Why concern ourselves with what happened four hundred ninety years ago? We have our Bibles, why bother studying history and theology? Don't they just divide the church unnecessarily?
The Reformation is a vital part of Church History. All Church History must be taught and learned by Christians. By remembering the Reformation, we can see what the Church did right, and in many cases, did wrong. Modern Church Growth movements, revivals, and "new" revelations from God can be compared with the success of the Reformers. (BTW, this can also be done using other successful times in Church History, not just the Reformation)
One of the most important reasons we should remember the Reformation is the lesson on discernment. Do you really think the unorthodox teachings (prayers to the saints and for the dead, indulgences, purgatory, salvation by faith plus works, the elevation of Mary that would continue even after Martin Luther and the near worship of saints and angels) just appeared overnight? Nope. These teachings were gradually inserted over time. What was introduced in an early church council was, by the time of Luther, doctrine. Why? Because tradition was elevated to the authority of scripture. As time went on, scripture became less and less important. The Reformers wanted a return to Biblical Christianity, using the Scriptures as the FINAL authority. They were not opposed to tradition per se, but anything that conflicted with Scripture was to be discarded. To the Reformers, the Scripture was "The norm that normed all other norms". This is why so many doctrines were abandoned by Luther and his followers. Let us continue, using the Scriptures, to discern true and false doctrine.
The Reformers wanted their people knowledgeable of Scripture and doctrine. To this end, not only did Martin Luther translate the Bible from a dead Latin to a living German (his language) but published a catechism for the training of small children and new Christians. Others would continue his practice till everyone, regardless of one's language would be able to read and interpret the Bible for themselves. If more churches would remember their history, maybe so many in the pews would not be so ignorant of vital church doctrine; ignorant and/or unable to defend it to an unbeliever or seeker. No wonder the cults have made such inroads in our churches. How many of our churches worship services are more about entertainment than doctrine? How many have replaced theologically rich hymns with repetitive praise songs with little substance?
The Reformers had a rule "Semper Reformenda" "Always Reforming." This doesn't mean we can reinterpret the Bible or invent new doctrine like the liberals or cults do. What it means is we, as a church, must always go back to the Scriptures for instruction. If a church is in error, reform itself, using the Bible.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Reformation Day
To most people, including Christians, October 31st is Halloween. More important, on this day, Martin Luther nailed his 95 statements to the Wittenberg Castle Church, starting the Protestant Reformation. You can read the statements here. http://www.carm.org/creeds/95theses.htm. But why should we know about the Reformation? Why was this event so important? Let's take a closer look.
For at least three hundred years, maybe more, the Christian church slowly became more and more corrupt. Tradition became as authoritative as Scripture. Teachings that were introduced at the close of the Roman Empire became established dogma to be believed by every Christian. Check out these two paragraphs from Canon I of the Fourth Lateran Council 1215:
There is one Universal Church of the faithful, outside of which there is absolutely no salvation. In which there is the same priest and sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine; the bread being changed (transsubstantiation) by divine power into the body, and the wine into the blood, so that to realize the mystery of unity we may receive of Him what He has received of us. And this sacrament no one can effect except the priest who has been duly ordained in accordance with the keys of the Church, which Jesus Christ Himself gave to the Apostles and their successors.
But the sacrament of baptism, which by the invocation of each Person of the Trinity, namely of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is effected in water, duly conferred on children and adults in the form prescribed by the Church by anyone whatsoever, leads to salvation. And should anyone after the reception of baptism have fallen into sin, by true repentance he can always be restored. Not only virgins and those practicing chastity, but also those united in marriage, through the right faith and through works pleasing to God, can merit eternal salvation.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.html These two paragraphs barely scratch the surface, but they set down or reaffirmed several familiar doctrines of the Established Church. By the time Luther came on the scene, the church had invented such teachings as indulgences, and purgatory and simple salvation by faith ALONE was substituted for a long list of works. To raise money the Pope sold indulgences (get out of purgatory passes) and priests and popes had many mistresses and children. One Pope in Particular, Alexander VI had several bastard children and lived like a king. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Alexander_VI# This was hardly unique. Remember, the Church made it clear, outside the church there is NO salvation. Not outside the invisible church, outside the VISIBLE church so whatever the church said, was true.
