The Self Fulfilling Prophecy of the Amillenial 2 Kingdom Camp

Here is a well written article regarding the efforts of a few San Diego pastors: http://www.worldmag.com/articles/article.cfm?eid=7EF87E24-A0B5-BDF2-2E3D2AA862332998

Excerpt:

The 14th Amendment equal-protection argument in favor of gay marriage already is trampling First Amendment rights to religious exercise and free speech.

In March 2006, for example, the 103-year-old adoption division of Boston Catholic Charities (BCC) decided to close its doors rather than comply with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ requirement that it place children with homosexual couples. Five months later, the group’s San Francisco branch followed suit. Both moves were direct outgrowths of the legalization of gay marriage and domestic partnerships in Massachusetts and California.

In September 2007, a boardwalk pavilion owned by the Methodist Ocean Grove [New Jersey] Camp Meeting Association lost its state tax-exempt status after the association refused to allow two lesbian couples to hold civil union ceremonies there.

In April 2008, Christian photographers Jon and Elaine Huguenin were fined $6,000 by a New Mexico state “human rights” commission for politely declining on religious grounds to photograph a homosexual “commitment ceremony.”

Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel for Liberty Legal Institute in Plano, Texas, said religious rights of conscience—and not relational equality—are precisely the target in California. “Gays and lesbians there can already be domestic partners, and have all the legal rights of marriage. The Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of gay marriage is about something else,” he said. “It is a direct attempt to establish same-sex couples as morally equivalent to a married man and woman.”

Legal scholars on both sides of the debate agree that if Massachusetts begins exporting gay marriage, and/or California’s gay-marriage law is allowed to stand, it will likely trigger nationwide court clashes that will profoundly alter law and public policy in the areas of employment, education, family law, and even the boundaries of the First Amendment.

The idea that the Gospel doesn’t affect EVERY aspect of life and only applies to Christians is part of what has caused this state that we’re in. The preachers and teachers that are training our clergy to say things like the following are responsible for the degradation of our society:

If you want to protest Nike or McD’s do it on your own time. The church is not an activist group. Once again, your theonomy skirt is showing, and it reveals a Methodist ecclesiology over against a Reformed and Presbyterian one.

Proverbs 31:8-9 is the charge to Christ on behalf of his people. Believe it or not, it was not written to the pro-life movement to protect the unborn or to Green Peace on behalf of the whales.Social gospels have ways of circumventing the Christo-centric nature of the Bible.

I’m not saying that America has ever been a perfect idealistic nation-state, but the outward law-keeping it once had was good, to some extent. For example, at least there weren’t MILLIONS of babies being MURDERED EVERY YEAR. There is a blessing even in a non-regenerate population that keeps the law. If a society doesn’t enforce capital punishment for capital crimes, then eventually, when our capital crimes grow rampant (infanticide aka: abortion, rape, public approval of sodomy, etc.), God will bring His justice of capital punishment to our nation. But the sad thing is that these things can only happen if the church becomes impotent. When she deludes herself into thinking that the Gospel is only about an individual’s justification before God, and that the Church is only about the Word and Sacraments, then, AND ONLY THEN, will God’s enemies regain their ground. Jesus told us that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church. Most people think of this in a backwards way. The truth is that gates are stationary. They are there to protect the citizens inside of the city. They are defensive. Which means that Jesus is speaking of the church as OFFENSIVE. The church is to be attacking these gates, NOT defending against them. Instead, we’ve built gates and holed up within the city walls, sorry, I meant to say holed up within the church walls and we’ve let hell come bashing on our doors. We have been so pre-occupied with saving individual’s souls and entertaining them from a stage that used to be a pulpit. We’ve split up the families and created programs for different age groups, that the younger disciples aren’t benefiting from the wisdom of the older disciples. We’ve watered down the Gospel to a man-centered, individualistic psychological feel good alternative, that we’ve forgotten that Christ came to redeem the WORLD. It is HIS. He bought it back, and if we’re not going to get with that program, he’ll prune the dead branches and graft in new living branches that will actually produce fruit.

