Archive for the 'Gospel' Category

The Pragmatism of Entertainment

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on March 12, 2010
in Culture, Gospel and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

” For centuries the Church stood solidly against every form of worldly entertainment, recognizing it for what it was – a device for wasting time, a refuge from the disturbing voice of conscience, a scheme to  divert attention from moral accountability.  For this she got herself abused roundly by the sons of this world.  But of late she has become tired of the abuse and has given over the struggle.  She appears to have decided that if she cannot conquer the great god Entertainment she may as well join forces with him and make what use she can of his powers.  So today we have an astonishing spectacle of millions of dollars being poured into the in holy job of providing earthly entertainment for the so-called sons of heaven.  Religious entertainment is in many places rapidly crowding out the serious things of God.   Many churches these days have become little more than poor theaters where fifth-rate “producers” peddle their shoddy wares with the full approval of evangelical leaders who can even quote holy text in defense of their delinquency.  And hardly a man dares raise his voice against it.”

~ A. W. Tozer, “The Root Of The Righteous”, (Harrisburg, PA, Christian Publications, 1955), pg.32-33

While Tozer was speaking of the influences of the world in the church in 1955, it may seem difficult to see his concerns in light of today’s so-called  “seeker-sensitive” churches or “missional churches” who have so “engaged” the culture, that it is difficult to separate the world from the church.

In the end, the deadly seriousness of the Gospel has been trivialized, and minimalized, as we have become more interested in meeting the felt needs of the audience.  The audience is now sovereign, not the Lord Jesus Christ and propositional truth born from the Scriptures.  Tozer saw entertainment becoming the primary tool used for outreach.  He rightly feared that the evangelical church was replacing the frivolous and the carnal for the supremacy of the clear preaching of the Word of God and the worship of the saints of God was becoming a spectator sport.  Like Spurgeon, Tozer feared the “down grading” of the church which would leave us with only a shell, devoid of sound doctrine and lofty worship where Christ would be seen and worshiped as supremely holy and the only sovereign of our lives.

Sadly, worldly pragmatism for the sake of church growth and perceived ministry success has replaced our reliance upon the  ministry of the convincing and convicting power of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8). It is easier for us to manufacture counterfeit growth than to wait on the movement of the regenerating ministry of the Spirit of God (Titus 3:5; John 3:5-6) as the church supplicates in fervent prayer and as separated witnesses ( I Peter 3:15) in obedient reliance as planters and sowers ( 1 Corinthians 3:7-8).  The latter requires a church of faith while the former looks to that which man, can and likes to do.

- Michael Holtzinger

Quote Of The Day

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on March 9, 2010
in Gospel and Quote of the Day
. 0 Comments

“The man who talks about his experience as a Christian, who never does anything for Christ, is , I am afraid, only and idle dreamer.”

~ Charles Spurgeon, 1893, Sermon 2315

Quote Of The Day

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 26, 2010
in Gospel, Quote of the Day and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

But if any one fact is clear, … it is that the Christian movement at its inception was not just a way of life in the modern sense, but a way of life founded upon a message. It is perfectly clear that the first Christian missionaries did not simply come forward with exhortation; they did not say: “Jesus of Nazareth lived a wonderful life of filial piety, and we call upon you our hearers to yield yourselves as we have done to the spell of that life.” Certainly that is what modern historians would have expected the first Christian missionaries to say, but it must be recognized at least that as a matter of fact they said nothing of the kind. They came forward, not merely with an exhortation or with a program, but with a message,—with an account of something that had happened a short time before. “Christ died for our sins,” they said, “according to the Scriptures; he was buried; he has been raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”

This message, even the small excerpt from it quoted by Paul in 1Cor. 15:3ff., contains two elements—it contains (1) the facts and (2) the meaning of the facts (“for our sins”). The narration of the facts is history; the setting forth of the meaning of the facts is doctrine. These two elements are always contained in the Christian message. “Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried”-that is history. “He loved me and gave himself

for me”—that is doctrine. Without these two elements, inextricably intertwined, there is no Christianity.

The character of primitive Christianity, as founded upon a message, is summed up in the words of the eighth verse of the first chapter of Acts—”Ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” It is entirely unnecessary, for the present purpose, to argue about the historical value of the Book of Acts or to discuss the question whether Jesus really spoke the words just quoted. In any case the verse must be recognized as an adequate summary of what is known about primitive Christianity. From the beginning Christianity was a campaign of witnessing. And the witnessing did not concern merely what Jesus was doing within the recesses of the individual life. To take the words of Acts in that way is to do violence to the context and to all the evidence. On the contrary, the Epistles of Paul and all the sources make it abundantly plain that the testimony was primarily not to inner spiritual facts but to what Jesus had done once for all in His death and resurrection.