Even Dr. Luther tried to earn God's favor by becoming an Augustinian Monk. After studying scripture, he discovered when one had faith, one was already justified (declared righteous) by Faith ALONE. Dr. Luther began to see many of the errors of his church and became convinced scripture alone was sufficient for faith. On October 31st, he nailed his arguments to his church door.
Thus began the greatest return to Biblical Christianity the church has ever known. By the time of Luther's death in 1546, he had stood up to the Pope, translated the Scriptures into German, and wrote and preached countless books and sermons. Others would follow to continue the work he started, many dying as martyrs but the seeds for true reform had been laid.
Luther was used by God to bring his church back to Him. He was not perfect. He was not charitable to the Jews and was many times hostile to others holding different views, but he was a man used by God to help bring his church back to Him Let all Christians remember a Man of God this Reformation Day.
For at least three hundred years, maybe more, the Christian church slowly became more and more corrupt. Tradition became as authoritative as Scripture. Teachings that were introduced at the close of the Roman Empire became established dogma to be believed by every Christian. Check out these two paragraphs from Canon I of the Fourth Lateran Council 1215:
There is one Universal Church of the faithful, outside of which there is absolutely no salvation. In which there is the same priest and sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine; the bread being changed (transsubstantiation) by divine power into the body, and the wine into the blood, so that to realize the mystery of unity we may receive of Him what He has received of us. And this sacrament no one can effect except the priest who has been duly ordained in accordance with the keys of the Church, which Jesus Christ Himself gave to the Apostles and their successors.
But the sacrament of baptism, which by the invocation of each Person of the Trinity, namely of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is effected in water, duly conferred on children and adults in the form prescribed by the Church by anyone whatsoever, leads to salvation. And should anyone after the reception of baptism have fallen into sin, by true repentance he can always be restored. Not only virgins and those practicing chastity, but also those united in marriage, through the right faith and through works pleasing to God, can merit eternal salvation.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.html These two paragraphs barely scratch the surface, but they set down or reaffirmed several familiar doctrines of the Established Church. By the time Luther came on the scene, the church had invented such teachings as indulgences, and purgatory and simple salvation by faith ALONE was substituted for a long list of works. To raise money the Pope sold indulgences (get out of purgatory passes) and priests and popes had many mistresses and children. One Pope in Particular, Alexander VI had several bastard children and lived like a king. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Alexander_VI# This was hardly unique. Remember, the Church made it clear, outside the church there is NO salvation. Not outside the invisible church, outside the VISIBLE church so whatever the church said, was true.
Even Dr. Luther tried to earn God's favor by becoming an Augustinian Monk. After studying scripture, he discovered when one had faith, one was already justified (declared righteous) by Faith ALONE. Dr. Luther began to see many of the errors of his church and became convinced scripture alone was sufficient for faith. On October 31st, he nailed his arguments to his church door.
Thus began the greatest return to Biblical Christianity the church has ever known. By the time of Luther's death in 1546, he had stood up to the Pope, translated the Scriptures into German, and wrote and preached countless books and sermons. Others would follow to continue the work he started, many dying as martyrs but the seeds for true reform had been laid.
Luther was used by God to bring his church back to Him. He was not perfect. He was not charitable to the Jews and was many times hostile to others holding different views, but he was a man used by God to help bring his church back to Him Let all Christians remember a Man of God this Reformation Day.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Time For Truth
I'm amazed at the howls of outrage directed at Rex Duncan and other members of the legislature after they (politely) declined copies of the Koran.
The Muslims and their enablers are leveling the usual charges. The members of Congress are closed minded, unamerican, divisive, and tampering on their rights.