In Canada, preachers can’t teach the scripture when it comes to calling sodomy a sin for fear of being fined or going to jail. The legislation has made this a hate crime. So, the pessimillenialists that teach that there are 2 kingdoms, and that the church kingdom has nothing to say to man’s kingdom, and that the world will just get worse and worse until the end, will see their beliefs come to pass only if they act upon what they believe. And then they won’t be able to preach and teach without going underground like in China or the old Soviet Union. Mark my words, it can happen here. It’s already starting as you’ve seen above in the excerpt I’ve provided.

Let’s not follow in their footsteps anymore. Let’s become educated with the scriptures and realize that we need to pray that God’s ONE KINGDOM will come ON EARTH as it already is in heaven. And then let us act as if God will answer that prayer.

kazoo

Were 17th Century Puritans Theocrats or Theonomists?

I realize that it is anachronistic to ask a question such as this. But lately I’ve encountered the argument that there is a difference between the reformers (called Theocrats) and modern day Theonomists. Every time I read some of the earlier primary sources, I find myself wondering what differs in their view that makes them a Theocrat and me a Theonomist. I find myself agreeing very often with the early reformers that I’ve read, both in Europe and very early New England.

Anyway, realizing that the very question is anachronistic, the real question is if modern “Theonomy” is very consistent with the early “Theocratic” doctrine.

I’m just starting to study this question in-depth for myself so that I can know for sure when having this discussion with professional historians. But until I am done with that study (read: a long time from now), I will share some material that I found on The Reformed Covenanter blog. It’s a good read that quotes a lot from 3 Puritans in the mid 1600’s. When I read the quotes given from them, it sure sounds a lot like Bahnsen to me. So, maybe Bahnsen was a Theocrat and not a Theonomist after all! Seriously, I’m not taking this subject lightly. It is certainly one that I am committed to study for myself. I’m not new to Theonomy. I was introduced to Bahnsen over 10 years ago from my pastor who graduated with a doctorate at Westminster Escondido. But I’m now taking a deeper look at these early reformers by reading the primary sources. We’ll see how it all stacks up and I’ll keep you informed.

Take a look at the following post, and then let me know what you think.

http://reformedcovenanter.wordpress.com/2007/08/03/the-new-england-purtian-theocracy-the-new-england-purtian-theonomy/

EDIT: I forgot to add that sometimes you’ll find someone referring to the title of the second chapter in Greg Bahnsen’s book, “Theonomy in Christian Ethics” in a way that makes it seem as if Theonomy teaches that that every detail of the mosaic judicial laws should be enforced in every nation today. The chapter’s name is “THE ABIDING VALIDITY OF THE LAW IN EXHAUSTIVE DETAIL.” As you can see, the word ‘judicial’ or ‘ceremonial’ isn’t in front of the word ‘law.’ Plus, this is the chapter that presents his thesis and goes into a painstakingly detailed exegesis of Matthew 5:17-19. The rest of this 600+ page book goes into all of the qualifications and explanations, which indeed shows that he is NOT gunning for every detail of the case law to be enforced. I can’t go into the detail to support this right now, but I think it was worth noting in this post for now.

kazoo

Was Sinai a Republication of the Covenant of Works?

Searching for electronic copies of primary sources WRT the Westminster Divines, I came across this blog. Casey Bessette gives five reasons he disagrees with Dr. Clark from the Heidelblog where we find an article asserting that the Westminster Confession did in fact support the idea that God republished the CoW at Sinai. This article is linked here and entitled: Re-Publication of the Covenant of Works (1).

I thought I’d provide this here for anyone interested while I am re-grouping and preparing my next series of blog posts. Enjoy.