~ J. Gresham Machen, (1881-1937), Liberalism or Christianity?, THE PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL REVIEW, Vol. 20, 1922, Page 97

Quote Of The Day

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 23, 2010
in Calvinsim, Gospel, Theology 101 and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

“For Calvinism, in this soteriological aspect of it, is just the perception and expression and defence of the utter dependence of the soul on the free grace of God for salvation. All its so-called hard features—its doctrine of original sin, yes, speak it right out, its doctrine of total depravity and the entire inability of the sinful will to good; its doctrine of election, or, to put it in the words everywhere spoken against, its doctrine of predestination and preterition, of reprobation itself—mean just this and nothing more. Calvinism will not play fast and loose with the free grace of God. It is set upon giving to God, and to God alone, the glory and all the glory of salvation. There are others than Calvinists, no doubt, who would fain make the same great confession. But they make it with reserves, or they painfully justify the making of it by some tenuous theory which confuses nature and grace. They leave logical pitfalls on this side or that, and the difference between logical pitfalls and other pitfalls is that the wayfarer may fall into the others, but the plain man, just because his is a simple mind, must fall into those. Calvinism will leave no logical pitfalls and will make no reserves. It will have nothing to do with theories whose function it is to explain away facts. It confesses, with a heart full of adoring gratitude, that to God, and to God alone, belongs salvation and the whole of salvation; that He it is, and He alone, who works salvation in its whole reach. Any falling away in the slightest measure from this great confession is to fall away from Calvinism. Any intrusion of any human merit, or act, or disposition, or power, as ground or cause or occasion, into the process of divine salvation,—whether in the way of power to resist or of ability to improve grace, of the opening of the soul to the reception of grace, or of the employment of grace already received—is a breach with Calvinism.”

~ B.B. Warfield, was professor of theology at Princeton Seminary from 1887 to 1921, Taken from an article:  “Calvinism Today”

The Manhattan Declaration “Why I can’t support the Declaration”

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 19, 2010
in Apologetics, Gospel and Theology 101
. 0 Comments

Over the many years of my ministry I have enthusiastically and sometimes aggressively supported such causes as the pro-life movement, the defense of traditional marriage, and religious liberty as part of my expression of the Christian faith I hold and my obedience to Christ.  Time and treasure have been spent on all these issues and others as well.  There is no doubt in my mind that the Christian and the Church should be animated and proactive on these and other issues as an outgrowth of our commitment and obedience to the Savior who purchased us with His precious blood on the cross of Calvary.

In 1994, Franky Schaeffer, in his book; “Bad News For Modern Man – An Agenda For Christian Activism” called for “An Ecumenicism of Orthodoxy” where religious groups united around what he called “an ecumenism … based upon what we agree to be the essence of Christian faith, including an orthodoxy of belief in social concerns and priorities.”[1] But just what is this “essence of Christian faith?”  It does not take long to see that Franky is arguing for a coalition of belligerents that would include the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches in cooperation with Evangelicals[2].
Continue reading ‘The Manhattan Declaration “Why I can’t support the Declaration”’

Quote Of The Day

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 19, 2010
in Gospel, Quote of the Day and Theology 101
. 0 Comments

There are those who think that Charles Hyden Spurgeon was not a Calvinist. So, here’s a quote from Spurgeon on “limited atonement.”

The Armenians say, Christ died for all men. Ask them what they mean by it. Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of all men? They say, “No, certainly not.” We ask them the next question – Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of any man in particular? They answer “No.” They are obliged to admit this if they are consistent. They say “No, Christ has died that any man may be saved if” – and then follow certain conditions of salvation. We say, then we will just go back to the old statement – Christ did not die so as beyond doubt to secure the salvation of anybody, did he? You must say “No”; you are obliged to say so, for you believe that even after a man has been pardoned, he may yet fall from grace, and perish. Now who is it that limits the death of Christ? Why, you. You say that Christ did not die so as to infallibly secure the salvation of anybody, We beg your pardon, when you say we limit Christ’s death; we say, No my dear sir, it is you that do it. We say Christ so died that he infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ’s death no only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved. You are welcome to your atonement; you may keep it. We will never renounce ours for the sake of it.

- Charles H. Spurgeon, “Particular Redemption,” sermon preached February 28, 1858.