I'm sorry, how is refusing a group's literature infringing on their rights? By this same logic, I'm trampoling on the rights of Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses when I refuse their literature. BTW, I've studied both and have come to the conclusion through research and talking to members of both both are outside historic Christianity so I'm not being closed minded. Furthermore, Rep. Duncan POLITELY declined a copy of the Koran. I ask again, how is that being abusive, mean, divisive, etc?
I think it's time to turn the tables around and ask the Muslim leadership for answers to the following questions...
Why do we not hear more Muslims speaking out against terrorism? Why are Muslim groups such as CAIR sympathetic to terrorism? Who is bombing Israeli targets? You guessed it, Muslims. What country is funding anti American Islamic schools? Why that would be the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, an Islamic theocracy. Whether it is Spain, The Netherlands, Indonensia or 9/11, all of these acts of violence have been committed by Muslims. Ok, let's say they are radicals who've "hijacked" the Koran, why aren't more Oklahoma Muslims speaking out? The one instance where one did resulted in his being expelled from his house of worship.
Muslim leaders, do not fake anger or outrage. Rep. Duncan was polite when he refused the Koran. He simply offered some advice you would do well to take. YOU are the ones that owe us an explanation.
I'm not letting area Muslim leaders off the hook in the name of "tolerance". They need to be held accountable for the actions of those practicing their religion.
P.S. Yes, a if somebody murdered an abortionist in the name of Christianity, I would speak out against their crime. The Bible forbids murder. The Koran, in some parts, does not.
P.P.S. I am not for violence against Muslims. If I met one I would share the Gospel with him/her and would show them the love of Christ. Several years ago when I had to take taxi cabs to and from work I met three Muslims that were very friendly and hospitable. Nevertheless, despite my love (or in spite) for Muslims, I must be honest about the silence directed towards terrorists by members of this religon and the the bloodthirsty tenets found in the Koran
The Muslims and their enablers are leveling the usual charges. The members of Congress are closed minded, unamerican, divisive, and tampering on their rights.
I'm sorry, how is refusing a group's literature infringing on their rights? By this same logic, I'm trampoling on the rights of Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses when I refuse their literature. BTW, I've studied both and have come to the conclusion through research and talking to members of both both are outside historic Christianity so I'm not being closed minded. Furthermore, Rep. Duncan POLITELY declined a copy of the Koran. I ask again, how is that being abusive, mean, divisive, etc?
I think it's time to turn the tables around and ask the Muslim leadership for answers to the following questions...
Why do we not hear more Muslims speaking out against terrorism? Why are Muslim groups such as CAIR sympathetic to terrorism? Who is bombing Israeli targets? You guessed it, Muslims. What country is funding anti American Islamic schools? Why that would be the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, an Islamic theocracy. Whether it is Spain, The Netherlands, Indonensia or 9/11, all of these acts of violence have been committed by Muslims. Ok, let's say they are radicals who've "hijacked" the Koran, why aren't more Oklahoma Muslims speaking out? The one instance where one did resulted in his being expelled from his house of worship.
Muslim leaders, do not fake anger or outrage. Rep. Duncan was polite when he refused the Koran. He simply offered some advice you would do well to take. YOU are the ones that owe us an explanation.
I'm not letting area Muslim leaders off the hook in the name of "tolerance". They need to be held accountable for the actions of those practicing their religion.
P.S. Yes, a if somebody murdered an abortionist in the name of Christianity, I would speak out against their crime. The Bible forbids murder. The Koran, in some parts, does not.
P.P.S. I am not for violence against Muslims. If I met one I would share the Gospel with him/her and would show them the love of Christ. Several years ago when I had to take taxi cabs to and from work I met three Muslims that were very friendly and hospitable. Nevertheless, despite my love (or in spite) for Muslims, I must be honest about the silence directed towards terrorists by members of this religon and the the bloodthirsty tenets found in the Koran
Who is standing up for the Innocent?