Kazoo

Gary North on the Latent Antinomian-Statist Alliance

I’m cooking something up myself, but for now I want to point you to the following short post:

Gary North on the Latent Antinomian-Statist Alliance

The Current American Presbyterian Confession

In my last post I pointed out how the American Presby’s undermined themselves by changing the confession in the very part that is what gave them their confession. They pulled the rug out from under their own feet!

Next, I want to address our modern “reformed” brethren from the W2K camp and very simply and shortly show how their modern “2 Kingdoms” view still isn’t in line with even the American revision of the Standards. Take note of the items I highlight in bold. This is from the 1788 version of the WCF.

Chapter XXIII

Of the Civil Magistrate

1. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil magistrates, to be, under him, over the people, for his own glory, and the public good: and, to this end, hath armed them with the power of the sword, for the defense and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evildoers.

3. Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; or, in the least, interfere in matters of faith. Yet, as nursing fathers, it is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the church of our common Lord, without giving the preference to any denomination of Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all ecclesiastical persons whatever shall enjoy the full, free, and unquestioned liberty of discharging every part of their sacred functions, without violence or danger. And, as Jesus Christ hath appointed a regular government and discipline in his church, no law of any commonwealth should interfere with, let, or hinder, the due exercise thereof, among the voluntary members of any denomination of Christians, according to their own profession and belief. It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people, in such an effectual manner as that no person be suffered, either upon pretense of religion or of infidelity, to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury to any other person whatsoever: and to take order, that all religious and ecclesiastical assemblies be held without molestation or disturbance.

Chapter XXXI

Of Synods and Councils

4. Synods and councils are to handle, or conclude nothing, but that which is ecclesiastical: and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs which concern the commonwealth, unless by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary; or, by way of advice, for satisfaction of conscience, if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate.

Even our American Presby brothers have no issues telling the civil magistrate what he “may not” do and what his duty is. They tell us that “God… has ordained civil magistrates to be under Him…” They even tell us what laws their should not be! Not only that, but in chapter 31, it seems they forgot to revise their chapter 4 (chapter 5 in the original). Since magistrates can’t call synods anymore, they shouldn’t have mentioned that synods can give their opinion to magistrates if the magistrate requires it.

Anyway, my point is that even our revised confession still has no issue giving authoritative direction to the civil sphere of government. But too often today, we have people within the church telling us that we (the church) can’t tell government how to govern and that governors only have “natural law” to rely on to discover how to rightly govern. Hogwash!

Kazoo

The Irrational Presbyterians of America

In June of 1643, the English Parliament appointed the Westminster Assembly of Divines to restructure the Church of England. The result of this assembly was a group of documents known as “The Westminster Standards.” The Assembly produced and forwarded to Parliament “The Directory for the Publick Worship of God”, “The Form of Presbyterial Church Government”, a creedal statement, “The Westminster Confession of Faith”, a “Larger Catechism” and a “Shorter Catechism”.

In 1788 the American Presbyterians made a few changes to the confession, and one little change to the catechism. Furthermore, they took out many of the proof texts that the original assembly included (I guess they thought that if they didn’t refer to the scripture, then they weren’t bound to consider it any more, *tongue in cheek*). Although I don’t agree with some of the conclusions or doctrine that this man represents, you can read about the changes here: The 1788 Revision.

So the point I want to expose here (and I can’t imagine that nobody else has ever pointed this out), has to do with kicking the ladder out from underneath yourself. Have you ever seen a comedy where someone climbs up a ladder to change a light bulb in a chandelier and inadvertently kicks the ladder over, left only to hang on the chandelier? Ultimately they fall to the ground, having lost their support. This is exactly what the 1788 assembly did to themselves. Let’s take a look:

The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1646, states in Chapter 23, paragraph 3:

III. The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of the Word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven: yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.

