Previous Home Next Table of Contents
Conclusion
Authority and the
Church Revived
The major question which can now be answered is whether this type of
theological diversity, as has been outlined in this book, can be accepted as
desirable or correct for the church. In
the answer to this question, the reader must remember several truths which have
been shown. One, there are
different views of man’s basic need presented in this diversity. As a result, the doctrinal expressions are different
as to the nature of God’s redeeming activity, particularly as it
relates to Jesus. Second, since
this type of diversity is found to be the case, the vision of the future and
where man is going is also viewed differently.
Consequently, the methods and goals of ministry also have become
different. Since this is the case,
I cannot conceive of any credible reason why theological diversity should exist
in the church, much less be allowed to continue unhindered.
If there is any reason why this type of diversity is accepted by the
church, it will be for unbiblical reasons.
As has been seen, such diversity does not base the unity of the church on
what is believed to be true, or on what man’s vision of the future is, or on
how to educate and what to impart. Thus,
the fellowship must be based on something that man has come to value above
God’s truth itself. I can only
assume it must be either financial security, the survival of a denomination or
organization, the survival of mankind, or for some other man-derived value.
Whatever the case, let us be honest.
These man-derived values and entities are not crucial to whether God’s
Kingdom will be established. Whether
they continue to exist is not even important.
God can honor man by using institutions or by discarding them altogether.
Their maintenance is not the end, particularly when falsehood and deceit
are professed. What is important is
obedience to God’s commandments as they are revealed. Afterall, was this not the reason for the Reformation and the
break from the Catholic Church? Has
this not been the reason for most of the disbanding or separating from corrupted
organizations? I think so.
The need for change is serious.
This is why diversity in the educational process is of great concern if
it should continue. The fact
remains, however nice or well-meaning the individual may be, when falsehood,
goals and values, such as those seeking an “ultimate environment,” are
transmitted in the educational process, these ideals will make their way into
all aspects of church life. It has
a leavening effect from the seminary down to the local Sunday School class.
This is because of the use of literature which is distributed throughout
the Body of Christ. While individuals may regard doctrinal investigations as a
denial of the competency of the believer, the fact remains that I do not want
unscriptural values and existential goals being taught to my children or to
those God has placed me over to shepherd. You
may say that I do not have to use the literature, and I do not, but this
leavening comes from every direction; from
associational meetings, seminars, retreats, to programs and ideas for growth
which have been influenced by unscriptural beliefs and goals.
Even more alarming, I do not see any warrant for financially supporting
those who promote and espouse a subjective approach to Scripture and the
corresponding reinterpretations. Especially when one considers the destructive affects it has
on the purity and design of the church. In
my opinion, this is to support Satan’s design and inroad into the church.
I am not trying to be harsh, I only desire to see God’s tithes, the
receipts that are God’s and that man has stewardship over, go to the work and
truth Jesus commanded and left the church to do.
Furthermore, instead of educating the future leadership on the false
methods and truths, a return to the reason for seminary is in order: training in
the things of God. It is foolish to
just preach a lot of different ideas, philosophies, perspectives and opinions
and then expect the student to discern the matter of truth for himself. Does anyone not realize the deceit of Satan in confusing many
future leaders? Is it any wonder
some have left seminary disillusioned or even in disbelief?
This should not happen. Instead,
the seminaries should become a true training center where doctrine is taught,
error is exposed, and the leadership is taught how to deal firsthand with the
deceitful and wicked designs of Satan. Of
course when this happens, it will not just be an impartation of a lot of
knowledge, which is the goal of secular universities, but seminary will be a
place where the leadership experiences the power of God’s Spirit in overcoming
the powers of darkness; whether it be demons, beliefs, deceptions or Satan
himself. Instead of people leaving
disillusioned, some may even be saved while others become anointed for service
in the power and might of God’s Spirit of truth.
This is the central task of Christian education.
Anything less is just playing school and the student is just as well-off,
if not better off, in a secular school or university.
