a purer conversation...

CHRISTIANS LIVING TOGETHER: Why Its Not A Wise Choice

2011-10-27T10:08:00.004-05:00

Lately I’ve been struggling with the abundant number of Christian couples my age who are avoiding marriage and simply sharing a living space. My feeling isn’t a self-righteous “looking down” upon, rather its a burdensome, painful, frustrating, worrisome feeling in my gut. In an attempt NOT to sound condescending to my fellow generation, and those above and below our generation, I simply want to share some truths in love as to the dangers of “cohabitation.” What follows are five reasons why living together outside of marriage is simply not a wise choice for a self-pronounced follower of Jesus. This post deals with the first of those reasons.

Reason Number One:

Truthfully, this should be the primary reason two Christians not live together. Yet in our current climate of “Anything goes, grace is sufficient,” this reason usually is balked at and ignored. Nevertheless, here it goes: Living together is disobedience to the Lord. Whew, glad that’s out of the bag. Seriously, though, living together outside of marriage is opposed to God’s plan for life and marriage. Now, God gave marriage for two primary reasons: First, it is a picture of His covenantal relationship with His followers, those whom He loves. The church is called “The Bride of Christ,” for a reason. Christian marriage is to model for the world the unselfish, undeniably better alternative that is a relationship with an almighty, all-loving, and just God and creator. Second, God gave marriage to us as a gift of love. Marriage is intended to cause within us a sense of completeness of companionship. Realizing that for a very small minority celibacy is satisfying, that leaves vast droves of humans with an innate desire to “fill the void” of human loneliness. Thus, we have a chance at truly blissful, deeply satisfying matrimony. Also, it is an opportunity for holiness. Note that I did not say perfection, but holiness. Holiness is God’s desire for his followers. Marriage serves as an opportunity for two people, in love with God and each other, to encourage and equip each other for living in Christ.

All of that being said--or written I suppose--the best reason why we shouldn’t settle for living together is that it forces us to look at God and say, quite plainly I might add, “Your not enough for me. Your ways don't satisfy me. I need to satisfy “me” elsewhere.” No one intentionally says that to God, though it is a statement made by our actions.

Give it some thought, reason with me on this.

I’ll share the next reason in the near days ahead. May the Lord guide us, who know Him and love Him, to a place where we can teach, rebuke, correct, train in godliness, openly without either condemnation or toleration.

Glory to the King of kings!

Bryan Laramore

Have You Ever Wondered?: A New Sunday Night Series @ ABC

2010-06-10T21:59:00.004-05:00

Two events in the recent past have led me to realize the need to have an "anything goes," open time of discussion about whatever topic is on our people's minds regarding faith and life.

FIRST, my wife and I were graciously invited to spend a weekend with our Senior Adults in Branson, MO at the end of this past April. The man who puts this event together each year came to me with a request, "Could we simply have an open ended time where people could ask any questions they've been wanting answered regarding God, the Bible, Christian practice, etc.?" I immediately felt like it was blessed idea! So we did, it was a hit, incredible discussion erupted, and together as God's people we sought out the Word!

SECOND, LifeChurch.tv did a sermon series several months ago on this exact subject "FAQ." (even though I couldn't find the series in their sermon archives) Allow me to be clear, I'm not claiming here that Lifechurch.tv is the "mouthpiece of God" in these corrupt days, and that anything they do is a must for every other church, but I will attest to this much: they boldly handle issues in their sermon series' that both teach the "whole counsel of God" and meet people where they are. So, they're worth taking a cue or two from.

If you've any questions to throw into the mix, please, for the sake of Christian growth, send them to me either by posting a response to this post or emailing me at bryan.laramore@gmail.com

For the Glory of Christ,

Bryan

A Model For Repentance - Part One

2010-02-10T09:21:00.008-06:00

The instruction for a follower of Christ to repent from sins is as paramount a teaching in Scripture as is "salvation by grace through faith" (2 Chron 6:38; Ps 7:12; Matt 3:2; Mk 1:15). Yet for every believer, the act of repentance is as unnatural and difficult as is fitting a round peg into a square hole. All humans are marred by the Fall of Man (Gen 3) and thus rebel against their God and Creator. This is a biblical fact and causes us realize how difficult it is for us to remove our desires for the things of the world and lusts of the flesh.

When Christ, though, ransoms a wicked heart and gives it His heart of righteousness, a believer is then called to "Repent and believe the Gospel." This has always plagued me, repentance that is. It is difficult, frustrating, guilt-ridden, and flat out hard work, or at least it seems. But I reckon it doesn't have to be. In actuality, God grants us the power for repentance. He provides the desire and foundation for repentance. Further, when we turn from evil and look to God, he makes it the joy of our heart to look on sin with disgust, just as he does.

But how?

When writing to the church at Colossae, Paul lined out for them what appears to me to be a "Model of Repentance." Now, Paul didn't label it this. Paul didn't come up with a three-point Baptist message entitled, "Four Easy Steps to the Repentance You Need" and conclude it with some emotionally driven poem or illustrative story. Rather, he simply taught what was revealed to him from Christ himself (Gal 1:12ff).

Here's what I see in the third chapter of Colossians regarding repentance:

1. Colossians 3:1-4. If we are going to be successful in our pursuit of repentance, we must "Get a Proper Focus." Our heart and mind should be set on the one who is calling us into relationship. If we have a "glancing eye" on anything else, of course we will return to the things of the world, "just as a dog returns to his vomit" (Prov 26:11). Just as Jesus taught his disciples that if they abide in Him, He will remain in them. This involves a constant, moment-by-moment intentional focus on the Lord. It's not easy, I'll throw that in right up front, but IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO OUR FAITH WALK.

Paul assumes that if a person "has been raised with Christ" (a way of saying, "If a person is a believer"), they must set their minds on Christ; not half of their attention, rather all of it. In other words, the believer's chief concern is Christ.

The questions to ask oneself are:
"What am I doing that pleases the Lord right now, through the day, and in the future?"
"What am I not doing that I ought to be?"
"Are my prayers filled with the wonder and glory of God or are they consumed with self needs?"
"Do the words of my mouth consistently honor my Lord?"
"If called upon, at any moment, could I give a defense for the hope I have in Christ"?
"Is my life consumed with a passion for spreading the glory of God?"

And so forth and so on . . .

Listen, we've got to get past this base and perverse view of Christianity that has reeked havoc on the faith in the latter part of the 20 century and the 21st century. Namely, the idea of "once saved always saved" gives me the right to do whatever I want and expect Heaven in the end.

Don't mock it, no one admits it aloud, but the majority of Christians I see, myself included, either all the time or at one time have affirmed it in your/our lifestyle.

"Seek the things that are above; set your minds on things that are above."

If you're not to this point, worry not, the Lord is calling you to it. He'll grant you the strength and the desire to do so. What else did Christ mean when he said, "Seek and you shall find, ask and you shall receive, knock and the door will be opened to you"?

REPENT and believe the Gospel

Grace for the Day

New Sermon Series

2010-02-01T10:20:00.006-06:00

This past Sunday, I began a new sermon series entitled, "Purpose." We'll be taking four weeks to unravel a mission statement developed by ABC several months before Whit and I arrived here. Here's what they adopted:

We exist to
PROCLAIM the Truth of the Gospel;
MAKE DISCIPLES in our Community, Nation, and World;
BRING RENEWAL and CHANGE in People;
WORSHIP a Glorified God through Christ!

Upon hearing this myself, I immediately had the sense that it was "right" for us! So now, it forms my own aim and goal here, as God has granted us these tasks to accomplish . . .

These essentially were the points in yesterdays message:
- We will PROCLAIM the Gospel both as individuals (via work, community functions, leisure, etc.) and as a church (preaching, worship, bible studies, fellowships, etc.)
- We will PROCLAIM the TRUTH of the Gospel, and nothing short of it. There are many "gospels," and/or variations of the gospel, but we will proclaim the biblical gospel.
- We will PROCLAIM the Gospel as Scripture teaches it: "while we were yet SINNERS, CHRIST died for us." We won't leave out the fact that without Christ we'd all suffer death and damnation. We won't leave out the bloodiness of the Cross, or the reality that by birth we're all inherently wicked, not inherently good. . . We will proclaim, instead, that with Christ, we'll endure this life and enjoy fellowship with a loving, faithful, just, holy creator.

If you'd like to, you can hear this message by clicking here or you can search "Ames Baptist Church" on iTunes . . .

Grace for the Day

How Is Ames Baptist Helping Haiti?

2010-01-25T08:45:00.017-06:00

Yesterday, the family of Ames Baptist Church decided to step out in faith and seek the Lord as to how we will be helping Haitian churches who were wrecked as a result of the January 12 earthquake. This coming Sunday, January 31st, we'll make a decision as a church body to do two things to directly help the rebuilding process of Christian churches in Haiti:

First, we'll take a special offering which will be above and beyond our normal tithes (Ps 24:1; Matt 25:14-30; Deut 14:22-23; 2 Chron 31:4-18; 2 Cor 8:3, 9:8). This will be an opportunity for individual members to dig deep and sacrifice for the Lord for the purpose of rebuilding His kingdom work in Haiti.

Second, as a church body, we'll dig deep and take 50% of our regular tithes and sacrifice for the Lord to help the kingdom rebuilding in Haiti.

Why are we doing this?
It behooves me as a pastor at least to consider what it would be like to stand in the shoes of a pastor in Haiti who has lost everything from family, church leaders, church members, ministry efforts, ministry facilities, etc., and still know that my calling is to reach the lost and teach the Word. This concern spilled over into our Deacon leadership and from there I believe God is moving our hearts as a church body to support this effort, for His glory and His renown.

How Are We Doing This?
First, with open hearts and by faith in the power of Christ. Second, by sending our offering through Churches Helping Churches. This organization has been brought together by nationally respected pastors Mark Driscoll, Preaching Pastor of Mars Hill Church, and James MacDonald, Senior Pastor of Harvest Bible Chapel,

"Churches Helping Churches was created to address the immediate and long-term needs of churches when disaster befalls a country, region, city, or people in the spirit of Galatians 6:10—“…let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.”

It is my desire to lead the ABC family to sacrificially give towards God's work in Haiti in the wake of this devastating disaster. Beloved, take this week to prayerfully consider how the Lord is leading you. This is not about making a statement for ABC, this is about standing before our Great and Glorious God passionately proclaiming, "Lord we will gladly spend and be spent for their souls" (2 Cor 12:15).

Will you help the churches of Haiti?

Forgotten God

2009-09-30T09:39:00.002-05:00

Forgotten God: Reversing Our Tragic Neglect of the Holy Spirit. By Francis Chan with Danae Yankoski. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2009. 166 Pages. $14.99.

