Theo-humor

This is funny...especially for anyone who's ever visited a "seeker sensitive"-type church. (I saw Joel Osteen on TV once. I turned it off after about 10 minutes).
























Barbara, you link to the greatest things on your blog. I can't believe I've never discovered Calvinist Cartoons.

UPDATE: It gets better. Read this satire "25 warning signs that you might be obsessing about Calvinism" over at Purgatorio! There are too many graphics to download in order to post it over here. I'm far too lazy (and the kiddies need breakfast).

#17: You hear a news story about some criminals being “reformed” and your first thought is to wonder how many criminals are arminians. ROFL!!

A Closer Look at Transubstantiation

by David E. Lister, published by Moriel Ministries (2002)

Transubstantiation is derived from the Latin term tansubsubstaniato, meaning ”change of substance”. This term was incorporated into the creed of the Forth Latern Council in A.D. 1215.

Transubstantiation is defined by the Roman Catholic Church’s Council of Trent as follows: “By the consecration of the bread and wine, a conversion (or change) is made of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His blood; which conversion is, by the holy Catholic Church, suitably and properly called Transubstantiation.”

The Catechism of the Council of Trent expands this belief by stating: “In this sacrament are contained not only the true body of Christ, and all the constituents of a true body, such as bones and sinews, but also Christ whole and entire”. It also explains, “Christ whole and entire, is contained, not only under either species, but also in each particle of the same species.” (Species = bread and wine)

The Church of Rome teaches that when the priest in the Mass blesses the bread, it is no longer bread but Jesus Christ himself and similarly the wine is Jesus Christ himself.

This poses a question. Has this Roman Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation always been taught since the time of the Apostles? Has this doctrine that the bread and wine of communion actually transforms into the actual body of Christ, been understood and accepted by the early Christian laity and Apostles? In the book of Acts, Chapter 2, verse 42 and in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 10 verse 16, the term used for what we know as communion today was “breaking of bread.” The term communion seems to become the common vernacular by the Councils of Elura and Arles in A.D. 314 and again at Nice in A.D. 325. In A.D. 418, the term the Lord’s Supper is used in the notes from the Council of Carthage. Irenaeus used the term Oblation to agree with biblical terminology found in 1 Corinthians Ch. 11:20. Pliny uses the term Sacrament in a letter to Trajan and also to Tertullian and Cyprian. The original meaning of the term Eucharist, was simply thanksgiving and in this sense was used by Ignatius, Irenaeus, Origen and others. Justin Martyr, Origen, Eusebius and Chrysostom also call the communion ”Memorial”. The Latin terminology of the “Mass” originally signified the dismissal of a Church assembly. It then came to be applied to the assembly itself, as Eusebius uses it in his History of the Church, and from there it came to denote the Communion Service. It was not until Ambrose, that the term Mass was used to denote communion. At no time in the early history of the church was the doctrine of Transubstantiation used or employed to mean that the bread and wine turn into the body of Jesus. But we do know there seems to be an introduction of heresy that would affect how the Roman Catholic Church would eventually practice “communion,” in the 4th century when the queen of heaven, under the name of Mary, was beginning to be worshiped in the Christian Church, this ” unbloody sacrifice” was also brought in. Epiphanius states that the practice of offering and eating it began among the women of Arabia; and at that time it was well known to have been adopted from the Pagans. (Se Epiphanius, Adversus Hoereses, Vol.1 P 1054.)

With the passage of time and further introduction of pagan practices into Roman Catholicism, a friar named Anastatius, In A.D. 637, rejected the figurative language and employed the doctrine of ”Real Presence”. In A.D. 754, at the Council of Constantinople, John Damascene, a condemned image-worshipper wrote: “The bread and wine are supernaturally changed by the invocation and coming of the Holy Ghost into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and are not two, but one and the same… The bread and wine are not the type or the figure of the body and blood of Jesus Christ - ah, God forbid! - but the body itself of our Lord deified.” Pashus Radbert the Abbot of Corbie advanced this doctrine even further. In A.D. 818 he wrote a treatise, which finally overthrew both the Scriptural belief and the early church history. He stated, “What was received in the Sacrament is the same flesh as that which was born of the Virgin Mary, and which suffered death for us; and though the figure of bread and wine doth remain, yet you must absolutely believe that, after consecration, it is nothing but the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ.” This doctrine was further developed and finally made a dogma by Pope Innocent III.

