Monday, November 23, 2009

Alliances: Old and New

Two "religious news" items came up on my monitor last Friday while I was at work. One, an electronic newsletter from the IRD (Institute on Religion and Democracy), and the other, a press release announcing the "Manhattan Declaration" sent to me by my friend in Chicago who edits Touchstone, and Salvo, two excellent Christian periodicals.

In the IRD newsletter, I learned that certain Methodists, Presbyterians and Episcopalians are lobbying hard for the passage of the trillion dollar health care plan now moving to the U.S. Senate. Boards from these mainline Protestant denominations were angered by the recent U.S. House vote that prohibited government health insurance funded abortions (a pro-life victory won largely by the efforts of U.S. Catholic Bishops).

The other news I received Friday was of the issuing of the "Manhattan Declaration: A call of Christian Conscience." It is an eloquent plea from Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical believers to uphold the sanctity of life, the institution of marriage, and religious liberty. It also includes an emphatic refusal to compromise the proclamation of the gospel.

Old alliances no longer serve. Our Reformed and Evangelical views on these issues seem to align us more closely with the Orthodox and Catholic than with mainline protestant churches, many of which have joined ranks with "liberal elites."

I cannot remember the last time I described myself as a "Protestant." As a child I found the label handy in distinguishing myself from Roman Catholics, but I don't use it these days.

What do you think? Is it safe to publicly align ourselves with others who call themselves believers in order to stand together on the important moral issues of our day? Can we, while holding theological differences, still unite on other issues?

Over 22,000 have signed this declaration since Friday. What say ye... do we sign on, or no. And if not, why not?


Labels: , , ,

Monday, June 29, 2009

A Culture on the Verge of Hunger?

I believe we are in the "perilous times" of 2 Timothy 3. Paul warned Timothy that in the last days, men would be lovers of themselves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, unthankful, and unholy, etc. Increasingly, this seems to describe our time.

A couple of years ago, I heard a pastor relate an incident that created a strong reaction in me. He told of an encounter he had with an unbeliever who made no bones about his doubts and denials, ending the conversation with this pastor by saying, "Look, I just don't believe in God."

It was the pastor's reply that got my attention. Upon hearing the words "I just don't believe in God" the pastor said, "That's OK, God believes in you." As I reflected on this my stomach churned. I felt that, had I been in the same situation, I might have answered quite differently. Perhaps like this: "Friend, if you persist in this unbelief, you will one day answer for yourself before this Almighty Creator whose holy law you have broken, and whose existence you boldly deny. You are in danger of eternal damnation."

What's the point of relating this story? I believe the day is coming when we will not feel the need to give insipid answers to keep people from being offended or otherwise pushed away from the Gospel. I believe that as sin, selfishness, and unbelief increase, there will come to be a great spiritual void. This, in turn, could lead to a new hunger and a new receptivity for the Good News of the Gospel. For now, Christianity continues to be pushed to the margins of society, but with this comes a corresponding moral bankruptcy. I believe we may soon see the day where life for many has become so dark and hopeless, that folks may begin to long for the Gospel.

Wouldn't it be wonderful to bring light to those in the darkness of these "perilous times" by simply telling the story, and presenting the wonderful news? To reintroduce the light, to a culture where many have become keenly aware of the prevailing darkness, and of their own deep need? No "soft-peddling" or "editing" of the gospel, no more need for "seeker sensitivity," just a bold and ready witness to the Good News-- the offering of a healing balm... the gospel, clearly proclaimed, and eagerly grasped by desperate hearts!

Lord, hasten the day!

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, April 18, 2009

A Sling and a Stone

"So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone" (1 Samuel 17:50.

One of the joys of consistent Bible intake is that you notice increasingly the little turns of phrase that God intends to capture our imagination. Here's one of them: "David prevailed...with a sling and a stone."

That's no inconsequential detail; in one sense it's the point of the whole story. How did little David defeat giant Goliath? With a sling and a stone. That is to say: "David didn't prevail over Goliath at all; God did." The attention is drawn to the means David used in order to make it clear that something/Someone other than David and the means was the real cause of David's victory.

Of course David knew this and made sure that everyone did too when he says in 1 Samuel 17:45-47--
Then David said to the Philistine, “You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down and cut off your head. And I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the Lord saves not with sword and spear. For the battle is the Lord's, and he will give you into our hand.

God loves to use slings and stones and borrowed swords because bigger weapons just might tempt us to credit the means rather than the Maker.

So what are your Goliaths? Sin, abortion, secularism, an unsaved loved one, discouragement, an ugly or evil habit, the culture war? You can be sure of two things: God will give the victory, and God will get the glory. And most likely He will acheive the latter by using some small effort, some inconsequential word, some lesser gift, some quiet insignificant act, some otherwise un-noteworthy person to achieve the former.

Let us never despair if it seems that the enemy has all the big guns on his side. For we've got a God whose really good with a sling and an arrow, and He loves to use it.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Bearing Witness to the World or Becoming Like the World?

I would like to connect to a previous entry posted by Tim entitled Fighting the Culture Within (March 28), as part of an ongoing blog focus on the war against God and Biblical truth surging within our culture. In this entry Tim helpfully described a number of ways that the sinful spirit of the age can find expression in our hearts and flow out through our lives. These sinful characteristics are all forms of the larger problem that the Bible refers to as worldliness, and worldliness is a serious problem pressing in on the followers of Jesus Christ, perhaps in unprecedented ways in our day.

Deeply concerned about this issue, C.J. Mahaney, in Worldliness: Resisting the Seduction of a Fallen World, writes as follows:
Charles Spurgeon, writing 150 years ago, nevertheless speaks poignantly to the problem in the church today: "I believe," he asserted, "that one reason why the church of God at this present moment has so little influence over the world is because the world has so much influence over the church." The greater our difference from the world, the more true our testimony for Christ--and the more potent our witness against sin. But sadly, today, there’s not much difference. The lines have blurred. The lack of clarity between the church and the world has undercut our testimony for Christ and undermined our witness against sin. In Spurgeon’s words once again: "Worldliness is growing over the church; she is mossed with it."

Are the lines between Christian and worldly conduct blurry in your mind--and more importantly, in your life? To put it another way, is your lifestyle obviously different from that of the non-Christian?

Imagine I take a blind test in which my task is to identify the genuine follower of Jesus Christ. My choices are an unregenerate individual and you. I’m given two reports detailing conversations, Internet activity, manner of dress, iPod playlists, television habits, hobbies, leisure time, financial transactions, thoughts, passions, and dreams.

The question is: Would I be able to tell you apart? Would I discern a difference between you and your unconverted neighbor, coworker, classmate, or friend? Have the lines between Christian and worldly conduct in your life become so indistinguishable that there really is no difference at all?

If the difference is hard to detect, you may be in danger of drifting down the deserter’s path with Demas (see 2 Tim. 4:10). In front of the deserter’s path is a warning sign. It’s 1 John 2:15: "Do not love the world or anything in the world.”

As followers of the Lord Jesus Christ we are called to be salt and light in relationship to the fallen world around us. We should be a true counter culture community living out the reality of our relationship with the Savior, speaking the truth in love as we bear witness to Christ to a culture in rebellion against the infinite-personal God who is really there, and who has spoken to us in the Bible. However, like the Israelites, who were called by God to be a holy nation, but were so often not able to faithfully bear witness to the surrounding culture because they were so much like it, so likewise, today’s church is succumbing to the same malady: worldliness.

As I reflect on this a probing question comes to mind, a question posed by the Savior: “Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46).

Why indeed.

Labels: , ,