I Am Secure Because of the Substitutionary, Sacrificial Death of Christ

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 18, 2010
in Calvinsim, Gospel, Theology 101 and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

When we place our faith in Christ we do so because He stood in our place as an atonement for sin (2 Corinthians 5:21).  He became our substitute for the punishment of sin and endured the wrath of a just and righteous God for us in our stead (Romans 3:24-26). He bore the sins of others in His body on the cross (1 Peter 2:24); He suffered once to bear the sins of others (Hebrews 9:28); He experienced horrible suffering, scourging, and death in place of sinners (Isaiah 53:4-6). That is the meaning of substitution.  It is often described as “vicarious,” meaning; “in place of another.”  The innocent Christ made atonement and suffered for the wicked (1 Peter 3:18).

Two Greek prepositions emphasize the substitutionary nature of the death of Christ on the cross. The preposition anti, ( appears 22 time in N.T.)  translated “for,” means Christ died “instead of” sinners (Matthew. 20:28; Mark 10:45). The preposition huper, also translated “for,” means Christ died “for the benefit of,”  or “in place of” sinners (Galatians 3:13; 1 Timothy. 2:6; 2 Corinthians. 5:21; 1 Peter. 3:18).

Continue reading ‘I Am Secure Because of the Substitutionary, Sacrificial Death of Christ’

Perserverance Of The Saints and the Westminster Confession

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 9, 2010
in Gospel, Theology 101 and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

Whenever I hear someone critical of the doctrine of the security of the believer, and properly called the “perseverance of the saints”, the question comes up;  “Is he a Baptist?”  This doctrine is not peculiar to Baptists but is held by a great many evangelical groups and was beautifully expressed by Reformed Theology in the Westminster Confession of Faith.  Here it is in part:

wcf“They whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually call and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally, nor finally fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end and be eterenally saved.  This perseverance of the saints depends, not upon their own free-will, but on the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father, upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ; the abiding of the Spirit and of the seed of God within them; and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which ariseth also the certainly and infallibility thereof.  Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous  sins; and for a time continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve His Holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.”

~Philip Schaff, ed., “The Creeds of Christendom, vol. 3, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1977, pg. 636-637

There can no doubt, by honest people, that the security of the believer/perseverance of the saints is not an excuse for antinomianism (a license to sin).

Those who hold that a onetime decision to accept Jesus Christ as Savior but not as Lord is all it takes to be a Christian will find that the Westminster Confession and the whole of the Scriptures fly in the face of that position.  Salvation is far more than an ascent to the facts of salvation; it also incorporates a transforming commitment to Christ where there is an abandonment of self effort that is reflected in the totality of one’s life.  It is commitment that emulates true repentance which is more than a change of mind about who Jesus Christ is (Deity), but one that changes one’s mind about sin as well and a commitment to walk in Christ, by the grace of God (Ephesians 2:10; Gal 5:16).  It s a faith that looks to Christ as the full sufficiency for life itself.  Christ did not come to give only a “fire escape,” but rather saving life itself (John 10:10).  This life perseveres to the end by the power of resurrected Christ (Philippians 1:6; 3:10).

-  Michael Holtzinger

Secure In Christ By The Power of God

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 5, 2010
in Calvinsim, Gospel, Theology 101 and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

Ephesians 1:19-22 ( NKJV ) 19and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power  20which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come. 22And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 

Philippians 3:20-21 ( NKJV ) 20For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,  21who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.

waterfallThis is a further discussion in many ways of the purposes of God in salvation.  Whatever God purposes He must have the power to carry out.  A God who calls ( Romans 8:28,30; Romans 9:24, 1 Corinthians 1:2,9,24,26; Galatians 5:13; Ephesians 4:1,4; 1 Thessalonians 2:12; 5:24, Colossians 3:15; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 Peter 1:15), and a God who elects (Romans 8:33; 9:11, 11:5,7,28; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; Colossians 3:12; 1 Peter 1:2) is a Sovereign God.  But if He lacks the power of his calling and elective prerogatives  He  cannot, in the final analysis , be called Sovereign and his elective purposes and His calling out a people unto Himself is meaningless.  Thankfully, this is not the case.

In our Lord’s high priestly prayer in the Gospel of John, we read; “Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.” The Apostle Peter, who no doubt heard this prayer, in his first epistle, concluded that we are “kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time” (I Peter 1:5).  The Lord Jesus’ prayer that those who were given to Him by the Father, were to be kept by the authority and power of the name of God.  It is no wonder then that Peter would state so emphatically that we are kept by the power of God, as it rests on the very authority and reputation of God Himself.