However, it was not without opposition from within the Roman Catholic Church that this doctrine came to pass. Pashus Radbert writes ”that there are many that in these mystical things are of another opinion.” Others who were against this doctrine within the Roman Catholic Church were Aefric, Abbot of Malmesbury (A.D.905) and Berengarius, Peter Lombard (A.D.1150) and Bede in the 8th Century. The early church fathers opposed this doctrine. They never acknowledged any change in the elements or believed in any corporal presence. Tertullian stated “Christ, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, made it His body by saying, “This is my body’, that is, the figure of my body.” Even Orgien, acknowledges “that they (bread and wine) are figures which are written in the sacred volumes; therefore as spiritual not as carnal, examine and understand what is said. For if as carnal you receive them, they hurt, not nourish you.” Both Cyril of Jerusalem and Eusebius of Caesarea denied Transubstantiation. Cyril stated, “Under the type of bread His body given unto thee, and under the type of wine His blood given unto thee.” Eusebius qualifies communion as “Christ Himself gave the symbols of the Divine ceremony to His own disciples that the image of His own body should be made. He appointed to use bread as a symbol of His own body.” Furthermore, supporters of Rome and the papacy suggested that “there was nothing in the Gospels that may enforce us to understand Christ’s words properly, yea, nothing in the text (’This is My body’) hinders but those words may as well be taken in a metaphysical sense, as the words of the Apostle, ‘the Rock was Christ’… That part, which the Gospel hath not expressed, viz., the conversion of the bread in the body and blood of Christ, we have received expressly from the Church.” Bellarmine, another Roman scholar admitted “there is no express place of Scripture to prove Transubstantiation without the declaration of the Church.”

Since Roman Catholic Church scholars cannot find a scriptural basis for this doctrine, is it any wonder that those who believe that the Bible is God’s word (and it is complete for instruction in life, doctrine and righteousness), also are unable to find a scriptural basis for Transubstantiation and therefore would reject it as a Truth from God and necessary for salvation. Therefore, as we have been given a sound mind and are instructed to search the scriptures to see what is true and then to hold fast to what is true, we find the doctrine of Transubstantiation illogical! The Lord Jesus at the Last Supper handed the broken bread to the apostles and stated, “This is my body”. However He was in his earthly body, 100 percent human. Yet this doctrine would destroy human nature by having the ability to be in multiple places at one time. Rome teaches that Christ is corporally on the altar but without any “accidents.” Accidents mean color, scent, form, and taste, the very things that make substances discernable. Yet again, we are to deny all logic and sensibility to believe that Christ is present upon the altar!

Christ warned that deceivers would come among us to deceive us and to tell us that He was here or there and that we were not to believe them. Christ also warned us that we were to be on guard against the leaven of the Pharisees, those who teach the precepts of man as the doctrines of God. Again, Rome is at variance with it’s own scholars and the early church fathers, as it teaches a doctrine (Transubstantiation) from men as the precepts of God. With this unbiblical form of teaching in the Roman Catholic Church, is it any wonder that they end up perverting the sacrament of communion by withholding the communion cup from the laity. The Council of Constance in A.D.1414 first formalized this doctrine. Pope Innocent III formalized it later and pronounced it a doctrine and then The Council of Trent (1537) confirmed his heresy. Even though the Council of Constance freely admits, “that the cup was received by all in former times,” they nonetheless go ahead and destroy the sacrament, this precious sacrament that the Lord Jesus Christ himself gave to us. “Do this in remembrance of me”

