Eliminating Unrealistic Expectations

Sometimes we all feel as if our prayers lack the power to penetrate our ceilings. It seems as though our petitions fall on deaf ears and God remains unmoved or unconcerned about our passionate pleading. Why do these feelings haunt us?

There are several reasons why we are sometimes frustrated in prayer. One is that our expectations are unrealistic. This, perhaps more than any other factor, leads to a frustration in prayer. We make the common mistake of taking statements of Jesus in isolation from other biblical aspects of teaching in prayer, and we blow these few statements out of proportion.

We hear Jesus say that if two Christians agree on anything and ask, it shall be given to them. Jesus made that statement to men who had been deeply trained in the art of prayer, men who already knew the qualifications of this generalization. Yet in a simplistic way we interpret the statement absolutely. We assume the promise covers every conceivable petition without reservation or qualification. Think of it. Would it be difficult to find two Christians who would agree that to end all wars and human conflict would be a good idea? Obviously not. Yet if two Christians agreed to pray for the cessation of war and conflict, would God grant their petition? Not unless He planned to revise the New Testament and its teaching about the future of human conflict.

Prayer is not magic. God is not a celestial bellhop at our beck and call to satisfy our every whim. In some cases, our prayers must involve the travail of the soul and agony of heart, such as Jesus experienced in the Garden of Gethsemane. Sometimes young Christians have been bitterly disappointed in “unanswered” prayers, not because God failed to keep His promises, but because well-meaning Christians made promises “for” God that God never authorized.

Do you have unrealistic expectations that account for seemingly unanswered prayers? Are you treating God like a celestial bellhop?

Passages for Further Study

Psalm 102:17-18
Psalm 141:2

A Clarion Call to the Modern Church

An interesting article regarding our modern church and how they have compromised the issues of today. How they have exchanged the truth for a lie. Calling themselves theologians and defenders of truth and at the same time, suppressing the truth and not  acknowledging His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, (Romans 1:19-20) and how has impacted every facet of our lives: Politically, judicially, education... total moral fabric of our nation and society in general. Are we paying the price for the disobedience of the modern church? Are we to speak out against her depravity without being called divisive? More than a decade ago, John MacArthur called modern churches to return to sound doctrine--we need to hear that call again.

Christians historically have understood that their calling is to be in the world but not of the world. As Os Guinness pointed out in a perceptive series of articles on the church-growth movement, traditional evangelicalism not only resisted worldly influences, but also used to stress "cognitive defiance" of the world spirit.

Now, however, "the world has become so powerful, pervasive, and appealing that the traditional stance of cognitive defiance has become rare and almost unthinkable" ("Recycling the Compromise of Liberalism," Tabletalk [May 1992], 51.). At some point, evangelicals decided to make friends with the world.

Guinness pointed out that although we are called to be in the world but not of the world (John 17:14-18), many Christians have reversed the formula, becoming of the world while not really being in the world. They did this by allowing cable television, VCRs, radio, and other forms of communication to infuse worldly values into their thinking, while isolating themselves from any personal involvement with the people in the world who most desperately need the gospel.

"Evangelicals are now outdoing the liberals as the supreme religious modernizers--and compromisers--of today," Guinness writes (Ibid.). The market-driven philosophy so popular among modern evangelicals is nothing more than "a recycling of the error of classical liberalism" (Ibid.).

The reason most evangelicals were caught unaware by modernism a hundred years ago is that liberals rose from within evangelical ranks, used evangelical vocabulary, and gained acceptance through relentless appeals for peace and tolerance. New church-growth movements are following precisely the same course, and that tactic has taken evangelicals by surprise once again.

Most of the market-driven megachurches insist they would never compromise doctrine. They are attractive to evangelicals precisely because they claimed to be as orthodox in their doctrine as they are unorthodox in their methodology. Multitudes have been sufficiently reassured by such promises and have simply abandoned their critical faculties, thus increasing their vulnerability. Unfortunately, real discernment is in short supply among modern evangelicals.

Like the modernists a century ago, churches in the user-friendly movement have decided that doctrine is divisive--peace is more important than sound teaching. Wanting to appeal to a modern age, they have framed their message as a friendly, agreeable, and relevant dialogue, rather than as a confrontation with the gospel of Christ.

The relevant issues of our modern age--radicalism, abortion, feminism, homosexuality, and other politically charged moral issues--pose the most obvious threat for user-friendly churches. Their undefined theology and seeker-sensitive philosophy do not permit them to take a firm biblical stance on such matters, because the moment they defy the spirit of the age, they forfeit their marketing appeal. They are therefore forced to keep silent or capitulate. Either way, they compromise the truth.

If a church is not even willing to take a firm stand against abortion, how will it deal with the erosion of crucial doctrine? If a church lacks discernment enough to condemn such overt errors as homosexuality or feminism, how will it handle a subtle attack on doctrinal integrity?

Many evangelical churches have wholly abandoned strong preaching about hell, sin, and the wrath of God. They claim God's primary attribute is benevolence--one that overrides and supersedes His holiness, justice, wrath, and sovereignty.

Rather than addressing humanity's greatest need--forgiveness of sins--modern sermons deal with contemporary topics, psychological issues (depression, eating disorders, self-image), personal relationships, motivational themes, and other matters a la mode.

The market-driven philosophy of user-friendly churches does not easily permit them to take firm enough doctrinal positions to oppose false teaching. Their outlook on leadership drives them to hire marketers who can sell rather than biblically qualified pastors who can teach. Their approach to ministry is so undoctrinal that they cannot educate their people against subtle errors. Their avoidance of controversy puts them in a position where they cannot oppose false teaching that masquerades as evangelicalism.