Francis Chan is Senior Pastor of Cornerstone Church in Simi Valley, California. He is founder and chancellor of Eternity Bible College in Simi Valley, California and also sits on the board of Children’s Hunger Fund. Chan is actively pursuing truth with a Christ-centered, God-glorifying, and Spirit-led passion.
Forgotten God is a balanced approach to the über-controversial subject of The Holy Spirit. Chan, a conservative, albeit in moderation, seemingly loosens his conservative ties while also reigning in any open, charismatic ties as he seeks to explore the Holy Spirit from a truly, biblical position. It is this writer’s opinion that Chan presents a balanced look at the Holy Spirit, giving supremacy to Scripture and glory to Christ.
Strengths of this book include: (1) readable and clear writing style. Chan puts his information before the reader in such a way that the need for clarification on the reader’s end is minimal if needed at all. (2) Chan provides helpful testimonies at the conclusion of each chapter regarding various Spirit-filled believers and the work to which God has called them. This seems to put forth “proof,” for lack of a better term, for the Spirit’s work in the lives of those presented. (3) At a point in Christendom when there is great struggle between “old” and “new” approaches, Chan presents culturally relevant, biblically based, and accurate claims regarding Christianity’s varied approaches to and understandings of the Holy Spirit.
Several areas of this book that warrant highlighting are as follows: (1) Chan exposes the truth that the Holy Spirit resides in all follower’s of Christ, regardless of whether or not they accept Him, follow Him, trust Him, or even understand Him. The issue, as the author points out, is whether or not believers are actively and daily seeking the Spirit’s supernatural filling and dwelling in their lives. Chan writes, “Living by the Spirit implies a habitual, continual, and active interaction with the Holy Spirit. (pp. 130-131). (2) Chan concludes with what could be considered as the most important application of his book: Supernatural Church. It becomes clear that his desire is for the Bride of Christ to live up to her Christ-commanded expectation. Namely, that they accept, follow, and live by the Holy Spirit’s leading, and not rely solely on a charismatic, good-looking, intelligent, visioneering, exuberant, or even controversial lead pastor or pastoral team (pp. 141-157). (3) Chan offers a difficult realization for any pastor or believer to stomach. He poses the question, essentially, “Is my theological, associational, and social appearance and reputation in the way of wholly leaning on the Holy Spirit?” (pp. 51-54). Chan seeks to cut out any intellectual jargon or theological hubbub and get right down to it, he writes, “One question I’ve had to ask myself repeatedly is am I even open to the possibility that I could be wrong in my beliefs?” (p. 52).
Chan’s intention is not to call into question historically orthodox belief. Neither is it his desire to cause a ecclesial conundrum. Rather, it is apparent that his yearning is to present before all of Christianity, whether it be Charismatics, Fundamentalists, Moderates, Liberals, Lay-folk, those who care or those who don’t, etc., the realization that a vibrant walk with Jesus Christ must fully rely on the Holy Spirit. After all, is this not what Christ intended when he said the Holy Spirit would be with us, guiding us, teaching us, reminding us, in the Lord’s physical absence (John 14:15-30)?

A Long Time Comin'

2009-08-06T08:15:00.002-05:00

As is often stated in the blogosphere by lessor bloggers, "It has been far too long since my last post." But here is an update. I have officially been a pastor for around six weeks. It's amazing how much one can learn in such a short time. We've preached almost through First John on Sunday mornings. We've encountered "Why We Believe What We Believe" on Sunday nights, thus far we've touched on Scripture, Salvation History, God, Jesus, and more. We've worked to make an impact in the lives of 25 or so children every week through our Children's Ministry. We are working towards helping students with true faith and repentance and what it is to Walk with Jesus.

It's been exciting and God is surely moving every day at Ames.

Praying for Deacon leadership, salvation for many, serious discipleship for many others.

More to come.

Grace,
Bryan Laramore

Edgy or Offensive?

2009-05-18T19:49:00.004-05:00

Craig Groeschel, senior pastor of Lifechurch.tv, has been amazing me. I've mostly always liked Groeschel. Seminary forced me to begin carefully examining all the "hip and cool" churches of the day. Yes, they do "neat" things, but is "neat" biblical, God-glorifying, and submissive to Christ? Frankly, not always. There are tons of "cool" mega churches, and small churches for that matter, that do a bunch of "neat" things. But as I've matured in the faith, much has been exposed simply by comparing various church methods with Scripture.

As I've begun to carefully and critically (in the constructive sense of the word) consider various contemporary, power-house churches, Lifechurch.tv has been no exception. I admit, there was a time when I questioned their depth. I loved their methods, but worried that the message was being overtaken by the method.

BUT, as I've followed Groeschel's message podcasts, and as I've followed his blog, I've been royally blown away at the growing depth of his heart. I'm no expert, I'm only beginning in ministry, but even I, a young pastor in the faith, can see amazing growth in one of America's leading contemporary pastors.

Here's why I say all this, Groeschel posted an awesome blog on "When Edgy Becomes Offensive." HE ABSOLUTELY nailed it on the head with this one. For example, one of the highlights of his brief post is, "The message of Christ and the cross is offensive. But our language and attitude doesn’t have to be." He is correct about the cross being offensive (1 Corinthians 1:20-25).

He also writes, "without wisdom and prayerful attention, a pastor can easily cross the line from edgy to offensive."

This is awesome. I am wildly encouraged by his blog, and other recent posts and podcasts as of late. Awesome, simply awesome.

Check it out . . .

Why You Believe What You Believe

2009-05-10T17:35:00.010-05:00

Every Christian believes something, but do they know WHY? For example, but speaking generally, Southern Baptists hold to their Baptist Faith and Message, United Methodists hold to their Articles of Religion and Confession of Faith, and Assemblies of God hold to their 16 Fundamental Truths. Throughout the centuries of Christendom, followers of Christ have formed these types of doctrinal statements in order to clarify their understanding of God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Bible, Salvation, believer's responsibility, and much more.

Beginning Sunday, June 7th, Ames Baptist Church will begin answering this question, "Why do we believe what we believe?" There is little reason or benefit in NOT KNOWING WHY we believe what we claim to trust as truth.

If you're in the area, come, join us at the Summit House, just across the street from Ames Baptist Church. Let's learn together WHY WE BELIEVE WHAT WE BELIEVE.

101 E. Cleo St.
Ames, OK 73718

Obedience in the Details - 1 Samuel 15

2009-04-26T09:13:00.003-05:00

This morning I'll have the opportunity to preach at my wife's parents' church. We'll be diving right into a difficult passage of Scripture, 1 Samuel 15. In this passage, God commands Saul, King over Israel, to "devote to destruction," or "utterly destroy" an entire people group, the Amalekites. God Almighty is a God of justice. The Amalekites had thoroughly offended God by attacking Israel long ago when they were being led up out of slavery in Egypt. The Amalekites were to be "blotted out from the very memory of heaven," as we're told in Deuteronomy 25:19.

Today's message, though, won't focus on the difficulty of thinking about God destroying an entire people group. No, it is not because I am "dodging the issue." Rather, it is because that isn't the point the author is trying to make. The point he is, though, trying to make is this: God may give difficult tasks, but he fully expects obedience, and obedience in the details.

Saul thought he could get away with killing only "most" of the Amalekites, but God told Samuel, the ever wise prophet of Israel, that this wasn't going to cut it. Instead, Saul learns the hard lesson that God desires, but also fully expects his followers to exist in a meaningful, faithful, and obedient relationship with HIM.

Grace be on us all in our desire to walk with the LORD.

Boiling it Down: Submit to the Father

2009-04-21T08:49:00.007-05:00

Maybe the "Great Divide" boils down to one simple concept:

If I have free will: Submit to the Father
If I do not have free will: Submit to the Father

Consider this brief insight regarding Free Will and Destiny, it will explain the painting below.

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
— Philippians 2:5-8

The Great Divide

2009-04-16T08:43:00.003-05:00

Theology is man attempting to understand God, simply put. Theology is a good thing, an excellent practice for all believers, for the Scriptures tell tales over and again about man trying to know and understand the Father. For many a century, though, men and women have wildly struggled with one aspect of theology in particular. It is this area in which I and my wife both too are greatly struggling.

When I consider this struggle, the best and most summative word picture that I can muster up is this: THE GREAT DIVIDE.

I am referring to what is known today as Reformed Theology, or Calvinism. This is a highly intellectual system that finds its basis, according to its adherents, in the Word of God alone. In a nutshell (though this is greatly dangerous to do), Reformed Theology ascribes to God and Him alone the ability to save man. Nothing is wrong with that, but wait, keep reading. In God's total sovereignty, man can do nothing to save himself. Thus, man does not have the free will to 'choose to receive' God's gracious gift of salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Reformed Theology teaches that God alone approaches man, turns his heart away from wickedness, and causes the regenerate man to persevere to the end, when he will be raised on that great and last day.

This is merely one aspect of Reformed Theology, but it is one with which I tend to clash. I grew up not only believing that as believers we are responsible for responding to God in faith, but also that if one did not continue in faith, he could readily lose his salvation. Now, though, I don't believe a Christian, a true follower of Christ, can lose his salvation. I have grown through this via the study of Scripture (for example Romans 8:38-39; Ephesians 1:13-14). I do though still think that believers are offered the gift of salvation by grace through faith, but that we have to choose Christ in our hearts and minds, confess and repent of sins, and live in the resurrected life of Jesus Christ, thus persevering to the end (The Book of Revelation again and again refers to "the one who perseveres to the end," he is the one who will inherit eternal life),

The struggle comes in that Scriptures seem to support both free will, human responsibility AND the God's total control, predestining those whom he saved.

Oh God, that you would make it evidently clear what is the truth of the mystery of the human will! Nevertheless, Lord, your will be done in our lives, and not our own! :)

The Annual Commercialization of Easter

2009-04-12T17:30:00.005-05:00

Easter Sales and Pastels, come and get 'em!!

Easter Weekend is intended to celebrate and magnify the Risen Lord Jesus Christ, He who conquered death, He who defeated evil, He who endured sin and shame, MY SHAME, YOUR SHAME (!!!), He who was raised from the dead to give life to those whom he foreknew, whom he also predestined, to be conformed into the image of Christ (Rom 8:29, paraphrase). Christ the King is to be the sole focus of this weekend.

But when it comes to the annual Easter weekend, what have we really done with it? Easter bunnies and painted eggs come to mind? They ought to, our society is proliferated with bunnies and eggs and pastels . . . but to what end? I'll inform you: Commercialization, Commercialization, Commercialization. To be graphic, and honest, in the same way people sell themselves for money, I'm afraid the church has allowed Easter to be commercialized in such a way that our focus has been largely impeded. The very presence of Easter bunnies in our churches should indicate the dire need for a refocus.

Can we all agree that while bunnies and eggs and pastels are not inherently evil, (well maybe pastels are, but anyway . . .) what is inherently evil is the loss of the church's intentional, clear explanation of the Gospel message, and the following up process known as "discipleship?" I think so. The church really needs to come to grips with this reality. The secular world has prostituted Easter, exchanging what the church considers HOLY for gold. What's wrong with that picture?

HERE"S THE GOOD NEWS, thanks to the teaching of influential Bible-believing, Bible-teaching churches (such as Travis Ave B.C., The Village Church, Redeemer B.C., Momentum Christian Church, Bethlehem B.C., and so many more), their is still a core of teaching occurring that helps to point the Bride of Christ in the right direction.

I make no apologies for the indictment here, it's a reality many need to first embrace, then reform. But how? Here's how: Teach the Bible, pray, teach the Bible some more, disciple new and old believers, teach the Bible again, love God's people, and continue to teach the Bible.

Barbies among Sisters, Kens among Brothers

2009-03-27T17:12:00.004-05:00

Remember the Barbie and Ken doll craze of our childhood? My sister had a Barbie doll, Ken doll, Barbie and Ken's friends dolls, and whatever other dolls there were. I'm pretty sure she even had a Barbie Car for them to ride in. The thing I remember most about the Barbie doll craze is how perfect their physical forms were, remember that? Barbie had the supposed perfect form, blonde hair, bright white smile, and her hubby [or live-in partner, ;), whatever he was], Ken, had the slender, fit physique, 'perfect' skin tone and all. I'm not sure what the Barbie creators based their design on, but I know this much, it wasn't based on the average American Joe. Well, the average American, non-Californian Joe. :) Why did they create them so "perfectly" formed?

Well, it only makes sense, really. Our society responded so well to the Barbie craze because there is such a craving for "looking the best, being the best." We saw then and we see today the constant push to have the perfect "bod," the best hair, the whitest teeth, the smoothest skin, etc. (Okay, part of me has to admit that some of the fitness craze is not all bad, after all, we are the fattest, laziest country in the world, it seems) The problem, though, is that we are so focused on what our outside looks like, that the inside gets little or no attention. Thus, the result is a bunch of Kens and Barbies running around, that is, 'pretty' on the outside, empty like a plastic bottle on the inside.