If you are Roman Catholic, we would ask you to turn to the Holy Scriptures and re-read the passages that teach about this sacrament and see if you can find the doctrine of Transubstantiation without the filter of the Roman Catholic Church. May God open your eyes and may the scales fall from them in order that you may come to His table and enjoy this sacrament, both the bread and the wine, in truth. Then ask yourself can there be salvation in a communion in which it is declared to be a fundamental principle, that the Madonna is ” our greatest hope; yea, the SOLE GROUND OF OUR HOPE ”? (The language of the late Pope Gregory, which was substantially endorsed by the late Pontiff John Paul II). The time is come when charity to the perishing souls of men, hoodwinked by a Pagan priesthood, abusing the name of Christ, requires that the truth in this matter should be clearly, loudly, unflinchingly proclaimed.

Early Worship as Described in the Didache - circa 60 A.D.

"Unity which is obtained by the sacrifice of truth is worth nothing. It is not the unity that pleases God. The Church of Rome boasts loudly of a unity which does not deserve the name. It is unity which is obtained by taking away the Bible from the people, by gagging private judgment, by encouraging ignorance, by forbidding men to think for themselves"

J.C. Ryle's 'The Fallibility of Ministers'

Last summer, while I was interviewing my former pastor, Christo Kulichev, for Christianity Today, he reflected: "The problem is, Protestants here in Bulgaria don't know their own history." I believe the same is true of Protestant Christians world-wide. While many of us know the Bible very well, Church history and the background of key doctrinal positions is often not a field many have studied (with notable exceptions....see Pyro's website for some excellent resources and apologetics recommendations).

Recently, I was accused elsewhere on the web of ignorance - both of biblical theology and history. (NOT ignorance of the latest i-phones, quadratic quations, or what's happening on daytime TV, mind you - all of which would have been fair charges. Ignorance of Church history and the Bible. I swear I am not making this up.) When I stopped laughing, it occurred to me that several times in perhaps the last 3-4 months, I have had a Catholic tell me that the Inquisitions never happened. As far as I know, this is not official Vatican doctrine, although the Inquisition archives were sealed until 2004. One may as well deny that the Holocaust occurred. Or claim that the Armenian Genocide was a myth. To deny the horrifying reality of the papist Inquisitions is to be intellectually dishonest. Although the Spanish Inquisition of the 15th century and beyond is the best known, there were four distinct Inquisitions spearheaded by the RCC - ranging from the Medieval Inquisition beginning in Southern France in the 12th century, to the Roman Inquisition that began in 1542. I hope to have time to devote a blog series to this ugly chapter of history, as the post-modernists seem to have abandoned the truth.

I am fortunate to have been a student of modern and medieval history since my undergraduate days at a secular university. In fact, ironically enough, it was there that I became a Christian. Most of my post-graduate research has been in the apologetics field, focusing on Church history from a Christian perspective (not your average History Channel and PBS nonsense!).

To be a student of history is, indeed, to cease to be a Romanist. The following is an overview (provided by several sources) of worship in the early Church, and how they viewed the Lord's Supper. This is a key difference between Catholics and Protestants, the latter of whom follow Scripture and the example of the earliest Church in their understanding of the sacrament.

Thanks to Fundamental Christian at onetruegod.com for some of the quotes.

The Roman Catholic church teaches that in the celebration of the Eucharist, the consecrated wafer and wine are miraculously changed into the actual body and blood of Jesus in a process they call transubstantiation. This doctrine was a fringe notion until the latter half of the 9th century, adamantly and specifically rejected by Tertullian, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Eusebius, and unknown to the Church of the earliest centuries.

1413. By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity [cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651.].” Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)

"The Roman church would have the world believe she is not an innovator but, rather, continues to observe the religious practices of the primitive church, modified only as a more clear understanding of God’s sacred Scriptures and holy Tradition are attained. Or something like that. Is that really the way things are?