Continue reading ‘Secure In Christ By The Power of God’

National Prayer Breakfast

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 4, 2010
in Gospel, Theology 101 and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

nday of prayerMornings for me have seen some changes of this past year as I received news from my doctor that “Hot Tamales” and “Junior Mints” were not a food group.  This meant a change in diet and early morning exercise.  The diet change was no big deal, but the exercise was something else.  So, in order to assuage the boredom of peddling a recumbent bicycle I turn on the TV and watch the news while I sweat and peddled.

Today was the National Day of Prayer and I was treated to constant flash backs on the TV news to the National Prayer Breakfast and then it happened… the speech of President Obama from the Prayer Breakfast.

First, let me say that my understanding of the Biblical theology of prayer is that true prayer rests with regenerated believers alone (Isaiah1:15; John 9:31).  And a gathering of people from all kinds of faith, Christian (Evangelical, Liberal Protestant, Catholic, etc.), along with Mormonism, Scientology, Islam, Buddhist, and who knows what else sends a message that devalues propositional truth, the exclusiveness of the Scriptures,  and makes God the subjective  god of our imagination.

As I listened though, to President Obama it became very clear, very quickly, that for him, government was the answer to the social condition of man and that God was a mere helper.  He certainly did not see prayer from a Biblical perspective that views the discipline of prayer as a complete dependence upon God no matter what the situation or outcome.  The politicizing of prayer by our President was truly sickening and his reliance on “his administration” and “their” policies to cure the ills of mankind was staggering.

I have kept this blog short, as I could comment no further on the speech since  I walked out of the room before he finished and I got sicker.

Acts 17:28 ( NKJV ) 28for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’

2 Chronicles 7:14 ( NKJV ) 14if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

-  Michael Holtzinger

I Am Secure Because Of The Sovereign Purposes Of God

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 3, 2010
in Calvinsim, Gospel and Theology 101
. 0 Comments

Ephesians 1:11 ( NKJV ) 11In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will,

Titus 3:5 ( NKJV ) 5not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,

waterfallI can remember a time before I came to know the Lord when I was told that my salvation did not depend on my goodness or good works but on Christ. I just found that incomprehensible. Once I came to know Christ I thought I understood the Biblical principle that I was saved by the Grace of God because of the work of Christ on the cross.  My understanding was that I added no work or effort to my salvation.  While that is true, what I didn’t really get, was that the phrase “not of works” (Ephesians 2:8, Titus 3:5; Romans 9:11), meant that God chose and that He did this before the foundation of the world and that His choosing was not dependent upon any good works I may or may not do in the future.

Ephesians 1:3-4 ( NKJV ) 3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,  4just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love.

The emphasis of Ephesians 1:11 is that salvation it is not by the will or effort of man but solely by the will of God and therefore for His purposes only (vs.5)! The Christian has an inheritance in Christ based on the will and purposes of God alone (vv.5, 11).
Continue reading ‘I Am Secure Because Of The Sovereign Purposes Of God’

Quote Of The Day

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on February 2, 2010
in Gospel, Quote of the Day and Theology 101
. 0 Comments

“What good does it do to me to tell me that the type of religion presented in the Bible is a very fine type of religion and that the thing for me to do is just to start practicing that type of religion now? …I will tell you, my friend,.  It does me not one tiniest little bit of good.

…What I need first of all is not exhortation, but a gospel, not directions for saving myself but knowledge of how God has saved me.  Have you any good news?  That is the question that I ask of you.  I know your exhortations will not help me.  But if anything has been done to save me, will you not tell me the facts?”

~John Gresham Machen, “Christian Faith In The Modern World”, (New York: Macmillan, 1936, pg 57

Quote Of The Day

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on January 29, 2010
in Gospel, Quote of the Day and Theology 101
. 0 Comments

“For the doctrine of justification by faith is like Atlas: it bears a world on its shoulders, the entire evangelical knowledge of saving grace.  …A right view of these things is not possible without a right understanding of justification; so that, when justification falls, all true knowledge of the grace of God in human life falls,  all true knowledge of the grace of God in human life falls with it, and then, as Luther said, the church itself falls. A society like the Church of Rome, which is committed by its official creed to pervert the doctrine of justification, has sentenced itself to a distorted understanding of salvation at every point.  Nor can these distortions ever be corrected till Roman doctrine of justification is put right.  And something similar happens when Protestants let the thought of justification drop out of their minds: true knowledge of salvation drops out with it, and cannot be restored till the truth of justification is back in its proper place.  When Atlas falls, everything that rested on his shoulders comes crashing down too.”