In fact, the new trends in theology seem ideally suited to the user-friendly philosophy. Why would the user-friendly church oppose such doctrines?

But oppose them we must, if we are to remain true to God's Word and maintain a gospel witness. Pragmatic approaches to ministry do not hold answers to the dangers confronting biblical Christianity today. Pragmatism promises bigger churches, more people, and a living church, but it is really carnal wisdom--spiritually bankrupt and contrary to the Word of God.

Marketing techniques offer nothing but the promise of popularity and worldly approval. They certainly offer no safeguard against the dangers of the down-grade toward spiritual ruin.

The only hope is a return to Scripture and sound doctrine. We evangelicals desperately need to recover our determination to be biblical, our refusal to comply with the world, our willingness to defend what we believe, and our courage to defy false teaching. Unless we collectively awaken to the current dangers that threaten our faith, the adversary will attack us from within, and we will not be able to withstand.

Yet, surely, there must be some who will fling aside the dastard love of peace, and speak out for our Lord, and for his truth. A craven spirit is upon many, and their tongues are paralyzed. Oh, for an outburst of true faith and holy zeal! (Charles Haddon Spurgeon)

NOT A CHANCE

“In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph. 1:11).

John Calvin

Modern Americans often find the biblical view of divine providence hard to swallow because we are accustomed to living in a republic in which no one can govern without the consent of the electorate. The right to vote is an external constraint on politicians; in other words, our elected officials know they can lose their seat in government if they act against the wishes of their constituents.

However, there is no external check on the reign of our Creator. There is no limit to His sovereignty. The extent of His control knows no bounds; everything that happens is ordained by the Lord. No person or force can thwart anything He has purposed to do.

This doctrine is taught throughout Scripture. In today’s passage, Paul tells us God works all things according to the counsel of His will (Eph. 1:11). The first part of the Westminster Confession’s section on providence helpfully restates the biblical position: “God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass” (3.1).

“Whatsoever comes to pass” includes the predestination of His people to salvation (Rom. 9) and the rise and fall of human empires (Acts 17:26–27a). Even evil is not outside the scope of our Father’s control (Isa. 45:7), although God relates differently to wickedness than He does to righteousness. The difficult issue of providence and evil will be discussed more in detail at a later date.

Moreover, the Lord ordains the outcome of seemingly chance events. “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord” (Prov. 16:33). We speak of things happening “by chance,” but God knows with certainty all things that come to pass. We say there is a fifty-percent chance a tossed coin will turn up heads or tails only because we do not know fully the causal factors (number of rotations, force of the flip, density of the air, weight of the coin, and so on) that would enable us to make a perfect prediction. But there is no “chance” for the Lord. He knows beforehand with certainty whether the coin will land heads or tails. Indeed, He has already ordained the outcome of the toss.

“When that light of divine providence has once shone upon a godly man, he is then relieved and set free not only from the extreme anxiety and fear that were pressing him before, but from every care” (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.17.11).

Knowing the Lord’s sovereignty frees us to take risks for the kingdom, because we know that our failures cannot throw God’s plan off course and that our final victory over the world, the flesh, and the Devil is guaranteed.

TWISTING THE TRUTH

“Fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them” (vv. 29–30). - Acts 20:7–35

Historically speaking, divergent viewpoints have existed within the church since the days of the apostles. Christians have always had to live in community with other believers who do not agree with them on every single point, and they have had to do so in a way that keeps “the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3). As an example of this, Paul in Romans 14 clearly intends to bring civility to Christians who are arguing over matters of diet and calendar.

No matter the particular issue, all disagreements occur only because one or more parties in the disagreement are at least partially in error. Both you and I can be wrong when we differ over something, but we cannot both be totally right. Not every error is a legitimate cause for division, and differences must be tolerated whenever they do not undermine Christian faith. Paul in Romans 14 makes this point, telling certain Christians not to judge other Christians who abstain from meat (mostly Jews still concerned with purity laws) even though no food is unclean in itself (v. 14). As long as the consciences of “the weak” did not bind the consciences of “the strong,” their view of food was tolerable.

Other errors deny those very beliefs that set Christians apart from all other people, that is, they deny those truths without which the Christian faith is impossible. Denials of the Trinity, the virgin birth, and other such matters are errors that we refer to as heresies. To preserve the purity of its testimony to the one, true God, the church has historically stood against heresy, calling councils and writing creeds to define the boundaries of orthodoxy.

Traditionally, heretics have been unwilling to admit that they do not affirm Christianity as it has been handed down throughout the ages. This problem was compounded beginning in the nineteenth century when heretics were increasingly able to stay in their churches without being disciplined for their aberrant views. Many unbelievers today are leaders in some Protestant denominations, which have suffered a mass exodus of members. The complicity of many church bodies in looking the other way when soul-damning lies are taught has forced many to flee these churches lest they be devoured by the wolves.

Paul in Romans 14 urged the toleration of those who in error felt it was wrong to eat what they thought was unclean. If this is so, should we not also tolerate those who disagree with us over issues such as the method of baptism or the millennial reign of Christ, especially when it is impossible to determine with absolute certainty which views are less faithful to Scripture than others? Are nonessential truths something over which you break fellowship?

The Times, They are a-Changing

R.C. Sproul


Everything in creation is subject to time. Everything in creation is mutable. Everything in creation goes through the process of generation and decay. God and God alone is eternal and immutable. God and God alone escapes the relentless onslaught of time.

We not only measure moments in time, but we measure periods that take place in terms of ages, eras, and epochs. In our own generation, we have seen various transitions of the human cultures in which we find ourselves situated, hurled against the backdrop of time (as Martin Heidegger indicated in his epic book Being and Time). We say that times are changing. That doesn’t mean that time itself changes. There are still sixty seconds in a minute, sixty minutes in an hour, twenty-four hours in a day. But cultures are constantly shifting in their patterns, in their values, and in their commitments.