The centerpiece of the Catholic Mass is the Eucharistic sacrifice, a bloodless re-presentation of Christ’s atonement on the cross. The Catholic priest, or “alter Christus” commands the Son of God to come down from Heaven and assume the physical characteristics of a cracker and a cup of wine, that He might be consumed by the priest and the faithful. Other studies offered by Christian scholars and myself have fully addressed the Jewish rejection of human sacrifice, cannibalism and the consumption of blood, all of which practices fly in the face of God’s clear proscriptions. It is not my intention here to resurrect those arguments. Instead, I hope to examine how the early Christian commemoration of the Lord’s Supper was corrupted into today’s present Catholic practice."

Ever since Eusebius wrote the first major history of the Christian church, (see Neil's blog for a great review), people have tended to idealize the primitive church as a monolithic structure with a uniform pattern of worship. Recent research has shown that was far from the case. Converts to Christianity were drawn from a variety of cultures and backgrounds. Lacking a strong central governing body, the various congregations developed individual worship practices and emphasized different areas of theology. It wasn’t until the 2nd Century that we begin to see the incipient development of uniformity.

In the Book of Acts and in Paul’s writing to the Corinthian church, we can get some idea of how the earliest followers of Christ celebrated the Lord’s Supper, but neither source provides much detail. Fortunately, there are other written records which help us to flesh out the bare bones of the biblical record. One of them, the Didache, was rediscovered in 1873. The Didache is a manual for church order and Christian living, probably written in Syria around 60 AD. In it, we have the earliest look, outside the New Testament, of the Eucharist celebration.

The Didache, which recommends praying the Lord’s Prayer thrice daily, provides a clear picture of how early Christians would gather on the Lord’s Day to “break bread and give thanks” an activity in which only baptized believers were to participate. The first activity of the day involved confessing their sins and reconciling themselves with their neighbors in preparation for making a pure sacrifice to the Lord. The actual service, which followed orthodox Jewish forms for prayer before and after meals, began with thanksgiving over the cup and the loaf. When offering the cup, the worship leader would give thanks for the “holy vine of David,” likely a reference to the Messianic community (Psalm 80:8), following up with a doxology, "To you be glory forever". (Note: this is pretty similar to how we conduct monthly Communion services in my Evangelical church. We do so separately from the main worship service, which contains the sermon).

After the doxology, the worship leader would give thanks over the broken loaf, thanking God “for the life and knowledge You have revealed through Jesus, Your Child,” concluding with another doxology. That was followed by a community meal which, though not detailed in the Didache, likely was a precursor of the pot luck suppers we see in some modern churches.

Notice this early guidebook for Christian worship, sort of an early day Novus Ordo, makes no mention of either the body or the blood of Christ? The emphasis is on the gathering of the church body (1 Corinthians 10.17). The worship service as practiced by the first Christians was a “praise-celebration” of the congregation of God’s people, an event where prayers and thanksgiving, interwoven with doxologies, were offered to God. Rome claims the mythical apostolic succession to validate her high priest, the pope, and has developed all sorts of rules and practices to control who gets to officiate at her “Eucharistic sacrifice” but the Didache provides no specifics concerning what sort of church leader was to preside over the earliest Eucharistic celebration. Yet it does give clear instructions concerning prophets, whom it calls the church’s high priests, and how they were to be welcomed and validated.

One of the men Rome honors as an early church father, Justin Martyr, provided details of weekly Christian worship some decades later in his “First Apology,” written to the Roman Emperor about 155AD.

"And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.”(Justin Martyr, First Apology, Chap 67, quoted in A. Roberts and J Donaldson Edd., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol 1, Books For The Ages, AGES Software, Albany, OR, Version 2.0 © 1997, p. 343-4)

It was not until 637 A.D. when a friar named Anastatius rejected the symbolic language connected with Communion and came up with the literal "Real Presence" that the doctrine began to develop, further supported by Church Councils in the 8th and 9th centuries. (More on that later).

Part II - a look at the beginnings of the Roman interpretation of the Lord's Supper.