It is equally unfortunate the stress in education has been placed in
other things other than evangelism. While
it is stated that the goal is to train ministers to lead others, the goals
rather seem to stress on how to implement a program or technique whereby the
visions and dreams can be achieved. Instead
of teaching the absolute truth of God and pure theology, the education takes the
form of philosophical discussions in which the varied views and speculations are
searched for their merits. While
exposure of falsehoods is useful and must be done, the tendency in most
education is toward an acceptance of these views, even though they contradict
Scripture, because they are so reasonable.
The result is apologetics and a defense of the faith is not taught.
The student is left to his own ability to research the issues and decide
what he thinks is useful and true. This
might be okay if man was still living in the middle ages, but given the stress
and demands upon the student, this type of research rarely has a chance to be
pursued. The result of these overworked and tired students are that
they become swayed by the reasonable logic that accompanies a subjective
approach to Scripture. While they
many not fully accept what they hear, they know there is not time to find out
what their inner Spirit is telling them about these falsehoods.
Neither is there any instruction given to refute these falsehoods.
While many professors proudly provide a list of further reading materials
and a list of those who may have different views, who has time to read this
extra material. These same teachers
will say that they oppose indoctrination. However,
in reality, they have indoctrinated their students with their own views and
opinions, raised conflicting questions to which no conservative response is
given, while the students have not time to think through what they have heard.
In fact, it sounds so reasonable why should it be questioned when it
seems to be accepted by a majority of the students?
That this type of education occurs is know from personal experience.
I do not know how many times
I have heard both students and professors mock and make light of the ideas of
John Calvin. At the same time, I
wonder just how many of them have taken the time to read
Calvin’s Institutes, both volumes. I wonder if they did if they would appreciate the genius
which is found in this book. Admittedly,
Calvin is not Scripture, but his writings do provide a good understanding of
biblical theology as held by evangelicals.
These writings also demonstrate many of the merits of the doctrines which
are so quickly dismissed because they are never fully understood.
The point being, students do not usually have the time for this type of
research, and thus, doctrinal apologetics are never addressed.
This is one reason diversity has come about in churches and why diversity
is exalted as the true measure of education.
Students can develop, and are encouraged to do so, their own belief
patters which only tends to further the stronghold that falsehood has taken upon
the church. The importance of this
point cannot be overlooked with regards to education. It is from the seminaries that a majority of individuals who
will be responsible for the production of literature will come.
These graduates will equally be instruments in determining the future of
the organization they become a part of. Thus,
they will define its goals, its vision, its methods, and what are considered of
absolute value. This fact is
particularly true in an organization with the structure like the Southern
Baptist Convention. Thus it
behooves those who would train leadership to show a truly scriptural view of who
Jesus is, the nature of his work, and the future which the church is directed
toward. If there can be diversity
on issues such as these, then everything that is done will be directed in
different directions and for different reasons.
The result is a powerless church with different groups competing for
significance and the chief seats. In
addition, good time, critical time, is spent debating what is truth while a
world perishes around the church. Does
this not seem to be what is happening in the Southern Baptist Convention?
Let it equally be said that a return to a precise and clear doctrinal
perspective is not an attempt to say that one group is right. It is a matter of divine revelation. It is a matter of the church being able to accomplish what
Jesus called it into existence for and endowed
it with power. It is a
matter of submitting ourselves to God and His truth.
Psalm 78 reveals the importance of this truth. This Psalm speaks of how God’s people turned their back on
God, and, as a result, were not able to accomplish all that would have been
possible. They were neither able to
receive all that God would have given them.
The Psalm emphasizes how God continued to show devotion and compassion
toward Israel even when they continued to rebel against His will for them.
An examination of this Psalm shows that the chief problem that Israel
manifested was that they refused to bow to God, they forgot His Word and His
covenant. As a result, they would
tempt and provoke God by their unfaithful and unbelieving actions.
It was an attitude that said they did not believe God would do what He
said if they truly were obedient, the same as it was in Malachi’s day (Mal.
3:14). Even when God
demonstrated His faithfulness by the mighty working of His hand, Israel still
would not remain “steadfast” in his covenant.
The result caused the Psalmist to make an important revelation, “Yea,
they turned back and tempted God, and LIMITED the Holy One of Israel” (40
KJV).