The decade of the 1960s — in which the United States of America went through an unbloody revolution that changed the culture so dramatically that people who lived before that decade feel like aliens in a culture dominated by a post-1960s worldview. The revolution of the ’60s spelled the end of idealism and ushered in several radical changes in the culture, including the sexual revolution. The sanctity of marriage was more explicitly undermined. Clean, wholesome speech in the public sphere became increasingly rare. The sanctity of life with respect to the unborn underwent attack legislatively, and moral relativism became the norm in our culture.

With this moral relativism came technological advances that also altered our daily lives. The knowledge explosion rocked by the advent and proliferation of the use of the computer has brought a new culture of people who live more or less “online.” This relativisitic culture brought with it a culture of eros and heightened addiction to pornography, as well as a culture of drugs with the subsequent invasion of addiction and suicide.

The times in which we live are times that are exceedingly challenging to the church of Jesus Christ. The great tragedy of the church in the post-1960s revolution is that the face of the church has changed along with the face of the secular culture. In a fatal pursuit of relevance, the church has often become merely an echo of the secular culture in which it lives, having a desperate desire to be “with it” and acceptable to the contemporary world. The church itself has adopted the very relativism it seeks to overcome. What is demanded by times such as ours is a church that addresses the temporal while at the same time remaining tethered to the eternal — a church that speaks, comforts, and heals all things mortal and secular without itself abandoning the eternal and the holy. The church must always face the question of whether its commitment is to sanctity or profanity.

We need churches filled with Christians who are not enslaved by the culture, churches that seek more than anything to please God and His only begotten Son, rather than to attract the applause of dying men and women. Where is that church? That is the church Christ established. That is the church whose mission is to minister redemption to a dying world, and that is the church we are called to be. God help us and our culture if our ears become deaf to that call.

Satan, The First Postmodernist

The Devil and Jesus Christ

Matthew 4:1-11 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, "If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread." Jesus answered, "It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’" Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down. For it is written: "‘He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’" Jesus answered him, "It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’" Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me." Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’" Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

Notice the diaprax of Satan in his three attempts to tempt Christ. He tries to get Jesus to prove He has power by making Himself something to eat. This appeals to the humanity of Christ on the levels of body and soul. But for Christ to break His fast and use His Divine power after making Himself "nothing" (Phil. 2:7) in obedience to the will of the Father would have been the end of salvation for men.

Postmodernism appeals to the mind and to the flesh and seeks to satisfy the desires of them, but is ignorant of the things of the spirit. In the second temptation Satan tries the same tactic, only this time he pulls Scripture from its context to do so. This is another mark of postmodernist teachers. They pull what they want out of context from Scripture to serve their own paradigm, their own agenda. Many postmodernists are fooled by this ploy because they don't bother to look up the biblical context to see if it is correct. They don't bother because critical thinking is not part of their daily existence. Facts really don't matter to them, it is how they feel about what they hear and how it fits into their sensibilities. But Jesus rejects this false argument because He is the author of the Scriptures and knows their context. He rejects this temptation with Scripture that is not taken out of context but used according to it.

The third temptation is Satan's grandest attempt. He knows that Jesus is on a mission to save men from sin who believe in Him and must die in order to achieve it. Satan tempts Christ to take the dominion of the world from Satan who is called the ruler of the kingdom of the air (Eph. 2:2) the prince of this world (John 12:31). Jesus knows that "the whole world is under the control of the evil one." (1 John 5:19). So this was a real offer. Jesus could have the world now instead of going through pain and suffering if He will simply worship Satan. But Satan failed to realize this offer was not what Jesus wanted. He did not need the world, He wanted to save people. The world would be His because He created it (Col. 1:16). But this world would be destoryed.(2 Pet. 3:10) In the course of time the devil and his angels would be thrown into the lake of fire forever (Rev. 20:10). Satan's goal had been, from the time of his sin in heaven, that God would worship him. Like postmodernists, the facts did not persuade Satan. What mattered to him was that his personal agenda be fulfilled come hell or high water. In this case, come hell.


Satan, False Apostles, False Prophets And False Teachers

2 Corinthians 11:13-15 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

2 Peter 2:1-2 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them— bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.

1 John 4:1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Finally, we have to deal with the issue of false apostles, prophets and teachers. False apostles pretend they are serving the Lord but actually they are serving their master Satan. They may not even realize they are serving Satan, but you can only serve one master (Matt. 6:24). Postmodernists do not realize that you cannot serve God if you are serving yourself and your own agenda your own way. Like Satan before them, they serve their own desires instead of God. Thus they end up serving the agenda of their master Satan. This never occurs to them because they believe that life is all paradox and oxymoron, that it is full of gray areas of truth instead of black and white truth according to God's Word. To the postmodernist life is subjective. God's truth is objective. To them truth is relative. To God truth is absolute. To postmodernists truth is existential. Existentialism is defined by the dictionary this way:

A philosophy that emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of the individual experience in a hostile or indifferent universe, regards human existence as unexplainable, and stresses freedom of choice and responsibility for the consequences of one's acts.

God views existence just the opposite from this. What postmodernists fail to realize is that, behind half truths and heresy lies the work and kingdom of Satan. The postmodernist's paradigm is then completely in the domain of the evil one. It was begun by him and it is sustained and bolstered by his temptations. It is propagated by postmodernist false apostles, prophets and teachers whom true believers are to test because of the spirit of antichrist that pervades their teachings and actions. Postmodernists see no reason to test anything because they have been taught not to judge by false Satanic teachers. But God says that we are not to suspend our critical thinking, our minds that He created in us, rather to submit them to God and use them to test the spirits.