As the church has moved forward into the technologically advanced, progressively contemporary culture, a problem has come up. (Truly, I'm kind of barking at the choir on this, because we've all heard and talked about what I'm talking about in this post) and this is it: We have many Barbies among Sisters, and Kens among Brothers. That is, mixed in the fellowship of Christ, the church, there are fervent, faithful followers of Christ (AKA believers) and empty, worldly focused ragamuffins, (AKA Barbies and Kens). . . and I'm not yakking' at the Barbies and Kens, wishing they would vacate from the premises of our churches. Quite the opposite in fact, they truly need Jesus "more," if you will, than already existing believers. I am, though, yakking at the leadership of Christ's church simply because of their lack of true teaching, edification, and biblical responsibility as leaders.

Matt Chandler, lead pastor of The Village Church, made a great point in a recent sermon. He basically said that if you go to a church and everybody looks perfect, and everybody holds hands, and nobody seems to have any problems, and they hug each other and serve each other perfectly, that you should LEAVE QUICKLY!!. His point in a nutshell is that there is no perfect place, because mankind is wholly broken. Sure, some believers are hopefully more mature, more encouraging, more exemplary, more exciting, and more faithful than others, but they are called leaders (at least ideally). So if everyone acts (key word, 'acts') perfect, than there is a much bigger problem in that community than what appears on the surface.

Bottom line: I worry that the church today, or at least in many expressions of it, is messily struggling with trying to look real pretty on the outside, but looking awfully ugly on the inside. It seems as though people want to look like Barbie, or look like Ken, all while not caring about the empty plastic this kind of lifestyle exhibits. The goal is to look like Christ, not like Barbie, right? So why, then, do we look like Barbie and like Ken, in many respects?

. . . my computer is about to die, so I will pause for now, but more is to come later. In the mean time, fill me in on where I'm wrong, and maybe where I'm right, but didn't flesh it out enough . . .

I Have a Serious Problem With This:

2009-03-05T22:31:00.004-06:00

Over at Ed Stetzer's blog, there is some interesting conversation taking place regarding an influential pastor from one of the mega-churches in America. Stetzer interviews Andy Stanley, pastor of North Point Community Church in Atlanta, Ga. Here's one thing that was asked and the answer follows:

"Question: What do you think about preaching verse-by-verse messages through books of the Bible?

Andy: Guys that preach verse-by-verse through books of the Bible-- that is just cheating. It's cheating because that would be easy, first of all. That isn't how you grow people. No one in the Scripture modeled that. There's not one example of that.

All Scripture is equally inspired, but not all Scripture is equally applicable or relevant to every stage of life. My challenge is to read culture and to read an audience and ask: What is the felt need? Or perhaps what is more important, what is an unfelt need they need to feel that I can address? Because if they don't feel it, then they won't address it.

So how can I make them feel an unfelt need and then make them feel like they need to do something about it? But when you do that, people are like, "Man, that is amazing. You're brilliant." No, all you have done is unearthed a need and you talked about it. "I have never heard anyone talk about that before." Probably, no one has ever made you feel that before. So they talked about it, but it didn't register because they didn't make you feel like you needed to hear about it to start with."

Frankly, I'm a little shocked. I have heard Stanley several times in person, in Atlanta, at Northpoint. I was always impressed, challenged, and thought he was on the right page. Sure, I wouldn't do things quite like he does them, but I didn't think he was saying/doing anything that was cause for question. Maybe I was a little "wet behind the ears" then . . . I don't know.

I marked out the specific places in which I am most concerned with Stanley's words.

Obama Nation

2009-03-02T22:08:00.003-06:00

With the news of yet another horrible selection of Obama's power party, I'm beginning to wonder if we* picked the right guy . . . Oh wait a minute, that's right, I never thought he was a good choice, yeah yeah that's it . . .

taxes, taxes, taxes . . . can't pay your taxes, can't lead our country . . .

Oh God in heaven, when will this foolish nation realize her mistakes?!?!?!

* 'we,' of course, here is used very, extremely, wildly, openly loose.

Dumbing Christianity

2009-02-17T22:01:00.008-06:00

It doesn't require a long and hard look to realize that Christianity, in comparison to its original setting, has been greatly dumbed down. This has become particularly evident in the 20th and 21st centuries. Biblical illiteracy is rampant (I myself am guilty of this) and the active pursuit of practical holiness is regularly brushed off by the thought, "Christ made us as holy as we need to be on the Cross." While this is true, as Colossians 2:9-15 explains, believers are still called to actively pursue living a holy life, that is, a life pleasing to God. There needs to be a balance, indeed, a balance that is often difficult to find. That is not, though, the purpose of this post.

Rather, the purpose of this post is to point towards one who is in a pursuit of holiness . . . practical, living holiness. He is not perfect, still human, and human like you and me, no doubt, but he pursues knowledge and wisdom in Christ. He teaches his students, in effect, to walk away from ignorance and instead learn with diligence the Word of God. In humility he would not stand up and point to himself as a model, so this post will point us to him instead. Dr. Ishwaran Mudliar is a man of faith, grace, and vigor. Hear a recent message of his here, listen to the heart of his message.

The message discusses true ministry vs false ministry and is centered on Malachi 2:1-9. Pastors, it is a wise warning for us to heed.

Thank God for men who stand out as an example, men who lead us away from the Dumbing Down of Christianity, yet lead us towards a pursuit of righteousness before God. It helps us to see mature believers, it helps us to see many of the Pauline commands fleshed out in practical life. I'm not "blowing wind up his skirt" as my father often says, just pointing out a good model for younger pastors and believers.

"God Will Never Give You More Than You Can Handle" . . . Oh Really?

2009-02-12T16:48:00.008-06:00

The great 4th/5th century Christian church father Augustine once explained that there are men who can superbly quote scripture at will, but lack the understanding it fully deserves. On the other hand, he rightly explained that there are those who only seem to understand scripture, but cannot readily quote it as to give their understanding any validity. His conclusion is this, “Better than either is the man who can both quote scripture at will and rightly understand it as it deserves” (Augustine, Teaching Christianity, Book IV:204). Looking at my own life, I feel that there is a tendency to rely on the good ole line, “I don’t recall exactly where it’s at in scripture, but the Bible says (fill in the blank).” If I grasp what the Great Teacher of Christian doctrine is intending to mean by this quote, then he is claiming that it is a wise thing to have both understanding of the Word and ability to point directly to where scripture states whatever it is I’m claiming. In the margin of my copy of the Augustine’s book, I wrote, “the more of the Bible you know, the more you can speak it. The less you know, the less you should speak it.” My thought at the time was something along the lines of “If you don’t know where something is in scripture, how do you really know what your claiming is actually scriptural?” This was a bit of an epiphany for me.

In all likelihood, many of the misconceptions and falsities that have crept into modern Christian living spring from this way of thinking. Thus we end up having to do more of the “unteaching of what is bad” than the “teaching of what is good.” Take for example the ever so common phrase, “God will never give us more than we can handle.” I cringe upon hearing this. The deception behind this thought is that it essentially denies the Fall of man and his utter depravity. The world is a bad place, no doubt, and because of mankind’s sin, the world is constantly warring against those who profess the name of Jesus Christ as Lord. Being a Christian inherently means that we will face certain opposition that will be more than we ourselves can handle (but by God’s grace and power alone, we supernaturally gain strength enough to endure!).

Paul’s opening words in his second letter to the Corinthian church echo loudly in my mind like the clash of a gong in a room made completely of corrugated steel walls and concrete floors, “For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despised life itself” (2 Cor 1:8b, italics added). Sounds to me like Paul, great Apostle though he was, was experiencing more than he could physically and emotionally handle. Nowhere in the God’s Word will you find, “God will never give you more than you can handle.” Augustine’s claim, “He who can both quote and understand Scripture is the one who deserves attention,” is worthy of all of our concentration. In other words, if we knew what Scripture actually said and where it says it, maybe Christians would come up with fewer ignorant, self-comforting statements such as, “God’ll never give you more than you can handle!” God’s grace and mercy be on the fool who believes this line!

I really need to add this comment to the end of the post, it completes the idea. Thanks Thomas, he wrote:
"But why would God give us more than we can handle?

"For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead." - 2 Cor 1:8-9

We're supposed to be in a state of dependence. That's what God's after -- dependence and trust."

Thoughts about Marriage

2009-02-05T22:11:00.006-06:00

Gary Thomas, speaker, professor and prolific author of Sacred Marriage, has a fantastic word for married couples who profess faith in Christ. He writes,

"Paul answers a lot of questions for us when he says, 'We make it our goal to please him [God]' . . . The first purpose in marriage - beyond happiness, sexual expression, the bearing of children, companionship, mutual care and provision, or anything else - is to please God."

I've been married for a little more than two and a half years. Now, I have a confession to make . . .

I have sought forgiveness when I've done wrong, to please my wife.
I wake up most mornings and iron clothes and make lunch and breakfast, to please my wife.
I make silly jokes and try not to be a jerk (all the time), to please my wife.
I love my wife, to please my wife.

While I am making no claim that these are inherently bad things, (nor am I saying in any way that I have to work to earn mutual love and respect from my wife) WHAT I AM SAYING is that my ultimate motivation has been off the mark. It's not my first responsibility to make my wife happy . . . err, what? Yes, that's what I said.

Rather, a right relationship with God the Father causes me to make HIM my first love, that is, He is the one whom I am to seek to please the most.

As Gary Thomas explains, in doing this, that is, seeking to "please God first," I will naturally do all those things which causes my second love (my fantastically awesome, caring, FORGIVING wife), to know that I love her and will serve her with all I have to offer.

The Lesson: ". . . and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised . . ."
2 Corinthians 5:15

Put your ULTIMATE love first, and serve him. From that relationship will flow a love that your spouse (and yourself) never knew possible!

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all,
B

5 Biblical Aspects to Godly "Communing"

2009-01-25T16:27:00.007-06:00

Our Bible Study teacher was out today, so as a semi-last minute request he asked if I could teach this morning's lesson. I had two things in mind as a one-time occasion. Something from the The Apocalypse of John or Colossians 3. After thinking it over, the Colossians 3 option seemed the best . . . In essence, here's what we learn from it:

Colossians 3 sets out a splendid explanation as to what living in a Godly, Christ-centered community looks like. No one of us gets all of this right all the time. Thankfully, God is gracious towards us and grants us graciousness to work with one another.

Briefly let me remind you, these 5 things apply both to the church as a group, and to the individual members that make up the group . . . either way, everyone in the chuch should be committed to adjusting their lives to the following commands from Paul.

A Godly Community . . .
1. Focuses on the things in heaven, not things on earth - Colossians 3:1-4

2. Seeks to destroy the evil that exists within - Colossians 3:5-11

3. Is marked out by a distinguishing characteristic: LOVE. (Not, though, a free-wheeling, hippy kind of "everybody love's everybody where they are" kind of love." That kind of love ignores the call of Jesus for believers to repent. Rather, a love consisting of "compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, forgiveness, peaceableness, and thankfulness.") Colossians 3:12-15

4. Is overflowing with the Word of Christ, that is, His teaching. Colossians 3:16-17

5. Consists of families who live by God's way of "doing things," not the world's way of "doing things." Colossians 3:18-4:1

Thinking Through 1 Samuel

2009-01-20T18:16:00.001-06:00

While reading the Old Testament at times may seem dreary and bleak, there is something revealed throughout it that simply escapes so many readers. Sometimes it happens that within the same chapter or book of the OT one has both the feeling of distinct clarity and floundering confusion. BUT (!!!!) the good news is that, over time, one end of the spectrum becomes more weighty than it’s opposite. In other words, things become more clear as one’s spiritual maturity grows. Where this has proven true recently in my own study is in 1 Samuel, particularly in the 15th chapter.

God’s people Israel had previously begged Samuel for a king. They wanted a “leader” they could see, hear, touch, and experience “hand’s on” (1 Samuel 8). They wanted to be “like all the nations” (1 Samuel 8:5). God, of course, only wanted them to follow Him as King, Lord, Master, Creator.

Israel was granted their request, even after a severe warning from Samuel about the dangers of having a king (1 Samuel 8:10-18). Thus, much to Samuel’s dismay God gave Israel Saul for a king. At first, things seemed to be going well. Saul was crushing Israel’s enemies. Then, as happened throughout Israel’s history, she turned from faithfully following God and worshipped the created things and not the Creator.