You can try to paraphrase this in many ways, but the thought remains the
same. Due to their unbelief and
rebellion against God’s decrees, God was not able to do for them all that He
could, they limited God. This is
not to say that God was powerless, it just shows the extent of God’s design to
use human beings in His purpose and work. There
is no doubt that this same situation is found in the midst of God’s people
today. While the church may feel it
has moments of victory, the fact that it has despised and turned its back on
God’s Word, as Israel did, by not believing its decrees and truths, by not
keeping all that is commanded of man knowing that God is faithful, has led to a
situation where God’s people have actually limited God.
This has shown up best in the method of evangelism and the results.
Instead of trusting in God’s Word to convict man, instead of lifting up
Jesus and trusting that He will draw all men to Himself, the church has become
preoccupied with other methods, gimmicks, and techniques to get results.
The obvious result is it limits the true power of the gospel message and
thus what God will and can do. Equally,
because God’s Word has been so reinterpreted and changed by modern views of
man, the fact that God will heal the sick, that demons and bondage’s of Satan
will flee at the name of Jesus, are looked upon as superstitious events in
Scripture. The result is a limiting
of what God can do, a limiting of the Holy One of Israel, our Father who wants
the best for His church in accomplishing His designs.
It must be granted, therefore, that if the church is willing to submit
itself to God’s Word as authoritative, not just in parts, but wholly, with all
parts just as relevant and binding for today as when it was written, then the
church would be in a position of trust for God to do all that He wants to do.
A causal reading of the
Scriptures shows the credibility of this truth.
If it be believed that the church has transversed too far, then consider
the number of times that God received back the nation of Israel, His people, and
restored the glory of their faith to where “Ichabod” was no longer the
situation (I Samuel 7; 2 Kings 19; etc.).
It will no doubt be pointed out at this point that I am suggesting that
everything is possible, that all we dream can occur, a thought that I have
denounced throughout this book. However,
this is not the case. The dreams
and visions that I spoke of primarily in Section
III are the goals and beliefs that man has established and exalted above all
else. Goals which seem to demand
that God grant them because they are good and noble. Here I am simply stating the truth that God can do tremendous
things through His church when it is in a position of submissiveness and ready
to be directed. This is not telling
God what man wants, God will be revealing what He wants. Furthermore, the church will go in obedience and trust and in
the power of the Holy Spirit. As a
result, the church shall reap the fruit that God beforehand determined that it
should bear. The measure of the
church’s success will not be whether the church achieves some carnal desires
and visions, not even whether it has obtained the numerical results it is
seeking, the measure of success will be simply how much the church is obedient
to the commandments Jesus has given it. This
will be what is important.
You see, most of the ministry that the church is doing has developed from
goals and visions that have little to do with biblical imperatives.
In other cases, ministry has developed from well-meaning individuals who
have mistaken their benevolent feelings for mankind as a command and vision of
God. The only credible goals I find
in Scripture have to do with simple obedience.
Nowhere do you find any suggestion that a certain number of ministries or
converts are the measure of success. When
Paul was sent out, he did not go with the expectation from the “Home Mission
Board” of establishing x number of churches by 50 AD.
Nor is there any suggestion that he went forth with the vision of
baptizing x number of people during a year's time.
(In fact, Paul was glad that there were not many who could claim to have
been baptized by his hand.) Paul
and others went out in simple obedience to the command of Jesus to carry the
gospel into every part of the world. As
God opened the door, churches were established, multitudes were healed and
saved. In other places when the
reception to the gospel was hostile, they did not compromise truth, they did not
send back to the home mission board for advisers, they did not try to evaluate
if there was some need that they would try to meet and then slip the gospel onto
those ministered unto, on the contrary, they preached the truth of Jesus, the
foolishness of the cross. They knew
that it was God who gives the increase and who opens the doors.
They were simply ambassadors, the stewards of the gospel, the servants of
Jesus Christ.
This is the type of attitude that is needed today.
Not the attitude that church is big business as some advocate.
I know it has become big business and that is the problem.
The church, however, is a spiritual organism.