For a postmodernist to be saved they must be reprogrammed by the Word of God and the Holy Spirit to think correctly. Their world view must be entirely changed. This is why people like Leonard Sweet and other Emerging Church teachers are so dangerous. They cater to an evil mindset instead of attempting to change it through education in the Word. This is why we are living in the end times generation. The postmodern paradigm will bring in the reign of the Antichrist, Satan himself. We can only thank the Lord Jesus Christ that it will be short-lived and that the devil, the first postmodernist, will be put down forever.

A Dearth Of Discernment - The Mark Driscoll Controversy

Once again, Mark Driscoll in a new controversy. As a leader of one of the largest ministries, should he be bringing awareness to the lost, in pointing them to the foot of the Cross at Calvary or to himself? When is the Mark Driscoll controversy going to stop laying its ugly head, at the church's doorstep? In the light of Titus 2:7,8, we ask ourselves, when will it ever end? Or are we in the wrong in exposing men like Mark Driscoll?





..."in all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good works; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility, sound speech that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of you." Titus 2:7,8

Mark Driscoll, the controversial Pastor of Mars Hill Church, Seattle, spoke at the London Men’s Convention at the Royal Albert Hall on May 7th 2011. He was invited to the Men’s Convention by a group of evangelical ministers and leaders, made up of Richard Coekin (Chair) of Dundonald Church Wimbledon; Trevor Archer of Chessington Evangelical Church; Tim Thornborough of The Good Book Company; Wes McNab of Slade Evangelical Church; Richard Perkins of Christ Church Balham and Wanyeki Mahiaini of All Souls, Langham Place.

The purpose of this website is to highlight areas of Driscoll’s ministry which should cause grave concern to true, discerning Christian believers. It is the contention of the authors of this website that the levels to which Driscoll has publicly stooped in his approach to a variety of issues are unacceptable when it comes to Christian ministry and ultimately make a mockery of the Christian faith. We are disturbed that Driscoll uses the pulpit to mock Noah, and to call Gideon a coward. We believe that the picture Driscoll describes of Vintage Jesus is blasphemous. We are concerned that Driscoll’s flippant and irreverent conduct makes him unfit for the pulpit. We are concerned that Driscoll encourages the use of what he calls new ‘convenant tattoos’ and that Mars Hill Church declares that Jesus loves tattoos. We believe that the assertion that God loves punk rock music demeans the holiness of God. In view of this evidence, and in the light of Scripture, the discerning believe needs to face up to this question: Is Mark Driscoll a false teacher?

It is essential that concern is raised in regard to the enthusiastic welcome which has been extended to Driscoll from across evangelical circles, and the support that has been publicly voiced.

The intention of this website is not to provide a platform for discussion on the ministry of Mark Driscoll but rather to provide primary source evidence from Driscoll’s own mouth and written works, as an opportunity for discerning believers to weigh what has been publicly stated with the Word of God.

A helpful introduction to the subject can be found contained in Cathy Mickel’s Memo to Church Leaders regarding Driscoll’s suitablility for ministry. Other articles and examples of questionable teaching can be found throughout this website.

Witness at London Men’s Convention

On Saturday, 7 May, the London Men’s Convention took place at the Royal Albert Hall. As there was an extensive report in the 22 / 29 April English Churchman about the LMC and the controversy regarding one of the main speakers we will not repeat the same material but refer readers to that particular issue.

A small witness to protest took place in the vicinity of the Royal Albert Hall. Three men arrived early in the morning and they set up large posters with relevant Bible verses in full view of those queuing to go into the building. The posters displayed the following: Jude 1:4 turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness; Philippians 1:27 Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ; Ezekiel 22:26 they have put no difference between the holy and profane;1 Thessalonians 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. One large poster displayed the article which appeared in the EC. There were tourists who took photos of the posters.

Many leaflets were given out warning people of the dangers of Mark Driscoll’s teachings. There was widespread ignorance regarding Driscoll. There were many conversations with people. Some were friendly and some were hostile.

Two of the protestors left after the people entered the building for the 10.00 a.m. start of the conference. One stayed to continue witnessing till people came out at lunch time and at the close of the conference in the late afternoon. He was joined by another friend who supported the witness.

The organisers of the convention and people who attended were alerted to the dangers. As predicted, Driscoll was well behaved during the conference and it was reported he spoke well and was careful with his language.

As the new contraversy starts to unfold, Mark Driscoll's "so called apology" has a lot to say, but surely lacking what a humble man of God would had said and done, under an all consuming God.Mark Driscoll Responds; "I then put a flippant comment on Facebook, and a raging debate on gender and related issues ensued. As a man under authority, my executive elders sat me down and said I need to do better by hitting real issues with real content in a real context. And, they’re right. Praise God I have elders who keep me accountable and that I am under authority"

I for one believe that this so called "apology", was nothing of the source. He was taken to the woodshed "supposedly" by the elders, because the "effeminate" issue was a "hot potatoe." They didn't want people like G.L.A.D.D. and others to run with this NEW controversy from Driscoll. If they have, as we yet to see, it would be the last of Mark Driscoll behind a pulpit. This has been a political hypocrisy in part by Mars Hill, the elders and Driscoll himself. Where is the heart felt apology to Christ, the body and the misrepresentation of The God of the Bible? It has always been about Driscoll and his so called cavalier way of preaching Christ and Him crucified. I for one moment do not think that we will hear the end of Driscoll's controversies as he prepares himself to be under the spotlight once again, in the Mark Driscoll Show.

Is this the last of Mark Driscoll's controversies? Will he ever stop, bringing these controversies to the church's doorstep? is the question that we need to ask ourselves. When will it ever end? To be continued...

