But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ (Philippians 3:20).
As a native of India, my wife carries in her purse something referred to as a "Green Card". This card officially declares her status as a 'resident alien', meaning though she has all the rights associated with living in this country, ultimately this isn't her 'home'. Though she is legally welcome to stay here for life, the government recognizes her identity and sense of belonging are connected with a foreign country.
Paul is saying something very similar in Philippians 3:20, but with a slight difference. His focus is on the community of believers, not the life of an individual believer. The word citizenship would actually be more literally translated as "colony" or "state". In ancient times it often designated an official colony of foreigners or relocated military veterans. Paul is reminding the believers in Philippi that their home is in heaven, and here on earth they are to be a colony of heavenly citizens.
Our churches, as well as our individuals lives, are supposed to consciously model the cultural values of Heaven--not earth. To redo an old phrase, far too many churches are too earthly-minded to be of any heavenly good. Our time on earth is but a few years, but our time in Heaven lasts forever. Isn't it time we began living that future reality now?
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9)
Over the years we've tried our hand at raising a few backyard animals---(chickens, geese, etc). One of my customs is to save food scraps in a few 5-gallon buckets. I use these to feed the scraps to the animals, or to store them to eventually throw on the compost pile.
Yet for the past several months I've also been busy finishing off our basement. I've accumulated a lot more buckets---paint, drywall mud, primer. Somehow, in the confusion of all these projects, one of the food buckets ended up in the contstruction supplies. All was well and good--at least until I opened it in the house. The smell of that bucket--now containing several months worth of rotted food--immediately filled the house.
That food bucket is something like the human heart. All might look well and good on the outside, but on the inside it is horribly rotten. C.H. Spurgeon captured the true condition of our hearts when he wrote the following:
"There is nothing one half so worthy of abhorrence as the human heart. God spares all eyes but His own that awful sight, a human heart; and could you and I but see our heart, we should be driven mad, so horrible would be the sight."
Jeremiah 17:9 isn't just talking about our evil deeds. It is highlighting the general condition of our heart apart from Christ. Of course, this does mean that we are prone towards evil thoughts and deeds. But it also means that even the "good" things we do are considered evil in the eyes of the Lord. Isaiah 64:6 tells us "all our righteous acts are like filthy rags". Everything is rotten, down to our very core.
The Christian does not stand before God because he or she has achieved some degree of righteousness by having lived a good life. The true Christian, instead, is one who recognizes he or she is a rebel and villian--but one who has been redeemed and changed by Christ. With David, we cry out "create in me a pure heart, O God" (Psalm 51:10).
“Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own” (Philippians 3:12, ESV).
Several years ago I spoke at a youth retreat where I struck up a conversation with a small group of youth leaders, one of whom flatly informed me that they had acheived "sinless perfection". They were alarmed because the youth group had not yet acquired this status.
"Oh, your problem is much bigger than that", I replied.
"What do you mean?", they asked.
"You're bigger problem is that your speaker hasn't achieved it yet, and has no real plans of doing so anytime soon".
That ended the conversation.
I've never understood the logic of those claiming to have acheived a sinless existence. If there ever was a modern day spirit of Pharisee'ism this would certainly be it. Certainly I believe God grants us victory over sin, but I also firmly believe Scripture teaches we will continue to struggle with sin throughout this life. Scripture commands us to "fight the good fight" (1 Tim 6:12), to "walk by the Spirit" so that we "will not gratify the desires of the flesh" (Gal 5:16), and to "take care, lest there be in you an evil heart leading you away from the living God" (Hebrews 3:12-13). It urges us "as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul" (1 Peter 2:11). Believers continue to struggle with sin. To deny this is to deny both the Word of God and current reality.
We are only able to deny sin when we have redefined it. Many view sin simply as the external acts of things like murder, adultery, or lying. Yet sin goes much deeper than that. Like a weed it wraps itself around even good and healthy things, slowly and silently chocking out holiness. It springs up from the depths of our heart, attitude, and will. Do we really think we can be free, in this life, from lust, selfishness, pride, or resentment? Romans 14:23 goes so far as to say that "whatever does not proceed from faith is sin".