Its principles of growth and success have nothing in common with those
that work in worldly affairs. Its
Head is Jesus the Son of God. The
world’s leader is Satan, the master of deceit.
In fact, the church’s success defies logic and common sense.
Yet obedience to its proclamation is what matters.
Just as the first century believers were servants, so are we to be.
The attitude the church is to possess is that suggested by Jesus Himself,
“So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded
you, say, we are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to
do” (Luke 17:10 KJV). Does this sound
or suggest that the church should measure its work in terms of success or
reaching numerical goals? Is there
any room for boasting in this attitude? It
is of great interest that Jesus gave this type of teaching when the apostles
asked Him to increase their faith. How
were they to do this? Simply by doing what He commanded them, whether they seem
to be reasonable or make sense, simply obey.
The results of such uncritical trust would be great things, greater works
than the ones the apostles saw Jesus do, because they believed in Him (John
14:21). Truly, such faith is able,
through confidence in the name of Jesus, to order a sycamore tree to be plucked
up and cast into the sea. Truly,
all things become possible not because man has the potential to bring them
about, or because man dreams they are possible, but because the church is
obedient and faithful in carrying out Jesus’ commands.
Thus, God’s unlimited power, in the message of the gospel and poured
out upon His servants, will go forth to do the perfect work which shall not
return to God void. There is no
doubt that the reason so much of the gospel preaching returns empty and void
when so much is being preached is because the message has been leavened by
reintepretations, misrepresentations, opinions and misunderstandings.
The proclaimer is just sharing the power of his reason rather than the
foolishness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
The results are empty.
Moreover, when it comes to the issue of
the church helping individuals to reach their potential or actualize, I
do not want to deny the church from transforming the Christian through the
washing of the Word. In fact, it
should, as its definition of equipping the saints, help them to maximize the use
of all of their talents, abilities, knowledge and gifts of the Spirit which they
possess. I do, however, challenge
that this goal is simply to help the church make society better or to help man
achieve carnal pursuits, whether they be material, economic or spiritual.
In fact, some want spiritual gifts for their own selfish use and
pleasure, as seen in Simon (Acts 8). This
is not what equipping is about. The
church has a mission. In this
commission, all that we are, all that we posses, everything that we do should be
to the end of spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ, of lifting up His Holy Word
to all men. I am always amazed that
so much evangelical preaching and ministry are directed simply in encouraging
people to achieve their “sanctified” dreams and desires.
I grow weary of all the messages, prayers and prophecies which seem to
suggest that God is nothing more than a great department store from which man
can choose what he wants. You have
heard this message, “If you want a new car, home, health, etc., just send your
vow money in faith and believe that God will grant your desires.”
Is this what Chrisitianity is about?
Is this what Jesus dies on the cross for?
I think not. Wakeup America! You
have the best anyway. You have more
than any group of people on the face of the earth and more than any group in the
history of man. Even those in
poverty situations are often rich compared to the way the rest of the world
lives. It is time to stop all of
this silly carnal pursuit and use the church’s energy and relationship to God
to spread the gospel around the world. The
church should be using its abilities, gifts and prayer power to spread the
truth, not just to get the best in life. Is
it any wonder that we ask amiss? This
is the only hope for this world and millions who are lost. Let me say again, I have no quarrel with anyone seeking to
reach their potential while doing all that God will allow of them while they are
being obedient to His commands. There
is no doubt that men like Paul and Silas could very well be raised up in our own
generation.
Let me further say on the subject of being able to do all things that
this is not a positive thinking type of proposition which encourages man to
accomplish all that he desires. Paul
made this statement while he was in prison, in a place where he would be
restricted in achieving his effectiveness and potential, at lease we would think
so.
Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatever
state I am, therewith to be content.
I know both how to be abased and
I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed
both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.
I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. (Phil.
4::11-13)
The
point he was making, however, was that no matter where he found himself, in
whatever conditions he had to endure because of his obedience to the gospel,
whether it brought him comfort or destituteness, Paul knew that Jesus would be
with him and strengthen him to endure all that occurred to him.