The new "culturally relevant" Christianity.

The subject of modernism, postmodernism, emerging, and the new "culturally relevant" Christianity, brings us to the fork on the road. We come to the question as to the holiness of God. In the scripture, every time an "Angel of the Lord", Angels or a theophany , men of God fell down and worship as if they were dead. Their mere presence was so powerful, that men could not contain their emotions or their reverence, of these incredible visible manifestations in the Old and New Testaments. But in this new postmodern, "culturally relevant" christianity, it doesn't matter as to the holiness of God in respecting His presence. Even though God resides in every single child of God and walks among us. As if God needed to change His message to appeal to this new generation in keeping up with the times, in order to be reverent. Vulgarity, crudeness profane, deliberately shocking, and just plain following society down the Romans 1 path is a valid way to “engage the culture”, is acceptable in this new "theology"

"Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving." Ephesians 5:4 To trivialized the sexual relationship("crude joking"), or on the other hand to idolize it, is out of step with our identity as "saints." As those called out of the human race (1:4-6) to bear God's restore image (4:24), we can accept God's gift, including sexuality, with thanksgiving, and restore them to their proper use (Proverbs 5:18, 19; 1 Timothy 4:1-5; Hebrews 13:14).

"Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear." Ephesians 4:29

"The words of a wise man’s mouth win him favor, but the lips of a fool consume him.The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness, and the end of his talk is evil madness. A fool multiplies words, though no man knows what is to be, and who can tell him what will be after him?" Ecclesiastes 10:12-14. Words reveal a person's heart, and what is spoken can have serious consequences (Matt. 12:34-37).

You have no doubt heard the arguments: We need to take the message out of the bottle. We can’t minister effectively if don’t speak the language of contemporary counterculture. If we don’t vernacularize the gospel, contextualize the church, and reimagine Christanity for each succeeding generation, how can we possibly reach young people? Above all else, we have got to stay in step with the times.

Those arguments have been stressed to the point that many evangelicals now seem to think unstylishness is just about the worst imaginable threat to the expansion of the gospel and the influence of the church. They don’t really care if they are worldly. They just don’t want to be thought uncool.

Let’s face it: Many of the world’s favorite fads are toxic, and they are becoming increasingly so as our society descends further in its spiritual death-spiral. It’s like a radioactive toxicity, so while those who immerse themselves in it might not notice its effects instantly, they nevertheless cannot escape the inevitable, soul-destroying contamination. And woe to those who become comfortable with the sinful fads of secular society. The final verse of Romans 1 expressly condemns those “who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.”

Even when you marry such worldliness with good systematic theology and a vigorous defense of substitutionary atonement, the soundness of the theoretical doctrine doesn’t sanctify the wickedness of the practical lifestyle. The opposite happens. Solid biblical doctrine is trivialized and mocked if we’re not doers of the Word as well as teachers of it.

When Paul spoke to that culture, he didn’t adopt Greek scatology to show off how hip he could be. He simply declared the truth of God’s Word to them in plain language. And not all of his pagan listeners were happy with that (v. 18). That’s to be expected. Jesus said, “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18-19).

Even Jesus’ high priestly prayer included a thorough description of the Christian’s proper relationship with and attitude toward the world: “I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world” (John 17:14-16).

Whenever Jesus spoke of believers’ being in the world, He stated that if we are faithful, the world will be a place of hostility and persecution, not a zone of comfort. He also invariably followed that theme with a plea for our sanctification (cf. John 17:17-19).

I frankly wonder how any Christian who takes the Bible at face value could ever think that in order to be “culturally relevant” Christians should participate in society’s growing infatuation with vulgarity. Didn’t vulgarity and culture used to be considered polar opposites?

"You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." Matt. 12:34-37. "By their CARELESS WORDS" A resounding message by our Lord! Where is the fear of the Lord, in this so called, "culturally relevant" message?

Faith And Reason

Faith and Reason
by R.C. Sproul

In this postmodern culture we have witnessed a fascinating revival of ancient Gnosticism. The Gnostics of antiquity were called by that name because they asserted that they had a superior type of knowledge that surpassed the insights found even in the apostles of the New Testament. They maintained that the insights of the apostles were limited by the natural limitations suffered by human beings tied to rationality. True knowledge, according to these heretics, was found not through reason or sense perception, but through a highly developed mystical intuition. In like manner, in this postmodern world we’ve seen a wide spread rejection of rationality. This rejection of rationality has infiltrated the church with a vengeance. We see frequent attempts to remove the Christian faith from all considerations of rationality. It is being argued today that biblical revelation is only intelligible by intuition or by a particularly sensitive poetic imagination. This carries with it the idea that biblical revelation is unintelligible through reason.

For good cause, the church in recent centuries has had to reject rationalism in its many faceted forms. There is no monolithic philosophy of rationalism; rather, rationalism wears various faces. On the one hand, we think of rationalism as distinct from empiricism with respect to how we come to know what we know. Second, Enlightenment rationalism contrasts reason not with sense perception but with revelation, arguing that revelation is unreasonable and the only truth that can be known is that which can be known by natural reason. The third and most complex form of rationalism is Hegelian rationalism, which defines reason with a capital R, and reality is the unfolding in space and time of ultimate reason. None of these philosophies represents historic Christianity. Christianity is not based on rationalism. However, the rejection of rationalism in the modern church often carries with it the rejection of rationality. This rejection is itself irrational. When we reject humanism, we don’t reject being human. If we reject existentialism, we don’t reject existence. So, if we reject an “ism” attached to reason, it does not mean that we are to reject reason itself.

