their sermons or Pulpits & that is valid! For instance right now there is a lot of talk about Pastors getting overly political behind their pulpits. Maybe you have heard, but if you haven’t over 30 Pastors of large Churches the Sunday before this past election choose to defy the IRS 501c-3 law that states non profits must not & can not take political sides in any election. These Pastors I guess feel that the pulpit is indeed the place to speak out on politics. This Pastor couldn't’t disagree more! I am no fan of the IRS, God knows that for sure & I see this rule being broken time & time again, especially by those on the left, but becoming as they are is not the answer, other than my humble feeling that the pulpit is not the place to endorse Candidates. I think the evidence is quite clear after this election just how fractured Evangelicals are by all the various person’s they supported. Certainly we can & should use our influences to try to get people to vote their faith & conscience, but to blacken the pulpit with political rancor just de-values God’s Word & our places of Worship.

So having said that, Pastors NOW more than ever need an outlet, a place to vent gracefully of course things that have been “simmering” in their souls for many years! And the beauty is that you can write about almost anything! On my blog here, I have written about topics ranging from the Tampa Bay Rays baseball run to the World Series to the Hungarian Revolution of 1956! Just about everything is “open game”.

So from first hand experience, I can honestly say that blogging for Pastors I believe is really very healthy, both mentally & spiritually. I hope you will consider starting your own blog today! I started here on Goggle & like this site & I am sure that there are many more out there, so Happy Writing Friends!

Stay Tuned,
Al

Post Election Thoughts

2008-11-06T16:02:00.000-08:00

Well, the Election is finally over & I’d like to share with you some of my thoughts. Before I do, I’d like to share with you what a friend wrote on their Daily Devotional site in regards to the Election & it’s outcome.

This is from Jerry Scott, Pastor of Washington Assembly of God in New Jersey & he writes:

President-elect Obama! A year ago, who would have thought it probable, much less possible? Our President-elect is no friend of evangelicals. Unless he governs differently than he campaigned, he is not going to be supportive of Biblical values that are so important to us. Now that the election is over, I will admit to a deep sense of concern over the direction our nation will likely take during his administration. He will be governing alongside of leaders in Congress that are equally hostile to evangelical Christian ideals, so there will be little reason to be a moderate. Most troubling for me personally is the kind of judges our new President is likely to appoint to the Federal bench. Despite all of that, I see his election as a real opportunity for evangelicals to get back to our calling to be the Church. I hope that we will embrace God's call to pray for our leaders, to work for a just society, and to proclaim the transforming Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work. We can now stop looking to the Oval Office and our legislators for initiatives to save our nation from her sins! It time to feed the hungry, to care for the dying, to visit the imprisoned, to become the defenders of the oppressed, to offer love to the outcasts and hope those who are enslaved by their sins. These words from Romans challenge us to remember that God gives us leaders and demands that we pray for them and live as good citizens. It becomes even more compelling for us when we remember that the authorities at the time these words were written were pagans, not just apathetic toward Christianity but in many cases actively persecuting the Church.

Read these words, then take time to pray for those elected to serve us. "Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. The authorities are God's servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God's servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience. Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons. For government workers need to be paid. They are serving God in what they do." (Romans 13:1-6, NLT)

I copied this because I felt like he really hit on a few good points, one of them is that so many in our Country today seem to look to the Government for or as their “source”. This is a disturbing trend, you would of thought these Candidates were running for “Pastor general” or something! It was promises, badly failed promises from the past that have caused so many people to look to the Government as their source, we gave these initiatives nice feel good warm & fuzzy names like, “the new deal or the great society”. But I believe time has shown that these programs have practically “enslaved” people to relying upon Federal help as the answer, rather than working in tandem with the private sector where opportunity, when pursued, pays huge dividends in the long run.

Like so many of you, I was very disappointed with the outcome of the Election. It is hard to describe though what I am so sure many people felt as I, that while then outcome was not what we had prayed & hoped for, in our hearts we truly wanted to be glad for how far we have come as a Nation. A black man, a woman, or like back in 2000 when we had a Jewish man run for V.P. it truly a testimony to our openness & the opportunity in our society! The problem with Mr. Obama has ALWAYS been his ultra liberal voting record in his short Senate tenure to date, never the color of his skin! But now to the other point Jerry made & is made clearly in Scripture, we need to be about the business of praying for this President-elect. The campaign is over & now our prayer is that he will govern as we are hearing from at worst, the center & that alone will take movement on his part & show his sincerity to lead ALL Americans.

And pray we will! If he does well for the Country, so be it! If we are really besides ourselves & upset, we must also remember that he was elected by a clear majority of the people in our Republic, so if he does not do well or goes back to his ultra left wing stances, perhaps he is only a reflection of us as a whole? I have often thought that whoever we elect is only a mirror of us anyhow, so when we point at him, we point at ourselves.

So today, I fully understand the joy in the black communities & in all minority communities who finally feel like their voice was heard. We have witnessed a true & genuine piece of American history that will & should live on in our history books for generations to come, should the Lord tarry. Blacks especially has suffered for so many years in this Country, something us whites MUST never ever forget. Bigotry & hatred were the “norm” in so many states for so long. I pray that the Black community as a whole today feels a lot better about their place in American history & that the “Dream” that Martin Luther King so eloquently spoke of some 40 years ago is being fulfilled before our eyes! I also deeply appreciated John McCain’s concession speech, one could easily tell that he was speaking from his heart; he knew all along he was running against history, if you will. I have no doubt Mr. Obama was touched by those words & hearing today that President Bush said he will do “all he can” for a smooth transition, confirms even more so that something has taken place bigger than all of us. May we at least give him a chance first!

Again, I am very concerned about this President elects contempt on deep moral issue’s, who he would place on the Nations highest court bench, etc., but I will be praying for a true & real change of heart, may I ask you all to join me?

Stay Tuned,
Al

Baseball, Oh I Remember……..

2008-10-15T12:44:00.000-07:00

Recently I got the chance to watch a few episodes of Ken Burn’s award winning series about America’s pastime, Baseball entitled “When It Was A Game”. Probably like millions of guys my age, baby boomers, it was hard to sit through these episodes without my eyes tearing up here & there. It also made me realize that Baseball, like so many things today has really lost it’s “innocence”. Now if you know a little about the game, then you know that the it was Cardinals player Curt Flood who in 1970 challenged Baseball’s “reserve clause” that lead to the start of free agency & that allowed players to now move much freer from team to team. And although I get that & do understand that the owners were a huge part of the problem by making millions off these guys & paying them pathetically low wages for the ballpark draw they were back from the roaring 20’s through the early 70’s, I wonder if there couldn’t have been a “middle ground” found somewhere? As far as I can remember, it seems to me the last guy I can think of who played for 1 team his whole career was Robin Yount & he retired back in 1993 & was with the Brewers for 20 seasons I believe! Today, it is practically impossible for a player to stay with 1 team his whole career! But this wasn’t the case back “then”. My all time favorite player, good old number 8, Carl “Captain Carl” Yastrzemski, affectionately known as “Yaz”, played his whole career for my beloved Boston Red Sox from 1961-83, 22 seasons. But today everything has changed sadly. A man I really admire & simply cannot understand why he is not Baseball’s Commissioner is sports reporter, Bob Kostas. He recently did a program with “Hammering” Hank Aaron, in my eyes still the home run king! and Willie “the say hey” kid Mays. It didn’t take long to realize that guys of this magnitude are simply few & far between these days! They spoke also about Mickey Mantle & what a great player he was as well & I fully agree, this coming from a Red Sox fan no less! If “the Mick” would of taken care of himself, it wouldn’t surprise me if he would of hit over 800 home runs, like May’s, he was what they call a “5 tool” player, the whole package! It was nice to see him make peace with all those who loved him before he died & mainly, with himself….

As I write this, my Sox are down to the Tampa Bay Rays (see what happens when you drop “Devils”!!) & being the true baseball purist I am, it is hard for me to root against this group of young guys who have gone from “worst to first”. (Remember the 67 Sox, the Impossible dream") Manager Joe Madden should be crowned “Coach of the decade” for supplanting both the mighty Sox & Yanks! And all with a payroll of 44 million, compared to over 200 million for the Yanks & 170+ million for the Sox. If they beat us, I won’t be all that upset & will certainly root for the Rays as an American League fan, except of course when the Yanks win, sorry New Yorker’s!

But I guess I just miss the innocence of the game & the strategy. I lost count of how many times the Sox all season this past year had runners on 1st & 2nd with NO one out & DID NOT bunt???? Is it me, or don’t the percentages speak for themselves? Runners at 2nd & 3rd w/ 1 out, no automatic double play, 2 chances 95% of the time to score, what is wrong? Could it be that many of today’s players can’t even bunt? I am not a National League fan, but it would seem to be, they still play “small ball” that they manufacture runs! Only Mike Scoscia, manager of the Angel’s, (btw Los Angeles Angel’s of Anaheim, am I missing something?) still believes in small ball. Perhaps because he was a National League catcher for so many years? Last, here’s some teams, names & just some memories from the past:

Seattle Pilots, played 1 year only, 1969 at Sick Stadium & in 1970 became the Milwaukee Brewers. Washington Senators have a long storied past, they would say: 1st in war, last in the American League! I think everyone wanted them to come back as the Senators, or at least the Grays as a tip of the cap to the Negro Leagues, but the old Senators became the Minnesota Twins in 1961. I am the only one who missed those old Seattle Mariner uniforms with the trident from 1977? Or what about those awful San Diego Padre uniforms from the early 80’s? Does anyone still remember Lenny Randall blowing the bunt foul down the 3rd base line for the old Mariners? Does anyone miss the old Municipal Stadium off the banks of Lake Erie in Cleveland? What a miserable place! The team back then didn’t help either, but some great players came through there. The “Eck” Dennis Eckersley, Andre Thornton, The “Hawk” Ken Harrelson & his Nehru jackets!
Anyone miss the “Bird” Mark Fydrich? This guy would talk to the ball, you had to love it! Detroit has seen it’s share of greats also, “Stormin” Norman Cash, Al Kaline, Micky Lolich, Lance Parrish. Old Tiger Stadium was unique as well, Billy Crystal filmed his movie about Mantle there “61” just before they tore it down.

One of my favorite things to do is visit old ballparks…. I just sit there & think of all the players who every played on those fields & the dreams they had of “making it” to the “Big’s”. In Waterbury, my home town, one year back in the mid 70’s Richie Zisk, former big leaguer hit 50 homers, Bobby Bonds once played for the Waterbury Giants at Waterbury’s storied “big ball park” as Bob Palmer would call it back in the 60’s. I listened intently as a friend told me how a ball was hit to deep right field in the corner & a guy tried to score from 1st base & Bobby Bonds took the ball & threw this guy out at the plate with a bullet & strike in the air no less!
As a side note, Bobby ended up coming back to Wtby. year after year as he truly loved the City. He was from all accounts, a class guy. Jimmy Piersall was also from Wtby. As a kid, I played in the Piersall League & Joe Conner & Grasshoppers!