Delving Deeper into Hebrews 13:5

Don over at Scripture Student has posted a great entry on God’s command to in Joshua 1:9: “Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged, for the LORD your God will be with you wherever you go.”

His friend is facing major surgery, and he is reminded of the Lord’s many exhortations against anxiety. Knowing with certainty that the King of Kings is by our side should flood us with peace. Don asked for personal thoughts or elaboration on the passage, (at least I think that’s what he asked for….had so much on my mind lately, it’s hard to have clarity of thought!), and I remembered this brief exposition/commentary I’d banged out on the related verse in Joshua 1:5 (as quoted by the author of Hebrews).

Rather than filling up the Scripture Student combox, I figured I’d re-post my thoughts over here. It’s funny, reading your own words several years after the fact! I wrote this in an earlier time in my walk with God, when I was only a novice student of hermeneutics (the study of Bible interpretation). Nevertheless, God’s Word was as living and active to me then as it is now, and I sought Him diligently therein. He was always faithful to teach me, and He still is….when I am faithful to seek.

From 2006:

************************************************************************

A little over a year ago, I started a personal study called "The Way of Agape" and have found its principles of dying to self (in order to be a clean vessel of God's love to others) quite challenging, to say the least. According to author Nancy Missler, step one in loving God the way we should is knowing He loves us.

We all say we know God loves us, but many of us struggle to get into our hearts what we know in our heads….that He truly loves us independently of what we do. In addition, the term "unconditional love" does not appear anywhere in the Bible. On impulse, I flipped to the verses listed "proving" God loves us, and near the top of the list was Hebrews 13:5, which contains the familiar promise that we repeat to ourselves to affirm that God is with us: "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you."

But do we ask ourselves "what does this mean to Christians, in practicality?" Is it just a warm fuzzy catch-phrase?

Of course, I do believe that God loves us tenderly and personally; but is this just an endearment? If we look at the circumstances under which God promises His presence, we may glean some insight into its application. Seeing the verse in the King James Version helps us realize God’s assurance is individual, and not just collective. The translation uses the you-singular term “thee”, rather than the plural “ye”, which is faithful to the original Hebrew. Many of God’s promises are, in fact, “singular” and therefore personal words to us, but we often miss that in the newer translations. What an amazing thought, that we are not simply one of 6 billion faces to the Almighty; but He is faithful to sustain each one of His children in exactly the way that he or she needs.

If you look up the verse’s cross-references, you see that the author of Hebrews was quoting from Moses in Deuteronomy 31:6 as well as Joshua 1:5. Look at the context in Deuteronomy 31:6 - they were going into battle. Where was the Lord leading them when He gave this promise? Into Canaan – the Promised Land. First He says to them, "Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified". He promises to go into battle with them, and assures their victory. At the beginning of the book of Joshua, the Israelites were about to take on a monumental feat and a trial – to inherit the land they had forfeited by their lack of faith 40 years earlier.

This is not a warm, fuzzy, self-affirming message; it's much more than that, if we learn to apply the illustration. What are our "enemies"? Or, put another way, what do we do battle against? Sin - especially our most ingrained, habitual sins. In Romans 7:23, Paul specifically says the carnal desires “wage war against” the spirit and law of God. Yes, we're dead to sin, but even the idealistic, Spirit-filled New Testament writers acknowledged it's a continual battle. God promises not only to fight the battle with us, but He won't abandon or forsake us when we're in defeat! That's what that verse means.

He won't leave us at the mercy of our sin [give up on us] - "Oh, she did that again. Hopeless reprobate." The context is of battle -- literal in the Old Testament; spiritual for us. This also conjures up Paul's allegory of "putting on the full armor of God" in Eph. 6:11 -- the whole idea of fighting a battle against sin and being soldiers comes through a lot in the New Testament. Paul refers several times to his fellow evangelists as “soldiers” of Christ, again comparing the spiritual battle to a military one. Soldiers on the battlefield never leave their fallen or wounded brethren behind, and God is assuring us in this simple promise, repeated three times in Scripture, that neither will He abandon us when we struggle and fail in our sin. Looking at that promise in its original context forced me to see it in a whole new light.