In 1 Samuel 15:22-23, it all comes to a head. Israel had put its hope in sacrifices and “religion.” At this point, Samuel says, “Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams. For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance like the evil of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has rejected you as king."

This was certainly Samuel’s cry to Israel, but in the whole scheme of things, this too is God’s cry to us. God delights in our faithful acceptance of his Kingship. Jesus Christ is the King of kings and is to be worshiped. This is to be the desire of our hearts, not “religiousity.”

Thoughts from First Corinthians

2008-12-05T13:27:00.002-06:00

A recent impression of First Corinthians lingers in my mind. Paul’s attestation to the Lord Jesus Christ is prevalent throughout the letter. In all the chapters, ironically with the exception of only chapter thirteen, Paul mentions Jesus in one form or another. This indicates to me the high view of Jesus of Paul’s letter. The lesson in this is that Paul is never ashamed to speak of the Lord of Glory, Jesus Christ. His relationship with the risen Lord is central to his life and thought. Thus, there must be more of Christ in my own teaching ministry (when that day comes) and even in my everyday life. The name of Jesus ought to pour from our lips rather frequently. Christ was the center of Paul’s teaching, is he the center of my own life and teaching? Christ, be the center of our lives!

"Why me?!?!?"

2008-11-13T21:10:00.009-06:00

I was doing my nightly checking of Facebook (something I don't have time for mind you) and saw that a friend of ours got a ticket. It was one of the pesky "Red Light Tickets." For those of you who don't know,
TEXANS DO NOT KNOW HOW TO STOP AT RED LIGHTS!
The city has placed still-shot cameras at various locations around town to attempt to force people to stop running red lights. Basically, if you run the light, then your license plate is photographed and a ticket is neatly tucked into a City of Fort Worth envelope and mailed to the addy that matches the license plate.

So . . . my friend ran a red light, got a ticket for it, and THEN asks "Why me?" I assume the question is grounded in, "Why did something like this happen to me? I'm not a bad person, I don't deserve this!" The assumption is that she is not a criminal, she pays taxes, leads a good, quiet life, tends to her family (Which by the way, these things are true). Why, then, did she get the ticket and not someone else? Simply put, she broke the law.

If the above paragraph is accurate, and it is (pardon my arrogance for the moment), then the situation provides the foundation of all lies which mankind comes up with so frequently when we do something wrong.

The bottom line, we are all smitten with sin. It is rooted very, very deep. So deep that we think we are not infected with it. Otherwise, my friend wouldn't have assuemd she was "above" getting a ticket for a crime she committed. Granted, running a red light is no match to murder or rape or something of the like. But its the attitude behind her words that make the difference.

BUT, It's not just her . . . it's me too, its also my beautiful, kind, forgiving, and loving wife, its you, its your best friend, your mother and father, siblings, its all of us. That is, all of us are steeped in sin, yet think we are generally good people.

For you theology buffs out there, you should know that I'm no Calvinist, but I do believe in the typically ascribed Reformed/Calvinistic idea of TOTAL DEPRAVITY. (though I hate ascribing a biblical teaching to a man compiled system of theology)Scripture says,

- "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23
- "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned" Romans 5"12

We are all guilty; and we have all been guilty sense the day we were born. We were born into this world, this world is sin-filled, and we can't escape it. Some might think, then, that because we couldn't avoid being born into a sin-filled world that we are not guilty for it, by no means! "All have sinned and fall short of God's glory" and "Be assured, an evil person will not go unpunished, but the offspring of the righteous will be delivered." Proverbs 11:21

Interesting how we automatically assume when we break the law that we somehow ARE NOT to blame. Reminds me of Genesis 3 when God calls upon Adam to confess his sins of eating the forbidden fruit. He didn't confess, no he blamed God first, then he blamed Eve. Adam's finger never got around to himself.

THANKFULLY we have an "out" of our sin nature, Jesus Christ came to this world and became the perfect sacrifice for sin. He accepted the punishment for my sins and for yours, and "he is in the business of saving souls" as my Pastoral Ministries prof likes to say.

If you believe in him, confess your sins, and live faithfully in Christ, he is just and will forgive you of your life's sin.

Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and God the Father desire to be in relationship with us all. That relationship comes through by grace through faith in Jesus Christ's death and resurrection from the dead.

"For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him." Romans 10:12

"And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” Acts 4:12

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." 2 Corinthians 3:14

Death and All His Friends

2008-11-06T09:13:00.006-06:00

REALITY
I am reminded this week of a certain reality which cannot be escaped: DEATH. I, and I believe many others, seem to function on a day to day basis as if tomorrow is guaranteed. It is somewhat cliché in Christendom nowadays to make such claim because we hear preachers say it all the time, “Do ya know where you’d go if you died today, sinner?!?! Don’t you know that every day is gift from God; today just may be your last, you are not guaranteed another day!!!” Something like this is preached in many pulpits every weekend and while it gets old to hear it over and over, there is a great measure of truth to it.

DEATH
As I am diligently working on a paper for my Hebrew class on Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 (“The end of the matter, all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is man’s all. For God will bring everything into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil”), I receive word that a classmate of mine was killed Tuesday in a motorcycle accident. Death, and all his friends, came over me like a chicken on a June bug.

It hits me every time this happens. Life is commonplace to us, but death is the ultimate reality. We know its coming, for we all have an appointment with Mr. Death. But it smacks me in the face when it happens “close to home.” Sadness, guilt, pity, doubt, wondering . . . these feelings flood over me as a sea billow over a helpless sea shell.

WISDOM FROM A WISE OLD MAN
The wise old man King Solomon had much to say. Hear this, “What does a man gain by all the toil which he toils under the sun? A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains for ever. The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises.” What wisdom he had!

We are comfortable with life, until trajedy befalls us, and all his friends, enter into our lives. A brother dies, a mother has cancer, a sister is abused, a father is sent to prison, a son is murdered, a daughter is raped, and an unborn child is slaughtered.

Sin has caused a gaping whole in all of our lives. Sin causes death, and all his friends, to emasculate our lives. We can’t always stop it, we can’t always prevent it, rarely can we control it, for it is “’just life.”

In the Wisdom of Solomon, we see these words, “When all has been heard, fear God and keep his commands, for this is mankind’s all. Everything we do will be brought into judgment upon our deaths, every secret thing, and everything good or bad.” Ecclesiastes 12:13-14.

THE GOOD NEWS
While the reality of death is always lurking near, for every last one of us, and even though sin has permeated all of our lives, we have a high priest who has gone before us to make right the things that have gone wrong. 1 John 2:1-2.

CONSIDER THESE WORDS:
“All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23

“But the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans 6:23

“But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Romans 5:8

“And if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, YOU WILL BE SAVED. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.” Romans 10:9-10

“For everyone who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.” Romans 10:13

“We know that everyone who has been born of God (saved in Christ) does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God (saved in Christ) protects him, and Satan does not touch him.” 1 John 5:18

COME ONE AND ALL, receive the Living Water which is ETERNAL LIFE. Fear God, live by his teachings, and escape the sting of death, and all his friends.
SALVATION IS FOR ALL WHO BELIEVE, I beg of the Holy Spirit to work in your life to wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, the Risen Lord. And I pray this happens before death comes.

O How Painful is the Word of God

2008-10-30T21:25:00.003-05:00

Well . . . election time. Oh joy. It's difficult, for there really is no choice. Frankly, we have to choose between a liberal socialist in the guise of a Democrat and a wishy washy Washington politician in the guise of a Republican. Frankly, neither are trustworthy.

Thus, we are in a crux.

Romans 13:1-7
13:1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
How in the world am I to apply this to our modern context?

Oh how painful are the Sacred Writings . . . and yet how wonderful is this Truth: Regardless of us, God is in control.

A New Christian Has FIVE Wives. Does He Keep Them?

2008-10-15T10:05:00.009-05:00

This question arose in one of my classes this past week. We spent two class sessions discussing the issue. Frankly, there were answers across the board.

The Situation
The class is 1 Corinthians and the passage under review was 1 Corinthians 7. Paul is teaching the Corinthian people that they need not worry about their social situation. Rather, they should "remain as you are" and worry more about who they are in Christ.
The question then came out, "What about those on the missionary field who lead folks to Christ who are in a Polygynous relationship"(polygyny: one man, many wives. Different from polygamy: having multiple partners)

The Problem
What shall be done? Is the man to keep his first wife and release/divorce the others? Does he keep all of the wives and only have relations with one? Does he divorce them all? Does he keep all of this wives and follow Paul's words, "Remain as you are?"

The Background info
In Genesis 1 and 2 it appears that God sees marriage as a relationship founded on Him between one man and one woman. Later, though, in the history of salvation we see what appears to be God condoning a man having multiple wives (2 Samuel 12:8; 2 Chronicles 24:1-3). Even so, this was certainly not the norm in the Old Testament days. Somehow I think it to be a mistake to assume that "well, everyone back in those days had many wives, or concubines, or whatever." Well, yes, Song of Songs seems to indicate this and other OT passages do too, but was it the norm? After all, when God first created everything and sin had not yet permeated the earth, he only gave to Adam, Eve, and to Eve God gave Adam, right? It seems to me that it was not the "norm," as many people assume.

Further, in 1 Corinthians 7:2, Paul makes it adequatley clear that "each man is to have his own wife, and each wife her own husband." (1 Corinthians 7:2)

The Results

So, what to do? My prof asked several other profs at the seminary I attend. He asked a NT Greek Professor, an Ethics Professor, a Philosophy Professor, and I myself asked one of our OT/Hebrew Professors.

Can you guess what the initial (I use the term initial in the sense that each of these profs would likely request more time to study and meditate on the issue) answer was from each of these profs?

Well let's hear it? Tell me what you think.

I'll let you know later what the profs all said . . .

Random

2008-09-23T22:16:00.004-05:00

Jonah 1:13-16
13 Nevertheless, the men rowed hard to get back to dry land, but they could not, for the sea grew more and more tempestuous against them. 14 Therefore they called out to the LORD, "O LORD, let us not perish for this man's life, and lay not on us innocent blood, for you, O LORD, have done as it pleased you." 15 So they picked up Jonah and hurled him into the sea, and the sea ceased from its raging. 16 Then the men feared the LORD exceedingly, and they offered a sacrifice to the LORD and made vows.

There's a storm raging, a man confesses that he's the cause of the storm, he suggests he be thrown overboard to appease the storm . . . The sailors throw the man overboard and the raging storm disappears like it never happened. Sounds more like a contemporary movie than a biblical account of a man running from God. (Go read the book of Jonah)

The crazy part, the men who threw Jonah overboard didn't return to their sailing and whatever business they were about. No, they turned to God and worshipped Him and feared Him. What a wild story, that is, a true story . . .

A Word to Embrace

2008-09-09T08:14:00.001-05:00

2 Timothy 3:14-17
14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Choice or No Choice? That is the Question

2008-07-28T19:42:00.004-05:00

When a person believes in Christ and trusts Him for their salvation, Christ becomes their life for them. Literally, in some way which is hardly possible to explain, we put on Christ and he becomes our life for us ( Colossians 3:3 , Ephesians 2:1-7 ). God then no longer sees a sinner banned from the presence of God, but a saint washed in the blood of Christ's sacrifice. All of that is fine and dandy, but I struggle. I struggle to great ends, in fact. I cannot seem to figure out which of the following is the most biblical answer.

1.) Did God choose me long ago to be a follower of Christ?

or

2.) Does God offer everyone the gift of grace, that is, salvation, and I responded in faith to him, trusting Christ as my savior?

This debate is the age old "Calvinism/Arminianism debate." It bores many, scares many more, and angers some others. At the seminary, this is an ongoing topic of discussion. Many believe God alone chose the specific individuals whom He would save. Others believe He offers salvation to all and those who respond with faith in Jesus Christ are saved in the end.

For a long while I believed quite comforably that I chose to respond to God's gracious gift of salvation by placing my faith in Christ. Lately though, actually for a long while, I have deeply questioned this understanding of God's interaction with mankind. I don't know, maybe my Reformed (Calvinist) homies have something going for themselves . . . I don't know.