There’s something about the serenity & beauty of a ballpark. I will always be thankful that my Dad took the time to bring me to a few games here & there, even though he wasn’t a sports fan very much. I cherish those times & will never forget them, I hope to have done the same for my children as well & have given them a love for America’s “Pastime”. I pray that the integrity of the game will remain, but I am not hopeful sadly….certainly not when you have a former owner in Bud Selig overseeing baseball's day to day operations. Sort of like the Roster watching the hen house! I vote for Bob Kostas as Basball Commish! he'd restore some integrity to the game & btw, don't let me forget these other names from the past worthy of our respect:

Frank Robinson, Brooks Robinson, Pee Wee Reese, Sandy Koufax, Joe DiMaggio, "Big" Frank Howard, Boog Powell, Harmon Killebrew, The 69 Mets! Willy Stargell, Roberto Clemente, Juan Marichal, Louie Tiant, Goose Gossage, Reggie Jackson (ouch!) Whitey Ford, Don Drysdale, tony Conigliaro, Marty Patten, Bob Gibson (maybe the best ever!) Roger Maris, Stan Musual, Willie McCovey, Pete Rose, Jonny Bench, Joe Morgan & I could go on forever!

Stay Tuned,
Al

The Deadly Price of Liberal Theology (Part 1)

2008-09-23T20:00:00.000-07:00

If any of you have been looking at some of the recent research data & answers to important Biblical questions put out by Barna, Gallop & others, then you know that there is an alarming move toward Liberal Theological views among many of our young people as well as many so called “ordained Ministers”. Questions relating to such key & basic topics ranging from the virgin birth to the deity of Christ & the authenticity of Scripture have been shocking to say the least. In the past, going back some 50 years ago, belief in the Scriptures as “God breathed & inspired” were around 50%, whereas today that same question draws a positive response in only 1 out of every 4 Americans or 25%, half as many as 50 years ago! Statistics among Clergy are just as frightening in their responses to similar questions. Never before has Hosea 4:6 meant more where God states “my people are destroyed for lack of knowledge”. It never ceases to amaze me how people will constantly refer to themselves as “Christians” & then spout out their own views on these topics which are in direct conflict with “thus says the Lord”.

The following is an article that you may find as a real “eye opener”

Only Half Of Protestant Pastors Have A Biblical Worldview January 12, 2004

(Ventura, CA)-In his recently released book and a subsequent research report on worldviews, author and researcher George Barna made waves by citing statistics showing just 9% of all born again adults and just 7% of Protestants possess a biblical worldview. That information pricked people’s curiosity regarding the worldviews of the nation’s religious leaders, prompting Barna Research to conduct a national survey on that topic among Protestant pastors. The numbers are now in – and the outcome may again shock many people. Interviews with 601 Senior Pastors nationwide, representing a random cross-section of Protestant churches, Barna reports that only half of the country’s Protestant pastors – 51% - have a biblical worldview. Defining such a worldview as believing that absolute moral truth exists, that it is based upon the Bible, and having a biblical view on six core beliefs 1)the accuracy of biblical teaching, 2) the sinless nature of Jesus, 3) the literal existence of Satan, 4) The omnipotence and omniscience of God, 5) salvation by grace alone, and 6) the personal responsibility to evangelize), the researcher produced data showing that there are significant variations by denominational affiliation and other demographics. “The most important point,” Barna argued, “is that you can’t give people what you don’t have. The low percentage of Christians who have a biblical worldview is a direct reflection of the fact that half of our primary religious teachers and leaders do not have one. In some denominations, the vast majority of clergy do not have a biblical worldview, and it shows up clearly in the data related to the theological views and moral choices of people who attend those churches.”

Denominational Distinctions

The survey of pastors included ministers from more than four-dozen denominations, each of which was represented in proportion to the number of churches it has in the U.S. That enabled the researchers to analyze the responses of seven denominational segments more closely. There is considerable variation in the worldviews held. An example of the gap among churches is reflected in the outcomes related to the nation’s two largest denominations, the Southern Baptist Convention and the United Methodist Church. (Of the nation’s 320,000 Protestant churches, more than 42,000 of them are Southern Baptist and more than 35,000 are United Methodist; these two denominations alone account for roughly one-quarter of all Protestant churches in the U.S.) The Southern Baptists had the highest percentage of pastors with a biblical worldview (71%) while the Methodists were lowest among the seven segments evaluated (27%).
Among the other segments examined, 57% of the pastors of Baptist churches (other than Southern Baptist) had a biblical worldview, as did 51% of non-denominational Protestant pastors, 44% of pastors of charismatic or Pentecostal churches, 35% of pastors of black churches, and 28% of those leading mainline congregations.

Demographic Differences

The survey brought to light some unexpected differences based on pastoral background. The most intriguing of those relates to theological training. Educationally, the pastors least likely to have a biblical worldview are those who are seminary graduates (45%). In contrast, three out of five pastors who have not attended seminary operate with a biblical worldview (59%). The largest gap related to gender. Whereas 53% of male pastors have a biblical worldview, the same can be said for just 15% of female pastors. Overall, just 6% of all Protestant Senior Pastors are women. Another huge gap was based on race. White Senior Pastors were nearly twice as likely as black Senior Pastors to have a biblical worldview: 55% versus 30%, respectively. Age and experience entered the picture. The youngest pastors in the nation (those under age 40) are more likely to have a biblical worldview than are their older peers (56% versus 50%). Similarly, Pastors who have five years or less experience in leading churches have a higher rate of biblical worldview possession (58%) than do other pastors. Even geography is related to worldview. Fewer than half of all Senior Pastors in the Northeast (43%) and Midwest (49%) have a biblical worldview, compared to majorities in the South (57%) and West (58%). In fact, of the nine geographic divisions defined by the Census Bureau, the one with the highest proportion of pastors giving evidence of a biblical worldview was the Pacific division – California, Oregon and Washington. Although the people in those states are among the most liberal in the nation, nearly two-thirds of Protestant pastors there (64%) have such a moral and spiritual compass in place.

A Worldview Is Taught As Well As Caught

Referring to the multi-year research project that formed the foundation of his recent book on the subject of worldview development (Think Like Jesus), Barna suggested that people do not get a biblical worldview simply by regularly attending church. “A biblical worldview must be both taught and caught – that is, it has to be explained and modeled. Clearly, there are huge segments of the Christian body that are missing the benefit of such a comprehensive and consistent expression of biblical truth. “The research also points out that even in churches where the pastor has a biblical worldview,” he continued, “most of the congregants do not. More than six out of every seven congregants in the typical church do not share the biblical worldview of their pastor even when he or she has one. This intimates that merely preaching good sermons and offering helpful programs does not enable most believers to develop a practical and scriptural theological base to shape their life. Our research among people who have a biblical worldview shows that it is a long-term process that requires a lot of purposeful activity: teaching, prayer, conversation, accountability, and so forth. Based on our correlations of worldview and moral behavior, we can confidently argue that if the 51% of pastors who have a biblical worldview were to strategically and relentlessly assist their congregants in adopting such a way of interpreting and responding to life, the impact on our churches, families and society at-large would be enormous.”

Research Source and Methodology

The data described above are from telephone interviews with a nationwide random sample of 601 Senior Pastors of Protestant churches conducted in November and December 2003. The maximum margin of sampling error associated with that sample is ±4.1 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. In addition, telephone surveys were conducted with a national random sample of 2033 adults during September through November 2003. The maximum margin of sampling error associated with that sample is ±2.2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All of the interviews were conducted from the Barna Research Group telephone interviewing facility in Ventura, CA. Adults in the 48 continental states were eligible to be interviewed and the distribution of respondents coincided with the geographic dispersion of the U.S. adult population. Multiple callbacks were used to increase the probability of including a reliable distribution of adults. “Mainline” churches are those associated with the American Baptist Churches/U.S.A.; United Church of Christ; Episcopal Church; United Methodist Church; Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; and Presbyterian Church U.S.A. The Barna Research Group, Ltd. is an independent marketing research company located in southern California. Since 1984, it has been studying cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. If you would like to receive regular e-mailings of a brief overview of each new bi-weekly update on the latest research findings from the Barna Research Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna Research web site (www.barna.org).

In my next article on this subject, I will take a close look with my experience at the following key bit of information:

Fewer than half of all Senior Pastors in the Northeast (43%) and Midwest (49%) have a biblical worldview, compared to majorities in the South (57%) and West (58%).

Until next time,
Stay tuned

Blessings,
Al

Lakeland Evangelist To Step Down

2008-08-19T15:46:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends,

Awhile back, I wrote about these meetings in Lakeland Florida. As you can read from that past blog, I centered my concern around the serious lack of accountability, despite all the sincerity of seeing the Lord move & our true & deep desires for such. Hence, the following article was just released & as should always be the case, may we be saddened when these things happen. Last, perhaps "GODTV" should also be held accountable as well....

Stay Tuned,
Al

Evangelist Bentley stepping down

Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 8/19/2008 11:05:00 AM

Todd Bentley will step down as head of Fresh Fire Ministries, after the ministry revealed he had an "unhealthy relationship" with a female staffer. That announcement comes one week after Bentley's ministry announced he and his wife were separating. The announcement from the board of directors acknowledged that Bentley had an "unhealthy relationship" on an emotional level with the female staff member. Bentley is best known for leading a series of public meetings in Florida since April that have attracted around 300,000 people to churches and a baseball stadium. The Canadian evangelist will also cease all public meetings, including a 38-city stadium tour of U.S. cities. In a recent article in Charisma magazine on the meetings, editor Lee Grady said many of those who defended Bentley displayed a "lack of discernment," in part because of a "raw zeal for God." Grady also pointed out that Bentley had serious credibility issues from the beginning of the meetings, claiming to have talked to an angel in his hotel room, and bragging about tackling a man and knocking his tooth out during prayer. "Many of us would rather watch a noisy demonstration of miracles, signs, and wonders than have a quiet Bible study," the Christian journalist wrote. "Our adolescent craving for the wild and crazy makes us do stupid things. It's way past time for us to grow up." Grady also criticized GodTV for telling people that any criticism of Bentley was "demonic." GodTV carried the Lakeland meetings live every night.

