Thursday, January 31, 2008

Our Sovereign God

It seems the sovereignty of God is used to explain much of what happens in the world today. I do not doubt that God is sovereign. Being sovereign denotes having ultimate power and authority. Rulers of empires were said to be sovereign and indeed they do represent a picture of God's infinite worth as the true King of kings and Lord of lords.

So my question for you today is this: If God is truly sovereign why do so many godly men disagree on so many issues? Why are there so many differing views from the leading theologians and scholars of our day and history?

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Fair Tax?

Does that sound like an oxymoron? Maybe not, after all don't we all need to pay taxes in order to keep our societies functioning properly? What do you make of the new Fair Tax iniative and would it be a practical plan to deal with the current loopholes used by predominantly wealthy individuals and corporations?

Fair Tax

Thursday, January 24, 2008

And The Nomination Is...

After much deliberation and thought, Faith Classics has chosen to throw its support and endorsement behind presidential contender Mike Huckabee. - I Like Mike!

How Do You Study Scripture?

How we arrive at a theological conclusion can be the most amusing and intriguing study. I have noticed that there are several well used and typical ways in which folks will come to a conclusion on Biblical matters.

So I am going to give you what I think are some of the most common methods currently in use. These would be ways in which the laymen and theologian (serious Biblical scholar) arrive at an answer to the Bible's most challenging subjects.

1. Pastor Said So it Must be True

Their motto would be, "Pastor said it so that settles it". This is probably the most common reason given by those who are the laziest of Bible readers. Rather than give any effort to become a Berean they simply take whatever the pastors says as gospel truth. Of course this is also one reason there is so much church shopping today.

2. The Historical Approach

Another way to arrive at answers to Biblical questions is to take the theologians from history and lump them into groups. The largest group must be right so therefore their conclusions are adopted. Another name for this approach is called the traditional view.

3. My Favorite Expositor View

This approach is similar to #1 except that the pastor of preference is usually found on television or the radio. There can be a number of favorites and they usually teach similar things. You will find an advocate of this view constantly referring to their hero by saying, "This is what so and so believes and teaches", or "I believe what ______ believes".

4. God Spoke to Me

This is probably the most dangerous method of Biblical interpretation because it relies on an emotional feeling rather than scriptural fact. This excuse has been used to rationalize everything from murder and divorce to church splits and cultist heresy. Adherents to this view typically place extreme emphasis upon the spoken and written teaching of a man or woman while using the Bible to justify their behavior.

5. Square Peg in Round Hole

This view sees the reader attempt to make the Bible agree with his or her presuppositions and established beliefs. Often they will go to great lengths to stretch the meaning of certain passages or read into a text a totally different interpretation. This is probably the most common method of Biblical interpretation and many unknowingly are guilty. We could also label this as the Blind Spot Doctrine or as some like to say, legalism.

6. Intellectual Rationalism

Man is a clever creature and it seems the more learning we accumulate the less we esteem the inspired word of God. Proverbs tells us that knowledge can puff up, and pride prohibits us from looking at the Bible in a humble and honest way. This view attempts to make scripture fit with science and rationalism rather than the reverse. Wisdom is using knowledge in its God intended role to properly interpret and apply scripture. God's Word will always agree with true empirical science. This view also attempts to reduce God to a formula. They like to say if A + B = C, then D must be____. This attempt at making logic trump faith reduces doctrine and theology to an intellectual pursuit and is primarily the reason so many seminaries have gone liberal.

7. I Studied the Bible and This is What I Saw

This last method is where we should all start. Simply reading and praying are crucial to our receiving of revelation from God. God is light and as we abide in His presence He grants us insights into His character and person.

There are obviously problems that can arise from using this method only. Even the apostle Paul after 14 years of personal study wanted to make sure his doctrine and beliefs were correct. He went to Jerusalem to seek out the fellowship of the top apostles but found that they added nothing to what He had already received. Furthermore he had to rebuke them on occasion for their return to law keeping.

I have seen many sincere readers begin their search in God's word but end up adopting method #3 - the favorite expositor. There is a lot of pressure to fit into a group and be affirmed by man. This often leads to us compromising our convictions for the sake of acceptance. Those who are extreme in their use of method #3 ultimately become parrots. They can speak wonderful truths and doctrines but do not have the reality of actually experiencing it for themselves. Their knowledge is second hand and this becomes evident in the dryness of their words and actions.


There is nothing wrong with confirming what we believe by checking with wise teachers, pastors, theologians, etc. In fact we should be doing that to make sure we are not holding some strange heretical view. However, be careful that you do not quench the Spirit by putting man's teaching above God's inspired and operative Word. Become like the Bereans who examine the scriptures daily to see if these things be so.

Alright, your turn. Do you have another method of interpretation that I missed? Do you agree? Disagree? How do you study the Bible and arrive at answers to the tough questions?

Repentance - not turning from your sins

If the title leaves you intrigued I encourage you to read the article Terry Rayburn has written over at Grace for Life. I think he did an excellent job of explaining Repentance and it's ramifications.

Let me know what you thought...

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

New Link

I would like to introduce a friend who has recently starting blogging. Matt McClay is a graphic designer and writer with ideas that simply ooze out of his cranium. His take on life is fresh and unique (part of being a creative I guess).

Anyways please stop by and leave him a welcoming comment.

Friday, January 11, 2008

A Powerful Testimony

Is this not a picture of NT forgiveness? Read the article.

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

A New Religion

I couldn't say it much better myself. Ron Gray of the Christian Heritage Party explains this week why secularism is more than the absence of religion.

BC MLAs, rewriting the School Act in 1986, mandated that public education should be Secular. Why? Apparently they didn’t understand that Secularism is a religion—arguably one of the most bigoted of all faiths, exceeded in virulence only by Taliban/Wahabbi Islam. These share with Secularism the goal of extirpating every other religion—the radical Islamists by roadside and suicide bombs, the militant Secularists by legislation and substituting indoctrination for education.

So far, militant Secularists seem to be having even more success than militant Muslims, at least in the West; however, both are re-shaping our world—for the worse.

BC’s legislative blunder didn’t really take effect until two decades later, when a Provincial Supreme Court judge decreed that—according to the statute written in 1986—moral preferences of parents cannot be considered by the local school board when choosing textbooks for students, if those preferences were influenced by the parents’ faith.

It didn’t matter which religion—Sikh, Christian, Muslim, Jewish—all were beyond the pale... except, of course, Secularism—that was mandated by law!

These three factors define Secularism as a religion:
• Secularism has a world-view: it is Naturalism, which declares that there is nothing beyond what can be seen and measured. According to Secularism and Naturalism (like Buddhism) there is no God; or if there is, He/she/it is irrelevant to humanity—we have “outgrown” any consideration of the spiritual dimension of life, they say.
• Secularism has a Scripture: Darwin’s On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection; or the survival of the most-favoured races. This has recently been supplemented by a spate of demonstrably un-scientific books written by radical anti-God “scientists” and science writers, like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and Richard Lewontin.
• Secularism has a priesthood: university professors train public-school teachers in a philosophy rooted in Naturalism, and teach them to be “change agents” in the classroom, working to overturn custom and tradition.

And now, Secularism has its own temples: the publicly-funded schools where our children are systematically indoctrinated in the dogmas of Canada’s new ‘official religion’. How ironic that so many “believing Christians”—MPs, MPPs, MNAs and MLAs, mis-educated in the tax-funded ‘public’ education system so that they don’t understand the difference between ‘non-sectarian’ and ‘secular’—now have a primary role in dedicating and supporting these temples!

You can find more information about the CHP on their website.