The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1788, states in the same place:

3. Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; or, in the least, interfere in the matter so faith. Yet, as nursing fathers, it is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the Church of our common Lord, without giving the preference to any denomination of Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all ecclesiastical persons whatever shall enjoy the full, free, and unquestioned liberty of discharging every part of their sacred functions, without violence or danger. And, as Jesus Christ hath appointed a regular government and discipline in his Church, no law of any commonwealth should interfere with, let, or hinder, the due exercise thereof, among the voluntary members of any denomination of Christians, according to their own profession and belief. It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people, in such an effectual manner as that no person be suffered, either upon pretence of religion or of infidelity, to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury to any other person whatsoever: and to take order, that all religious and ecclesiastical assemblies be held without molestation or disturbance.

Now if we think back to how the Standards came about in the first place, we should all realize that they are a result of something that our 1788 fathers obviously thought shouldn’t have happened. So maybe they should have just met to decide not to use them at all, instead of revise them. Food for thought.

Kazoo

EDIT 04/07/2008: I should note for those that don’t know me, I am a member in good standing at a PCA church. I love being Presbyterian, so take this post with that in mind.

Legislate Morality?

I’ve been a little behind on the blog writing, so for now, I give you this:

http://larrytemple.wordpress.com/2008/03/31/who-says-you-cant-legislate-morality

kazoo

What kind of Apostasy? (Great or Small?)

Revelation 20:7-10
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where[a] the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

With my recent endeavors to better understand the major views of eschatology, I have been introduced to a problem that I find quite interesting. It seems that all major camps believe that there will be a "Great Apostasy" at the end. One of the major texts teaching this is quoted above. What are the pre-conditions necessary for a number of individuals that "is as the sand of the sea" to fall away? Obviously, you have to be in the visible church before you can fall away from it, right? So, for a number as great as the sand of the sea to fall away from the church, the church will need that type of number to begin with. And since there will be some left in the church, then the number needs to be even greater than "the sand of the sea."

So, whose view of eschatology is able to account for such a great number? We read in verse 8 that Satan will deceive the NATIONS, gathering them together, and their number is as the sand of the sea. My understanding of the four views, pre-mil, dispi pre-mil, a-mil, and post-mil, tells me that only the postmillenialist can account for such a great falling away.

kazoo

(a couple articles I’m reading on this: "The Prima Facie Acceptability of Postmillennialism,""Objections to Postmillenialism," and "Postmillennialism: Wishful Thinking or Certain Hope?")

Enough is Enough, The Church needs to REPENT!

The Catalyst

This week 3 God hating covenant breakers declared that home schooling in California is against the law. This is just one little symptom revealing the state of our nations relationship to the Sovereign Lord and King. This act by these three judges is their confession that they have usurped God’s authority and the people must obey the state instead. Of course, this is nothing new. Just state coercion to idolatry. It wants us to worship/obey it rather than God. Remember Daniel? Shadrach Meshach and Abednego? Just read the Declaration of Independence and you’ll see that we’ve faced these issues not long ago here in America. How soon the people forget. The Apostle Peter dealt with this issue as well:

Acts 5:28-29
Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us. Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Notice that Peter used the word "ought." He didn’t say that they would "prefer" or that they "felt like," but that they "ought" to obey God. You see NOBODY has the right to disobey God. NOBODY. God has communicated to everybody what is required of them. The apostle Paul does a great job of defending this idea in the epistle to the Romans. This idea being that ALL men will account to God for their disobedience to Him in this life AND in the life to come. Thank God we have a Savior to rely upon for settling that account. If you’re reading this and you don’t trust in Christ to save you from God’s wrath, stop now and seek His grace, forgiveness and repentance. Get familiar with the Gospel (Good News) and become one of His covenant keepers.

Now, the basic issue here is that God has ordained 3 (some say 4) spheres of authority/responsibility/rights. The family, the church, and the state. The fourth is the individual. So there is a self-government, a family government, a church government, and a state government. God gave each one of these spheres duties that are required of them, rights that are given to them, and ordained servants (ministers) to govern them. There are checks and balances between the three (or four), but each one has its own God given purpose. God’s law is clear that when one sphere steps into the other’s duties or rights, it is disobedience. When the state steps into the family sphere (in this case, education) then it is usurping God’s authority, and it becomes a tyrant. It becomes the beast. It is antichrist.