Eternal Security (Part I)

2008-07-22T07:15:00.000-07:00

So here we are again, tackling yet another “biggie” in the Body of Christ. Namely, the question of whether a Christian can truly fall away? Many individuals I truly appreciate have written books on this topic, from BOTH sides of the argument. Men like Calvinist Pastor Charles Stanley, H.A. Ironside, Brethren Pastor & Dispensationalist & on the other side, Carl J.E. Nelson and Ray B. White among others. I even saw this title “Eternal Security, License to Sin!” So there is certainly enough in print out there about the subject, but again let us take a journey though the Scriptures & see what the Bible says & what we can draw from the Word of God. Now, again I want to emphasize that although I will be drawing a conclusion from this study, I am very respectful of those on EACH side of the argument & when I am finished, I refuse as many others, especially on the one side, to call anyone a “heretic” as we are limited in our understanding as long as we live in this body of flesh & bones, which is not a cop out, but must be something as humans, we always remember, especially when we get overly dogmatic! Certainly the following passage is used often in defense of Eternal Security, also btw known by many as “once saved, always saved”.
We read this in:

John 10:27-29 “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I have heard these verses used many times in the argument for E.S. (we’ll call it that from here in) and I concur that indeed a Christian cannot be “snatched or taken” out of the Father’s hand upon His finished work in them! So this gives rise to the following thought: can a Christian then “walk away” from Christ, or can a Christian receive Christ into their life & then continue on in a life marked & dominated by sin, yet still be ‘saved?” The Apostle Paul stated this concerning a person who has meet Jesus as Savior, but perhaps not Lord, although they did pray perhaps to ask Christ to come in:

Romans 6:1-2 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?

Further on this the Apostle John states the following:

1John 3:9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, (perhaps practice sin?) because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.

And the writer of Hebrews emphatically states this:

Heb 10:26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left,

So if we piece all these verses together, certainly we have a picture that simply “praying a prayer" or saying one thing & doing another is not sufficient unto salvation! This would tend to gives us a picture that salvation is a “progressive’ (ongoing) work in a person’s life. Made complete by continuing in a life that is pleasing to God & no longer practicing sin, this neat term I once heard applies here: “Christian are not sinless, but they do sin less!”. Meaning we no longer practice sin, but are tripped up by it due to our “Adamic” natures which we came out of the womb with according to the Psalmist in:

Ps 58:3 Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

But Hebrews 10 does give us a picture undeniably that if a person lives a “double” life, even though they have invited Christ in, or maybe never missed a Sunday service, or like a women in Middlebury, Ct. once told me so many years ago when I was going door to door: “Al, I know I am going to Heaven because I sing in my Church’s choir”, or whatever external thing that seems right on the outside, they are still lost in context to salvation! I heard it put this way: “just because you join the lion’s club, it doesn’t make you a lion!” So one may argue that what I am saying is that we are then ‘earning” our salvation, NO! We can’t earn it as that is already established in Scripture friends. (Eph. 2:8-9 & Titus 3:5-6) But we must “work or walk it out” as the Bible teaches us in:

Philippians 2:12-13 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed-- not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence-- continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.

And the Lord Jesus Christ said these very words concerning the faithful members of the Church at Thyatira found in Revelation 2:24-26:

“Now I say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan's so-called deep secrets (I will not impose any other burden on you) 25 Only hold on to what you have until I come. 26 To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations—

So even in addressing the faithful here, the Lord Jesus tells them to stay true “to the end”.

In Revelation 3, Jesus warns members of the Church at Philadelphia to beware lest they have their crowns taken from them, so we can see that there is a sense of “progression” in salvation, that we simply can’t “sit” on what we have been given. In fact, the parable of the talents is an excellent example of this, what happened to the one servant who “buried” his talent? Yes, he was thrown into that place of weeping & gnashing of teeth. I see a great parallel between that parable & salvation in general. And of course the Apostle James really opens up the window to show us what happens when we get “fat & happy” so to speak with our salvation
And begin to think that “it’s a lock”. Let’s read his words found here in:

James 2:20-26 You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? 21 Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.
23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend.
24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

In fact the question is posed, can a man who says he has faith without works be saved by “that” kind of workless faith? James states this which has an obvious response:

James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?

Of course not friends! So in this opening, I think we’ve established that a person certainly cannot simply “pray a prayer” & that’s it, they can go off & live whatever way they want & still be “saved”. We’ve also established that salvation is a “progressive” work that is ongoing. Many would disagree here, especially High Calvinist & that is okay! We further know that our faith MUST, again MUST be accompanied by works in order for it to be valid friends. For how else can God judge us? Just imagine how many people are going to stand before Him & say things like, “but Lord I loved you, I this & I that, etc”. Will not God then direct them to specific instances that would prove there can be no doubt that they spoke the right words with their lips, but by their actions denied Him all along? So these things truly go hand in hand and an over-emphasis on either is wrong! And we must endure to the end, we must remain faithful. This I find most intriguing because if salvation is a “one time” it’s a done deal over with proposition, then why must we “endure” or “walk out or work out” our salvation as the Scriptures teach? Arminian Theologian John Wesley had much to say about this, what is the sense in asking people to endure & continue on unless there is indeed a sense of the importance of walking through this life & being found faithful unto the death, whenever that time my come should the Lord tarry? Next, we’ll get more into the possibility of being able to fall away & whether or not we are indeed “once saved, always saved”.

Stay Tuned,
Al

Lakeland "Outpouring"

2008-07-21T11:16:00.000-07:00

Well,

Once again I am going “where no man likes to go” I guess, lol! In this post, we’ll talk about what is happening down in Lakeland Florida where there has been meetings going on night after night for quite awhile lead by a young Canadian man named Todd Bentley. And the reason I want to talk about this is because whenever something like this sprouts up, there are ACTUAL sign’s friends we can look at to see if this is something that is just good intentioned or is it a “God thing” along the lines of a Azusa Street or what God did back in the 50’s when Billy Graham came to New York City. Bottom line is can we really check things out to see if they are genuine? I truly believe we can! Now I know many will say “Al, why even bring it up, people are getting healed & some good things are happening, aren’t you for that, etc”? Believe me I am friends! I want nothing more than to see the Power, Glory & Majesty of God show up in this World & through us & our Fellowships, but just because some “good things” are happening. That is certainly NO reason for us to turn a deaf ear when we see Godly principles & order being shrugged off because of what is taking place, always remember this Christian, THE WORLD IS FOREVER WATCHING US & we need to be accountable & so if various organizations, inside & out of the Body of Christ want to see if Todd Bentley has been accountable there along with the local leaders of that meeting, then there can be nothing to fear or hide from such an honest investigation, especially if it is a Christian organization! So we’ll allow the record to speak for itself. World Magazine is an excellent source of information & a magazine I would highly recommend & one who did try to contact Todd & the people there, but sadly what they were told was far from accountable…. Mr. Bentley was quoted as saying something to the effect of: “I just don’t have time for interviews & need to be about God’s business, etc. Also when World Magazine asked about the ATM machine’s being placed in the lobby for the offerings which ran approx. 30- 40 minutes each evening, per eyewitnesses of World mag. and also began to ask general questions about offerings & funds coming in, again they were given the “we’re about the Father’s business” answer.

The truth is friends, someone there needs to let those on the outside know exactly what is happening with the finances, as by all reports, massive amounts of money are flooding into their books there. You may not know this, but whenever Billy Graham has held a Crusade in an area, within a Month or so afterwards, they release a full disclosure of all the finances. Perhaps that is a big part of the reason that the B.G.E.A. has been so blessed throughout the years, because they have always been accountable. In this age of Ministries carrying Lear Jet’s in their arsenal & so forth, never has there been a greater need for accountability!
I am sorry, but ATM’s in the lobby trouble this person greatly, as does 30-40 minute offerings, regardless of what is happening there! Sadly, all too often Christians look at outward things like “sincerity” instead of inward things like integrity! Show me a place that is accountable & I’ll show you a place that is indeed seeing a move of God. Yes, there are great things happening there because of who our God is, even when we miss it, he promises to lead us still in the paths of righteousness & be with us simply for “His names sake”. (Psalm 23)

Back when a similar thing was happening in Brownsville in Pensacola, Fl. I never forgot that when they looked at the local statistics, they saw that despite the claim of “Revival”, the crime stats & all similar stats across the board remained unchanged! I think there was a simple reason for this, it was because what was really happening was that 70-80% of the people who were coming to Brownsville were from other areas! There was a revival alright, but it was a revival of people visiting & not so much getting saved! I am afraid, that although this is being called an “outpouring”, the main pouring has been people pouring in from other areas! I do rejoice with all those who have received from the Lord, but like many others, including MANY from Charismatic circles, which I include myself, there is much concern for the local leaders refusal to “open” all things up & be accountable. There have also been many questions about Mr. Bentley's rather "un-orthodox" methods of things ranging from kicking to slapping folks as well as more than once re-canting claims of healings, including rising from the dead, all things that God has & continues to do friends, but we must defer to Jesus & His example of love & humility & not "showmanship". So time will tell, but it may be too late because my guess is that Mr. Bentley will be taking his show on the road all over no doubt to a town near you!

Stay Tuned,
Al

In Defense of God's Desire, Nature & Character (Opening)

2008-07-20T18:14:00.000-07:00

Hello Again Friends,

I have been in the long process of writing my 1st book entitled: "In Defense of God's Desire, Nature & Character, as found in Arminian Theology". This is a book which is birthed from the "heart" of "Classic" Arminian Theology, it is the "engine" if you will, that runs this view of our Heavenly Father. Friends, at the heart of Arminian Theology is the rejection that God, in the beginning only chose certain people for salvation & although being the Creator, He in some way shape or form, left people out of His salvation plan! I ask & appeal to you with simply this....is there anything in Scripture that we know & have studied about our God that would lead you to believe that He created certain people to salvation while others to spend eternity in Hades/Lake of Fire by leaving them out of His plan of salvation? I thank the Lord that I am FAR from alone in seeing the mis-representaion of God in this. I can say however, that time & time again, I see the opposite in Scripture, we see God speaking here in:

1Ti 2:4 "who (God) wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all men-- the testimony given in its proper time"

Notice that God desires that "all men" come to know Him! Further please notice that Jesus was a ransom given for "all men". If God's desire has been that He wants all men to come to know Him, could it still be possible that He left many out of His plan of salvation? For Jesus told us this in Matt. 7:13:

"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it".