This is a far cry from the idea of positive thinking which has become so
popular among religious groups. In
fact, positive thinking is just another thinly disguised belief in the ability
of man and his potential. Thus,
today instead of being content with where God might lead him and doing what He
asks, the believer simply becomes content because he “believes” God at some
point is going to grant him what he really wants.
When he does not get his carnal desires, the Christian usually will
complain and gripe about his present condition until “God does something.”
This is not only bad theology, it is pure selfishness.
It treats God as if He owed man a favor.
Let the church return to the confidence of Paul and let this type of
religious rhetoric fall to the way side. Let
the Christian be confident that if he will be faithful to God’s decrees, the
persecutions will arise, hardships will come, accusations will be made, the
powers of darkness will oppose him violently, the principalities of evil will
resist, but through Jesus Christ, he will preserve and overcome all of these
things. This is the instruction of Hebrews where it is written,
“For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye
might receive the promise. For yet
a little while, and he that shall come and will not tarry. Now the just shall live by faith; but if any man draw back,
my soul shall have no pleasure in him” (Hebrews 10:36-38 KJV). Thus the
Christian desire should not be to obtain some carnal level of living, but to
obtain his reward which is reserved in the glorious mansions of heaven.
It is also certain that when this type of faith and obedience is
manifested in the church, the Body of Christ will truly have a ministry to do.
The reason is simple. This
type of faith is costly, not just in the sense of it costing the precious blood
of Jesus Christ. It is costly to
those who dare walk and live in a Satanic controlled world with this type of
faith. This type of faith will
cause some members of the church to lose their job.
Others will be forced to move due to threats and the spoilage of their
property. Others will be in danger
of losing their lives and the lives of their family.
That these things are not commonly evident in this country is not a
compliment on how Christian this nation is.
It is a comment on just how far the church has compromised.
When faith is costly, the Body will have to minister to many of its own
unselfishly.
Equally, when this type of faith is possessed by the members, there will
be a need for equipping and building each other up.
This is because this type of faith will bring insults and accusations
from others. This type of faith is
going to divide families and friendships. This
type of faith is going to require sound teaching of the members who will need to
be able to stand against the heresies and doctrinal attacks which occur in the
world. One of the greatest
testimonies given to a church is when one of its members is about to launch out
into unfamiliar places, by moving or some other type of change, and yet shares
their confidence to go because they have a firm foundation to build upon, one
that will not be shaken by the shifting tides of this world.
This, my friend, is good and sound “equipping of the saints” for the
work of ministry. It may be called indoctrination, but I call it life-saving.
Let me add, I am always amazed at the number of individuals in leadership
positions who may know all the correct things, but has no idea on how to defend
them in Scripture. This should never be. This
is what equipping is about. The
point being, when submission to God’s Word is achieved, there will be plenty
of ministry for the church to do. The
church will be weeping and praying for those who are suffering because of their
faith. There is a major difference
between suffering for the cross and suffering because one has pursued some
carnal end at great cost.
The church will also be able to minister to those who are sent out to
share the gospel: the apostles, prophets and evangelists. These will need financial and prayer support from home.
When these servants of God are not on the mission field, they will have
other needs which need to be ministered unto.
Equally, when outsiders come to the church asking for help or a member
comes across a dire need in everyday living, the church will be ready to
minister to these individuals with no expectations of anything in return.
All of these are examples of the types of ministries which are required
when the Body of Christ becomes truly obedient to the commands of Jesus.
It is a shame when anything else is considered ministry.
This brings up another interesting point.
Since there is little ministry going on as described above, the church
has directed its ministry primarily in the direction of social reform or being
benevolent. In fact, the majority
of ministry outside the Sunday morning service is directed toward those outside
the Body of Christ. In many cases,
God’s own children are going without while the church is preoccupied with
ministering to the lost. When a
person, however, searches Scripture, he will find that most references dealing
with giving to the poor have to do with taking care of the poor among God’s
people. This is the case in
James’ epistle (James 2:14f.). It
is the reason for the collections for Jerusalem and the impoverished saints
there (Romans 15:26; 2 Cor. 8-9).
This emphasis on one’s “brother” is also found in the epistle of
John (I John 3:17), and Paul mentions it in the letter to the Romans (12:13).