I heard this morning on KFAQ, HB 1804 is again under attack by the usual suspects. Their justification? They are defending the (unnamed) victims who will be unjustly deported by the enforcement of HB 1804.
The conversation then went into the documentation of the influx of illegal aliens committing crimes. From Pennsylvania to Texas to our own Oklahoma, Americans are seeing the affects of these crimes. For example, Philadelphia is now known as a hot spot for human smuggling. Local Pennsylvania leaders are calling the increase in crime committed by illegal aliens an invasion and rightly so. In Texas, a sizable amount of those in prison are illegal aliens. The question was then asked on the show…...
Who is standing up for the victims of these crimes?
Who is standing up for the 2 year old in Texas killed by a drunk driver who happened to be an illegal alien? Who is standing up for the thousands of victims of crimes committed by people who should not even be in our country? Are the two “reverends” standing up for s Americans unable to get emergency room care because border hospitals have been shut down due to the influx of illegal’s? How many of our tax dollars are going to prosecute criminals that shouldn'tt even be in America?
Answer me “reverends” and for that matter, your group La Raza can answer too, why aren’t you standing up for the innocent? What’s more important, the lives of innocent Americans, created in the image of God or your own personal agenda?
It appears you may be answering that by your actions.
BTW, on a side note, La Raze is Spanish for “The Race” Yeah, tolerant group aren’t they?
The conversation then went into the documentation of the influx of illegal aliens committing crimes. From Pennsylvania to Texas to our own Oklahoma, Americans are seeing the affects of these crimes. For example, Philadelphia is now known as a hot spot for human smuggling. Local Pennsylvania leaders are calling the increase in crime committed by illegal aliens an invasion and rightly so. In Texas, a sizable amount of those in prison are illegal aliens. The question was then asked on the show…...
Who is standing up for the victims of these crimes?
Who is standing up for the 2 year old in Texas killed by a drunk driver who happened to be an illegal alien? Who is standing up for the thousands of victims of crimes committed by people who should not even be in our country? Are the two “reverends” standing up for s Americans unable to get emergency room care because border hospitals have been shut down due to the influx of illegal’s? How many of our tax dollars are going to prosecute criminals that shouldn'tt even be in America?
Answer me “reverends” and for that matter, your group La Raza can answer too, why aren’t you standing up for the innocent? What’s more important, the lives of innocent Americans, created in the image of God or your own personal agenda?
It appears you may be answering that by your actions.
BTW, on a side note, La Raze is Spanish for “The Race” Yeah, tolerant group aren’t they?
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Catering on the Taxpayer's Dime
An Executive order from Governor Henry created the Ethnic American Advisory Council. Interestingly, the council consists entirely of Muslims. Furthermore, this group is distributing copies of the Quran to all members of the legislators. Taken from a Google article, here is Legislature Rex Duncan’s reason why he is refusing the copy of the Quran.
“Most Oklahomans do not endorse the idea of killing innocent women and children in the name of ideology,” he said in an interview with the Associated Press. Duncan said he objected “to the use of the state Centennial Seal and the state Seal all in an effort to further their (Muslims’) religion.”
He’s not the only one, other members of our legislator are now refusing copies of the (supposedly) holy book.
Which is why I ask, is this something a private group is funding or is Governor Henry expecting the tax payers to pick up the tab?
Update: Per Fox local news, no state funds were used to purchase the Korans.
“Most Oklahomans do not endorse the idea of killing innocent women and children in the name of ideology,” he said in an interview with the Associated Press. Duncan said he objected “to the use of the state Centennial Seal and the state Seal all in an effort to further their (Muslims’) religion.”
He’s not the only one, other members of our legislator are now refusing copies of the (supposedly) holy book.
Which is why I ask, is this something a private group is funding or is Governor Henry expecting the tax payers to pick up the tab?