Notice that Jesus, God's only Son, just stated that most people are heading the wrong way, to destruction, so if God only saved an "elect", then the hard fact can ONLY be that He created MOST/MANY people only to be left out of the Salvation plan, as Jesus clearly stated here that most people are heading the wrong way! Friends, how can this be true? I submit that upon a clear & close examination, this just cannot be true from a Scriptural basis, despite the fact we all respect John Calvin & those who agree with his Theology & the good work he was able to accomplish during his lifetime realizing that ALL of us are far from perfection, thus unlike many Calvinists, I will not "mock or chide" their views & do & have always considered them to be my brothers & sisters in the Faith, albeit we have a very different view of the Desire, Nature & Character of God! So we see that God's desire is mis-represented when we hear High Calvinists making claims that God provided salvation for ONLY certain people.

And so then comes God's Nature... let's look at a bit as this & see a few things about the Nature of God.

Ps 147:5 Great is our Lord and mighty in power; his understanding has no limit. We are told here that besides how powerful our God is, that His knowledge (understanding) is infinite. I often ask myself, if I being human, have trouble with a belief system that NEVER gives a person a chance, then what must this doctrine sound like to God?
Ac 17:24 "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Here's is Paul at Mar's Hill giving his discourse on who our God is & notice that in verse 27, Paul says things are this way so that men Would seek after God & even perhaps find Him! Needless to say, what would be the sense of seeking or even finding God, if everyone was already "predestined"? In short, yes we must allow for God's Sovereignty, which Classic Arminians do & so God can certainly do "what he wants, with whom he wants, and how he wants", etc., but we see in God's Nature that He desires for man to long after Him, to seek Him, that He (mankind) may find Him! Jesus Himself stated in Matthew: "seek & you shall find, knock & it will be opened to you" In Exodus 20, where we find the 10 commandments, God states this to us about His Nature: "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

He is a jealous God, thus it would seem logical that He truly desires our hearts & that he truly wants us to be with Him, not away from Him friends! Also notice the great balance here contrasted in verses 5 & 6, God truly is the "perfect balance" & in keeping with this thought, Arminian Theology is likewise a Theology that is balanced in that we believe in God's direct intervention, while maintaining man's 'freed" will, which God has seen fit not to infringe upon, outside of His Sovereign will in specific situations. And last, but certainly not least is God's character & perhaps to many Arminians like myself, this is what concerns us most. One could clearly argue that if these things we've stated above from High Calvinist's are indeed not true, then one can argue that God's character has been badly maligned throughout the ages! And I shutter to think of the repercussions of such a teaching, for instance, how many people upon hearing this, felt it to be "unreasonable or un-balanced" have then turned away from the Living God? I am of the mindset that many have sadly..... Think about our lives friends, are they not filled with choices? How is it that we would somehow have this "freed" will to make choices daily & yet many/most have NO choice in regards to salvation? I submit it simply just doesn't add up... Well, you at least got the introduction to what I am writing!

Stay Tuned,

In Christ,

Calvin / Arminian Viewpoints (Part III)

2008-07-08T15:57:00.000-07:00

Well, here we are at my 3rd discourse on this interesting, too say the least topic. As a refresher, below is what High Calvinism’s acronym “TULIP” stands for:

T……….the total depravity of Man

U……….unconditional election

L………..limited atonement

I…………irresistible grace

P………..perseverance of the saints

In this section, we’ll now take a close look at the “L & then I” in TULIP. Now for the record, thus far I have disagreed with the ‘U’ & this next point, Limited Atonement I have the hardest time with of all 5 points. So let’s define what the ‘L’ stands for in H.C. Also called "particular redemption" or "definite atonement", the doctrine of limited atonement is the teaching that Jesus' substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its design and accomplishment. The doctrine is driven by the concept of the sovereignty of God in salvation and the Calvinistic understanding of the nature of the atonement. Namely, Calvinists view the atonement as a penal substitution (that is, Jesus was punished in the place of sinners), and since, Calvinists argue, it would be unjust for God to pay the penalty for some people's sins and then still condemn them for those sins, all those whose sins were atoned for must necessarily be saved. Moreover, since in this scheme God knows precisely who the elect are and since only the elect will be saved, there is no requirement that Christ atone for sins in general, only for those of the elect. Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in its value or power (in other words, God could have elected everyone and used it to atone for them all), but rather that the atonement is limited in the sense that it is designed for some and not all.

To go further on this matter, I’d like to quote Classic Calvinist Theologian Edwin Palmer who states the following: “The Bible teaches again & again that God does not love all people with the same love”. “The atonement of Christ is limited in it’s scope, that Christ intended to & actually did remove the guilt of the sins of a limited number of people – namely, those whom God has loved with a special love from eternity”. “Thus, the atonement of unlimited value is limited to certain people”.
- Palmer, Five Points Of Calvinism, pg. 27

Friends, if you did not find those statements, “music to your ears”, have no worry for you are far from alone! With this opportunity to contrast such a statement, I will now quote Nazarene (Arminian) Theologian Orton Wiley speaking for all Arminians he writes:

“The atonement is universal.” “This does not mean that all mankind will be unconditionally saved, but that the sacrificial offering of Christ so far satisfied the claims of the divine law as to make salvation a possibility for all”. “Redemption is therefore universal or general in the provisional sense, but special or conditional in its application to the individual”.

Orton Wiley, Christian Theology ( Kansas City, Mo. Beacon Hill, 1941)

Amen indeed! So Be it!

So the issue here is whether or not Jesus death applies for all, regardless of their standing with Christ. This passage of Scripture immediately comes to mind:

1 Timothy 2:5-6 “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all men-- the testimony given in its proper time”.
Friends, notice the use of the word “ALL” in this context. These 2 verses are telling us, especially v6 that Christ Jesus gave Himself at Calvary a ransom or a “payment” if you will for ALL of mankind, not a limited amount of mankind. What is does not say here is that Jesus gave himself as a ransom for “only a elect”, etc. but rather for us all.

In staying with this thought, another passage of Scripture is found in: Mark 10:45 which states: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
So notice here the word used is not all, but many. Now we have already talked about the “U” in Tulip & in doing so addressed predestination, but here we do indeed see God’s foreknowledge which is the term I like to use instead of predestination because of its inference. So in this passage here I would argue that because God knows all & is omniscient, He certainly knew that His Son, Jesus would die for all, but He also foreknew that not all would accept Him, thus this passage that tells us that although Jesus was given for us all, only “many” would accept Him! My point being that I do not believe this passage is saying Jesus death was on limited scope. To further bolster this Classic Arminian view, let’s look at a few more passages.

John 3:16, known to us believers as the “Golden Text” of the Bible.

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life". If Jesus death was somehow limited to certain people, we would need to remove the “whosoever” from this hollowed passage! Whosoever means just that friends, ANYONE!

Hebrews 9:14-15 “How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! 15for this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance-- now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant”

In another passage we are told this: “many are called, but few are chosen”. Do you remember where I stated earlier that there are truly many areas where both viewpoints intersect? Well, we both believe that people are indeed called & that people are indeed chosen if you will, but what remains a very strong difference between these viewpoints is just exactly HOW that calling comes about & just exactly HOW people are called, but we all do certainly believe in such a calling of people, but WHO plays WHAT part is where we differ. In the discourse on "Prevenient Grace" a Classic Arminain viewpoint, you can go back & see where we differ from each other on WHO does WHAT, etc. Okay, this got a bit long so we’ll discuss the “I” in the next post.

Blessings & Stay Tuned,
Al

Women In Leadership Today

2008-07-08T05:42:00.000-07:00

Friends,

Here’s another topic that your probably thinking I am crazy to take on! And the truth is, I can fully understand your reason for thinking that! This subject has literally caused a “firestorm” of controversy in the Body of Christ, in particular maybe over the last 20 years with the advent of many Women teachers who have become prominent in Christianity. There are MANY trains of thought on this subject ranging from the Fundamentalist viewpoint that women should not be in any form of leadership to many in the Pentecostal circles who have embraced women teachers & preachers, but what does Gods Word say in context?

First off, as a general observation & you are hearing from a very truthful man in this subject, I truly believe that women, for the most part have it all over us guys! What I mean is that they are certainly more “aware” of their surroundings then us, they are more “perceptive” & just have that “6th sense” about them. I have even gone as far as to say that women as a rule are smarter than us! Sorry guys, I know I just ticked off a few of you, but that is my observation! The picture in the Garden of Eden & the fall shows us further this great contrast between the 2.
Remember once they ate & God came looking for them what transpired? When God asked Adam, he did perform the 1st ever recorded case of P.T.B.! or pass the buck when he turned the situation around & said to God: “the women you gave me”, etc. thus effectively blaming God for his own sin. Certainly Adam could of obeyed God & told Eve that what she did was wrong. No where do I see that Eve had to push Adam. On the other hand God asked Eve what happened & she spoke plainly: “I was deceived”, hence, women generally also tell the truth, whereas men often fabricate things or lie. Why am I pointing this all out? Because I do not want any men out there to flatly dismiss women from any form of ministry! In Romans 16, we see that Phoebe was referred to as a “servant”. Now there has been much made over the Greek word used here because it is not the “normal” Greek word used for Deacon, but none the less, it is the same basic root word, (diakononso) so we have Scriptural precedent that women can indeed be Deacons. Now it was clear that back at that time, women were forbidden to preach, but rather here Phoebe must have been a strong mature believer & one who was hospitable & had much love for the “Saints” & even possibly opening her own home. Now clearly today, much, if not all of the controversy surrounds the Apostle Paul’s words found in: 1 Corth. 14:34 which states “women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says” (NIV) And again in 1 Timothy 2:12 which states
“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent". (NIV) I think you would agree that these are 2 strongest verses & are what are usually quoted in refuting Women in leadership, wouldn’t that be fair friends?

Now I’d like to share something from Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible. I have always used this as a good & solid reference & there are some very important points made here in regards to women in the Church then & now. This was a Jewish ordinance; women were not permitted to teach in the assemblies, or even to ask questions. The rabbins taught that "a woman should know nothing but the use of her distaff." Continuing, the A.C.C. goes on to say: This was their condition till the time of the Gospel, when, according to the prediction of Joel, the Spirit of God was to be poured out on the women as well as the men, that they might prophesy, i.e. teach. And that they did prophesy or teach is evident from what the apostle says, 1 Corth. 11:5, where he lays down rules to regulate this part of their conduct while ministering in the church. But does not what the apostle says here contradict that statement, and show that the words in chap. 11 should be understood in another sense? For, here it is expressly said that they should keep silence in the church; for it was not permitted to a woman to speak. Both places seem perfectly consistent. It is evident from the context that the apostle refers here to asking questions, and what we call dictating in the assemblies. It was permitted to any man to ask questions, to object, altercate, attempt to refute, &c., in the synagogue; but this liberty was not allowed to any woman. St. Paul confirms this in reference also to the Christian Church; he orders them to keep silence; and, if they wished to learn any thing, let them inquire of their husbands at home; because it was perfectly indecorous for women to be contending with men in public assemblies, on points of doctrine, cases of conscience, &c. But this by no means intimated that when a woman received any particular influence from God to enable her to teach, that she was not to obey that influence; on the contrary, she was to obey it, and the apostle lays down directions in chap. 11 for regulating her personal appearance when thus employed. All that the apostle opposes here is their questioning, finding fault, disputing, &c., in the Christian Church, as the Jewish men were permitted to do in their synagogues; together with the attempts to usurp any authority over the man, by setting up their judgment in opposition to them; for the apostle has in view, especially, acts of disobedience, arrogance, &c., of which no woman would be guilty who was under the influence of the Spirit of God.