The Problem

Moving on, I want to talk about why we are finding ourselves more and more in the position of bondage to the state in this once great nation. And to be straight up about it, I’ll come right out and tell you what I think. THE AMERICAN CHURCH IS TO BLAME.

Deuteronomy 28:47-48
Because thou servedst NOT THE LORD thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things ; 48 Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies WHICH THE LORD shall send against thee, in hunger, and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things : and he shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee.

I recommend that you read all of chapter 28 in Deuteronomy. It’s quite an eye opener. But what does this have to do with our covenant breaking ‘friends’ in the California judiciary and the American church? Plenty. Take a look at my post "There is only ONE kingdom" and you’ll get an idea of what I’m getting at. You see, America is a wonderful inheritance that God established and gave to us. It should not be squandered. It is the land wherein each citizen possesses more liberty than this world has EVER seen. This was not some mistake of evolution or natural law or man’s ingenuity. America is a result of God’s providence AND His reward to His faithful servants who studied God’s Word and put it into practice as best they knew how. It is a blessing to His covenant people, and that blessing ran over and has blessed the covenant breakers as well. The blessing was so great that there is still blessing today AND even the WORLD has been blessed as a result. God is gracious. He is faithful, and His blessings last for generations. But the church has turned her attention inward. She has neglected the GREAT commission and replaced it with the ‘doom and gloom’ commission instead. The concept of God blessing or cursing a people can be seen in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The ultimate judgment would have been stayed if there were just 10 God fearers. God blesses His people and he also chastises them. The church is starting to suffer His chastisement, and will be responsible for her ultimate modern day exile that is to come if she won’t repent.

"Repent from what?," you ask. From her partial obedience. She obeys God in many ways today. That’s wonderful. But God demands full obedience. If one only obeys partially, then one is in some way disobeying partially. The extent of disobedience will determine the extent (or the area) of His chastisement. I wrote about whether the church has something to say to politics with the affirmative answer. She has neglected this part of her calling. We are suffering as a result.We are squandering our inheritance. Christians have a majority in America. We have a government made up of men (and women) representatives. With this majority, there is no excuse, no reason, for our government to be filled with God haters and covenant breakers. Sadly, this is the case though, because the church ignores this duty when she disciples her families and individuals. She only disciples partially. She doesn’t teach us that part of our commission is to engage the culture. There is no other reason for this rise in our government’s disobedient tyranny. Even those Christians that are representatives aren’t discipled to know how to properly serve under God. It is a sad state indeed.

A Flawed Excuse

On a related subject, why is the church this way? I don’t know, really. I don’t have the answers. I believe that the history of the church here in America is a complicated one. There are many events and attitudes that have occurred over the past four centuries that have brought us to this point, and I am not going to try and cover them in this post. However, I will address at least one attitude and doctrine that I have encountered that is partially responsible for this sin of the American church. Yes, I called it SIN. It is the idea that we are to be like the Jews in Babylonian exile. We are to suffer in the here and now, or else we’re not representing Christ properly. We are to look forward to glory, but for now we are just pilgrims with nothing to say to this world, this culture. It is a theology of pessimism. A theology of doubt toward God and His Word. It is a sorry excuse for their lack of obedience. You see, they say that "this is the way it is supposed to be." We can’t do anything about it. And so they do nothing about it, with justification. And then they teach our pastors to teach us the same. It’s no wonder we’re so weak and useless. But that’s not God’s plan. The Christian life is one that promises blessings for obedience in this life AND in the life to come. I sometimes wonder if our theologians have forgotten about the "already" in the phrase "already and not yet."