Until our Lord returns, we are in the awkward state of being sinful beings redeemed by a holy Lord. Yet the great promise of Scripture is "that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil 1:6). Did you know when this work would be completed? Not until His return. We need him--not only for our salvation, but for our continued growth.
"I care not where I go, or how I live, or what I endure so that I may save souls. When I sleep I dream of them; when I awake they are first in my thoughts…no amount of scholastic attainment, of able and profound exposition of brilliant and stirring eloquence can atone for the absence of a deep impassioned sympathetic love for human souls."
Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892):
"If sinners be dammed, at least let them leap to Hell over our bodies. If they will perish, let them perish with our arms about their knees. Let no one GO there UNWARNED and UNPRAYED for."
C.S. Lewis (1898-1963):
“The Church exists for nothing else but to draw men into Christ, to make them little Christs. If they are not doing that, all the cathedrals, clergy, missions, sermons, even the Bible itself, are simply a waste of time. God became Man for no other purpose.”
Within the Southern Baptist Church the Calvinist/Arminian debate is heating up. A group in Tennessee is advocating what appears to be little more than a witch-hunt to expose and remove pastors who have calvinistic leanings. One document that has circulated advises churches about "Reformed Red Flags" to watch for in their pastors.
"Reformed Red Flags"
Lack of passion in the public invitation for the lost to repent and receive Jesus as Lord and Savior, or no Gospel invitation is extended.
Lack of salvation sermons or evangelistic (revival) preaching.
Use of the ESV Study Bible.
Lack of participation with other churches in evangelistic campaigns in their city, county, region.
Adding other belief statements or confessions to what their church believes, such as 1st London Baptist Confession, New Hampshire Confession, Abstract of Principles.
Moving the Church to elder rule.
Focused on creating the "true" church.
Strict Church discipline is sought to grow the church down to the "true" church.
Members of the Founders movement and attend their annual meetings.
In their sermons they quote from men such as John Piper, R.C. Sproul, James White, Jonathan Edwards and others.
They will call other Calvinists to join them on their church staff.
They will methodically employ a strategy of "converting" members to the Doctrines of Grace. As the circle widens, the movement grows bolder within the fellowship.
Tendency towards a highly logical systematic theology where all the questions about life and God have answers and fit neatly and nicely into a theological box.
The love to write and blog about their reformed theology.
Tendency to use their pastoral authority against any member that questions their reformed theology or direction.
Tendency to be evasive about their theology during the pastoral search process.
Much of these are obviously silly and many are little more than nonsensical distortions of the Calvinistic/Reformed positions. One wonders of the author of this list has ever even read Hodge, Warfield, or Edwards. Who could honestly accuse Bavinck, who wrote extensively about the absolute sovereignty of God, of putting God in "a neat little box"? Who could honestly accuse Edwards or Spurgeon of lacking in zeal to see the conversion of sinners? And didn't the Baptist church movement begin with a passionate desire to have a regenerate, New Testament, "true" church?
Another document is called the "Pastor's Pledge". The pastor is asked to sign a statement that reads, in part:
"I wish to state that I do not hold to a reformed or Calvinistic doctrine and the Pastor Search Committee has questioned me comprehensively in this area. With integrity of the heart, I have heard the statements of the Pastor Search Committee and can say with certainty that if my theology ever changes to a Calvinistic doctrine, I will share with the Deacons my new beliefs and work with them and the personel committee in transitioning me and my family to a new place of ministry that is more in line with my new theological stance."
Blowback against good biblical teaching is, of course, to be expected. Jonathan Edward noted that during his time Calvinist theology was generally despised. Little has changed. Yet what alarms me the most is that many Calvinistic pastors will simply dismiss this list as the writings of a poorly-read, uneducated Arminian-zealot. But to do so only allows the document to have a seed of credibility. Rightly or wrongly, distortion or partial-fact, this is how Calvinistic are seen. Now is not the time for a point-by-point theological response. Shouldn't we instead simply get busy doing Christ's business? Evangelizing the lost, preaching the Gospel, loving the Body?
Calvinists must be the most loving, the most patient, the most evangelistic, and the most joyous of all Christians. Anything less, and we will only see more of these letters.