I think that Paul’s words are very important & apply here as well found in Gal. 3:22-29 “But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. 23 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. 26 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, MALE OR FEMALE, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise".

So in closing on this controversial subject, let me state that with the information above, I believe that God is indeed using Women in the Body of Christ today. Perhaps you know of such a women? I have had the pleasure of meeting many & I would found to be a liar if I was to state that I did not believe God was using them! Now I will also say this to “balance” what I have said here. While I do believe as the Scripture states that “God is the head of Christ, the Man the head of Women, etc. this does not mean Man is to “lord” over Women any more than the Apostle Peter’s charge of 1 Peter 5 states the same of Pastor’s “lording” over their flocks. But what is sad today is this & I believe it to be 100% true: Men in so many Churches have “vacated” their leadership role ordained by God! Just stop & think friends, how many times have you seen a women married to a “spiritually absent” Man & so she has now had to take on the role of spiritual head? I have often asked myself where would the Church as a whole be today without the women? So I for one thank the Lord for the women who have “stepped up” & now take part in their Churches & although it may not be the way God ordained it. (for the record if all was right & men were in their rightful place as a whole, I still do not think God intended women to sit still & be quiet! My God, for where would husbands be without the wisdom & insight of their wives as a whole?) So while in I may not be completely doctrinally comfortable with women Pastor’s I am open to just about every other office & opportunity they that may be given to serve!

Stay Tuned,
Al

How 'Bout Those Rays & Manny Being Manny

2008-07-04T18:27:00.000-07:00

Well, if you follow Baseball, how about those Rays? Although I am a passionate Red Sox fan, I love to see a team come together that’s “unadulterated” sort of speak by high salaries & huge Ego’s, etc. My 2nd favorite team is the Minnesota Twins who have been doing well for many years with a low budget & few big name players & now here is Tampa Bay! Even though they swept my Sox, I think what they are doing is great & Manager Joe Madden deserves all the credit in the world. The question now is this: can they keep it up after the all-star break which is when the “dog days” of the LONG Baseball season start to kick in, so time will tell & we shall see!

On another note, Boston beat sports writer Bob Ryan wrote an excellent column the other day in the Globe about good ole Manny. Seems that when this guy who clearly lives in a “bubble” impervious to the fact that people actually work to make a living, got upset at Jack McKinley, the sox traveling Secretary, which if you know anything about the inner workings of baseball is really a tough & thankless job catering to these guys, got thrown to the ground by Manny when he couldn’t produce 16 tickets to a game at the last minute. Now this guy is in his 60’s & here’s Manny throwing him to the ground, but what is worse is that the Sox have yet to take any action! Well maybe Mr. McKinley will! What a message the Sox management is sending to their players & to us when they allow guys to do such things. Bob Ryan went on to say that what happened amounted to assault! Maybe this will be Manny’s last year in Boston & I for one say “Adios Amigo”.

Stay Tuned,
Al

The Electoral College, What It Is & Why...

2008-06-29T15:29:00.000-07:00

Are you familiar with the Electoral College?
Can any of you describe with any detail what it is or why it was started? Let me start this topic then with a little introduction of exactly what the Electoral College is & why our forefathers had the tremendous insight to put it in place. Then we’ll fast forward to 2000 to see exactly how their vision actually came to pass! Here is a legal definition from the Dept. of State: Often misunderstood today, the Electoral College was established early in our country’s history and continues to play an important role in the American political process. Although the name suggests ivy-covered walls and classrooms filled with books, the Electoral College is responsible for formally selecting the next president and vice president of the United States. To be elected president, a candidate must receive at least 270 of the 538 electoral votes cast nationwide. If no candidate receives 270 votes, the final decision is made by the U.S. House of Representatives. Only two American presidents have been chosen by the U.S. House of Representatives because they lacked enough Electoral College votes. In 1800, Thomas Jefferson and, in 1824, John Quincy Adams both took office after the election was sent to the House of Representatives. To understand why the Electoral College, and not the people, ultimately determines who is president requires a brief look into our country’s turbulent beginnings. The Electoral College was written into the U.S. Constitution in 1787, a time when our nation was new and still struggling in many ways, including politically. Of primary concern was the possibility of a nationwide election breaking down into chaos and confusion. To counter the politically volatile environment of the late 18th century, the Electoral College was established to balance the state’s and people’s interests. The idea of mass communication and the dominant two-party political system we take for granted today could never have been anticipated by our country’s first leaders as they wrestled with the problems of the early republic. Our country was founded on the principle of government of the people, by the people and for the people. Voting is one of this country’s most cherished rights. Our political system, including the Electoral College, is designed to ensure the full realization of this fundamental principle. In 2000 we actually had the incredible opportunity to see this in place! If you look at the map of the U.S. & which state voted from whom, you’ll notice that President Bush won very small states that only have 3-5 electoral votes. States like, North & South Dakota, New Hampshire, Idaho, Montana & Wyoming. This is significant because these states put the president “over the top” in the election, thus giving less populated states a fair & honest say in any & all presidential elections. However friends, there are many on the left & even some on the right sadly who want to eliminate the Electoral College in favor of the “popular” vote, which Al Gore won in 2000. Now on the outside that may seem to make sense, so what is the fuss?

For one I just shared with you a very good reason above, those small states if there was a popular vote would rarely if ever see the Candidates. Plus, as we see today, very large populations of people in concentrated cities are voting a certain way & in heavy populated area’s of people voting the same way, the rural area’s in both those states as well as different states would never stand a chance! In 2000 this is exactly what we saw & I must say that our founding fathers had great insight to protect ALL the states at least politically wise. Eliminating the Electoral College would be an attack upon the framers vision of our Country & would certainly spell the end of any influence of those living in rural America, important workers like Farmers & all those who make a living off the land or with livestock, etc. It is said that there will be a strong push come 2012 to remove the Electoral College so we need to be aware friends & speak up about it, lest we see another building block of our framers going by the wayside!

Stay Tuned,
Al

Calvin / Arminian Viewpoints (Part II)

2008-06-27T06:17:00.000-07:00

Okay,
we're back to take another step forward in this discussion of these 2 contrasting Theological views. Now I used an important term in my 1st discourse. This term was “High” Calvinism or “5 point” Calvinism. I’d like to define now for you what it means. In Calvinistic Theology, there are those who hold to a form of Calvin’s teaching & accept them, but not to the extreme & such could be stated also about Arminian viewpoint’s, albeit they are in no way anywhere near as harsh as High Calvinism, after all they are based upon what we believe to be the truth that God gave mankind a freewill to choose, while also providing for a way for us to be “re-joined” back into fellowship & Covenant with Him, should we respond to His leading, etc. Some folks even like to be called “Calminian’s”! You’ll hear that a lot, I have a few Pastor friends who claim to be such! So let’s look at this 5 point system that created the need for a rival Theology like the Arminian viewpoint to come about in the 1st place. The acronym is “TULIP” which stands for the following:

T……….the total depravity of Man

U……….unconditional election

L………..limited atonement

I…………irresistible grace

P………..perseverance of the saints

Hence the term “Tulip”. In this 2nd discourse, I want to look at the first 2 points of High Calvinism, “total depravity” & “unconditional election”. So first, let’s discuss total depravity. Here is what is taught in H.C. (I’ll use this to define the term High Calvinism)

1) Total Depravity
The doctrine of total depravity (also called "total inability") asserts that, as a consequence of the fall of man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God with their whole heart, mind, or strength, but rather all are inclined to serve their own interests over those of their neighbor and to reject the rule of God. Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the necessity of their own natures. (The term "total" in this context refers to sin affecting every part of a person, not that every person is as evil as possible.)

Jacob Arminius himself and some of his later followers, such as John Wesley, also affirmed total depravity. This is an area of some of that “common ground” I spoke of earlier. BOTH systems of thought agree that due to the fall of Man in Adam, all flesh has inherited a corrupted nature in bondage to sin. So we have common ground here, but I must also say that despite man’s “sin nature”, we clearly see that there are many good & wonderful people in the World at all times who live lives apart from Christ. In a recent conversation with a dear friend who shares most of the Calvinism viewpoint, he confessed to me that he was having a hard time with the concept of total depravity based on this observation that there are many good people out there who do many good & Godly type things while all the time not knowing Christ, hence I see this total depravity as more of a “overall” problem with our nature in general & it is Spiritually based, meaning that a person can indeed live a “good” life while denying Christ, but in the end as Proverb’s 14:12 so honestly put’s it “there is a road which seems right, but in the end it is the way of death”. So it would seem that the Enemy (satan) himself jumps in & convinces people that things like “Good Work’s, Philosophy & yes even Religion (not RELATIONSHIP)” are the way to happiness both here & in eternity. But certainly we see this concept based in Scripture & starting back in Genesis 3 at the fall of Man in the garden of Eden. So in this 1st point, there is common ground between the 2!

Let’s now look at the 2nd point of H.C., “Unconditional Election”. This is where things start to get much more interesting. Let’s define what H.C. means by this term:

2) Unconditional election

The Doctrine of unconditional election asserts that God's choice from eternity of those whom he will bring to himself is not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people. Rather, it is unconditionally grounded in God's mercy alone. The doctrine of unconditional election is sometimes made to stand for all Reformed doctrine, sometimes even by its adherents, as the chief article of Reformed Christianity. However, according to the doctrinal statements of these churches, it is not a balanced view to single out this doctrine to stand on its own as representative of all that is taught. Unconditional election, and its corollary in the doctrine of predestination are never properly taught, according to Calvinists, except as an assurance to those who seek forgiveness and salvation through Christ, that their faith is not in vain, because God is able to bring to completion all whom He intends to save. Nevertheless, non-Calvinists object that these doctrines discourage the world from seeking salvation.