Any discussion of faith and reason has to ask the question, “What is faith?” The biblical answer, according to the author of Hebrews, is that faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (11:1). The author goes on to say that by faith we understand that the world was formed by the Word of God. The first thing we notice in this assertion is that faith is something that is substantial, not ephemeral. Secondly, faith represents a type of evidence. It is the evidence of the unseen. At the heart of the concept of New Testament faith is the idea of trust, namely, that faith involves placing one’s trust in something. In this regard all human creatures are subject to depending at one point or another on faith. I am not an expert in medicine, so I must give a certain trust to the diagnoses offered to me by experts in the field. That trust may be provisional until I find that it is not based in substance or evidence. But in the meantime, to trust what we do not see is not necessarily a matter of being irrational. Without reason, the content of biblical faith would be unintelligible and meaningless. So we say that biblical faith is not the same as reason, but that faith is rational and reasonable. The first assertion that faith is rational means that faith is intelligible. It is not absurd or illogical. If biblical revelation were absurd and irrational, it would be utterly unintelligible and meaningless. The content of the Bible cannot pierce the soul of a sentient creature without first going through the mind. It was Augustine who declared that faith without evidence is credulity. At this point we understand that though faith is rational, it is also reasonable. Biblical faith does not call people to crucify their intellect or take irrational leaps of faith into the darkness with the hope that Christ will catch us. Rather we are called to leap out of the darkness and into the light.

When the Scriptures say that faith is the evidence of things not seen, what are we to understand that to mean? The example given is that by faith we understand the world was formed by the Word of God. None of us was an eyewitness of the action of God in creation. Yet we trust that the universe has come into being by the act of God’s divine work of creation because we have come on reasonable grounds to believe that God’s Word is trustworthy. Because we are convinced that God’s Word is trustworthy and that that conviction is a reasonable conviction, we can trust God’s Word even for those things that we cannot see. John Calvin also argued the point that true faith is not believing against evidence. Rather, true faith involves trusting in the evidence that God has amply provided in and through His Word. That faith is not without what Calvin called evidences; rather, it is a faith that surrenders to or acquiesces to the evidences.

We must be on our guard and vigilant at every moment against the intrusion of irrationality coming from existential philosophy, neo-orthodox theology, and the resurgence of mysticism set forth in neo-Gnosticism. What is at stake is the coherence and intelligibility of God’s divine work.

Open Letter To Evangelical and Protestant Pastors Worldwide Now is the Day to Turn Back to God’s Word

This is the problem, that I have been saying is happening to the body of Christ for years now. The mentality of the three wise monkeys("see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil") within the church. Protect the institution and their leaders at all cost. Sad commentary on the people, that are supposed to protect the flock and the defenders of the truth.

From: Roger Oakland, Understand The Times

The following letter is to all Bible-believing pastors throughout the world who have been or are being influenced by current trends that are attacking the Word of God through the postmodern humanistic mystical belief system. I have witnessed this deception firsthand on a worldwide basis but am most familiar with what has been happening in the two fellowships I have been part of for the past thirty years - one in Canada and one based in southern California.

It is with a heavy heart I write this open letter to those who consider themselves evangelical or Protestant pastors. While my desire is to do this respectfully and with the love of the Lord, I am compelled with a strong sense of responsibility to write this warning.

The fact is we are living in a time in history where there is great spiritual apostasy (a falling away), and sadly, many pastors don’t even realize it is happening. Others realize it but don’t know what to do about it, while still others see it but promote it anyway. The purpose of this letter is to shine light on the darkness that has crept into so many churches today.

For many years, I have documented my concerns about this apostasy and presented the evidence to the body of Christ. An article I wrote a few years ago called “Ichabod” described the departing of God’s Spirit from many churches. That article was later followed by the commentary “Is Your Denomination a Sinking Titanic?.” I believe we are witnessing the sinking of the Titanic at the present time. While most are still dancing around in the ballroom, a few have chosen to get off the boat. How many get off in time is the question that remains to be answered. Please view this short YouTube video of the Sinking of the Titanic

While I recognize that I am “marked” by some as someone who has caused division within the church, please understand I do not fear any man. I look to Jesus Christ and am committed to tell the truth whatever the cost. I know I have enemies among the “brethren” who insist that I remain silent. I have also been falsely accused and slandered by gossip as a means of discrediting me.

The Bible teaches that we should never fear man or follow man’s ways. “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Proverbs 14:12). We should fear God and His Word alone. Based upon what God revealed to Ezekiel (Chapter 3: 17-20), there is a biblical principal that cannot be overlooked. When God reveals deception and darkness, a watchman must speak out and tell the truth regardless of the circumstances and the consequences.

What I find very alarming is that many pastors who gave warnings in the past about End Times deception seem to have now ceased and become silent. Taking the place of the warnings are teachings or promotion on everything from church-growth, seeker-friendly, contemplative spirituality, Purpose Driven, postmodern/emerging spirituality to even a Catholic/Jesuit agenda.

These various teachings are not biblical Christianity, and for many pastors who once taught the Bible faithfully, these seductive teachings have pulled these pastors in a direction that negates so much of what they once stood for. It is not uncommon now to hear these pastors espousing those such as Mark Driscoll, Rob Bell, Richard Foster, and Rick Warren, all of whom de-emphasize Bible prophecy of the last days and emphasize the “Kingdom of God on earth” now.

Some pastors recognize that their own denominations or fellowships have turned or are turning away from the teachings of the Bible, yet so many have remained active participants of these denominations. As the years go by, these pastors do not speak up – they are silent. Is this silence an indication that they have bought into a sensual, carnal, three-legged stool plan that links hands with those such as Rick Warren and Tony Blair and is on the road to Rome for a One World Religion? I fear that for many that is the case. What may have begun as “looking the other way” has become outright rebellion in many cases. This is the way deception often happens.