The point being, most of these exhortations have to do with God’s
people ministering to God’s people.
This is also the case in the Old Testament.
God’s commands to Israel concerning the poor and neglected had primary
reference to the poor among God’s people.
This was the reason for the seven year rest, called the Sabbath, as well
as, the Jubilee which occurred every 50 years.
The truth of Scripture reveals that nowhere do you find the church
engaged in a social ministry as an end or in trying to improve the world by this
type of activity. The main contact
with the world was in the form of simple proclamation of truth.
People were confronted with the life-changing truth of the gospel.
The point being, when the church was obedient to the commands of God, it
had plenty of ministry to do among its own members who were being rejected by
the larger society. Today’s
church seems to be so accepted that little is offensive to the world.
In fact, the church has become in many ways exactly what the lost desires
it to be: a benevolent organization.
While I admit there are times the church is to minister to those outside
the church, the reason for doing so is revealed as one of two reasons. One, when
a Christian comes across a dire and certain need, as suggested by the parable of
the Good Samaritan (Luke 10). Two,
when a Christian is asked for help, he is to give it to them (Matthew 5:42).
Anything beyond this runs the risk of simply comforting the sinner in his
sinfulness. For the most part, the
only reason the church engages so much in this type of ministry is that it
thinks it can gain converts by it. It
is the same belief that somehow a believer can love the lost into the Kingdom.
The church, however, is not to gain converts by the power of sharing
money, food or clothing, but by the power of the gospel.
Jesus did not say that the church would be known by its ministry and love
for the lost. He said it would be
known by the love the believers have for each other.
If someone objects to this and asks about Matthew 25 where God judges
people on their works of ministry, I would ask you to look at the message
closely. Verse 40 is Jesus’ reply
to the redeemed. He answers their question by saying, “Inasmuch as ye have
done it unto one of the least of MY BRETHREN, ye have done it unto me”
(Matthew 25:40 KJV). There is also reason for believing that this particular
judgment will relate not to those in the church age who are judged on the cross,
but to those Gentiles who are in the time of Tribulation. In this sense, the judgment would concern those who treated
God’s people, Israel, with respect during the time of their persecution.
At any rate, it is unfortunate that in every congregation those who go by
Jesus’ name will neglect their own brother in order to run and help a poor
sinner who will only take them for their money anyway.
Perhaps this explains why seminary students can be literally starving or
being worked to exhaustion to support their
families while the church glories in its love and ministry to the lost.
Is this the ideal? Is this
love toward each other? No doubt,
when the church returns to being obedient to God’s Word, the resulting effects
upon the lives of the faithful will give the church many ways to minister.
Then the full force of Jesus’ statement will be understood.
Then the world will see the Christians love for each other, that nothing
can crush or defeat God’s children. Then
the light of the glorious living God will be upon the Body of Christ.
When the church returns to a submissive approach to God, its
organizations will equally be used for what they ought to.
If one has thought that I am against organization, programs and goals
completely, this is not the case. Structure
is necessary. However, rather than
this structure being used to organize a way to reach carnal goals and visions, I
advocate they be used solely for the purpose of spreading the gospel of Jesus
Christ. In Baptist life, this was
the original noble goal of the Cooperative Program which now has grown into a
bureaucracy. There is nothing wrong
with an organized outreach which
keeps good records on people who have been visited.
There is nothing wrong with organized outreach.
However, the church organization and programs should not be used simply
for the perpetuation of a church, to fund a building program, or to have higher
numbers as an end. These types of
goals only distort the purpose of organization and of the visits into the world.
When organization is used in a Scriptural manner, however, it is a most
effective and efficient way of carrying out the commands of Jesus.
In this idea, the organization is secondary to the task of the church and
the commands of Jesus.
If it be asked whether this type of faith and practice is possible, I
will simply direct your attention to the life of Daniel.
This saint remained faithful and useful to God in spite of all the
efforts to reinterpret his world view. He
also remained faithful in spite of being moved to a foreign, hostile and pagan
society. When searching for the
reason he remained faithful to God, the reader will find that he simply refused
to defile himself by compromising God’s commands.