I think it would be wise for me to quote John Calvin on this:
“By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death." (Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Section 5)

Yes, you heard that right, but just in case, I’ll explain. Here’s basically what he just said: The doctrine of Unconditional Election stresses that man has no choice (no free will) at all because man has no ability to seek God, (Total Depravity) therefore it is by God's sovereign choice that anyone is saved. So we must take this doctrine carefully to its “end implications” to see the outcome of such a Doctrine. Here’s what that would be friends: The bottom line, from everything I’ve read & know about this Unconditional Election, is that if true, basically in the beginning God said YES to Jane Doe, NO to John Doe, YES to Anne Doe, No to Jim Doe, etc. Get the picture friends? In other words, God Almighty in His creation, created some people who would have NO way to salvation! Now I can’t speak for anyone else, but I will speak for myself, this is totally inconsistent with scores of passages throughout the Old & New Testaments, while also being incompatible with the God I have come to know friends! As I pointed out earlier in the tree in the garden of Eden, in the Ark of Noah, in John chapters 3 & 7, it just does not line up with God creating us as "free moral agents" with choice. It also contradicted I think whom God reveals Himself to be & furthermore, His character is now being distorted in that what is being said is that He gave some NO freewill! Now there is certainly the subject of "Sovereignty" & I have NO problem acknowledging that God intervened more than a few times & we'll tlak about HIs Sovereignty in another part, but please allow me to close with this thought: “predestination is NOT pre-determination”

Stay Tuned,
Al

"Popular" Preachers Who Take Serious Liberty With The Scriptures

2008-06-25T21:24:00.000-07:00

Hmmm, what a topic, huh? Maybe your asking, “why in the world would anyone want to write about that”? It is true after all, that many of us have certainly “missed” it at times when sharing God’s Word, well I know I have! So what is the difference you may ask? Well, for one thing, when I do & someone points it out to me, or when I go back & realize that maybe I slipped up, I am always willing to accept the fact that I may of taken something out of context & need to be more careful next time. However, what I find alarming today is this: It seems to me that when confronted in grace & love, many of these individuals just push their point’s even further! Plus the fact that they have a “following” & certainly we all have those personalities that minister to us & seem to speak directly to our hearts & I thank the Lord for such people! For me, I have always appreciated people like the late Dr. Lester Sumrall, Billy Graham, Dr. Leighton Ford & Dr. Joe Stowell among other’s & they all seem to be men of humility as well, albeit Dr. Sumrall could really get going at times, lol! So we all know we miss the mark & as humans are fallible. (Rom. 3:23) But it seems that some people out there have “bypassed” that verse. I remember watching Jimmy Swaggart many, many years ago & when he was speaking about a controversial subject said that “if you don’t like what I’m saying, take it up with my boss”. I remember right then & there, that something is wrong here when ANY of us speaks in such a way that OUR words are “mint”, or equal to Scripture! I for one, do NOT believe when I reside behind my, or anyone’s Pulpit on a Sunday that what I say becomes “infallible”. I am human, I am corruptible as such & only when, as the Scripture states I put on the incorruptible, will I “be like HIM”, Amen! Thus, I have NO right to make such a strong statement, UNLESS it is something that is CHRYSTAL clear friends! Today however, this trend continues of people almost “deifying” personalities & taking what they say as “Gospel”, yes there are many things I say that you can “take to the bank”, but NOT everything! Well, maybe you thought that I was going to name a few people & so let me say I am not, however I think that many of us know a few of these people out there & certainly we know those who “follow” them! I remember getting ready to pray for a women who had a hideous goiter on her neck, only to have her say, “no, please don’t pray for that as I am saving that for Oral Roberts”, I kid you not! It was no surprise that when I saw her again, she still had that ailment on her neck. I am always encouraged by the Church found in Berea in Act’s chapter 17 who when the Apostle Paul came through we’re told “searched the Scriptures to see if the things he said were true”.
Friends, NEVER take what a “Popular Preacher” says simply because he is on TV or radio, etc. Especially today when we see Scripture being stretched & many times twisted to fit one’s doctrine or teaching on a given subject. One of the great rules of Biblical interpretation is as follows: “Scripture interprets Scripture”! If you have questions, keep reading, you will find the answer soon enough! So please be aware of strong heavy handed statements like “The Lord told me, or is telling me”, etc. This is not to say that HE doesn’t speak to us, but all too often such a statement is used because there is a lack of Biblical evidence to support such a teaching or doctrine & so the person reverts to using “divine” appointment as the reason they can say something so unbiblical. Remember, whatever is said, MUST always line up with God’s Word for HE will never give someone something that is contrary to HIS Word friends! Stay Tuned!

In Christ,
Al

Calvin / Arminian Viewpoints (Part 1 - Opening)

2008-06-24T05:39:00.000-07:00

Oh boy, perhaps you’re saying to yourself, who would ever want to dive into this topic? After all, it’s one of those “secondary” issues isn’t it, that some people & Churches have made primary? I guess that is a fair statement, I think at least?
This debate has been going on for a long, long time, all the way to the days of Reformation! So again, why write about the subject? Before I list a few of my reason’s, or at least my perceptions & also my undeniable experiences. Here is the MAIN reason why I am taking this on friends... And I suspect that many of my fellow Arminians would agree or perhaps feel the same way? Namely that our God, whom we have come to know through His Son Jesus Christ & through His Word, if High Calvinism is incorrect, then there can be no doubt that the Nature & Character of our God has been for a long time & continues through today to be impugned & badly mis-represented & we'll see this for sure in the 2 points of High Calvinism known as the "U & L" or Unconditional Election & Limited Atonement, thus you know exactly what drives me friends! It seems to me that we Arminian’s are all to often taken badly out of context, or are constantly being called things like “heretic’s or Pelagian’s or Semi[Pelagian's” by “High” Calvinist’s & actually even mocked very often by these High Calvinists on their websites & in print. Now I realize in order to share some good & valid information with you, I first need to define a few terms. When I say “High” Calvinist, I am referring to those who call themselves “5 Point or TULIP” Calvinist’s. These people have a much different point of view & approach to our Heavenly Father & His nature & attributes then those who simply called themselves “Reformed or just Calvinistic” in their thinking. They adhere to a system of thought that we will be looking into in depth in a bit. I seek to challenge a few of these thoughts for truly one basic & very important reason. Could it be that God’s character is being misrepresented in any or a few of these thoughts? We’ll come back to this later. Is the constant charge of Calvinist that Arminian’s are Pelegians, or Semi-Pelegians really true?
Let’s take a look at this charge first in depth to see if it hold any merit, sound okay? Now Pelagianism is a theological theory named after Pelagius. It is the belief that original sin did not taint human nature (which God called very good), and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without Divine aid. Thus, Adam's sin was "to set a bad example" for his progeny, but his actions did not have the other consequences imputed to Original Sin. Pelagianism views the role of Jesus as "setting a good example" for the rest of humanity (thus counteracting Adam's bad example). In short, humanity has full control, and thus full responsibility, for its own salvation in addition to full responsibility for every sin (the latter insisted upon by both proponents and opponents of Pelagianism). According to Pelagian doctrine, because humanity does not require God's grace for salvation (beyond the creation of will), Jesus' execution is devoid of the redemptive quality ascribed to it by orthodox Christian theology. (Thus Pelagianism is Heresy or Un-Orthodox Theology) (Calvinists also regularly have accused Arminian’s of being “Semi-Pelagians” because of their free will emphasis) Okay, so that’s the skinny on Pelegianism. So let’s look at 2 crucuial points to see if Arminian Theology is a close companion or not as many High Calvinists claim.

That original sin did not taint human nature…… and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without Divine aid. In Genesis 3, we see the recorded “Fall Of Man”. That Satan tempted Eve who partook of the forbidden fruit & then gave it to Adam, who ate also & then later blamed God for giving him Eve basically! What was the outcome?
Was it not that sin entered the World? Was this not the “original” sin that lead humankind to walk down this path & now all humans would be born with what we refer to as an “Adamic” nature? Do we not also see here in Genesis 3 that the 1st effect or emotion of sin was fear? (Ge.3:10) So if one was to deny original sin or the fall of man, we see it would be unscriptural to do so! Also we see in Gen. 3 that fear entered in & we continue to see from God’s Word that many other effects of sin began to quickly show up leading to murder. (Cain & Abel) So to say that the fall of man or original sin did not taint the human race would be a denial of Genesis 3 & thus would void God’s word! I can honestly say I have never saw anything in the writings of Jacob Arminius or ever heard anything by a person who understands classic Arminian Theology that would adhere to such Pelegian thought. Prevenient (or preceding) grace is divine grace which precedes human decision and allows a person to thus engage their God given free will to make a choice concerning Christ. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin. Ephesians 2:8-9 I believe goes hand in hand with this view, for the Scripture here states the following: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9 not by works, so that no one can boast”. Notice “not from yourselves”, in other Words GOD gives us this Grace & it is a gift, hence we further have the gift to choose, WE have that gift. Friends, when I think about the concept of freewill or choice, I see over & over in Scripture example after example, thus prevenient Grace I humbly submit is a view that is compatible & in harmony with Scripture.
Here’s a few examples:

The Tree in the Garden of Eden……….. What did that tree represent?
Was it not freewill? Would not Adam & Eve of been a sort of “robot”? God says jump & Adam says “how high”, etc. Freewill to me at least & many other believers is the 3rd greatest “Gift” God gave us other than His Son & His Word!

The Ark of Noah…… In Genesis 6:5-7, God made this incredible statement:
“The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth-- men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air-- for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD”. Have you ever stopped to think that if God here would of allowed anyone else in the Ark if they were also found righteous? Do you see anything here to the contrary? God found Noah to be right before Him & thus He saved him & his family, but does this automatically mean He wouldn’t have allowed other’s in if they too were righteous? Remember the Scripture tells us that it was Noah who found God’s favor, thus NO one else had! In verse 5 God stated that with the exception of Noah, ALL men’s hearts were to do evil continually, hence only Noah & his family were saved from the flood, but the point is that God perhaps (feel free to disagree!) would have provided for others who CHOSE to place Him first in their lives as did righteous Noah. Thus I see the Ark as a provision for those who would choose to live righteous, sadly only one did!

John 7:37-38 On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him”.

John 3:16-17 “John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

I am sure by now you get what I am saying, I can certainly provide many more examples! Thus I believe the concept of choice & choosing is found all throughout the Bible, just as many Calvinists (not High Calvinists) can claim also & I get that & respect & understand that. One thing I am very happy about is that I rarely if ever have seen or read any writings of Arminian’s who mock or refer to Calvinists, especially High Calvinists as “heretic’s”, we’ll save that term for them. (only joking!) So my point is that as you can see, WE DO believe that it is God who is at work to “will” as the Scripture states, but while saying that, because we believe God made man as a “free moral agent”, mankind does hold the right or gift to choice, not only to chose Jesus, but what about the choices we make everyday? Do we not chose to attend certain functions, or go to certain places to eat, to pay our bill’s & so forth? God gave us very capable faculties, we need to use them in conjunction with His good & perfect will!