Many times, when we sin, our first impulse is to “run and hide”. I’ve often felt like God should be throwing His hands up by now! This promise is that He is an Ally, ever fighting by our side. The following verse in Hebrews 13:6 confirms that: “So we say with confidence, "The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?"

More Christian Movie Recommendations

Thanks to Torchlighters' "Heroes of the Faith" series (in conjunction with Voice of the Martyrs), kids and adults alike may be edified and inspired by real-life stories of uncompromising faith and commitment to Christ. The 30-minute personal stories highlight several saints in Church history, including martyred Bible translator William Tyndale, 17th-century preacher John Bunyan, missionary Jim Elliot, and imprisoned Romanian pastor Richard Wurmbrand (the founder of Voice of the Martyrs).

The films are colorful cartoons, and include great extras. Several of them are available through Netflix, if you don't want to purchase the whole set. I spoke with a couple of homeschooling moms from church this week, and two of them have used the films as part of their Church history curriculum. Many Christians do not know much about our shared legacy of faith, and these true stories of the saints who have gone before us are a great way to inspire a love of the Truth and similar passion for Christ in the younger generation.

Many thanks to Pastor Kevin Williams over at Puritan Fellowship for posting the trailers of all of these great films (you can view them here).

From the William Tyndale DVD jacket:

Living as a hunted fugitive has its challenges. King Henry VIII has ordered his bounty hunters to track William Tyndale down and William can almost feel them closing in.

William Tyndale’s calling is to right a great wrong. The church and government authorities have made it illegal to read, write or even speak the sacred Scriptures in English. The most important book ever written is being kept from all but the most educated and powerful people of the day. Sensing that God’s Word is for all people, William defies the authorities and begins the difficult and dangerous work of translating the Old and New Testaments.

This Episode of Torchlighters follows William’s adventures as he works in secret to complete his task. Friends and allies will help him along, but enemies may be lurking behind any corner. Children will be challenged by the story of how William risks his life to bring God’s word to England. When they see the sacrifice William is willing to make so that others may read the Bible, their appreciation for the Scriptures will increase.

Angry religious leaders burned William Tyndale’s Bible translations and other writings.

Spurgeon on Taking Every Thought Captive

Here is an insightful excerpt from Charles Spurgeon, "The Prince of Preachers" on the battle unbiblical thoughts often wage in our minds after Christ has redeemed us. Often, when we are living for the Lord and striving to renew our minds in light of His Word, we forget that we are targeted by the enemy and are still susceptible to the darkness within us...and without. The battle rages on, but those of us who are in Christ have been secured the ultimate victory. It was won 2,000 years ago, on Calvary.


"I have heard someone say, “I am tormented with horrible thoughts. Wherever I go, blasphemies steal in upon me. Frequently at my work a dreadful suggestion forces itself upon me, and even on my bed I am startled from my sleep by whispers of the evil one. I cannot get away from this horrible temptation.”

Friend, I know what you mean, for I have myself been hunted by this wolf. A man might as well hope to fight a swarm of flies with a sword as to master his own thoughts when they are set on by the devil. I do not wonder you feel that you are without strength to stop these hideous and abominable thoughts which Satan pours into your soul; but yet I would remind you of the Scripture, “When we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” [Romans 5:6]