Oh boy, many of my non-Reformed compadres just might hit me up something good for this post . . . Ragamuffin, anything to say?

So umm, what now?

2008-07-10T18:29:00.003-05:00

As my wife flipped through the channels on the tube, I caught a random question from Family Fued. It was something along the lines of, "Name one thing Adam and Eve were the first to do." As a result of this, a random question popped into my head. Here it is:

What do you think the first thing Adam and Eve did when God created Eve from Adam?

Genesis 2:21-25 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

WIPEOUT!!! Hilarious!!!

2008-07-08T19:37:00.007-05:00

Wipeout

is a hilarious show! My wife and I are laughing our faces off! Check it out.

Are We Ignorant by Choice or Design?

2008-07-05T15:34:00.003-05:00

Our pastor mentioned an interesting statistic this past weekend in his message. He explained that a poll done among thirty-six thousand Christians revealed that too many, far too many, believers believe that there is more than one way to heaven. This poll, done by the Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life, revealed that among Southern Baptists, sixty percent of those polled do not believe that faith in Christ is the only path to salvation.

This is breathtaking, simply breathtaking! It is not breathtaking in the way a purple mountain gloriously captivates our sights. It is breathtaking in the sense that it steals my breath and causes me to choke up and take notice of a serious problem. Even if this percentage is inaccurate, even if it was only twenty percent of Southern Baptists, it is still just as breathstealing! This should not be. Scripture clearly points out that faith in Christ is the only way anyone gets off this rock when all is said and done. Consider Christ’s words in John 14:1-7, particularly verse six.

1 "Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. 4 And you know the way to where I am going." 5 Thomas said to him, "Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?" 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him."

No one enters eternal life except through Jesus Christ. It is clear, cut, and dry. Jesus is, in fact, the only way to heaven.

But why is this even an issue? I think that it is in part due to the rampant anti-intellectualism that has scourged the pews of our churches. People have decided that intensive study and learning is not for the common man in the pew. For some reason, it appears that many think that serious biblical study is something for theologians and seminary professors. Since I began seminary, I have noticed a huge gap between the professors in the seminaries and the people in the pews. Granted, there is going to be an inherent difference in the intellectual levels of the church and the seminary for obvious reasons. Their purposes and motivations are slightly different. Even so, the large chasm between the church pews and the professors’ papers ought not be so wide. There is so much to learn and see and experience and share in regards to our walk with Christ. Certainly there is more to it than Sunday Mornings!

It is my desire that churches, particularly pastors, seek to teach the members of Christ’s body the things above, as Colossians 3:1-4 puts it, "If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory." This would come at a high expense; at least it appears to be a high expense to the modern church goers of the day. There is much to learn and much to teach.

If we believe that God has saved us, a reckless and godless people (which make no mistake, we are in fact just that), then it should be natural for His people to seek the things which help us to better understand our faith. These things are church history, Christian doctrine and theology, biblical languages, Old Testament prophecy and New Testament fulfillment, and so on. Yes I agree, these things are not immediately as pleasing as Lost, CSI:, Golf, Football, Baseball, and the rest. No less, these things also do not grant us the salvation we so happily have in Christ.

There is much to learn! So I ask, are we ignorant of God's Word by our own choices, or is it someone else's fault that we have let go of the things of God? Let us not be the victim of this rampant anti-intellectualism. The less we attempt to tackle, the more ignorant we become and the more vulnerable we are to the foolishness of man.

431 Days Later . . .

2008-06-29T21:06:00.002-05:00

It has been 431 days, according to my calculations, since I left the blogosphere. I had reasons for doing so, but after a few days of consideration I think it's time to begin again. I enjoy sharing my thoughts here and enjoy seeing and responding to the comments that rarely come along . . . ;) If you're reading this, come back later and see what's new.

Can a Baptist be Arminian and Still be a 'Good' Baptist?

2007-04-24T11:04:00.000-05:00

The Five Articles of the Remonstrants, 1610

Article 1.

That God, by an eternal and unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ his Son before the foundation of the world, has determined that out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ’s sake, and through Christ, those who through the grace of the Holy Spirit shall believe on this his son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end; and, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible and unbelieving in sin and under wrath and to condemn them as alienated from Christ, according to the word of the Gospel in John 3:36: “He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that does not believe the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him,” and according to other passages of Scripture also.

Article 2.

That, accordingly, Jesus Christ the Savior of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross, redemption and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins except the believer, according to the word of the Gospel of John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” And in the First Epistle of John 2:2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”

Article 3.

That man does not posses saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is); but that it is necessary that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, and will, and all his faculties, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the Word of Christ, John 15:5, “Without me you can do nothing.”

Article 4.

That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to the extent that the regenerate man himself, without prevenient or assisting, awakening, following and cooperative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. But with respect to the mode of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible, since it is written concerning many, that they have resisted the Holy Spirit (Acts 7, and elsewhere in many places).

Article 5.

That those who are incorporated into Christ by true faith, and have thereby become partakers of his life-giving Spirit, as a result have full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory; it being well understood that it is ever through the assisting grace of the Holy Spirit; and that Jesus Christ assists them through his Spirit in all temptations, extends to them his hand, and if only they are ready for the conflict, desire his help, and are not inactive, keeps them from falling, so that they, by no deceit or power of Satan, can be misled nor plucked out of Christ’s hands, according to the Word of Christ, John 10:28: “Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” But whether they are capable, through negligence, of forsaking again the first beginning of their life in Christ, of again returning to this present evil world, of turning away from the holy doctrine which was delivered them, of losing a good conscience, of neglecting grace, that must be more particularly determined out of the Holy Scripture, before we ourselves can teach it with the full confidence of our mind.

These Articles, thus set forth and taught, the Remonstrants deem agreeable to the Word of God, tending to edification, and, as regards this argument, sufficient for salvation, so that it is not necessary or edifying to rise higher or to descend deeper.

The Articles of the Remonstrants are adapted from Phillip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Volume 3, Baker Books, Grand Rapids, 1996, pp 545ff.

Book Review: Beneath the Surface by Bob Reccord

2007-02-19T13:00:00.000-06:00

Beneath the Surface by Bob Reccord

“God’s intention is for marriage to be full of joy, regularly growing and supremely fulfilling.”

In this book, Bob Reccord explores the devastating nature of marital infidelity as well as the joy of faithful husbands and wives. He looks at this issue through the lives of two biblical characters, Joseph and David, both of whom dealt with the temptation to go against the grain of marital faithfulness. He displays how both Joseph and David handled their situations; one succeeded and one failed. Each chapter offers personal and real life scenarios dealing with the corresponding content of each chapter. He gives the biblical basis for his findings and conclusions and offers scriptural ‘safe-guards’ for a pure marriage. Anyone who has either dealt with fidelity themselves or any who are simply looking for ways to seal their bond of marriage in as many ways as possible would benefit from this text. It is authoritative and inspiring, loving and not condescending, yet honest and truthful.

A Matter of Opinion

My wife and I have been married a little over eight months and this book has provided ways for me to safe guard myself from the temptations that lurk all around me. Dr. Reccord came and preached at our church three days after a friend handed this book to me. After seeing his passion live, I couldn’t do anything but read this book. It was an excellent read!

Details

Title: Beneath the Surface
Edition:
Author: Bob Reccord
Introduction by: John Maxwell
Publisher: Broadman & Holman Publishers
Publication City: Nashville
Date: 2002
Number of Chapters: 13
Number of Pages (Actual Text): 120

Book Review: Revival! by Richard Owen Roberts

2007-01-31T13:00:00.000-06:00

Revival! is a practical look at divine revival as seen by one man. Richard Owen Roberts describes what he has learned that is not true revival. Roberts contrasts that with what is indeed true, extraordinary revival. He explains that revival is not a series of scheduled gatherings where a guest Evangelist proclaims truth about God’s scripture. He goes on to express that revival is not mass evangelism. Revival is, most of all, is not and emotional extravaganza. In the first chapter he exclaims that revival is “an extraordinary movement of the Holy Spirit producing extraordinary results.”
Chapter two, titled “When Is Revival Needed?” explains the backslidden state of the believer and gives twenty-five explanations of possible backsliding situations. He boldly, perhaps harshly, hammers away at the marks of a Christian in need of a personal reviving by the Holy Spirit.
Chapters three through seven emphasize issues such as when revival from God can be expected, the realities within true revival, the hindrances and dangers of revival, and lastly the question of “What happens after revival?” He warns that without diligent prayer and study of Scripture, sensitivity to the renewing Holy Spirit will not last. An overarching point made by Roberts throughout the text is the idea that for change to occur from within, one must not only be in prayer and study, but one must practice ongoing and honest repentance. Without such action, revival will never take place; neither from within the soul nor from within the greater church!

A Matter of Opinion

In my estimation, this book provides a solid look at experienced revival. There are, no doubt, very relevant truths within the pages of this text. A word of warning from me to any reader of this book would be that Roberts comes across extremely harsh. It appears that one of the favored words of the book is the term “backslider.” He offers suggestions of how one would go about change, while still coming off as condescending. My suggestion would be to read it through, glean the great truths that are apparent, but be watchful of an over emphasis in “wrongs done” without fair explanation of Christ’s freedom and the joy that comes from His salvation.

Details

Title: Revival!
Edition: 2nd
Author: Richard Owen Roberts
Introduction by: Richard Owen Roberts
Publisher: Richard Owen Roberts, Publishers
Publication City: Wheaton, IL
Date: 1991
Number of Chapters: 7
Number of Pages (Actual Text): 121

Book Review: Eragon

2007-01-15T12:35:00.000-06:00

I recently finished reading Christopher Paolini's Eragon: Inheritance Trilogy, Book One. It was an incredible adventure! Instead of explaining the plot and what have you, I will provide the summary found on the back cover of the book:

When Eragon finds a polished blue stone in the forest, he thinks it is the lucky discovery of a poor farm boy; perhaps it will buy his family meat for the winter. But when the stone brings a dragon hatchling, Eragon realizes he has stumbled upon a legacy nearly as old as the Empire itself. Overnight his simple life is shattered, and he is thrust into a perilous new world of destiny, magic, and power. With only an ancient sword and the advice of an old storyteller for guidance, Eragon and the fledgling dragon must navigate the dangerous terrain and dark enemies of an Empire ruled by a king whose evil knows no bounds. Can Eragon take up the mantle of the legendary Dragon Riders? The fate of the Empire may rest in his hands. . . .

This book is a must read for anyone who enjoyed Lord of the Rings or who enjoys a great fantasy adventure. Laced with magic, battle, trust, and fate this book portrays a marvelous journey through danger and laughter, swords and dragons, and good and evil. Easy enough to read for the younger eyes, yet deep enough for the older.

For more information about Christopher Paolini, click here . You can also find more information about his trilogy here .

God is the desire of my heart, but football fuels my mind!

2006-12-23T10:00:00.000-06:00

A friend and I were working the other day and he randomly posed an interesting question. It went something like this: If I believe with all my heart that God has fully sustained me from my beginning and continues to do so on a daily basis, why do I still desire to do things and have things that are "here and now"? After we discussed it a bit more, I gathered that he was aiming at the question of why watching College or Pro football, playing video games, eating sensational meals, etc., for example, seem to be so fulfilling to us as humans in light of the understanding that GOD is to be our "fulfilled desire" in all things. Is it wrong to seek delight in things of the earth when it is NOT an over indulgence of such earthly enjoyment.