I went to a live taping of a radio show last night. It was about the sin of the church leaning toward consumerism and meeting felt needs. The sin of "selling" Jesus. I agree that this too is a problem and a sin in our church today. I do not at all advocate these views. But in bucking against the one extreme the opponents of the church’s consumerism have gone too far to the other extreme. They basically said that the good news of the Gospel is all future. Until then we must suffer. Dr. Clark answered a question I asked by saying that he’s been accused of preaching a "doom and gloom" gospel and to that he can only reply: "Welcome to the Kingdom of God." This faithlessness makes me want to vomit. And cry. And plead with our Lord to have mercy on us.

The Solution

I say to the church of God here in America: "WAKE UP! REPENT! Keep doing what you’re doing right, and add to it repentance for leaving this world behind. Christ came to destroy the works of the devil. He came to destroy sin. So everywhere that sin rears its ugly head is where we are called to take the fight. But we won’t even take the fight where it belongs, if we don’t believe that it belongs there. May God have mercy on us."

kazoo

Newly Found Theonomist Friend

A fellow blogger stumble upon my latest post and tracked back to this my "ONE Kingdom" post. He has a very well written post on "Theonomy and Natural Law." I highly recommend the reading. He touches on some points that I have been considering as a topic here, so he saves me some work.

kazoo

Powered by Qumana

There is only ONE Kingdom

Sometimes we talk about our theology as if we live in a vacuum of hypotheticals. I remember speaking with Rube over and over again about the magistrate. He always wanted to insist that magistrates have no way of being able to understand or comprehend God’s law since it is to be spiritually discerned. Some of his sentiments of that nature are found on his post: "Paul Was Not a Theonomist." I bring this up because is speaks of the world as if it were a sterile experiment in some glass tube. It’s as if the world isn’t made up of people with brains that can read. As if Christians and the bible haven’t been to practically every land on the face of our planet. Plus it imports the pre-conceived commitment of the false W2K view of the world.

Well, I wish I had more energy, less physical pain and fatigue and so forth, so that I could do justice to the effort needed to correct these views that are so prevalent in the church today. But, I don’t. So, I’ll write what I can, and respond to comments as much as I can, and hopefully there will be others to help join in with the defense of the [reformed] faith, over against the new [so-called] reformed faith. (I’m feeling very testy today).

Psalm 24:1 tells us:
The earth is the LORD’s, and all its fullness, The world and those who dwell therein.

So that is where we will start. God is the beginning and the end. He started the world and put man on it in the context of a covenant (Hosea 6:7). Man broke the covenant and suffered the curse because of it. At the same time, God graciously provided a promise of salvation, and shadowed this promise even as early as the day man was thrown out of the garden. We see hints of this in what could have been the sacrifice of an animal to clothe Adam and Eve. In Cain and Abel, we see the two lines. One line of covenant keepers, and the other line of the covenant breakers. God gave Eve Seth as a replacement for Cain. The line goes on. We have Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David.So we see from the very beginning of human existence, we have this idea of covenant, and one’s standing with regard to it. These are not two kingdoms, but simply two states of relationship to the one King, Jesus Christ, who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Isaiah 24:5
The earth is also defiled under its inhabitants,
Because they have transgressed the laws,
Changed the ordinance,
Broken the everlasting covenant.

Isaiah supports this fact that all of the earth’s inhabitants have broken this covenant. Paul supports this when he gives us a short history of the earth’s beginning in his letter to the Romans:

Romans 1:18-23
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

We see this when God judged the earth with the flood. Scripture confirms this with His judgement upon Sodom and Gommorrah. And keep in mind that this is after God called Abram out from among the covenant breakers and gave him a new name, Abraham. Also, we see that Moses gave his people God’s law written on stone and assumed that the [other] peoples would hear these and recognize that observing this law makes a nation "wise and understanding."