Jesus saw that we could not overcome the prince of the power of the air; He knew that we should be greatly worried by him; but even then, when He saw us in that condition, Christ died for the ungodly. Cast the anchor of your faith upon this. The devil himself cannot tell you that you are not ungodly; believe, then, that Jesus died for you. Remember Martin Luther’s way of cutting the devil’s head off with his own sword. “Oh,” said the devil to Martin Luther, “you are a sinner.” “Yes,” said he, “Christ died to save sinners.” Thus he smote him with his own sword. Hide in this refuge, and remain there: “In due time Christ died for the ungodly.” If you stand to that truth, your blasphemous thoughts which you have no strength to drive away will go away of themselves; for Satan will see that he is answering no purpose by plaguing you with them. These thoughts, if you hate them, are none of yours, but are injections of the Devil, for which he is responsible, and not you. If you strive against them, they are no more yours than are the cursings and falsehoods of rioters in the street. The rush and throng of these dreadful thoughts, put you in much the same condition as the poor diseased woman who could not come to Jesus for the press of the crowd around her. Still, she put forth her finger, and touched the fringe of the Lord’s garment, and she was healed. You can do the same. Jesus died for those who are guilty of “all manner of sin and blasphemy,” and I am therefore certain He will not refuse those who are unwillingly the captives of evil thoughts. Cast yourself upon Him, thoughts and all, and see if He is not mighty to save. He can still those horrible whisperings of the fiend, or He can enable you to see them in their true light, so that you may not be worried by them. In His own way He can and will save you, and at length give you perfect peace. Only trust Him for this and everything else.

We are not strangers to the cry:
Oh that I could believe,
Then all would easy be;
I would, but cannot; Lord, relieve,
My help must come from thee.

It is a very curious thing, this whole matter of believing; for people do not get much help by trying to believe. Believing does not come by trying. If a person were to make a statement of something he saw, I should not tell him that I would try to believe him. If I believed in the truthfulness of the man, I should accept the statement at once. If I did not think him a true man, I should, of course, disbelieve him; but there would be no trying in the matter. Now, when God declares that there is salvation in Christ Jesus, I must either believe Him at once, or make Him a liar. Surely you will not hesitate as to which is the right path in this case. The witness of God must be true, and we are bound to believe in Jesus. But possibly you have been trying to believe too much. Now do not aim at great things. Be satisfied to have a faith that can hold in its hand this one truth, “While we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” He laid down His life for men while as yet they were not believing in Him, nor were able to believe in Him. He died for men, not as believers, but as sinners. He came to make these sinners into believers and saints; but when He died for them He viewed them as utterly without strength. If you hold to the truth that Christ died for the ungodly, and believe it, your faith will save you, and you may go in peace. If you will trust your soul with Jesus, who died for the ungodly, even though you cannot believe all things, nor move mountains, nor do any other wonderful works, yet you are saved. It is not great faith, but true faith, that saves; and the salvation lies not in the faith, but in the Christ in whom faith trusts. Faith as a grain of mustard seed will bring salvation. It is not the measure of faith, but the sincerity of faith, which is the point to be considered. Surely a man can believe what he knows to be true; and as you know Jesus to be true, you, my friend, can believe in Him. Sit before the cross and watch the dying Saviour till faith springs up spontaneously in your heart. There is no place like Calvary for creating confidence.. The air of that sacred hill brings health to trembling faith. Many a watcher there has said:

While I view Thee, wounded, grieving,
Breathless on the cursed tree,
Lord, I feel my heart believing
That Thou suffer’dst thus for me.

“Alas!” cries another, “my lack of strength lies in this direction, that I cannot quit my sin, and I know that I cannot go to Heaven and carry my sin with me.” I am glad that you know that, for it is quite true. You must be divorced from your sin, or you cannot be married to Christ. Recollect the question which flashed into the mind of young John Bunyan when at his sports on the green on Sunday: “Wilt thou have thy sins and go to hell, or wilt thou quit thy sins and go to heaven?” That is a question which every man will have to answer: for there is no going on in sin and going to heaven. That cannot be. You must quit sin or quit hope. Do you reply, “Yes, I am willing enough. I have the willingness but sin has mastered me, and I have no strength.” Come, then, if you have no strength, this text is still true, “When we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” Can you still believe that? Whatever other things may seem to contradict it, will you believe it? God has said it, and it is a fact; therefore, hold on to it like grim death, for your only hope lies there. Believe this and trust Jesus, and you shall soon find power with which to slay your sin; but apart from Him, the strong man will hold you forever his bond slave.