Bart Stupak is one of the only Democrats I've ever voted for. This is why:
Via POLITICO Playbook:
BREAKING — Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), author of anti-abortion language in the House health-care bill, tells ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on “Good Morning America” that he’s willing to bring down the final bill if abortion language isn’t changed: “[T]he bill that they are using as a vehicle is the Senate bill. If you go to page 2069 through page 2078, you would find in there the federal government would directly subsidize abortions, plus every enrollee in the Office of Personnel management plan, every enrollee has to pay a minimum of $1 per month toward reproductive rights which includes abortion. … [W]e’re not going to vote for this bill with that kind of language in there.” …
STEPHANOPOULOS: “Let me be clear here. If the president doesn’t change the language, if your language is not accepted, you and your 11 colleagues who voted yes the last time will vote no this time. Does that mean you’re prepared to take responsibility for bringing down this whole bill?”
STUPAK: “Yes, we’re prepared to take responsibility. I mean, I’ve been catching it ever since last fall. Let’s face it, I want to see health care. But we’re not going to bypass some principles and beliefs that we feel strongly about.”
Note: I should add, Stupak is so well loved in this area there isn't a chance his party will be able to turn on him. Though he follows the Democrat's platform on most things, he is zealosly pro-life, anti-euthanasia, and pro-second ammendment rights (the last being a really big deal in Northern Michigan)
Here is a quick history of his voting record on the Abortion issue:
•Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
•Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
•Voted YES on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
•Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother's life. (Oct 2003)
•Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
•Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
•Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
•Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
•Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
•Rated 0% by NARAL Pro-Choice America, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
•Rated 100% by the National Right to Life, indicating a pro-life stance. (Dec 2006)
Though I do not own a MacArthur Study Bible, I've used one in the past and quite enjoyed it. Now it has been released in the English Standard Version. MacArthur has long used the New King James Version, though this probably had more to do with the limited choices available at the time. The NKJV, while a product of wonderful scholarship, is severely limited by its manuscript base (it uses only the textusreceptus, the same as the KJV, which is rather poor). Still, I have used the NKJV in my pulpit ministry for the past 3 years and found little difficulty in working around the occasional manuscript problems. For public readings, it reads fairly well (perhaps a tad too awkward and archaic at times, but still understood), and its translations can be trusted.
Frankly, I would have little difficulty using a number of translations. The NIV, NKJV, NASB, and now the ESV, are all excellent options for Evangelical churches. As I've already mentioned strengths/weaknesses of the NKJV above, here are my thoughts on the others:
NIV: The NIV is a tad loosey-goosey at times, as it strives for greater readability. But it has often been falsely called a "dynamic equivalent translation". That is simply not true. More accurately, it is almost exactly half way between a dymanicequivalent and literal translation style--with all the blessings and curses that brings. All in all its a good "middle of the road" translation. The worry is what it is going to become in the future, as Zondervan has gathered a new translation team to completely redo it. The last time they did this it resulted in a disastrous gender neutral version, which almost tanked the NIV in the States until they withdrew it.
NASB: Good, solid, excellent scholarship--and at one time was a favorite among conservative bible schools (and some seminaries). In the 1980's it was fast becoming the de facto translations at these institutions, and every young graduate proudly introduced it to their churches. It is a favorite (or at least was) with Greek professors because it sticks closer to the word order of the original Greek. The only problem here is that it sometimes make the sentence harder to understand than if it had been in KJV English. So, it gets a high score on accuracy---but a low score on readability.
ESV: I've been very pleased with this version, which I have used in my personal Bible study for the past 2 years. It beats the NASB and NKJV both on readability and accuracy, its manuscript base is superior to that of the NKJV, and for public reading it sounds more 'majestic' than the NASB . Negatively, it doesn't match the NIV'sreadability. Our family has chosen the ESV for our bible memory, personal study, and family devotions.
But, as the old saying goes, the best translation is the one you will actually read. Find one you like and just get into the Word. In the video below, MacArthur discusses the new publication of his study Bible in the ESV:
By my own rebellion, I am a prideful sinner. By His wonderful grace, I am forgiven. Because of His great love, I am ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (in Christ Jesus), and will spend eternity in His Kingdom. And because of His continued blessings, I married to a beautiful native of India, have 3 adorable children, and pastor at Indian River Baptist Church, in beautiful Northern Michigan.
Posts