This faithfulness was manifested when there
is no doubt that reasons could have been given for partial disobedience
given the circumstance, much as is done to God’s commands today.
Certainly, no one would have been too judgmental of him.
Yet he refused to defile himself and disobey God.
He also remained useful by being a prayer and a witness to God.
Scripture affirms Daniel’s life as being a witness to the truth of God
and as being confident in his prayers that God was faithful to His promises for
those who obeyed Him. The results
were that he received a place in
God’s spoken Word to man while he received the fullest vision of what God was
planning to do in the future compared to any other saint in the Old Testament.
The point being, the church can be just as effective in the present pagan
society if it refuses to compromise and turn its back on God.
What a difference the church could make if it was totally submissive to
God’s Word and rule.
As a final word, there are two practical reasons for a return to an
objective type of Scriptural approach. One
has to do with the lost. The other
has to do with the church. With
reference to the lost, it is imperative that the church holds forth God’s Word
without compromising or removing one jot or tittle.
God has a reason for giving man an impossible Law which he cannot keep.
In fact, the Law is so uncompromising, so exact, so beyond man’s
ability to approach its righteousness, that for anyone trying to keep it, the
end is only despair. But is this
not where God wants man to be, guilty under the curse of the Law so they can see
themselves as they truly are? It is only until man gets to this point that he can find
himself in a position to understand the great mercy and grace of the gift of
life in Jesus Christ. Thus, it
behooves the church to present the full counsel of God in its demanding and
exact commandments, particularly the Law, that man might find himself in a
position to be saved. Afterall, is
this not what Jesus did with the Law when He was on earth?
If this is so, why is the church trying to compromise and make the Law
livable and acceptable? Why is the
church trying to take the Law and make it an attractable addition to one’s
life philosophy? To do so is only
to be clothed and lost in the robes of outward righteousness.
A second reason for an objective approach to Scripture is the position
the church will find itself in. First,
the church will no longer have to address the problem of deciding which parts
are relevant for today and what was for the first century, all parts will be for
now. Second, by submitting to the commands and truths therein the church will
once gain take on the character of Christ, one of holiness and righteousness.
Third, the church will find itself guided by Scriptural visions and
goals, the second coming of Jesus Christ. Fourth
and of great importance, the church will be in a position to accomplish great
things for Jesus. I will not assert
that a great revival will occur or that a great outpouring of the Holy Spirit as
seen on Pentecost will occur. These
things are reserved for the counsel and ever wise direction of God.
In fact, I can not find in Scriptural prophecy a prediction of a great
return to Jesus just before His return. If
anything, the Bible predicts a great falling away.
However, I do know that the church will be in a position of humility,
submission and watchfulness, clean and ready to serve Jesus if He so chooses to
use the church in a tremendous way. The
church cannot make Jesus do things, but it can place itself in the position to
be used by repenting of its errors and being preoccupied with prayer and fasting
until He does move.
In conclusion, I can only plead with the men and women of God to awaken
from their slumber and see what this “other gospel” is doing to the church.
Awaken to what is being preached from the pulpits and promoted as the
future of man. In fact, I may not
be very far out of line to ask you to consider the other gospel.
Not the one exposed in this book, but the other one.
The one which was proclaimed in the first century.
The other gospel which was driven by the convicting power of the Holy
Spirit. This precious gospel which
Paul, Peter, James, Stephen and many others gave their lives for.
The gospel of Jesus Christ to which the church is to be an ambassador and
steward. This gospel is a scared
trust not to be abused or tampered with. Let
the church use it for what it was intended.
Perhaps Hugh Thomson Kerr has said it best:
We are sent...not to preach sociology but salvation; not economics but
evangelism; not reform but redemption; not culture but conversion; not
progress but pardon; not the new social order but the new birth; not
revolution but regeneration; not renovation but revival; not resuscitation
but resurrection; not a new organization but a new creation; not
democracy but the Gospel; not civilization but Christ.
We are
ambassadors not diplomats. (Zwener,
p. 16)
Previous Home Next Table of Contents
© CopyRight 2002 Scott R. Simpson