His question was beautiful in that he craved with intense honesty something that rarely seems to be discussed, possibly with exception to those who I categorize as " Health and Wealth " or " Prosperity " gospel teachers/preachers. As our discussion continued, we wondered if it was possible to distinguish between our SPRITIUAL (Eternal) NEEDS/DESIRES and our HUMANISTIC (Material) NEEDS/DESIRES? In this hypothetical dichotomy, we ventured to view God as our sustainer, counselor, and pillar in the entirety of who we are, but that we still exist "here and now" and need not heavy condemnation for our "here and now" desires (shopping, football, movies, music, shoes, whatever…) if indeed they do not overtake the spiritual desire and remain within an understood amount of moderation. Is that right, wrong, or what? This is especially difficult in light of Matthew 6:19-21 when the Christ says:

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

The outcome of our discussion, while it was no where near long enough to truly conclude anything substantial, was that moderation, balance, and most of all, Scripture, are the keys to living in the light of Christ. Jesus is the only way to heaven; that is understood and is not being disputed! Though until we get to heaven, we are restricted to the “here and now” and as long as we stay within the guidelines of truth (the Holy Bible) we haven’t lost sight of our purpose ( Mathew 28:19-20 ; Mark 12:28-30; Deuteronomy 6:2-9 ).

The above is simply “thinking out loud.” It is in no way my concise theology or anything of that makeup. Honestly though, is this far off or right on or what? Tell me what you think….

Newsweek Article: Holy Family Values

2006-12-11T12:17:00.000-06:00

Newsweek has an interesting article out regarding the Nativity Story. Check it out...

Book Review: Confessions of a Pastor by Craig Groeschel

2006-12-08T22:45:00.000-06:00

In Confessions of a Pastor author Craig Groeschel (bio) discusses ten issues in his personal life and ministry that he has dealt with. He brings honesty to the table and offers solutions and suggested helps for those issues discussed. Straightforward candidness is his intention for penning such a wide open, introspective look at himself and his relationship with God. In describing his desire to expose his real self to his church and all people he writes “It’s about how, over a lifetime, a reasonably well-intentioned follower of Jesus can succeed at building an impressive exterior but fail miserably at being the real thing – the person God so lovingly created in the first place.”
Groeschel walks through issues such as how he feels about other Christians as well as the issues of sexual purity, loneliness, prayer, worry, doubt, inadequacy, criticism, and failure. He gives his personal experience with each of these issues and explains them by means of telling several humorous and meaningful personal stories of how he has interacted with each situation. His honesty never subdues and he tells it as it is. It is quite obvious that his intentions are not simply to tell his story, wipe the guilt away, and move on selfishly fulfilled. The apparent intention of Groeschel is to be REAL with God and with people. He does not leave the reader hanging without helpful insight. Each chapter gives suggestions on how he has handled situations and been successful; he also is willing to explain how he has failed at some attempts also.

A Matter of Opinion

This text is an uplifting insight into one man’s battle with reality. Gleaned from it are “how-to’s” for real Christ-following. It is satisfying to know that a Godly and successful pastor admits to similar frustrations and fears as a lay Christian. He ends the book with a powerful challenge: Real Christ Follower or Sunday Morning Faker?

Details
Title: Confessions of a Pastor
Edition: 1st
Author: Craig Groeschel
Introduction by: Craig Groeschel
Publisher: Multnomah Publishers
Publication City: Sisters, OR
Date: 2006
Number of Chapters: 10
Number of Pages (Actual Text): 189

Exegesis on Philippians 3:1-12

2006-12-08T12:32:00.000-06:00

The following is a paper I recently submitted for a hermeneutics class. I made an 84% on it. Not real pleased with that, but it will do....

Introduction
The letter written to the church at Philippi is one of personal intimacy between the author and its recipients. Philippi holds its own unique status among the early believing assemblies in the eyes of its author. 2 Corinthians 8:1-9 discloses that the church in Philippi gave abundantly to Paul and his companions out of “overflowing joy.” Therefore, it is obvious that they shared a copious familiarity with Paul. An exegetical walk-thru of this letter, more specifically this passage, displays such understanding and provides insight into the relationship between the person behind the letter and its recipient; it also displays the author’s passion and expectation for a close fellowship with the risen Lord Jesus Christ.
In order to see this clearly, it is essential to explore the background of the church and city to which the letter was sent, the authorship of the letter, and the date and setting in which it was composed. Engaging in this material then provides the necessary tools to exegetically understand the exposition of the selected passage of scripture within the context of the letter as a whole. Gordon Fee put it as straightforward as possible when he wrote “God’s Word to us was first of all his Word to them.” Therefore, a passage of scripture, not to mention an entire letter, in the Bible is simply too much to grasp without the background context in which it lies.
The Church at Philippi and Its City
The city of Philippi was the leading city of the Macedonian district, and a Roman colony. That Thessalonica was the actual capital of the Roman province means that Philippi would be in essence similar to what we in America now might call the “county seat” of any such county. A mere ten miles by foot from the port city of Neapolis, this city found its origin at the hand of the powerful and energized father of Alexander the Great, Philip II. The city of Philippi was one of political and commercial significance. Commercially Philippi was known for its industry in selling purple garments. Paul and his companions met a woman of means named Lydia, a maker of purple garments. It is apparent that the Philippian church became that of great giving and understandably so, again they were in a suitable position to do so. Politically, the citizenship of the city was naturally Roman as they were colonized as such in order that they would be able to vote and govern themselves, underwritten by the authority of the Roman Empire of course. Philippi’s geographical significance was in relation to the continents in which it is found. It was the “highway” of passage from the Europe to Asia, and vice-versa.
The city of Philippi, as well as the Macedonian region, had strong sense of female leadership and prominence. It becomes no surprise, in contrast to the modern day conservative evangelical churches, that women had a prominent role in the establishment of the original house church in this city. Luke’s account in Acts 16:11-15 indicates that Paul and his associates began to speak to the women who had gathered in the place they sought out for prayer. The result of their conversation was the beginning nucleus of the church at Philippi. Again, this was at the commencement of the women there in the city, interestingly enough.
It is also beneficial to note the use of first person in Paul’s letter to the Philippians. In only four short chapters there are more than one-hundred occurrences of first person usages (Gromacki, Philippians and Colossians, 7). The church at Philippi had an obvious intimate relationship with Paul, possibly more so than any other churches of which he graced with his presence.
The Author of Philippians
The authorship of this letter is almost inarguably the great apostle Paul; the majority of scholars take this viewpoint. Beyond the claim made in chapter one and verse one as to the addresser of this text, the early Church Fathers Clement, Ignatius, Hermas, Justin Martyr, Theophilus and Polycarp all echo the Philippians’ letter as Paul’s words to them and not anyone else’s. Further, Polycarp, a second century Bishop of Smyrna, penned a letter to the Philippians and explicitly mentioned that Paul wrote a certain letter to the church at Philippi. The widely held opinion is that this is the letter understood to be The Epistle to the Philippians. Moreover, within the letter Paul described his own present situation (1:12-13), his personal feelings (1:18-24), and his own autobiographical information (3:5-6) giving more persuasion to the understanding that Paul is the credited author of this letter. None have successfully disproved Paul as the author, though in the eighteenth century F.C. Baur sought to do so. Baur’s argument was determined to be inconvincible and frail.
Paul, as the author of this text, is obviously in close relation to the believers at Philippi as his discourse with them is rather personal. As mentioned above, he reveals his personal thoughts and feelings to them (1:7-8, 18, 22-26). It is apparent that he drew a close-knit comfort from his fellowship with the Philippians while he was away and imprisoned. In other words, their belief and faith in the message of the Gospels seems to have brought a sensible peace to him. Imprisoned as he was, the circumstance gives the reader more context as to the setting in which Paul wrote the letter. He was not a man of emotions that were swayed to and fro by the wind. He was impassioned by the Holy Spirit to assure sound teaching and practice by those of whom he had influenced.
The Date and Setting of Authorship
There is a traditional position held that Paul wrote this letter while imprisoned in Rome. This traditional view is attested to the second century Marcionite prologue. It was this viewpoint that many, if not most, held up until modern times. It has held the longest credibility as it was accepted and unchallenged from the second century all the way up into the nineteenth century. Gerald Hawthorne notes several fundamental factors for reasoning such a position (Hawthorne, Word, xxxvii). One particular and worthy note pointed out is that Paul made use of the term to praitorion, the term for headquarters , or even imperial guard. The phrase within the letter itself is “o to praitorion” indicating the entirety of the imperial guard. Arguably, because Paul does not address a specific quadrant of the Empire, it could be sought after that he is implying that portion of the Empire which encompassed all of such power, Rome. This would indicate that Paul was under the control of the governing authority. This coupled with the other “fundamental facts” that are mentioned, Rome satisfactorily fulfils these facts as noted by Hawthorne. Deissmann objected this, for one, due to the “enormous journeys” that are mentioned in the letter; sufficient time would not have been available to fit this into Roman Hypothesis.
In the early nineteenth century, Lisco led several serious scholars in arguing for an Ephesian setting, named the Ephesian Hypothesis. They argued, for one, that Paul’s use of “t& praitwri&” didn’t hold sufficient evidence to support the Roman Hypothesis. The argument states that this term could mean any governing residence, not Rome alone. Other hypotheses have arisen in regards to the setting such as the Corinthian Hypothesis and the Caesarean Hypothesis first proposed by S. Dockx and H.E.G. Paulus of Jena, respectively. Though due to these arguments being speculated conjecture at best, it is fairly determinable that the traditional second century Roman Hypothesis wins out as the lead view on the setting and date of the letter to the Philippians.
Exegesis of Philippians 3:1-11
Philippians 3:1-2
The introduction to this portion of Paul’s letter to the Philippians displays a powerful insight into his own personal feelings of the given situation. It is senseless to mention this without noting his exhortation to “rejoice in the Lord!” at the top of the chapter. This apparent joy sets up his concern and for this portion of his letter. It is understood that Paul is in great joy to write such encouragement and warning to the church. The employment of the term “to loipon”, most often meaning “finally” or “in conclusion,” can, at times, simply signal a change in the content of a letter. That this letter is understood to be holding to the integrity and validity of the New Testament Canon implies that, here, Paul is simply continuing the body of his letter. Though, some have gone as far to say that this is an insertion from an entirely different letter. They do not rest without difficulty in the mindset that Paul intended this to be a part of the original letter. It is worthy to note, at this point, that the NIV, NKJV, NASB all translate the word as “finally” while the REB translates the term as “to repeat.”
Also, Paul indicates that he has no trouble in writing the “same things” to the Philippians again. This tells the reader that these issues must have arisen or been prevalent in the brief history of the church. Paul is aware of this and he issues his stern word of warning as support before he seemingly berates his opponents. He calls it a “safeguard” to the church. This designates the fact that Paul has knowledge of the Philippian church’s situation deeper than jus the surface level and has deep concern to issue such a warning. There must have been some kind of “evil” dissensions in the church as Paul would have understood how to address the church there in Philippi. Lightfoot speaks to the fact that it was the customary practice of the Apostle to close the letter with some type of warning dealing with the given circumstance. Martin notes that “such repeated warnings are necessary for their well-being.”
Philippians 3:2-3
Paul’s emotions appear to be running wild, yet still in control and on target, as he employs the repetition of certain words to emphasize his certain point; that of a warning to watch for false teachers. Gerald Hawthorne points out that in verse two, he repeatedly used the term blepete. The device employed here is termed anaphora, the repetition of a word or words at the beginning of two or more successive verses, clauses, or sentences, which colors Paul’s descriptive introduction. This goes even further beyond the obviously vivid terminology of “dogs,” “workers of evil,” and “mutilators” in regards to his opponents seen in verse two.
These “dogs” that Paul mentioned are widely held to be Jews who fit into one of two categories: those Jews not respondent to the Christian message or those who had accepted Christ as Messiah but were seeking to impose their own ritualistic traditions of the Jewish faith on those who were not formerly Jewish. Michael makes an interesting notion in which it is possible that Paul is speaking in regards to Jews who where antagonistic to Christianity because of Paul’s use of listing his biographical information. He, Paul, even reminds them of his own persecution of the Way before his conversion (3:4-6). This, according to Michael, who is noting Adeney’s point, might indicate that Paul is speaking in reference to those Jews not submitting to Christ as their Lord.
Paul is drawing a connection from those he mentioned earlier in his letter. In Philippians 1:15-18 Paul mentions those who preach Christ out of selfish ambition and do so insincerely somehow hoping to cause Paul more strife while he was imprisoned. This quite possibly concludes who it is of which he is speaking of in Philippians 3:2; that is Jewish Christians upsetting the peace of new Christians in their demands for following Jewish rites. In Philippians 1:18-19 he appears to dismiss this issue peacefully stating “the important thing is that in every way, whether false motives or true, Christ is preached.” Why then, is Paul’s attitude much different toward these opponents in Philippians 3:2. He uses the term “kunas” to refer these adversaries of the Gospel. This term was often used by the Jews to refer to the gentiles in an extremely crude and offensive manner. In the Levitical law, the dog was seen as an unclean animal. The fact that this term was used by the Jews towards the Gentiles so commonly and that Paul now used it against them is an acute reversal of insult made by Paul towards the ritualistic Jewish believers. Moreover, Paul uses the term katatomein place of peritome; katatomh< is a noun defined as mutilation whereas peritome is a noun defined as circumcision. This term for circumcision was the term used for the religious rite of the Jewish religion referring back to the Abrahamic Covenant in Genesis 17:11. Paul employs a word play in using “mutilation” instead of “circumcision. He is pointing out that they have misunderstood the true circumcision, the circumcision of the heart (Romans 2:29). Paul is implying that their circumcision, the Jewish believers’, was only a mutilation of the flesh! The point of this is to argue that Paul was not speaking to the Jews who rejected the Way, rather he was exhorting a warning to the Philippians against those who teach falsely the need for a ritual circumcision. To support this notion, Fee discusses the use of Paul’s emphatic “we are the circumcision” (Fee, Philippians, 134). Paul so explicitly distinguishes who the true circumcision is and who is not. If he was talking about those who rejected the message behind the Christ, there would be little reason to use such harsh reversal of concepts, let alone display his ample reasons for placing any confidence in the “flesh” (3:4-6). Paul is surely warning against those who wished to impose the Jewish rites upon new Gentile believers. Paul assures the Philippians that it was they, he and the Philippians, that shared the true communion with God in the Spirit. In Philippians 3:3 he is concluding his warning against the Judaisers in saying that the proper circumcision, or the proper communion with God came not in the flesh, but in Spirit of God who enables them to worship.
Philippians 3:4-6
It appears at the surface that Paul offered his impressive biographical information as a means to boast. He is not, though, at all. Paul is offering the notion that if there truly was any merit to place confidence in the flesh, he would certainly meet such expectation. Melick points out a pattern of relationship between the qualities Paul mentioned in his personal story. He points out that Paul exceedingly matched his opponents in attributes. Paul specifies that he was a true Israelite, a Hebrew of Hebrews in pedigree, a zealous Pharisee in persecuting the church pre-conversion, and faultless in regards to legalistic righteousness. This impressive list displayed that there was no one who could deem him refutable in his teaching. In doing this, he rules out those who have seemingly opposed the true understanding of belief in Jesus out of faith and not obedience to the law. Vincent states that the sense of this certain translation should translate as “though I myself might have confidence in the flesh.” Paul clearly puts it that he actually has reason for such confidence in the flesh. This again places him above equality with the Judaisers who opposed him.
More specifically, in regards to Paul’s listed credentials, he claims to be of an eighth-day circumcision. That Paul specified this is a direct reference to the fact that he was pure Israelite (Gen 17:12). In contrast, an Ishmaelite was circumcised while in his thirteenth year (Vincent, Philippians, 96). His mention of the tribe of Benjamin indicates his excellent heritage as this tribe was held as a greatly honorable tribe of Israel. They gave Israel its first king (1 Sam 4:1-2) and were faithful to Judah (1 Kings 7:21). Paul is not merely boasting in his rich heritage, rather he is proving the necessary status in order to prove his point in verse four. In stating he was a “Hebrew of Hebrews” most likely gives light to the fact that he had no heathen blood in his bloodline. He fulfills a pure, for lack of a more conceptually accurate term, Israelite bloodline.
In verse 6a, Paul digressed from detailing the rich heritage of which he had no control and moved towards the decisions he had a direct effect on. The Law, zeal for the nation, and righteousness were at the core of a Jewish boy’s standard for living (Melick, Philippians, 130). The fact that he attained the level of Pharisee demonstrates his abilities and prosperous decisions along his path. Opposition to foreign religion and law acted as the barometer for how well a Jewish man matched the standard of commitment to God. Paul is claiming, because of his extreme methods in persecution the Christian church pre-conversion (Acts 8:1); he easily matched the expected rejection of what was foreign to the Jewish religion. As for his mention of his righteousness in the law, it is apparent that Paul does not mean he was a faultless being. As it is read here, Paul’s “perfection in the law” would be equivalent to one who has never been issued any type of citation for any kind of legality whatsoever. Paul is exclaiming his devotion to right living. This section is only a set up for what Paul writes in verses seven through eleven.
Philippians 3:7-11
Paul summed up all it was to live properly with confidence only in the flesh in the first portion of this passage (Phil 3:1-6). To any reader’s amazement and especially the Philippians, Paul led on to say that all of which he had gained was worth nothing in comparison to the greatness of knowing Christ. In order that the depths of this concept take root, the Philippians were provided Paul’s incredible “gains.” This was intentional by Paul so that he could readily state that knowing Christ was far greater and much more trustworthy than anything that comes in the flesh. Martin notes that this is the section of the letter where Paul states clearly the reassessment of his spiritual endeavors (Martin, Philippians, 144). Again, it is necessary to note here Paul’s intimate language used with the Philippians, much like conversational communication. Paul employed this use of intimate language in order that the Philippians grasp his appeal (Phil 3:1).
In verse nine, Paul sources righteousness as coming from faith in God alone and not from righteousness in the Law. A clear contrast is made between what is owed to God and what is owed to him. Paul admits the fact that having righteousness in the law is unfulfilling and incomplete in relationship with the Christ (v8). Bockmuehl supports this claim. He noticed that Paul’s contrast was between Paul’s own righteousness and the type that finds its origin in God alone through faith. In completion of this portion of his letter, Paul states his overall desire built on the righteousness of God alone. This desire is to travel to the depths of relationship with Christ. Moreover, he claims he wishes to do this by knowing the power of his resurrection. Paul is not surrendering the hope in his future resurrection when Christ comes to reap the harvest of believing souls. He still very much has his hope in the future of the coming Lord. He though, at this given moment, wishes for God to bring him understanding in his present situation, in prison that is, of the saving resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ (vv10-11).
Word Study of peritomh< (Circumcision)
The term peritomh< is translated as circumcision. Literally it means “to cut around.” The origin of this word is found in the second century B.C. Its appearance seems to have always been used for the technical term of circumcision. The Old Testament origin of this term is debatable in the scholarly world. There are plausible suggestions that this term was related to the ceremonies of marriage or puberty trials. This connection was related to the West-Semitic peoples found in the Malaysian and Polynesian tribes. In the traditional Jewish setting the circumcision practice was obligatory and was a symbol of membership into the Jewish Community.
The similar term to this and used by Paul in this Philippians passage is katatomh<. In contrast to peritomh<, this term implies a mutilation of the flesh. This was also known as the “Concision.” It was understood to be a “cutting off” or even just a “cutting” as opposed to cutting around as related to the circumcision term. Either way, the relationship of these two terms is inseparable in the context of this passage. This is because Paul makes such an important word play with these two terms. Lastly, it is important to note that katatomh< appears a total of one time where peritomh< appears thirty six times, according to Swanson, Kohlenberger III, and Goodrick.