Personally, I could never have overcome my own sinfulness. I tried and failed. My evil tendencies were too many for me, till, in the belief that Christ died for me, I cast my guilty soul on Him, and then I received a conquering principle by which I overcame my sinful self. There is nothing like faith in Jesus, the sinner’s Friend: it overcomes all evil. If Christ has died for me, ungodly as I am, without strength as I am, then I cannot live in sin any longer, but must arouse myself to love and serve Him who hath redeemed me. I cannot trifle with the evil which slew my best Friend. I must be holy for His sake. How can I live in sin when He has died to save me from it? See what a splendid help this is to you that are without strength, to know and believe that in due time Christ died for such ungodly ones as you are. Have you caught the idea yet? It is, somehow, so difficult for our darkened, prejudiced, and unbelieving minds to see the essence of the gospel. At times I have thought, when I have done preaching, that I have laid down the gospel so clearly, that the nose on one’s face could not be more plain; and yet I perceive that even intelligent hearers have failed to understand what was meant by “Look unto me and be ye saved.”

Converts usually say that they did not know the gospel till such and such a day; and yet they had heard it for years. The gospel is unknown, not from want of explanation, but from absence of personal revelation. This the Holy Ghost is ready to give, and will give to those who ask Him. Yet when given, the sum total of the truth revealed all lies within these words: “Christ died for the ungodly.”

And those replacement Pharisees think we subscribe to "easy believism".

"Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.' You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." - Mark 7:6-7

Victory in Tragedy

Our church buried an 18-year-old boy today.

The funeral was such a sad event, knowing the grief and emotion that was tearing his family and all of us apart; yet ironically there was an undercurrent of joy running throughout the ceremony.

Somewhere around 1,000 people attended his memorial service, most folks were not from the church as it was mid-day. I was fortunate to be able to attend, and am so glad that I witnessed the legacy that this young man left behind.

His best friend performed the song "I Can Only Imagine", which led most in the sanctuary to tears. The pastor, in his message, related that he asked Steven when he knew he was going to die, (knowing Steven was saved and walking with the Lord). The young man replied, "I pretty much knew I was dying when they told me I had brain cancer." He knew. Throughout his months-long agonizing ordeal, he knew.

And he was at peace with dying. Why? Because he knew Who he served.

Many of Steven's classmates, teachers, and football teammates were present today. The message was for them - the pastor candidly told them that his dying wish was that they may have the same assurance of eternal life that he had. He wanted them to come to the Lord Jesus Christ, and for 20-odd minutes, our pastor gave the best Gospel presentation I have ever heard.

All of us must face the Lord someday, and the road diverges to either heaven or hell. How do you know where you are going? What would you give as an answer to the Judge of your soul? The pastor addressed the two main misconceptions that people have about heaven - that righteousness ("I hope I've been good enough") or religion (I'm a spiritual person - I go to church and take the 'sacraments' ") will get you in. He talked about repentance, what it means to follow Christ, and being born again. Statistically, most of the attendees were Catholics; such a clear-cut, simple explanation of salvation and assurance from the Bible was foreign to most of them. I heard a few kids talking about the message over the lunch that followed with a tone of awe. Never had they heard, seen or felt anything like the message of Christ lived out in the sanctuary that morning.

The most moving part of the service came when the adult leader of the teen post-Katrina mission trips took the podium. Sharing a few special (and humorous!) anecdotes about Steve, he then spoke of his last few weeks. Confined to bed and hospice care, he was weak, in pain, with virtually no motor ability and no speech. He and the boy's best friend prayed through much of the Word with him. A day or two before he died, straining to participate in praying a psalm, this boy pleaded with God to "use [him]". "Let my life have meaning....for your glory," he prayed.

Even on his deathbed, even in his own pain, he was thinking of bringing others into the Kingdom. He longed for God to be glorified.

What an amazing, moving life. We know he is rejoicing now in heaven, and so many people have heard the Good News because of him. His death, although tragic and by our standards early, may be used of God to save as many people as he did in life.

THAT is a life well lived.