David tells us in Psalm 119:46 that he "will speak of Your testimonies also before kings, And will not be ashamed." He wasn’t concerned with keeping to himself or preaching some pietistic, individualistic gospel to the common man but not to magistrates. He was obviously not talking about Israelite magistrates since he was the magistrate of the day. He also tells us in 2 Samuel 23:3 that "‘He who rules over men must be just, Ruling in the fear of God." Let’s not forget the many references in the Psalms. The second Psalm is enough for this brief treatment where kings and judges are told to fear the LORD and kiss the Son. That must include present day kings and judges since it is referencing the son. There is also Psalm 9 verse 5 & 8.

Solomon gives us much wisdom in this regard as well. Proverbs 16:12 tells us "It is an abomination for kings to commit wickedness, For a throne is established by righteousness." Huran, king of Tyre, recognized the divine appointment of Solomon (2 Chron. 2:11-12), and the queen of Sheba acknowledged Solomon’s appointment by God as well as his just and righteous government (1 Kings 10:9).

The list goes on. Daniel ruled by God’s law for Darius. Ezra praised the LORD for putting it on Artexerxes heart to rule by God’s law (Ezra 7:11-28). Jonah preached to a non-Isralite city repentance.

Jesus called Herod a fox (Luke 13:32). Peter says we must obey God rather then men (Acts 5:29). Paul says that the magistrate is appointed to be the minister of God (Romans 13: 1 & 4).

The point is that there is one Kingdom, Christ is the king, and you are either a good standing citizen or a citizen in bad standing. If you are in bad standing, there is good news! Christ has provided a way out from His judgement. Just have faith in His promises and repent of your sin against Him. Join the covenant keepers and proclaim His good news.

This message is basic to the scripture. But somehow man’s sinfullness constantly finds a way to creep back in and take away some of the progress that the church has made in spreading the kingdom like leaven or that mustard seed. Rest assured. It is always temporary. The world today is "better" than it ever has been and will continue to progressively get "better." God has always implemented covenental sanctions on this earth, both positive and negative, and He has never stopped. If a nation will not rule in righteousness, He will blot it out, still today. If the church will ignore, or explain away (and I’ll add to this description the adverb "SINFULLY&quot then the church will also suffer the temporal sanctions of God in history. We will suffer the destruction of our nation if we won’t speak up and declare God’s Word to our nation. All of God’s word, not just the pietistic message of God’s salvation for you and your family. (See my post: "Preach Only to Some?").

Jesus is going to continue to rule until He returns. His rule will continue to grow. When He returns there will only be one enemy left to conquer: death.

1 Cor 15:24-25
24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

Christ right now has ALL authority and ALL power. As we, His disciples, go about, we are to make the nations, ALL PEOPLES, HIS DISCIPLES (take it corporately or individually, the end result is the same). Christ will accomplish this through His church. Don’t get left behind.

Matthew 28:18-20
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.

Is amillenialism extreme?

A friend of mine pointed me to an article by my favorite author, Greg Bahnsen. The title of it is: “The Prima Facie Acceptability of Postmillennialism,” and it can be found here.

I haven’t finished reading it yet, but one part of it stuck out to me as so very funny. I’ve never heard this before, and I post this more as a “for fun” discussion than something serious. Most people that know me, understand that I haven’t done the tough study to have come down hard and firm on where I stand on this issue. If you check my original post, found here, you’ll see that I am open to amill still. But if I finally do the study and come down in the postmill camp (as most of my friends suspect I will), then at least I will have one area in my theology I can point to and say that I fall in the middle of both extremes! LOL

A further criticism which cannot be applied uniquely to postmillennialism is that it interprets biblical prophecy both figuratively [19] and literally.[20] The premillennialists see symbolic interpretation as a failure of nerve, and amillennialists take literal understanding of prophecy as crude and insensitive. But the fact remains that none of the three schools interprets biblical prophecy exclusively in either a literal or figurative fashion. (And, by the way, nobody really adheres to the rule, “Literal where possible,” as is evident from the respective treatments of the beast of Revelation, which could possibly be a literal monster but obviously is not.) All three schools end up finding both kinds of literature in the prophetic passages, and it is dishonest to give an opposite impression. If anything, the fact that postmillennialism is seen as too literal by amillennialists and too figurative by premillennialists perhaps suggests (certainly does not prove) that it alone has maintained a proper balance. The upshot is this: the charge of subjective spiritualization or hyperliteralism against any of the three eschatological positions cannot be settled in general; rather, the opponents must get down to hand-to-hand exegetical combat on particular passages and phrases.