~J.I. Packer, “Introductory Essay,” in James Buchanan, “The octane of Justification: An Outline Of Its History In The Church And Of Its Exposition  From Scripture, London: Banner of Truth, 1961, pp. viii, ix

The Jesus of Postmodernism Has No Address

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on December 19, 2009
in Apologetics, Culture, Gospel and Theology 101
. 0 Comments

mailboxNot long ago I was out on visitation to visit a family who had recently visited the church.  But before I went out I used “Google Earth” to locate the address and print out a map.  I even went so far as to zoom in on the earth map to get an idea of what their house looked like.  I was confident I knew where to  go and had the right address.  That night it was raining and seemed especially dark.  But I was sure that between my research, printed directions, and GPS navigation I would find the right address.  I was really proud of myself for thinking ahead as I headed out that evening.   I just knew I would find the address and arrive on time for my visit with the new family.  All was going well until I came within striking distance of success.  As I was approaching their house, in the rain, I miss read a street sign and turned down the wrong street.  Even my GPS could not help at this point because I was so close.  But the house at the address I pulled up to didn’t look anything like the picture I had seen on “Google Earth.”  I was now a bit confused but proceeded to get out of my car and walk up the drive way for the visit.  Part way up my doubts grew stronger so I turned around and walked back down the driveway and up to the street corner to double check the street address.  I was on the wrong street!  The street I needed was a couple hundred feet away.

I wonder what would have happened if I had applied postmodern epistemology?  For the postmodernist there is no absolute objective truth.  Would the folks answering the door on the wrong street address have said, “Come on in, we’re as good as the folks a block away.  We’re just like them.”  Hmmm… I wonder how the family I was supposed to visit and was waiting for me would have taken that concept of truth upon my non-arrival?

But for many evangelicals that is exactly how we approach Christ.  For the postmodernist evangelical it is all about relationship and objective truth is unnecessary.   William H. Willimon of Duke University in the 1996, March 4th issue of “Christianity Today, pp 21-22, makes exactly that argument.  Evangelicals, according to Willimon, “are making a tactical mistake.”  “…Jesus did not arrive among us enunciating a set of propositions that we are to affirm.”  He suggests that Jesus came inviting us to follow Him.  But just exactly how are to follow Christ if we have no information about Him that is based on reality and objective truth?  For Willimon it was not important that a person understand or hold to any propositional truths concerning Jesus which might be characterized as objective truth.  With that kind of logic the Jesus of Mormonism or Islam will do nicely.  And of course this kind of logic has also extended itself to the authority of the Scriptures.  For the postmodernist Christian, the bible is authoritative simply because “the community of faith” has granted it this status, not because the Scripture claim to be the infallible, inerrant word of God and authoritative within its self.
Continue reading ‘The Jesus of Postmodernism Has No Address’

The Security Of The Believer – What It Is Not!

Published
by
Mike Holtzinger
on December 17, 2009
in Gospel, Theology 101 and Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

Matthew 7:21-23 ( NKJV ) 21“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.  22Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’  23And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

2 Corinthians 13:5 ( NKJV ) 5Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

waterfallFor me, there is no more glorious a thought than to know that I rest in the saving hands of God (John 1:28).  And for many years I rested in this one solid dimension of God’s faithful grace until, while reading Romans 9:4-13 I saw that the elective purposes of God stood as the foundational and paramount truth to my position in Christ.  I realized that when we are told that it “is not of works but of Him who calls” (vs.11), I stood solely by the grace of God and that “not of works” meant exactly that.  I saw new and afresh that I was saved “to the praise of the glory of His grace” (Ephesians 1:4), and “that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:7).

But the “exceeding grace” of God found in the gospel has been co-opted by a gospel message that proclaims;”You don’t have to give up anything, come as you are.”  It is a gospel message that bases it invitation on; “Ask Jesus into your heart,” or ”Invite Christ into your life”, and even worse; “God has a wonderful plan for your life.”  In each of these statements, including the first double phrased statement, there is a measure of truth but if they stand alone they are completely and wholly inadequate and often base the gospel  invitation solely on the perceived benefits accruing to the hearer. It is a gospel message for the welfare of men and not preeminently to the glory of God.  The emphasis on the saviorhood of Christ  is purely relational and ignores or plays down sin and is silent regarding  Jesus as Lord of the life.  Christ is not divided (I Corinthians 1:13).  He is savior and Lord.  The modern gospel message calls the lost to Christ without addressing sin, the depravity of man and the true nature of justification that sees it as a result of regeneration leading to sanctification.  James Montgomery Boice in his preface to MacArthur’s book, “The Gospel According to Jesus Christ states;
Continue reading ‘The Security Of The Believer – What It Is Not!’