Thus I am hoping you can clearly see that Classic Arminian Theology is in NO way Pelegian, Jacob Arminias taught nothing of the kind & the truth be told, the 2 systems of thought, basic Arminian & Calvinistic thought are actually closer than you may think! Okay, that’s my 1st discourse on this most interesting topic, more to come, stay tuned & please share your thoughts if you dare, lol!

In Christ, Al

The Hungarian Revolution Of 1956

2008-06-19T10:58:00.000-07:00

I am going to share a bit with you about a story the World actually, in my humble opinion knows very little about, The Hungarian revolution that took place in October of 1956, a time for many of us before we were even born. Recently & thankfully this topic has been getting some more press around the World. Director Quentin Tarantino recently helped make a film about the revolution called “Freedom’s Fury”. It mainly focused on the incredible water polo match at the Melbourne Olympics’ of 1956 which took place shortly after the massacre of their fellow citizens by Russian soldiers & tanks in Budapest. In this match, the Hungarian team became the World’s daring after what just happened to their Nation & when a Russian player punched a star Hungarian player in the water above the eye, he bled all in the water & escalated the game to near frenzy in the water! The crowds & the World were now cheering on a “fight for freedom” in the water of the Olympic pool! In the end, the Hungarian, who were a perennial power in water polo prevailed to win the Gold medal, but many of their players choose to defect & not to return to the satellite Eastern European Communist nation once again controlled by a Russian “Puppet” Dictator. Another film, which won many awards including "best foreign film" is "Children Of Glory", a brillant film about the heroics of the many who took to the streets in October of 1956. There is an excellent book, now in its 4th printing on this topic entitled “The Bridge at Andua” by James Michener, which from what I know is about as complete a history of what actually took place those 4 days of “Freedom” & what lead to the uprising. Similar uprisings took place 3 years earlier when the workers of East Berlin rose up in 1953 & Polish workers in 1956 also in the same fashion dared to take to the streets in a Society that forbid such actions & many believe that both of these uprisings, especially the Polish one were a good part of the reason for what happened in 1956 in Hungary. One must also understand the long & hard determination of these Hungarian people & what they been through, the former Austria-Hungary Empire & the Emperor, then tragically aligning themselves with the Nazi’s & embracing their anti-Semitic laws & now rode in their new “Savior”, Joseph Stalin who “freed” them from the Fascists. So when one looks back at their history, it is not a pleasant one & so maybe you can see where these people perhaps had enough of being told what to do. So now to the story of what happened, it is, at least for me, one of the most courageous acts of defiance against an oppressor I have ever heard of as these people, young & old took to the streets to defend the Country they love so dear, Hungarian Patriots never to be forgotten! As I stated earlier, the small semi-revolutions that took place in East Berlin in 1953 & Poland earlier in 56, they where a sort of “springboard” for what was to come. Anyone familiar with the Communist system knows that they like to make incredible claims of “Utopia”, something I’ll discuss later when I start a topic on “what ever happened to East Germany”? They use propaganda everywhere, slogans, banners, getting at the minds of their youth from day one. Such was the case in Hungary & so it was very stunning & shocking to the Russian leadership to see the VERY people they trained & “feed” this propaganda to, to take to the streets in open defiance demanding their immediate withdrawal from their beloved Country.
In short, Communism promises a “worker’s paradise” for all who will submit to it’s cumbersome tenets. So now you have the backdrop, promises made, but un kept, working days made longer, food shortages & lines to buy products everywhere, meager pay & so forth. The hated Hungarian “AVO” or secret Police were everywhere looking for informers & anyone who dared to speak critical of their regime. Each Communist state had one form or another, a model of the Russian feared KGB & Hungary was no exception! Fast forward to 1953, Stalin is dead & “some” reforms are implemented, but not enough to bring much relief.
In 1955, Imre Nagy, a much more open & liberal minded Russian trained Dictator is made Prime Minister, only to be ousted by Rakosi, the hard line Soviet Dictator whom Nagy was chosen over the year before, hence the fight for control of the direction of Hungary was on! In 1956 Khruschev gives a speech that denounces Stalin & so more flames are added to the “fires of freedom” burning in the hearts of many in Eastern Europe. PETOFI CIRCLE were groups of Hungarian writers, and journalists who participated in forums and debates. They became more critical and active in politics, especially criticizing the Rakosi system. At the same time, in Poznan, Poland, there was a 50,000 anti-Communist workers' revolt; Stalinists squelched it with the help of the Polish Army. 50 died; hundreds were wounded. In Hungary, it was the University students who really must get the credit for the birth I think of the revolution, they formed an illegal “union” of sorts in early Oct. of 56 which carried a specific “list of demands”, including the withdrawal of Russian troops from Hungarian soil! They also wanted Imre Nagy to be returned to the head of the Government, as he was sympathetic to their demands. Here’s a few other of their demands:
- formation of multi-party system - free elections - dissolution of the AVO Secret Police - Soviet troops to leave Hungary, - Hungary's withdrawal from Warsaw Pact
When news reached that the Poles stood up to the Russians, although they stopped short of leaving the Warsaw Pact, which avoided serious bloodshed, the Hungarian students knew the time had come for them to take “center stage”.
Thus on October 23rd, 1956 the students took to the streets to march in support of the Polish revolt & again sought an answer to their demands. After marching to various statue’s, they eventually came to the one of Stalin & began to tear it down, from there they went to Radio Budapest & sought opportunity to air their demands over the radio, thus the revolution was on! The AVO police began shooting Hungarians in the streets, young & old, blood was shed & so the government called upon the Russians for help to restore order & although at first nothing happened, soon Russian tanks began to pour into the city center. It should ne noted that when the AVO men atop a building open fired on the population below, that one of the first Russian tanks, which had a soldier at the helm who had developed a love for this strong & gritty people, actually turned his turret toward the AVO men & open fire at them atop the building which in turn buoyed the crowd & set the revolution in motion full force! Imre Nagy took control of the Gov’t. & asked for people to be clam, but the Demonstrators recited these verses from Petolfi’s 1848 Hungarian national Poem.
“Stand up, Hungarians, your country calls. The time for now or never falls. Are we to live as slaves or free? Choose one. This is our destiny! By the God of all the Magyars, we swear. We swear never again the chains to bear”.
Within the next 2 days, people, both young & old took up arms from the barracks depot & police & rigged up thousands of “Molotov Cocktails”. Russians Go Home, could be read everywhere! It was estimated that these people, barely armed ended up disabling anywhere from 250-400 Russian tanks, can you believe that? By October 27th, everyone was thrilled as the streets were eerily quiet, all symbols of Communism were taken down or destroyed, the Hungarian flag was restored to it’s previous crest which has been taken over by the communist symbols, it was utter euphoria! On October 30th, CARDINAL MINDSZENTY, the Catholic prelate, who had been imprisoned by the Rakosi regime, was rescued by the Freedom Fighters and gave a very supportive speech praising the bravery of those fighting for the liberation of the nation. Nagy then abolished the AVO & one party system, but would it last & what would be the response of the West? I have often asked myself this question…. How much guilt does America hold in this revolt, in that for years we were broadcasting through the Voice Of America, the benefits of Democracy & freedom? Were we not partly responsible for encouraging such a revolt by leading the Hungarian people to believe we would be there waiting to help? I can assure you that many Hungarians who are alive today, remember WORD for WORD the things we were saying when the signals wasn’t jammed at certain times, this is why perhaps in conversations I have with the children of those who lived through the events of 1956, there is a sort of “hidden bitterness” toward the West for it’s inaction when the Russian returned en masse which they did on the 4th of November. Now many would argue the following as the reason for the lack of our intervention & to be honest, I don’t know if we should have or could have? I do know President Eisenhower did not want to start WW3 over Hungary or any Nation for that matter & I fully get that, plus, here’s what else was happening at the VERY same time, sadly for Hungary. In the meantime . . .WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST! Unfortunately for Hungary, the SUEZ CRISIS diverted the world's attention away from Hungary. Egypt had nationalized the Suez Canal, and the British, French, and Israelis were determined to keep their "oil lifeline," so Israel invaded Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. Britain and France bombed Egypt by air. They sent in their land forces. In the United Nations, the U.S. found itself in a real dilemma. It opposed and condemned this aggression by its friends -- Israel, France, and Britain. The U.N. only sent peacekeeping troops into Egypt even though Hungary, too had asked for help. NAGY was Prime Minister, and he made it clear that Hungary wanted to be neutral and was withdrawing from the Warsaw Treaty. He went on the radio and pleaded for help. "This is Prime Minister Imre Nagy speaking. At dawn, Soviet troops attacked our country in order to overthrow the legitimate Hungarian democratic government."
Even though America and the world heard Hungary's call for help, only Red Cross help was given and Hungary was on its own! PAL MALETER [pall mall lay tair] was in charge of the Hungarian Army, and at that time, he and some of the Hungarian Army units were fighting against the Russians . Nagy made him his Defense Minister, and he headed a Hungarian delegation to talk with the Soviet Army generals about withdrawing their troops. But it was a trick, and they arrested him. Two years later, in 1958, he was executed. The Soviets wanted a Hungarian government acceptable to itself, so they chose JANOS KADAR [yon-oh-sh kod- ar] to form a counter-government. He had been tortured and imprisoned during the Rakosi years and Nagy brought him in as part of his government. After the Revolution failed, he became the leader of Hungary. Thus when the Russian tanks & soldiers returned on the 4th of November, although the freedom Fighters fought valiantly for another week, including the “Men of Cespol”, which was considered the “heart” of the Communist Worker’s Movement, who all fought against the Russians, they were beaten back badly & paid a severe price. There were thousands who died. 26,000 were put on trial, and of those 13,000 were imprisoned [general amnesty given in l963], and about 300 were executed. Imre Nagy was deceived into thinking once he left the Yugoslav Embassy he’d be given free passage abroad, was taken by the KGB & never seen again, no doubt executed with a “mock” trial, much like Maleter. Some 200,000 refugees escaped into Austria or Yugoslavia and eventually started new lives in other parts of the world such as England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Canada, and the United States. Many came through in dramatic fashion over the little barely walk able “Bridge At Andua” into freedom in Austria. It should also be noted here that despite the many tensions that existed between Hungary & Austria over the years, NONE were more gracious & hospitable to the Hungarian refugee’s than the citizens of Austria, who shoed incredible love & concern for their neighbors next door! In the end, thousands of Hungarians sacrificed their lives for the cause of freedom, they fought tyranny & left over 700 Russian soldiers in their wake! Burned & disabled anywhere from 250-400 tanks! All with homemade “Molotov Cocktails”, gas hoses rigged so that the pump would shoot out fire when lit at the Russians & many who gave their lives were children! Yes, children who would run up underneath the tanks & throw the “cocktail” just at the exact location to destroy the treads. Friends, I am not sure if the World will ever know the bravery these men, women & children exhibited did during that incredible 10 day period in October of 1956 in Hungary. What I do know for sure is that this story needs to be told to EVERY generation to honor those who stood against the forces of totalitarianism. Perhaps one day we will see the likes of Hungary in Communist China, I don’t know, but what I do know is that you have a better chance of “catching” the wind, then suppressing the human spirit forever!
Stay tuned, respectfully,