Update: Per Fox local news, no state funds were used to purchase the Korans.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
The Gospel of "Feel Good Theology"
A week or so ago 60 Minutes did a segment on Joel Osteen. The title was "America's Most Popular Pastor" What does Mr. Osteen preach? Why does he draw so many people? We Christians are to discern all teachings, comparing it to God's Word the same way the Bereans did. What struck me most during the interview was Mr. Osteen's apparent lack of theological depth. One doesn't have to give a detailed comparison between John Calvin and John Wesley, but a little understanding would have been appreciated.
It is obvious Mr. Osteen's theology (if one can call it that) is Word Faith. Reading his books and listening to his sermons, his message is simple. Ask expecting to get. If you want something, think positive. The clips played have him saying right out that our words have meaning. If you think positive, BINGO! you can have what you think. (better job, pay raise, better life now etc)This of course works the opposite too. If you thinK bad things they also can occur. His message on giving is rather interesting as well. Rather than give because God wants us to give, he reduces giving to a forumula. To get what you want, simply give. God HAS to respond to you wishes if you give. Like other Word Faith Charismatics, he takes entire passages and verses completely out of context, making them mean something completely different that what the original authors meant for them to say.
The methodology of his church is Seeker Sensitive. For those unaware, the Seeker Sensitive movement focuses on people's felt needs. (think Rick Warren) These churches focus on what the church can do for you. As such, one will not hear sermons about suck sticky subjects as sin, judgment, repentance, the atonement, justification, faith, works, etc. If one listens to the broadcast one will see a smiling Mr. Osteen telling the reporter how the lights change colors with each song. This obviously is to create a mood, to heck with teachings, just work over people's emotions. I also noticed how completely scripted Mr. Osteen's church is. The songs are selected so the most can be gotten out of everybody's emotions. You won't hear anything about sin or repentence at his church. Those are too negative.
So, as Christians, should't we be happy in the Joy of the Lord? Why not be positive? After all, should the world see something different in us? Why am I and a host of others so hard on Mr. Osteen? Why can't we just "agree to disagree?"
We as Christians should be happy, but WHY are we happy? That is a question Mr. Osteen MUST answer. As Christians, are we always going to be happy? Let me tell all of you something, I wasn't the happiest person when my mother was suffering from brain cancer. Nor was I happy when I went through my divorce. Did I have God's reassurance? Yes, but I was not "positive" like Mr. Osteen asserts. As for blessings, yes, God does bless. Many times, however, it is not the way we mere mortals think we should be blessed. Mr. Osteen focuses on "Your Best LIfe Now" rather than "Laying up treasures in heaven" I have had times where God blessed me with material possessions, other times, it is spiritual blessings. We as Christians need to be open to either. God many times will say "no" not because he is mean, but because he knows what is best. He's not our "daddy" that spoils his kids the way WF teachers make him out to be.
Mr. Osteen also preaches only part of the Gospel. In the business of souls, part is as bad as none. Others have said it better than I have. He seems to think "God is love, love everybody, and if you want something from God, he will give it to you." That's pretty much it. Nowhere does he address man's sinful state, our total loss without God, the (just) consequences for our sin, what it took for man to obtain forgivemess for sin (Christ's death on the cross), man's need for repentence, and the result of man's refusal to trust Christ. I don't know about anybody else, but the realization that I'm born in sin and have a first class ticket to hell isn't something that is too uplifting. Only when I trusted in Christ was I able to rejoice, not because of some emotional mind trick, but because I KNEW my sins were forgiven. I can now say with John Wesley my heart was "strangly warmed"
I applaud Mr. Osteen's emphasis on giving and loving others. However, the Word Faith and Seeker Sensitive teachings in his church make these good points almost moot. Also, as stated earlier, this is only part of the Gospel. Without man knowing his sinful state and need for Christ, he is eternaly lost.
Part of the Gospel will send people to hell as much as none of the Gospel.
Here are some links on Mr. Osteen.
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/229-joel-osteen
Go down to and click on the Larry King Live segment. You will see what I mean when I say Mr. Osteen is lukewarm.