Conclusion
The question begging an answer after engaging in the historical and cultural aspects of the letter sent to the church at Philippi is, “What place does the content of this letter have in the modern believer’s life today?” This answer comes in understanding the key theological point of this text. The point is that Paul greatly desired to know Christ and gain the righteousness of His resurrection by means of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father. What is gleaned from this passage is that this comes not from being naïve to all those who speak and teach Christ. Philippians 1:17 exemplifies that the message will be preached out of many motives, not all being justified motives. This explains that believers must be on guard at all times looking beyond the “credentials” of the flesh; Paul referred to this as being aware of the “dogs.” Paul’s denying of his past “credentials” gives testimony to this fact. He gained all there was to gain, though, his confidence in the flesh was not enough to get him entrance into that which he wanted more than anything else: knowledge in Christ to the point of being resurrected with him.
Today, believers ought to desire such a relationship with Christ as Paul did. He gave warnings to the Philippians that are employable to Christians today just as they were to the believers at Philippi. The exhortation in this text is for all who engage themselves with it to plunge deep into riches of Christ and to abandon the rituals of life that stack upon themselves owning only senseless meaning. Christians can, and should, have the same passionate desire for the resurrection of Christ as Paul did. Eloquence, status, rituals, and confidence in the flesh lead to death; death without a cross. Faith alone, too, leads to death, but death in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bockmuehl, Markus. The Epistle to the Philippians. Black's New Testament Commentaries, ed. Chadwick, Henry. London: A & C Black Publishers, 1998.
Brown, Colin. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Edited by Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther and Hans Bietenhard. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973.
Fee, Gordon and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
Fee, Gordon. The IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Philippians, ed. Grant Osborn, vol. 11. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1999.
________. Paul's Letter to the Philippians. Edited by Ned Stonehouse, F.F. Bruce, and Gordon Fee. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995.
Gromacki, Robert. Twenty-First Century Biblical Commentary Series. Edited by Mal Couch and Ed Hindson. The Books of Philippians and Colossians. Chattanooga: AMG Publishers, 2003.
Hawthorne, Gerald. Word Biblical Commentary. Edited by David Hubbard, Glenn Barker, John Watts and Ralph Martin. Philippians. Waco: Word Books, 1983.
Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary. Exposition on Philippians. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977.
Kohlenberger, John, Edward Goodrick, and James Swanson, comps. The Exhaustive Concordance to the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.
Kubo, Sakac. Andrews University Monographs. A Reader's Greek-English Lexicon to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Andrews University Press and Zondervan, 1975.
Lightfoot, J.B. Saint Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. London: MacMillan and Co, 1885.
________.B. Saints Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. London: Macmillan and Company, 1913. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956.
Martin, Ralph. The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. ed. Tasker, R.V.G. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1959.
Melick, Richard R. Jr. The New American Commentary. Edited by David Dockery. Philippians Colossians Philemon. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991.
Michael, J. Hugh. The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. The Moffatt New Testament Commentary, vol. 4. New York and London: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1878.
Morton, A.Q. and James McLeman. Christianity in the Computer Age. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.
Nestle, Erwin and Kurt Aland, trans. Novum Testamentum Graece, by Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979.
Vincent, Marvin. The International Critical Commentary. Edited by Samuel Rolles Driver, Alfred Plummer, and Charles Augustus Briggs. The Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1976.
________. Word Studies in the New Testament: The Epistles of Paul. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1901.
Zondervan NIV Study Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.

Something Not Religious...

2006-11-21T09:44:00.000-06:00

The Dallas Cowboys recently pulled out all the stops and straightforwardly whipped the daylights out of the Colts...let me just say that again...the lately less than par Cowboys completely and fairly OUTMATCHED the leading NFL QB Payton Manning and his excellent posse of players. The facts are far from fiction: Cowboys 21 – Colts 14. Tony Romo led the Dallas offense on several impressive drives to take one heck of a fought for lead. DeMarcus Ware and the Cowboy’s defense shook, rattled, and rolled the 2006 NFL’s number 1 ranked QB Payton Manning as they had him slapping his leg out of anger, blasting out curse words in frustration, and ultimately tongue-twisted and bedazzled at his inability to perform like he has known how to do so well up to this point in his season, and career for that matter. All in all, the ‘boys flat-out turned the Colts into a “tail between the legs” offense and sent them right on back to the stalls in Indy, victory-less!