Al Stewart
6/19/08

Justice Clarence Thomas, A Look Back-1991

2008-06-18T19:19:00.000-07:00

It was way back in October of 1991, which today seems like it forever ago, but for me, it was like it happened yesterday. How many of you out there are even a little bit familiar with the Clarence Thomas hearings for his seat on the Nation’s highest bench, the Supreme Court? I am sure that once I mention this next name, you will probably remember the “sound bite’s” like, isn’t he the guy who harassed that women, etc? Do you remember the name of Anita Hill? Now your memory was jogged a bit I’m sure. So why you may ask write about these hearing’s what was so significant about these hearings? I’ll begin here…… I grew up in Waterbury, Ct. A town of about 100,000 souls & specifically, I grew up in the Brooklyn section of Wtby. What this means is that I grew up in the most unique of all the “section’s”, of which Wtby. had many. What made Brooklyn unique is that we were what I & some of my friends called “the mixed nut’s”, meaning we had Black, White, Hispanic, Lithuanian & basically many Ethnic backgrounds in this little section of town cut in half by the massive flood of 1955 & the subsequent development of Interstate rt. 8 which ran literally out my back door! So what I am saying is that the issue of Race has always been important to me. From all accounts I can see & from everything I have read, when people, regardless of their skin color, are given an “even” chance, which btw, when you grow up in a City like a Waterbury friends & are a person of color, the truth is that the odd’s are against you, because there is a very good chance that you are or may be growing up in some form or another of poverty or low income & add to that the overwhelming statistics that further say you have a good chance of only having 1 parent at home, it makes things pretty rough & it’s easy to develop a “us against them” mentality, wouldn’t you agree? However, when given the opportunity to have a “level playing field”, look at what happens, look at the results! Many minorities have & continue to excel in our Country today because they had the means needed for them to succeed. Clarence Thomas, however is truly an exception to the rule. Raised basically by his grandparents in the deep & prejudice South in Georgia, this young man turned his anger of the injustices he saw & experienced around him, into an opportunity to learn & excel. In his recent book “My Grandfather’s Son”, he speaks at length about Pinpoint, Georgia & about the solid value’s his Granddaddy instilled in him & his brother, values which stay with Justice Thomas to this very day! So there are certainly exceptions almost any rule & Justice Thomas is certainly one! Okay, so if your still with me, you may ask “Al, what are you so fired up about here”? Well, President Bush Sr. nominated Mr. Thomas to sit on the Supreme Court, he would be the 2nd Black ever after Thurgood Marshall, however the dilemma starts here. Now what I am going to say here is about as honest as a person could write so hang on! So herein lies the Dilemma….. You see, although he is Black, Mr. Thomas is conservative, both Spiritually & Politically. He was running the EEOC at the time & was appointed to that position by President Regan, a Republican.
Now I must state for the record that it is commonly believed by the average “blue collar” working man that the Democratic Party is the “Party Of The People” & so of course they would support this nominee being a minority, a person of color despite close ties to Conservatives right? Think again for what ensued is what happens to a man, especially a minority if he or she chooses to “buck” the norm, if you will & “tie their own bootlaces” which is exactly what Mr. Thomas did all his life & now, the very people he once believed were on his side & working for people of Color & for those who didn’t enjoy that same “level playing field” we about to put him in his place! For it was at the last hour of the confirmation hearings, when it became clear that Thomas was going to have the votes needed that Senator’s Biden, Kennedy & especially Metzenbaum of Ohio released a last minute charade from Anita Hill stating Mr. Thomas sexually harassed her during her tenure at the EEOC serving under him. Thus a clear statement was being made in front of the whole Country & what was it? It was this: If you are Black or a Minority, you BETTER tow the party line, you better be a liberal, you should be taking some form of Gov’t. assistance to get you to where you are, etc. It was time for “hardball” & now a man of honesty, a man who worked very hard, was having his name smeared all over the Country. So let’s look at Mrs. Hill. What is interesting is this, who hired her at EEOC? Yes, it was Mr. Thomas & in fact when he moved offices, who followed him? Yes, Mrs. Hill did! Countless fellow employees’s testified on behalf of Mr. Thomas, male & female alike that he helped her countless times despite the fact she was in his estimation a sub standard employee. Now she saw her opportunity to grab the headlines & to bite the very hand that fed her. You may ask why, why would she do this. Well, under oath she testified that she would never receive any compensation for her testimony. I can personally tell you that some 6 Months after her appearance at the hearings, Anita Hill was the PAID guest speaker at the then Sheraton Hotel to a radical women’s organization & she was paid 15K for her appearance & has been on the “circuit” ever since & why in the world she has never been brought up on perjury charges is beyond me, while Mr. Thomas now has to fight for his life to save his good name, the good name of his dear Grandfather who raised him & taught him the value of all things. He referred to the hearings as a “high tech” lynching & I concur! I also found it interesting that Mr. Thomas wife was white & have always wondered if that also played a part in all this, only God knows. Now as a Pastor, I can tell you from FIRST hand exp. that just about 99% of people I have met or counseled who exhibit or have had some form of sexual problem, have RARELY harassed or bothered just ONE person. My exp. is that people with this condition just can’t contain themselves & so there are almost always multiple situations or one after another once exposed, however this was indeed an isolated situation, also casting serious doubt on Mrs. Hill’s charge. She said that Mr. Thomas made a reference to a Pornographic movie while they were alone in his office, but not ONE person was able to substantiate that charge, in fact to the contrary, Mr. Thomas was held in high esteem by his employee’s at EEOC & ALL throughout his career. Even his former wife of many years spoke favorably on his behalf. So I write all this because to this day, Clarence Thomas is thought of in a negative light, but I believe the fact’s & time have shown him to be an innocent man, while Anita Hill went on to use her appearance before the sub committee to prosper & continues to speak to this day! To further add insult to injury, the NACCP upon his nomination actually ordered ALL their chapters to remain NEUTRAL on his confirmation!
Now the last time I checked, it is called the National Association For The Advancement Of Colored People, right? Well clearly not if your Black & Conservative! Chapters were told they could lost their charter if they spoke up for Mr. Thomas, so yet another travesty against a good Godly Man. Justice Thomas just released a book entitled “My Grandfather’s Son”. It is a fantastic book & a true monument & testimony to what hard work & commitment to the Lord & Godly principles can & will do for you when you choose to “do the right thing”. This is why Justice Thomas is one of my few “Heroes” & I am glad to say that he has been a good Justice on the bench & is not afraid to follow those values he learn from Grandpa as a child to this very day. The final vote back in 1991 was 52-48, a narrow margin & sadly our Senators from Ct. Lieberman & Dodd both voted against Thomas, however Lieberman waited until the 50th vote came to cast his no vote, so he could see Mr. Thomas elected to the Court & also save face with the many special interest left wing groups, not one of his best moments for sure. In the end, I truly felt that EVERY person of Color along with any Minorities should have been outraged at the injustice toward this man. If you don’t “fit their mold” you will be “taken down” as it was stated later, but I am thankful today for such people like Dr. Thomas Sowell & many others of Color who have embraced Conservative thought & see the intrinsic value of “helping yourself” & not relying on the Gov’t. We are some 40+ years removed from what LBJ so proudly proclaimed would be the “Great Society”, 2 words I understand that his speech writer, Dick Goodwin found in some book, but in reality all this time later, we have seen firsthand that it does NOT take a Village to raise a child, but a Mother & Father like Mr. Thomas grandfather, it starts at home, not with the Gov’t friends.
Stay Tuned!

Thanks,
Respectfully,
Al Stewart
6/18/08

What I'll Be Taking On!

2008-06-18T06:16:00.000-07:00

Hi friends,

Here are the first few topic's I'll be writing about soon, in no particular order:

Arminian / Calvin Theological Viewpoints
Hungarian Revolution Of 1956
Why Is Disagreeing "Homophobic" Today & Who Is Partly Responsible For This?
The Clarence Thomas Hearings, A Look Back at 1991
Lakeland Outpouring, My Cautious Thoughts
This Year's Presidential Election: McCain vs. Obama
Is God A Conservative?
Darwinism, "Truth Without Evidence"
Evolution Or Adaptation?
Popular Preachers Who Take Serious Liberty With The Scriptures
Why I believe "Middle School's" Have Damaged Our Neighborhoods
Judical Activism, "Re-Interpreting the Constitution" & It's Deadly Effects on American Society
The Electoral College, Is It In Danger & Why Did Our Forefathers Create It?
Can Women Be In Leadership In The Church Today?
Eternal Security, Can A Christian Fall Away?
In Defense Of God's Desire, Nature & Character

My Very First Post!

2008-06-18T05:16:00.000-07:00

Hi Everyone,

Well, this is as I state above, my very first post. It's my hope & goal to post my "musings" & thoughts on many different subject's & issue's. The beauty of blogging I think is that it gives each of us who choose to participate, a real chance to express our thoughts & feelings on things.
For me, it's sort of like a "Home Group". In Christianity, this is when someone or usually a couple open their home & invite a few friends from the Church & hopefully a few neighbor's over to a weekly or bi-Monthly study which is usually based on God's word or a topic of interest to everyone that is impacting them at the time. So this is what I hope to do here & express my thoughts on things, even those things which are controversial, actually probably especially those things! I also hope that you'll join me in sharing & expressing YOUR thoughts here as well, all comments will be welcome, that are of course rated "R" for readable without my having to delete certain words! (thank you in advance!) It seems that in today's Society, we have all these "talking heads" who express their views & the general public, all too often "consumes" it as though it was fact! And most important is what I call the "forgotten" voice, the voice of God! What does HE have to say on such things? Does HE even speak about such things? So there you have it friends & on each post, I'll finish with these words, "stay tuned", so "stay tuned"

Blessings,
Al