Here is the 60 Minutes broadcasst. http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3366025n
It is obvious Mr. Osteen's theology (if one can call it that) is Word Faith. Reading his books and listening to his sermons, his message is simple. Ask expecting to get. If you want something, think positive. The clips played have him saying right out that our words have meaning. If you think positive, BINGO! you can have what you think. (better job, pay raise, better life now etc)This of course works the opposite too. If you thinK bad things they also can occur. His message on giving is rather interesting as well. Rather than give because God wants us to give, he reduces giving to a forumula. To get what you want, simply give. God HAS to respond to you wishes if you give. Like other Word Faith Charismatics, he takes entire passages and verses completely out of context, making them mean something completely different that what the original authors meant for them to say.
The methodology of his church is Seeker Sensitive. For those unaware, the Seeker Sensitive movement focuses on people's felt needs. (think Rick Warren) These churches focus on what the church can do for you. As such, one will not hear sermons about suck sticky subjects as sin, judgment, repentance, the atonement, justification, faith, works, etc. If one listens to the broadcast one will see a smiling Mr. Osteen telling the reporter how the lights change colors with each song. This obviously is to create a mood, to heck with teachings, just work over people's emotions. I also noticed how completely scripted Mr. Osteen's church is. The songs are selected so the most can be gotten out of everybody's emotions. You won't hear anything about sin or repentence at his church. Those are too negative.
So, as Christians, should't we be happy in the Joy of the Lord? Why not be positive? After all, should the world see something different in us? Why am I and a host of others so hard on Mr. Osteen? Why can't we just "agree to disagree?"
We as Christians should be happy, but WHY are we happy? That is a question Mr. Osteen MUST answer. As Christians, are we always going to be happy? Let me tell all of you something, I wasn't the happiest person when my mother was suffering from brain cancer. Nor was I happy when I went through my divorce. Did I have God's reassurance? Yes, but I was not "positive" like Mr. Osteen asserts. As for blessings, yes, God does bless. Many times, however, it is not the way we mere mortals think we should be blessed. Mr. Osteen focuses on "Your Best LIfe Now" rather than "Laying up treasures in heaven" I have had times where God blessed me with material possessions, other times, it is spiritual blessings. We as Christians need to be open to either. God many times will say "no" not because he is mean, but because he knows what is best. He's not our "daddy" that spoils his kids the way WF teachers make him out to be.
Mr. Osteen also preaches only part of the Gospel. In the business of souls, part is as bad as none. Others have said it better than I have. He seems to think "God is love, love everybody, and if you want something from God, he will give it to you." That's pretty much it. Nowhere does he address man's sinful state, our total loss without God, the (just) consequences for our sin, what it took for man to obtain forgivemess for sin (Christ's death on the cross), man's need for repentence, and the result of man's refusal to trust Christ. I don't know about anybody else, but the realization that I'm born in sin and have a first class ticket to hell isn't something that is too uplifting. Only when I trusted in Christ was I able to rejoice, not because of some emotional mind trick, but because I KNEW my sins were forgiven. I can now say with John Wesley my heart was "strangly warmed"
I applaud Mr. Osteen's emphasis on giving and loving others. However, the Word Faith and Seeker Sensitive teachings in his church make these good points almost moot. Also, as stated earlier, this is only part of the Gospel. Without man knowing his sinful state and need for Christ, he is eternaly lost.
Part of the Gospel will send people to hell as much as none of the Gospel.
Here are some links on Mr. Osteen.
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/229-joel-osteen
Go down to and click on the Larry King Live segment. You will see what I mean when I say Mr. Osteen is lukewarm.
Here is the 60 Minutes broadcasst. http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3366025n
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Leave of Absence
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=071017_1__OralR36523 According to this article, Richard Roberts was granted a temporary leave of absence.
This is a good step, kudos to ORU for taking it.
This is a good step, kudos to ORU for taking it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)