I sent a text message to a friend of mine who all out hates the Cowboys. Just before Thanksgiving break he was hassling me about my love for the Cowboys, AMERICA’S TEAM that is, and promptly stated how terrible they are and bla bla bla.... Naturally, after the Cowboys settled the Colts I sent him a text message which said “Cowboys?” That’s all it said. I didn’t have to say anything more for the bite to sink in. I enjoyed it, he didn’t so much. He responded by sending a multi-volume work berating the ‘boys and their well deserved win. “Don’t hold out for a Superbowl victory” he says. SUPERBOWL!?!?!?!? WHO EVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT SUPERBOWL????

(Isn’t it so funny that he immediately jumped to the end to justify the here and now? Nowhere in my mind will you find dreams of a Superbowl victory, not this year at least. Our time is coming, as is every other team in the other NFL.)

Anyhow, as I look across some of the sports headlines (SI.com and Yahoo Sports for example) I don’t see what should be there! What I see is all this jargon about the Colts’ loss and NOT the Cowboys’ WIN!!!! “What’s the difference” you might ask? Well, let me tell ya. The Cowboys should be getting a pat on the back from every NFL player in the league. Lately, they have played crappy and completely not on the same page. BUT, Sunday at 3:15 in Irving, TX they played as well as any top five team in the NFL! Yet, the attention isn’t given to the COWBOYS’ WIN but the COLTS’ LOSS. It’s just a bit ridiculous, that’s all. It just goes to show that the general public is still TOO AROGANT to admit that the Cowboys are a great team, with struggles along the way, just like every other team in the league. Ever since the dynasty in the 90’s, it appears that almost all of the NFL lovers have slapped the boy’s in the face and sent them away, written off and crapped on! Oh well, all in a day’s work for the NFL.

Cowboys 21 – Colts 14 Enough said.

A Few Shots

2006-11-04T23:29:00.000-06:00

i thought i'd post a few photo's i've snapped over the last couple of years...let me know what ya think...

Third-Tier or Golgotha, Which Is More Important?

2006-10-21T00:29:00.001-05:00

“Instead of the Cross holding Jesus, in reality
Jesus upheld the Cross.” -W. Dembski, Research Professor of Philosophy, SWBTS

Amongst all the recent flare in so-called “third tier” issues that have caused uproar in the SBC, there is a principle that amounts to so much more than all of the hubbub that has come up from the mouth pastors and leaders in the wider church. Many seem to engage their entire day’s effort into these issues. Tongues, Private Prayer Languages, Spiritual Gifts and all those issues that can divide or unite believers have somehow blown past the message of such simple, life giving truth: Christ held up the Cross at Golgotha as His impassable divinity allowed his passable humanity to suffer in order that all who believe would be saved! To that, we tip our glass!! In a recent Chapel Service (to view this chapel, click here then click “Chapel Video” on Wednesday October 19, 2006), Dr. William Dembski, a leading expert (if not THE leading expert) on Intelligent Design, breathed out a phrase that caught me somewhat off guard. It was a twisted thought at first, but when my mind was allowed to wrap itself around it I understood just what he was going for. What’s the phrase? You’ve already seen it, but here it is again: “Instead of the Cross holding Jesus, in reality
Jesus upheld the Cross.” Notice the difference? Of course you do, it’s “Plain Jane” and right there in the open. But just to be certain, we’ll review; Christ held up the Cross at Golgotha as His impassable divinity allowed his passable humanity to suffer in order that all who BELIEVE would be saved! The question, though, is does our theology truly match up to this accurate understanding of Jesus Christ?
It may seem like I’ve just tossed a couple of issues together here and labeled a blog. There’s more going on here, though, at least in my attempt. There is an enormous clash (as witnessed by clicking here , and here , and here ….you get the idea…) happening at this moment that seems to ignore the true point of our purpose. My intention is NOT make light of or display indifference towards these third tier issues as they do hold weight. I do, however, see that the foundation of our Faith system rests solely on something in which seems to be lacking in our conversations. I too am guilty of this; I point no fingers. I’ll admit it, “J.C. and the Gang” comes up very little in my conversations with the outside world even though it comes up all the time in my circle of believing buddies. I certainly must change that. (Confession Time is over now, let’s move along)
Christ was a bigger controversy than Private Prayer Languages WILL EVER BE!!! He came hitting on all cylinders and guns a blazin’!!! Sure he was about truth, sure he was about redemption, sure he served in love, sure he fought for peace…but it was these very issues that provided such controversy. All this to say Christ is the only redeeming factor and the only message that brings hope. He held up the Cross for the short few hours that he did because of a choice he made to serve God. He is the light, he is the love, he is the greatest controversy of all time. May we seek after His controversy to glorify the King and show mercy to all!

Silent Humility

2006-10-12T23:07:00.000-05:00

A few days ago in our Chapel Service (to view this chapel, click “Chapel Video” on Wednesday October 11, 2006 after clicking this link) the speaker, Dr. Jeffrey D. Johnson of Israel Today Ministries in Corpus Christi, TX acknowledged some folks who were so kind in helping him get situated prior to his speaking engagement here at the Seminary. One of those he thanked was a friend of mine. Joe (not really his name) has the responsibility, though it is really a privilege, of picking up the many incoming Chapel speakers from the airport and bringing them to the seminary. The speaker made a brief but heartfelt mention of thanks to him for his kindness in conversation and assistance; he thanked him by name before all the students and professors present. My friend happened to be sitting just across the aisle from where we were sitting. I glanced over at him knowing it was he who the speaker spoke of. Not to my surprise, his face indicated nothing... Allow me to make it clear that he had quite the possibility to make a slight nod or mention or anything that would indicate that he was the one the speaker thanked. In this world, it wouldn’t be too arrogant for him to have politely acknowledged the pastor’s thanks. It wouldn’t have been too self-righteous of him to simply smile. He made no nod; he smiled not. He did not indicate in any way that he was being thanked. Though I will say there was one thing for sure he “reeked” of, he might as well of had a sticker on his forehead that said: HUMBLE! Obviously, he didn’t. That would negate the very point I am making here. He was silently, and beautifully humble. Later, I asked him about it. I asked him, “Hey man, that was you he was talking about wasn’t it?” As peacefully and meekly as he could he said, “Yeah.” He immediately turned the conversation away from himself and asked me how my day was going. That was the end of it. I responded accordingly and we went on our ways.
This man’s humility amazed me. I was amazed that he was so inclined to be kind and respectful, Christ-like to say it best, to this stranger (the speaker) and then to be thanked by the speaker in front of a ton of his fellow students, humbly receiving it! I know this may be a “duh” kind of situation; this kind of things is “common” amongst our Christian brethren. I have to say though, there certainly seems to be a fair dose of arrogance floating around the Christian society, I certainly do not exclude Seminary folk. Now, I’m not saying everyone’s arrogant and self-centered or anything. I’m just pointing out that the level of intellect here at the Seminary, and the wider world for that matter, could easily have the “Big Head” syndrome. Anyhow, this fellow is to be praised for his humility, surely God was blessed and proud of His good and faithful child! May all of us be blessed with the willingness and desire to serve, most of all doing so in silent, worshipful humility…

Hallelujah Out Loud...Should I or Shouldn't I?

2006-10-06T23:37:00.000-05:00

Hallelujah!...Today I sat outside this book store reading this book waiting on a buddy who had gone in to make a purchase. All of the sudden: a shout, no no, a scream...."Hallelujah!" I immediately looked up as it caught me off guard. A man was coming out of the bookstore and for no obvious reason yelled at the top of his able lungs, "Hallelujah!" I admit chuckled to myself as the thought ran through my head, "Goofy charismatic..." Later, it hit me! This man, for whatever reason, felt like lifting his heart and voice to God in praise and was certainly free of concern of someone else's hearing it. Wow. The very fact that I was "caught off guard" and had the thought "goofy charismatic" shows my inward attitude. A man praises God out loud in public and I call him goofy!? Umm, seems like I've got "goofy" placed on the wrong person. Shame on me. David obviously had enough reason to shout such joyous melody when he wrote, "My cup overflows with blessings. Surely goodness and mercy will pursue me all the days of my life," Psalm 23:5c-6. Who knows this man's reason to give such a shout? The fact is he was praising GOD with a seemingly honest heart!

Inward reflection...I'm not the type of person to be so outwardly open with my love and joy for our loving God and Savior. Frankly, unless I'm around someone or some group I feel "comfortable" with, I really wouldn't dare be so bold as to do what this man did just before he hopped in his car and carried on with his day. It leads me to wonder if there is a need for me, B.L., to be more vocal about my affection for God, His son, and the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit. At this point I can honestly say that my conviction is not necessarily to shout the awesome name of God every chance I get, around every corner, and in every public place. My conviction is though to be a bit more open whenever I can be to God's "goodness and mercy, or unfailing love" to the point that if my heart all of the sudden bursts with joy, a shout of joy releases from deep within my soul, regardless of my "20". I wish I would have thought to run over to the man and say to him, "Sir, I just wanted to thank you for your openness to praise the Almighty Giver of Life with an open heart in an open place." Of course, the good things to do or say never seem to come until way after the given event. I will say on this World Wide Web with all of the electronic voice and heart I can possibly muster..."PRAISE GOD FOR HIS AMAZING GOODNESS AND MERCY!!!"

A Paper for Church History

2006-10-02T20:51:00.000-05:00

The following is a paper I recently submitted for my Church History class:

COUNCIL OF NICAEA, 325 A.D.

Controversy between Arius the presbyter and Alexander the Bishop spawned a somewhat state of disillusionment for the fourth century Christian church in Alexandria. This circumstance compiled with Constantine’s gain of power to all of the Roman Empire made way for a certain meeting that would regain a bit of an axial relationship between the church that Paul sought after in the early days and the early fourth century church as it were. Linking what the church had become back to what Paul intended for the church was well needed because during the persecutions, interchurch communication was lessened quite a bit allowing for a rise in disharmony. A likening of minds was absolutely necessary. This meeting called by Constantine in roughly May of 325 A.D. was named the Council of Nicaea, also known as the First Ecumenical Council.
The church preached of in the New Testament was that of a Trinitarian belief system. This would prove both the full deity and full humanity of Christ, clearly verifiable by the New Testament texts. The issue that Alexander and Arius squabbled around dealt with the Trinitarian status of Christ and God and their relationship to each other. Constantine attempted to regain unity on the issue by writing and request a unity be sought after by Arius and Alexander but his attempt was unsuccessful. Therefore he saw fit to bring forth a general council to heal the divisions by settling authoritatively the different questions by which it was agitated. The resolution to the issue was that the Arians and their leader were exiled. As far as the teachings and beliefs, they were ridded of as well, “Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with the Father.” This provides for the first and heaviest issue of the Council’s deliberations.
Another question on their table was which day to celebrate Easter. It was a practical difficulty in which several different calculations were being used to formulate the proper day of celebration for the Lord’s resurrection. The decision made by the Council was that it was to be celebrated by all Christians on the same day. This would give unity in practice. The day that was selected for the Easter celebration was the Lord’s Day directly following the Jewish Feast of the Passover.
The third issue covered was the Meletian Schism. Basically Meletius wanted a higher power. His greedy selfishness led to a split in the church. He did have some twenty-eight bishops under his leadership. The council chose to grant recognition to their ordinations against the trepidation of Alexander. Meletius was sent away satisfied with the decision and was ordered to ordain no one else.
Lastly, the contribution of the Council was significant though much has not come down through history in terms of texts. Though the Nicene Creed and twenty church discipline canons came forth from this meeting. This statement of the church, the Nicene Creed, was catholic in nature and meant to bring unity upon the believers of Christ as well as their leaders. Therefore, the creedal statements born of the Council of Nicaea declare the truths of scripture thereto and forever to be believed. While variations of belief and practice have come about, the Nicene Creed continues to set the stage for belief in the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ and the Father Almighty.

References
John Kaye, Some Account of the Council of Nicaea in Connection with the Life of Athanasius (London: Gilbert and Rivington Printers, 1853), 28.
John Kerr, Readings in Christian Thought, 2nd ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1990), 76.
J.W.C. Wand, The Four Councils (London: The Faith Press, LTD, 1951), 4.
Elizabeth Sewell, History of the Early Church (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1860), 337.