We are living in the time of strong delusion that Paul wrote about (2 Thessalonians 2:11). If you are a Bible-believing pastor, shouldn’t you be helping to lead the way in warning about deception, not promoting the apostate agenda in any fashion?

Ecumenism within the church has been allowed to develop for years.

When a pastor does not warn his flock about ecumenical apostasy, it sends the message that exposing apostasy is just not that important. When a church, organization, or denomination starts down the Road to Rome, there is very little chance of turning back – the pull is just too great. Nowhere in the Bible is it acceptable to join hands with those who promote another Jesus and another gospel like that of the Roman Catholic Church.

This is why John warned: come out of her (the harlot) and be set free (Revelation 18:4).

Some Personal Ministry History:

In June 1981, Chuck Smith, the founder of the Calvary Chapel movement, invited me to fly down from my farm in Saskatchewan, Canada to speak at Costa Mesa at a four-night conference called “The Bible: Key to Understanding Science, History and the Future.” Seven years later, in the fall of 1988, Chuck Smith asked me to join the staff at Costa Mesa. My family moved to Orange County, California from Saskatchewan, Canada.

My position at Costa Mesa involved being an outreach from CCCM as an apologist in the area of creation and evolution. I also showed the association of the New Age Movement and its relationship to Bible Prophecy.

In 1991, after being on staff for three years, Understand The Times was founded as an independent ministry, separate from CCCM. However, UTT was still closely associated with CCCM and was given missionary support. The UTT association with Calvary Chapel pastors and missionaries encompassed the world for about twenty years.

During a fifteen year time period, UTT had an office on church property at CCCM from time to time. Understand The Times had a five-minute radio program that aired on KWAVE and CSN for over ten years. I also had close relationships with members of the Smith family including Chuck’s brother Paul and his son Jeff.

While many of my experiences and associations with those in Calvary Chapel had been good over the years, I observed many serious problems in the Calvary Chapel movement, especially in the last five years. Many Calvary Chapel pastors I know have admitted they also see these same warning signs, but most have not felt they could speak out.

The reason I am writing this letter as an open letter to all pastors is because I believe that many of the problems I witnessed while part of the Calvary Chapel movement are the same problems that many other Christian organizations and denominations are experiencing today. And many of these kinds of problems lead to deception and apostasy.

Common Problems in the Churches:

Today many evangelical and Protestant pastors are operating on the principal or idea that if their churches are small, there is something wrong with them. The “doctrine of big” has replaced the doctrine of being faithful to the Word of God. Along with this doctrine of big comes the subtle attitude that any “offensiveness” must be removed from the church. Thus, a watered-down gospel takes effect; and thus, people in the churches are not hearing the true Gospel. Crosses are removed, Bibles are left at home, hymns are stopped, and talk about the blood of Jesus and His atonement for our sin ceases.

As Bible-believing Christians, we should be able to discern that there is a flaw in this doctrine of big. As churches get bigger, more funds are required to accommodate bigger budgets. The bigger the budget the bigger the offering is needed to meet the budget, and big donors become more and more important. Now you have a situation where the pastor preaches carefully so as not to create controversy. Controversy can cause powerful donors to leave. Pastors who once feared God now become man-fearing where doctrine is determined by men and their motives, and not by God’s Spirit and His Word.

Over the past two decades, I believe the Lord led me to author or co-author six books warning about the ecumenical one world religion movement and how it is impacting Evangelical Protestant Christianity. These were: (1) New Wine or Old Deception (2) When New Wine Makes a Man Divine (3) New Wine and the Babylonian Vine (4) How Marian Apparitions Plan to Unite the World’s Religions (5) Another Jesus: The Eucharistic Christ and the New Evangelization (6) Faith Undone: The Emerging Church - a New Reformation or an End Time Deception. God has put in my heart all these years a passion to warn of impending spiritual danger.

On March 6, 2011, I attended the Peace in a Globalized Society Forum that was held at Saddleback. Rick Warren and Tony Blair both explained what they are doing to set up a one-world religious program for peace. Yet even though it has become most apparent to many discerning Christians what is taking place with Rick Warren and his “new” reformation, very few pastors are publically denouncing the Purpose Driven Peace Plan. In fact, prominent pastors like John Piper are embracing Rick Warren and his teachings.

The Jesuit Connection

As I have written in some of my books, Ignatius Loyola was the founder of the Order of the Jesuits in the Catholic Church. The Jesuit goal is to turn the inerrant Word of God into the word of man while at the same time promoting the word of the pope as the word of God. In addition, the Jesuit ambition is to bring the “lost brethren” back to the “Mother” church (read Another Jesus). This is no minor thing. I have been to the city of Rome. I have seen the multitudes worship and adore a man (the Pope) who carries a wafer and a vial of juice that is supposed to be Jesus. Martyrs in earlier centuries were murdered for rejecting the papacy and the Eucharist. And yet today, I am horrified to watch once Bible-believing pastors turn their hearts and their congregations toward Rome, often through a Jesuit influence. Instances of this are occurring more every day.

Now that Rick Warren and Tony Blair (who converted to Catholicism) have announced they will be working together to set up a One World Religion as they did on March 6, 2011 in southern California, how will Christian pastors respond to this? Or will they at all? History shows, most probably won’t.

What is known as fact is this: the emerging/postmodern, Purpose Driven ecumenical, contemplative mindset in the Evangelical or Protestant Christian church has not gone away. And it is not popular to speak against this growing apostasy. It is a lot easier to go down stream than upstream. The Bible foretells we are in the Last Days. What do you as Christian pastors want to be: dead salmon washed out to sea or true fishers of men?

Check out the Bible! There will be a One World Religion. Do you want to be part of the problem, or do you want to be standing up for truth? The latter is not easy and carries with it a high price.