Is the Christian Faith Right-Wing?

Doug Wilson has a very thought provoking article on his blog today. Here is a snippet:

Consider the following:

“. . . Matthew and Thomas; James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called the Zealot . . .” (Luke 6:15).

When Jesus choose His disciples, His selection included a truly “odd couple.” Among His disciples were Matthew, or Levi, a man who made his living collecting taxes for the Romans. He was a collaborator with the occupation forces. But Christ also choose someone who probably wore his extremely nationalistic anti-Roman politics on his sleeve — Simon the Zealot. It might appear that this was just asking for trouble. But Christ was not trying to build a coalition. He was establishing His kingdom.

“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but not My kingdom is not from here’” (John 18:36).

There are two errors to avoid here. One is that identifying Christ’s kingdom with the affairs of this world. The other is that of detaching the relevance of Christ’s kingdom for this world.

In order to understand this complicated subject, we must keep a fundamental distinction in the forefront of our minds. There is a difference between separating the Church from partisan politics, which must be done, and separating the world of politics from God’s standards (as declared and preached by the Church) which must never be done. All of us need to be faithful citizens, family-members, and church-members, and each under the law of God. And our involvement in civic affairs must be explicitly Christian.

Subjects for Baptism

Well, this wouldn’t really be a reformed site for discussion without something on baptism now, would it?

When I was dealing with the subject of baptism it was a long struggle. It’s always hard to come to a view that you’ve been against.

Proverbs 18:17

The first one to plead his cause seems right,
Until his neighbor comes and examines him.

But, in the debate between Gene Cook and Paul Manata (discussed here and here), Paul gave a very simple and yet very strong argument in favor of baptising the children of believers. I think that if I had access to this argument when I was wrestling through the scripture, I might have had an easier time. I highly recommend listening to the debate. Notice that it seems Gene didn’t even grasp the simplicity of the argument. He didn’t deal with the argument itself, but brought up typical objections to they typical paedobaptist arguments that Paul didn’t even use.

Anyway, here is the argument:

1. All church members should be baptised
2. Believer’s children are members of the church
3. Therefore, believer’s children should be baptised.

Notice that this is the simplest form of syllogism. In order to defeat this argument, you need to prove that children are not members of the church. To uphold it, obviously, you need to prove that children are members of the church. It’s as simple as that, unless you want to argue against premise 1. But it is pretty unusual to find any Christian that denies that (although I know at least one Christian who does. But that’s another story).

Paul goes on in his argument to show that Old Testament Israel was the church. He does this by showing us that we actually get the word ‘church’ from the Greek word that the Septuigant uses in place of the Hebrew word for ‘congregation.’ (I’m doing this from memory, so hopefully I have that correct). He then goes on to show how throughout Israel’s history, children were considered members of the congregation. Then there are OT prophecies that speak of the children being members of the congregation, but these are prophecies applying to the NT church. And lastly there are some NT references to children that show they are members of the church.

Hopefully, we can get Paul to post his notes somewhere, or maybe he’ll send them to me and I can post a follow up to this with more detail on his argument.

Praise God for His mercy and love! Praise God for His love toward our children.

Kazooless

Who are these kings?

1 Timothy 6:13-16

13 I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, 14 that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing, 15 which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.

So here is a simple question. Who are these "kings" and "lords" that our God is King and Lord over? And what does it mean to be their King/Lord? I’m curious to find out both your speculation and any scriptural/exegetical evidence.