A Wake Up Call to Pastors

Teaching and preaching the Word of God is a high calling. You should always be true to your calling and remain true to the Word. And yet, many know that something is seriously wrong, but they say nothing.

Saying nothing can be as detrimental as outrightly supporting the lie. It is time to wake up! We are in the last days, and many sheep are being deceived, and pastors have a huge role in that deception taking place. When the sheep have the wool pulled over their eyes, they cannot see. This is not acceptable. What about the wolves who are among the flock? Good shepherds should never allow that to happen.

While there still remain faithful Christian pastors who look to Jesus Christ as their Good Shepherd and still believe in the inerrant Word of God, the fact that so many pastors have moved away from the basics of biblical Christianity toward a man-made apostate church will result in much of the flock drifting with them.

And may I say this to any believer who now realizes his or her own pastor is compromising the Word of God and embracing apostate teachings: If you have done what you can to warn and exhort your pastor(s) to turn back to the truth, and if your warnings and exhortations are rejected, perhaps it is time to get out of that church. Paul addressed this when he said: “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject” Titus 3:10.

Deception has crept in, unnoticed to many, and even at times been purposely covered up. Jude warned this was happening in his day (Jude 4). The same is true in the perilous days in which we live (2 Timothy 3: 1-5).

As of last fall, I am no longer affiliated with the Calvary Chapel movement, although I am still friends with and associate with some of the pastors, ones who have sought to remain faithful to the Lord and His Word.

As do many leaders in the body of Christ, Calvary Chapel pastors who have veered need to get right, and they need to do it quickly. According to the Word, our redemption draweth nigh, and He could return for those who are ready at any moment.

If you are a pastor who has succumbed to the present-day spiritual apostasy, get back to the Word of God, and preach it, and teach it! If your congregation shrinks, so what! Better to have a few who are solid and can go out and be fruitful for the Lord than have a mega church full of participants of a social gospel that is being prepared for the coming One World Religion.

While the large-scale move toward apostasy has been taking place for some time, and postmodern/emerging, Purpose-Driven ideas are widely accepted, there still may be time if pastors will repent and return to the purity of the Gospel and God’s Word.

Many pastors reading this open letter who belong to an organization or denomination may feel fearful about leaving the security of such a “covering.” Perhaps you have never been out from under that umbrella. But at some point, you are going to have to ask yourself the question, Am I really “counting all things but loss” in order to gain Christ (Philippians 3:8)? Am I taking up my cross and following Him, no matter the cost (Matthew 16:24)? I have heard stories now of pastors (both in the Calvary Chapel movement and in other groups and denominations) who finally did make that decision to separate themselves from any apostate associations. If you are one of those, continue on with the ministry God has given you and follow Jesus Christ alone. You can never go wrong by being obedient to Jesus and His Word.

The Lord Jesus Christ is coming soon. May we be found ready and waiting.

Sincerely in Christ,

Roger Oakland

Understand The Times

P.S.

Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice; with the voice together shall they sing: for they shall see eye to eye, when the LORD shall bring again Zion. . . . Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the LORD. Isaiah 52:8, 11

But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. Matthew 15:13-14

Bible Believers Can't Shake Intolerant Image, Says Atheist

There we go, in order to be tolerant and live harmoniously among others, we need to throw out the good book (Bible). Okay Mr. Zamecki, will be doing that right away. What a buffoon! One thing for sure atheists don't have. The lack of common sense in arguing the validity of the scriptures or the existence of God. Or the honesty in the lack of knowledge of history or theological training. In order for someone to argue the laws of entropy, the essence of God and so on, you must first study the material in order to argue its merits. You just don't come out sounding like a four year old child (no disrespect to four year olds, because they have more common sense and understanding better than the best atheists out there) and looking and sounding like fools.

Why is it that these people never, ever have any sort of credibility or validity in any of their arguments. They always look like they are trying to catch a great whale with silly string. Or thinking that they can throw rocks at the sun as to a lamppost in order to take out its light. If they don't believe in a God then that's fine. We'll respect you for that. But don't fall in the trap in trying to proof that there's no God. They will always falter in disproving the God of the universe and every time God allows them to look like imbeciles.

"Professing to be wise, they became fools." Romans 1:22, in trying to disproof God.

"The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good." Psalms 14:1. The true interpretation of this verse is; "There is no God for me. So according to these people, since there is no God for them, they want to make sure to take your rights away in believing in a personal deity, so there would be no God for us also.

The main objective and agenda of all atheists goes back to the first question in the bible posted by the father of all lies, satan. In 3rd chapter of Genesis the serpent questioned the authority of God, by asking Eve, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” Genesis 3:1. Notice that he said "any" tree. God didn't say that, as eve confirmed God's decree as she iterated what God really said, in verse 2 and 3. "The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’” Satan planted that seed of doubt in Eve by telling her, why would God not allow you not to eat from a certain tree, you should eat from "ALL" trees in the garden, not just the one in the middle of the garden, that is your right and privilege. God's authority has been question and the seed of rebellion was sown. Satan planted that seed of doubt from the very beginning of time and the atheists have ran away with it, as atheists ask us the same question, "is there such thing as God?"

Any phycologist or laymen in the field of phycology will tell you that when anyone has doubts or does not believe in something would try to convince others in bringing them over to their side on their lack of understanding of their beliefs. Just as satan tried to convince Eve, atheists are trying to convince the rest of us, in order for them not to walk alone in the road of destruction as they walk away from the judgement seat of God. Because if they're really honest with themselves and really search their conscious, they would know that;

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who SUPPRESS THE TRUTH by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. There would not be any excuses from anyone, given to God when that day comes. Not even from the most prestigious atheist from the past, present or in the future.